# [Official] - Xeon X5660-X58 Review & Discussion [and Xeon L5639 benchmarks inside]



## Kana-Maru

*Updates:
[April 10th 2020]* - Screwed up the formatting in this topic, and I will fix it ASAP.
*[Dec. 11th 2014]* - Moved a large portion of my review to another website. All info will be there.Home
*[Nov. _6th 2014]* - Added a new section *"X5660 Power Usage Charts and Results"
[Oct. _5th 2014]* - Added Middle Earth Shadows of Mordor Benchmarks 1440p & 1600p.
*[Aug. 28th 2014]* - Added SSD & HDD Benchmarks. Revised PC specs.*[Jun. 25th 2014]* - Added Gaming Rig Pictures.
*[Jun. 19th 2014]* - Added Watch Dogs 1080p &1440p Ultra Settings /w Unlocked Graphic Mods. I'm working on it
*[Jun. 16th 2014]* - Added NEW 3DMark Fire Strike & 3D Mark 11 results. Broke previous record.
*[Jun. 13th 2014]* - Added 3500x1800p Gaming Benchmarks for BF4 100% and Tomb Raider.
*[Jun. _9th 2014]* - Added 6 new HWBOT Comparisons to the result chart.
*[May 29th 2014]* - Added a result chart instead of text to the HWBOT Comparisons.*[May 19th 2014]* - Added *BRAND NEW CPU Benchmarks* and HWBOT Comparisons
*[May 10th 2014]* - Added BF4 1440p Real-Time Benchmarks and *Updated CPU Benchmarks*.
*[Apr. 27th 2014]* - Added DDR3-1600Mhz vs 1900Mhz vs 2000M Mhz Gaming Comparisons.
*[Apr. 18th 2014]* - Added Battlefield 4 1600p Real-Time Benchmarks.
*[Mar. _4th 2014]* - Added RealBench Thief 1080p Very High Benchmarks Stock vs OC.
*[Feb. 19th 2014]* - Added RealBench V2 Results to the GPU Benchmark Section.
*[Feb. 13th 2014]* - Added Star Swarm Stress Test 1080p CPU Stock vs OC Results.
*[Feb. 11th 2014]* - Added *5.2Ghz* CPU-Z results.
*[Feb. _8th 2014]* - Added Total War: Rome II 1080p CPU Stock vs OC Real-Time Benchmarks.
*[Feb. _2th 2014]* - Added categories to the thread. Everything should be easier to find now.
*[Jan. 29th 2014]* - Added GTA IV with mods maxed @ 1600p.
*[Jan. 27th 2014]* - Added Cinebench R11.5 - 4960X & 3970X 4.8Ghz results.
*[Jan. 26th 2014]* - Added Battlefield 3 - 1600p Real-Time Benchmarks @ Stock CPU settings.
*[Jan. 25th 2014]* - Added Battlefield 3 - 1600p, 1080p and 720p Real-Time Benchmarks.
*[Jan. 24th 2014]* - Added Gaming Benchmarks and Real-Time Benchmarks.

Original Post:

It was suggested to me that Intel’s best platform to date could be the X58-LGA1366. From the looks of it, that suggestion may have been correct. Moving into its sixth year in the market; the legacy X58\Tylersburg is still alive and kicking. There appears to be plenty of life in the platform now that high-end server microprocessors are more affordable. This review is mainly for those who are on the fence and thinking about upgrading to X79 or possibly the X99. I also understand that Haswell-E is right around the corner, but some users might not want to upgrade unless they absolutely have to. Some users can’t always buy the latest and greatest. Personally I can, but only if I feel as if I’m getting a lot more than what I already have.To most X58 users Intel’s X79 felt like a “side-grade” instead of an upgrade. I’m not saying X79 doesn’t offer a lot, but is it worth the price at this point? The architectures are obviously different.

However, the X58 now has upgrades that cost less than $150-$200 that can easily even up the playing field a bit. Hex-cores are available and more affordable now. Unlike Intel latest Xeons [Sandy & Ivy Xeons], which have locked straps, LGA1366 has the ability to overclock Xeons by increasing the BLCK and\or CPU ratio. I’m sure many users are hoping to add as many years to the awesome X58 platform as possible. Many will tell others to upgrade, but not so fast. I’ve taken the time to compare my Xeon X5660 and L5639 to Intel’s latest and greatest high end CPUs.While I am speaking about the Xeon L5639 be sure to check my review
here:X58 in 2014 - I was thinking about upgrading to X79 or...

I cover the CPU benchmarks and gaming benchmarks. I also added something I like to call “Real-Time Benchmarks” which is for gaming. Instead of running a benchmark tool, I literally capture the frame times and frame rates from actual gameplay. I try to play at least 25 minutes or longer to give a good review, but sometimes I can't always hit the 25 minute mark [depends on the level and\or gamemode]. I also try to select the most demanding levels. For an example, my [email protected] struggled to play Crysis 3 maxed @ 1080p. There was constant micro stutter and bottlenecking. After I installed my L5639 and later the X5660, Crysis 3 is much more playable and runs at a smoother rate. I show the actual data from my play through. The differences are night and day. Moving on, I have made a brief chart comparing the X58 architecture to the X79 architecture.






Spoiler



Now you can see why a lot of X58 users felt like this platform was a side grade. PCI-E 2.0 still has plenty of bandwidth for high end cards. There have been a lot of reviews that proves that there is a minor difference between PCI-E 2.0 and 3.0. X58 gamers can still enjoy high end gaming as usual. So hopefully my review will help X58 users that might want to make a minor upgrade to their existing system, rather than upgrading to a new build.*My PC Specs:Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58CPU: Xeon X5660 @ 4.8GhzCPU Cooler: Antec Kuhler 620 Push/PullGPU: GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI - Reference ModelRAM: 12GB DDR3-1600Mhz [6x2GB]SSD: x2 128GB RAID 0HDD: x4 Seagate Barracuda 7,200rpm High Performance Drives [x2 RAID 0 setup]PSU: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 1300W 80+ GOLDMonitor: Dual – Res- 1080p, 1400p, 1600pOS: Windows 7 64-bit*Note: All test prior to July 2014 were performed with a 7,200 HDD containing the main OS.*Click Here for Pictures of my Gaming Rig**Rig Pics* (Click to show)http://postimg.org/image/mquf7xn6t/full/*Click Here for the CPU Benchmarks**CPU Benchmarks* (Click to show)I had a decent SSD at one point that contained my OS. It died randomly one day and I’m sticking with traditional HDDs from now on or at least for a few more years. HDDs move plenty of data IMO.HDDs does move plenty of data, but I've recently setup two SSDs in RAID 0. I purchased them at a price that I could refuse. TRIM has been enabled in RAID 0 on MB btw.OLD HDD RESULTS:*Click to view old HDD performance* (Click to show)*HDD Benchmark:* [no RAID]NEW RESULTS:*SSD RAID 0**HDD RAID 0 Quick Test*It took awhile, but I finally hit 5.2Ghz. It only took me about 10 minutes to resolve all of my boot issues. I'm probably going to shoot for 5.4Ghz eventually. It will have to be on a cooler day.I will admit that I was pretty excited when I first received my X5660. I only spent about $200 for it. I couldn’t find a lot of info on it. Some of the info I found was true and the other info was wrong. Finding info on this chip was much easier than my Xeon L5639. The X5660 is rated at 6.4 GT/s and I’ve personally pushed it all the way to 8 GT/s. It is a 32nm processor with 12MB a 95Watt Max TDP. There’s a lot of more info you can search and find. Now when I first installed the chip I was amazed at the low temps it maintained. The cores usually stayed below 23C in my room that was approx. 20C. Default voltage can get as low 0.88vCore. During 100% Loads the cores never went above 32c. Obviously I couldn’t wait to overclock this CPU and I’ll speak more on the overclocking below.*X5660 Stock clocks and minor BLCK overclock*I ran a few quick tests in Cinebench R11.5 after I first installed this chip. I scored a 7.71pts in Cinebench R11.5 @ stock clocks– 3.2Ghz [x24]. One of the impressive things about this chip is that the voltage was extremely low. What was even more impressive was the idle frequency. 1.6Ghz as the idle speed. So I performed a minor increase to the BLCK. I pushed it from 133 to 166. I only increased the BLCK and left everything else set to auto. I was able to hit 3980.50Mhz [x24] very easily or in other words 4Ghz. This only required 1.22vCore! I noticed the idle clock speed increased to 2Ghz [1990Mhz]..Obviously the 4Ghz will down clock to 3.8Ghz after using more than two cores. @ 4Ghz [3.8Ghz -x23] I scored 9.64pts in Cinebench R11.5. Not too bad at all. At this speed the Xeon L5639 with a highly clocked BLCK @ 228 [and other settings] running @ 4.1Ghz is only 10% faster than the X5660 @ 4Ghz\3.8Ghz-BLCK 166. With a minor bump in BLCK and with ZERO other changes the X5660 was already looking better than my lovely L5639. If you were to compare my X5660 @ 4Ghz\3.8Ghz [x23] w/ BLCK 166-1600Mhz RAM to Intel’s i7-4960X @ stock clock, the difference in speed is only 14.8%. This is extremely minor if you are looking to upgrade from X58 to X79 and may not be worth it at this point if you don’t plan to heavily overclock. This CPU definitely has plenty of headroom. Continue reading more for the Cinebench R11.5 overclocked settings below.*L5639 RECAP+Xeon Info**Taking another look at the Xeon L5639 vs Several Intel Stock clocks*As the title suggest, I'm comparing an overclocked [email protected] to stock High-End Intel CPUs. The i7-4770K isn't "that" high-end, but I have seen people upgrading to Haswell. This should give LGA 1366-X58 users an ideal comparison to stock higher end CPUs. I personally like to compare my overclock CPU to Intel’s latest stock clocks. It really helps me decide if an upgrade is really worth it or not. Now does this mean the Xeon L5639 or Xeon X5660 would perform better clock for clock [?] of course not, due to the fact that the CPUs use different architectures to perform. Obviously people who still use their X58 as their main gaming and workstation platform will be looking to overclock the Xeon L5639 and the Xeon X5660. The highest constant overclock I could achieve with a reasonable vCore while using the Xeon L5639 was 4.1GHz. I've gathered several stock clock benchmarks from reputable review sites. So let's see how a overclocked Xeon L5639 compares to several CPUs.Obviously the latest and greatest Intel CPUs will overclock better. They also cost over $800-$1000.00. While the L5639 [$70-$150] and X5660 [$150-$200] are affordable now. So the cheaper L5639 does pack a nice punch for those who are still running the X58. If you can manage to reach a high BLCK with the L5639 you’ll see that the i7-4960X [stock] is only 4.2% faster than the overclocked L6539. The Xeon X5660 has a higher x24 CPU multiplier which makes it easier to overclock. The Xeon L5639 has a x20 multiplier. The multiplier fluctuates [L5639 [x20]+X5660 [x24]-Xeons] with the amount of active cores.For instance, using the Xeon L5639 as a example: Cores 1 & 2 will operate at x20. Once the 3rd OR 4th core becomes active the multiplier will drop to x19. When Core 5 OR 6 is active it will drop the multiplier to [x18] and so on. x16 is the lowest multiplier. Some motherboards can lock the CPU multiplier\CPU Ratio to x16 or x18. The following x19 and x20 can only be enabled if you have the C-state functions. So the x18 CPU Ratio should be your main focus. The only way to overclock this CPU is to increase the Ratio and the BCLK and various settings in the BIOS. With all of this being said, the 1366\2011 i7 "X or K" counterparts can and will be unlocked; allowing a much easier overclock. Therefore the L5639 takes some patients to overclock past BLCK 200-215 due to the low multiplier. From what I’ve read from several users; hitting 4Ghz is pretty easy for the average overclocker. I can easily tell you that the L5639 is pretty easy to overclock if you plan to use the C-States. Most X58 motherboards can move the BLCK upwards towards 200Mhz with minor issues. Which would put most around 3.8Ghz to 4.0Ghz with the x20 multiplier.*Overclocking the X5660 and Cinebench R11.5 results:Click here for the results:**X5660 Cinebench R11.5 Results* (Click to show)Before jumping right into the review about this benchmark section, I would like to point out my performance increase. Coming from the i7-960 I have seen a huge performance increase. The Bloomfield’s are pretty damn hard to OC past 4.2Ghz, mostly due to several limitations and voltage issues. It’s hard to get the i7-960 past 4.1-4.2Ghz without some serious cooling and high vCore [or the golden chip]. My performance gains in CinebenchR11.5 were a breathtaking 76.1% if you compare my old [email protected] to the [email protected] Now that’s what I call a upgrade.*X5660*The i7-4960X has a difference of 9% when compared to the [email protected] Remember that I’m only running DDR3-1600Mhz RAM. The Xeon X5660 is pretty impressive. At 1.36v I was able to hit 4.6Ghz. This voltage is right outside of Intel’s recommended max voltage of 1.35v. I was able to get a score of 11.89pts @4.6Ghz in Cinebench R11.5. This would put the i7-4960X @ 4.4Ghz only 13% higher than the [email protected] When I pushed the BLCK to 209 and increased the vCore to a stable 1.43v, I was able to hit 4.8Ghz rather easily. This is outside of Intel’s max [only 0.08v], but safe enough for me to test and play games without worrying for hours. You’ll definitely want aftermarket cooling if you plan to overclock this CPU heavily.So once again the [email protected] vs the X5660 @ 4.8Ghz difference is only 9%. I’m only running DDR-1600Mhz RAM. So I’m sure if you run faster RAM with tighter timings you can make the 9% even smaller, possibly 7% or less. I can say I’m pretty impressed. Between the [email protected] vs the [email protected], the different is roughly 17%; easily making the X5660 the better choice for X58 users who don’t want to spend a lot on legacy technology.*L5639*Now let's even up the playing field a bit. I have included some overclocked examples to give you a better representation of the “Locked” L5639. The i7-4960X @ 4.4GHz is 27.1% faster than the L5639 @ 4.1Ghz while running DDR3-1333Mhz. 27.1% might not be enough to make a ton of X58 users to run out and spend approx. $1,059.00 for the latest and greatest CPU plus more for the latest platform MB. Most L5639 users should be able reach 4Ghz rather easily with the x20 multiplier and low vCore. For those who manage to reach 4Ghz or 4.1Ghz with the x18 multiplier; you’ll definitely get great results while playing games. Those who can reach 180Mhz-200Mhz [BLCK] will be just as happy. This CPU definitely gets the job done. Just be sure to leave the C-States enabled.*Cinebench R11.5: Clock for Clock - 4.8Ghz Comparison*After a recent request was made I decided to post the clock for clock comparisons. Instead of comparing the [email protected] to the lower clocked Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge-E; I have posted the clock for clock comparisons @ 4.8Ghz for the i7-4960X, i7-3960X and the X5660 in Cinebench R11.5. Remember that the i7-4960X and the i7-3960X have faster RAM, newer architecture and faster single core speed. It took awhile to find the [email protected] so it must pretty rare. I threw the Quad [email protected] in the mix to give those running Bloomfield’s below that clock speed an idea of the potential upgrade percentage. Getting Bloomfield’s pass the 4.0-4.2Ghz can be a challenge.[email protected] + DDR3-1866Mhz = 14.58 [-17.7%][email protected] + DDR3-2134Mhz = 13.82 [-11.6%]X5660 @4.8Ghz + DDR3-1600Mhz = 12.38 [0.0%]i7-920 @4.4Ghz + DDR3-1600Mhz = 7.41 [+67%]I originally I wrote the Cinebench 11.5 review for the L5639 comparison and added the X5660 results. This should provide a better comparison for those looking to upgrade to the X5660. The X5660 still holds it’s ground. Clock for clock coming within 11.6% of the highly clocked 3970X is pretty damn good. The 3970X was taken from HWBOT as well. The i7-4960X increased from 13% to nearly 18%. The X5660 is still within 17.7% of the i7-4960X. The comparison is still a bit one sided since I’m running legacy tech and using lower memory speed. I’m still impressed with the X5660. The X5660 is 67% faster than the [email protected] You don’t find a lot of i7-920 running 4.8Ghz without nearly ruining the chip. The i7-4960X is a whopping 96.7% faster than the i7-920. Even if the i7-920 was running 4.8Ghz I’m sure the 4960X would still stomp it by at least 80%. With all of that being said I hope this answers more unasked questions.*Cinebench R15:Click here for the results:**X5660 Cinebench R15 Results* (Click to show)i7-3970X @ 4.9Ghz = 1252 cb*Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 1110 cb*Xeon L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 965 cbThere are a lot of Cinebench R15 scores available. Cinebench loves faster RAM. I chose the i7-3970X that is ranked on HWBOT. The i7-3970X is 12.8% faster than my X5660. The i7-3970X is running DDR3-2423Mhz and once again I’m running 1600Mhz with my X5660. Cinebench loves fast RAM so those numbers can easily change for both processors. It’s hard finding units that match my RAM setting so I went with the processor speed.The 3970X is roughly 30% faster than the L5639 running DDR3-1333Mhz. For only $70 [L5639] that’s pretty damn good for nearly 6 year old technology. The i7-3970X processor retailed for $1,039.99 and currently $700-$900. The numbers look good, but the performance increase is what really matters to me. 12.8% [X5660] increase isn’t going to make me run out and upgrade my PC. You’ll have to also add the price of the new MB and CPU. Not to forget to mention coolers and other things needed when changing platforms\MBs. obviously enthusiast will always have that upgrade itch. Maybe the X5660 can ease the pain for a little longer.*Cinebench R10:* - *[!!! Updated!!!]Click here for the results:**X5660 Cinebench R10 Results* (Click to show)*NEW Multi-Core**OLD Multi-Core*Xeon X5660 Performance Increase [+] \ Decrease [-]*Multi-Core - Overclocked:*i7-4960X @ 4.4Ghz = 42967 [-12.5%]i7-3970X @ 4.6Ghz = 41359 [-8.3%]X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 38162 [0.0%]i7-4770K @ 4.6Ghz = 36644 [+4.1%]i7-3770K @ 4.8Ghz = 32738 [+15.1%]L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 32627 [+16.5%]i7-920 @ 4.4Ghz = 25143 [+52%]*Singe Core - Overclocked*i7-4770K @ 4.6Ghz = 9288 [-33.5%]i7-3770K @ 4.8Ghz = 8467 [-21.7%]i7-4960X @ 4.4Ghz = 8037 [-15.5%]i7-3970X @ 4.6Ghz = 7699 [-10.7%]X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 6953 [0.0%]L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 5862 [+18.6%]Cinebench R10 is pretty old, but still useful. Well the Open GL isn’t that useful for me, but the CPU benchmark scores are. In the Multi-core test the Xeon L5639 actually does pretty well. The i7-4960X is 31.7% faster than the Xeon L5639 @ 4.1GHz and 71% faster than the i7-920 @ 4.4Ghz. The i7-4770K [Quad-Core] clearly outperforms the other CPUs core for core in Cinebench R10 Single Core. The i7-4960X is only X5660 12.5% better in the Multi-Core benchmark. I7-920 and i7-960 users will definitely see a lot of performance gains if they choose to upgrade to the X5660 or the L5639.*WinRar v4.20:* - *[!!! Updated!!!]Click here for the results:**X5660 WinRar v4.20 Results* (Click to show)*NEW Results**OLD Results*Moving on to the WinRar v4.20 benchmark, I’m comparing the X5660, L5639, and the i7-960. The results were amazing if you consider my i7-960 results I only ran my X5660 @ 4.6Ghz during this test. Here is the breakdown:*Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz = 16,458*Xeon L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 12,441i7-960 @ 4.2Ghz = 8,519Read the entire article in the link below.Read the rest of the benchmarks by clicking here: X5660 Full Reviewhttps://overclock-then-game.com


----------



## Kana-Maru

Ladies and gentlemen, with all of that said I will post more benchmarks as I complete them.


----------



## RushiMP

I like this post. It is like the most fun I have had reading about CPUs in months.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RushiMP*
> 
> I like this post.


That was fast. Lol thanks.


----------



## ssgtnubb

nice to see comparison's to newer tech to our good ole' 1366. I've been eyeing a 980 a bit to jump from my 950 just because of the fact that you have to upgrade 3 components instead of one if you go to a new chip design.


----------



## Akadaka

Nice but according to Intel on X79 the Max DMI2.0 bandwidth is 51.2GB/s


----------



## jlhawn

thank you for this. I knew there was a reason I decided not to build a new system every time I thought about it.
I am keeping my good ol Sabertooth X58 and i7 970 6 core.








I built my system in 2010 and it has been perfect with never a problem.


----------



## avesdude

Well. . . now I'm thinking about a hex core upgrade to replace my 950. Crap. I was unaware the L5639 or X5660 would run in an x58 sabertooth, and now I want to do it.

EDIT:
I love the review, but can I ask how you monitored temps?
Quote:


> The cores usually stayed below 20C in my room that was approx. 23C.


Cores can't be below ambient. Could be a problem with software used to monitor the sensor.


----------



## mechwarrior

hi Kana-Maru love the topic have an I7 920 @4 with 2x gtx 670, was thinking of upgrading to haswell-e this year. really looking forward to
the real word tests and of course the game test.
Would you recommend upgrading this year or wait for broadwell? not sure what AMD have coming?
thanks again for starting this thread.


----------



## rezax58

I've been building PC's since 1999 and my X58 has been my favourite thus far; Also it's the first time that I'm confident that truly Softwares are behind now and not the Hardware!

Thanks for taking the time to do this OP. Very much appreciated!


----------



## PontiacGTX

what about some gaming? i7 lga1155/1150 vs Xeons

I really need that info


----------



## RushiMP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what about some gaming? i7 vs Xeons
> 
> I really need that info


Yes please.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry for the late reply guys. Alright I'm going to post a reply to everyone I missed earlier.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> Nice but according to Intel on X79 the Max DMI2.0 bandwidth is 51.2GB/s


I got the info directly from Intel's website. X58 has DMI as well, but it uses it in a different way [sort of]. DMI 2.0 uses x4 link I believe and Intel states 20 GB\s on their diagrams and in their offical PDF. There was pretty lenghty revised PDF on both the X58 and X79. Intel also said that the X79 only supports PCI-E 2.0. PCI-E 3.0 depends on the CPU. Then again they could just be throwing the PCI-E 3.0 out there to make current and potential X79 users feel better about their purchase. Who knows it IS Intel you know.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mechwarrior*
> 
> hi Kana-Maru love the topic have an I7 920 @4 with 2x gtx 670, was thinking of upgrading to haswell-e this year. really looking forward to the real word tests and of course the game test.Would you recommend upgrading this year or wait for broadwell? not sure what AMD have coming? thanks again for starting this thread.


No problem man. I put A LOT OF TIME into this review and I still have a lot of more things to add to this review. Things like pictures of the results and more tests I haven't gotten around to posting. Making the charts were a pain at first, but I'm used to it now. I'm going to be adding the Gaming Benchmarks veru soon. I'm going to upload my 3DMark data first. I'm running two GTX 670s as well. So please post your scores in 3DMark 11, 3DMark Vantage and 3DMark [all test - Fire strike etc] and I'll compare them in my review. I could really use more i7-920 data especially for gaming.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> I've been building PC's since 1999 and my X58 has been my favourite thus far; Also it's the first time that I'm confident that truly Softwares are behind now and not the Hardware!
> Thanks for taking the time to do this OP. Very much appreciated!


Hey man it was no problem at all. The latest and greatest i7-4960X only has one extra Instruction Set that the X5660 doesn't have; and that is the "AVX" Instruction . The other major difference is the architecture itself. Instead of revising the X58 architecture, Intel just came out with the X79 altogether. It appears that the X99 could follow suit and use the same LGA2011[-3] socket [R]. I'm glad I didn't run out and spend a ton of money when I thought heavily on the X79. Hardware-wise there isn't much different. They overclock to about the same speed unless you have some serious cooling go higher than 4.8Ghz. Speaking about the software behind it; I believe a lot of people have been claiming bias against Intel+benchmarks. I think I was reading something about Cinebench a while ago.

AMD has been claiming this for a while and was right back in the day. I'm hoping AMD can get it together and get over the Intel hump. That's going to be hard since some programs are specifically written to run slower on non-Intel CPUs _. I'm hoping this still isn't the case, but it appears AMD can never catch up. Cinebench is featured on Intel's website as well so that should make you think a little bit.

_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what about some gaming? i7 lga1155/1150 vs Xeons
> 
> I really need that info


Coming very soon. I'll try to get some of the data posted tonight along with pictures. I'd have to find similar setups if I can, but I'm going to post them anyways and update later. You guys can fell free to compare the scores to yours. I'm running the 2GB GTX 670 2-Way SLI. I'm looking to upgrade to a 7990 Quad or something better soon. GTX 670 2-Way is doing fine right now.


----------



## Vlasov_581

great job on this


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry for the late reply guys. Alright I'm going to post a reply to everyone I missed earlier.
> 
> Coming very soon. I'll try to get some of the data posted tonight along with pictures. I'd have to find similar setups if I can, but I'm going to post them anyways and update later. You guys can fell free to compare the scores to yours. I'm running the 2GB GTX 670 2-Way SLI. I'm looking to upgrade to a 7990 Quad or something better soon. GTX 670 2-Way is doing fine right now.


yes who has an i7 sb/ib/hw please share your performance`s result with the OP please

And a question does these x56xx reach 4.7ghz usually?


----------



## RushiMP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> yes who has an i7 sb/ib/hw please share your performance`s result with the OP please
> 
> And a question does these x56xx reach 4.7ghz usually?


I have had 3 overclocked hex core Westmere Xeons, mostly X5650s. They have all overclocked to 4.4-4.6 with around 1.35-1.4V. None reliably beyond that, the BCLK starts to get tricky.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> yes who has an i7 sb/ib/hw please share your performance`s result with the OP please
> 
> And a question does these x56xx reach 4.7ghz usually?


Well I can't speak for them all, but they have plenty of headroom. Well at least my X5660 does. If you have good cooling and a good MB+CPU+RAM you shouldn't have a lot of issues. The vCore will be the tell tale. I was lucky enough to hit 4.6Ghz 0.04v outside of Intel max recommendation [1.35v]. Expert overclockers shouldn't have a issue with these CPUs though. Increasing the BLCK to 200 will get you 4.8Ghz with C-states enabled. 191 BLCK will net you around 4.6Ghz. Hopefully you can maintain that with decent vCore [4.6Ghz]. Outside of benchmarking....you'll only need around 4Ghz on a daily basis. If you are running high end graphic card like Quad\SLI\Crossfire X then 4.2-4.4Ghz would be better.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RushiMP*
> 
> I have had 3 overclocked hex core Westmere Xeons, mostly X5650s. They have all overclocked to 4.4-4.6 with around 1.35-1.4V. None reliably beyond that, the BCLK starts to get tricky.


Well do you have sone i7 for testing?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RushiMP*
> 
> I have had 3 overclocked hex core Westmere Xeons, mostly X5650s. They have all overclocked to 4.4-4.6 with around 1.35-1.4V. None reliably beyond that, the BCLK starts to get tricky.


I've never had issues with the BLCK on my rig. My biggest issue is the amount of voltage it takes to run more than 5Ghz. Going over 200 or 215 might be a issue on some motherboards.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've never had issues with the BLCK on my rig. My biggest issue is the amount of voltage it takes to run more than 5Ghz. Going over 200 or 215 might be a issue on some motherboards.


which mobo do you recommend for the xeons x5650s?that could reach your frecuency


----------



## Kana-Maru

I can only suggest the Asus Sabertooth X58. It's the only board I have used for years. I'm used to the board, but it might be overwhelming to new users. It does offer some nice settings and features.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I can only suggest the Asus Sabertooth X58. It's the only board I have used for years. I'm used to the board, but it might be overwhelming to new users. It does offer some nice settings and features.


i would like a cheaper mobo.hiw much that sabertooth costs?


----------



## Bonn93

I've come from your other thread, such a good job on everything. The X58 platform still performs and surprises everyone.

I'm trying to find a 6 core now!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> i would like a cheaper mobo.hiw much that sabertooth costs?


Thanks to the widespread news of the hex cores, USED Asus Sabertooth X58's have increased in price. It's going to be hard to find a cheap one now. Anywhere from $230-$300+ is what I've been seeing since late last year. Sabertooth X58 were as low as $110-150, but not anymore.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bonn93*
> 
> I've come from your other thread, such a good job on everything. The X58 platform still performs and surprises everyone
> I'm trying to find a 6 core now!


Thank man! X58 users should unite. We are still using an extremely viable platform that can still run any graphic card released today. I'm sure the platform does surprise everyone, which is probably why the X58 boards have been skyrocketing over the past year or so. I saw a Sabertooth X58 for $800 brand new on Amazon. Funny thing is someone actually purchased it. Now there's only 1 for $229.99. I'm going to posting my gaming benchmarks soon.

A lot of the 6-cores have been selling out all across Ebay. Good luck man. I hope you find a nice chip one that's good and not defective.


----------



## Vlasov_581

yea prices are hella low on the x5XXX series. on eBay you can grab an SR-2 for $350ish, and 2 x5650s for $250ish for both, and have a 12C/24T computing monster


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vlasov_581*
> 
> yea prices are hella low on the x5XXX series. on eBay you can grab an SR-2 for $350ish, and 2 x5650s for $250ish for both, and have a 12C/24T computing monster


where do people sell their sr 2?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Alright I've gotten getting my GPU\Gaming Benchmark scores together. I will be updating my post on the first page with all new info I post throughout this topic. I've taken the L5639 info from my L5639 topic and compared both processors - here:

The L5639 topic is here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1442498/x58-in-2014-i-was-thinking-about-upgrading-to-x79-or-haswell-l5639-comparison-review

Alright here are my Gaming Benchmarks. I will post more benchmarks as I complete them. I'm going to be comparing my X5660, L5639 and i7-960 benchmarks. If you would like to compare your scores please post them. I tried to remember some my i7-960 scores. 4Ghz-4.2Ghz is all most gamers will need anyways with Hex-cores. The X5660 will be a better choice if you stream games online in HD. It should be able to handle the load and specific settings in certain streaming programs for high end CPUs.

GTX 670 2-way SLI @ 980Mhz [except 3DMark Cloud Gate and Vantage which was ran @ 915Mhz]

*3DMark 11:*



[email protected] = *P16449*
[email protected] = P15692
[email protected] was around P12000-P13000

Looks like the GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI is pushing max with the Hex cores. The X5660 increased my Graphics [+174 points], Physics [+1,736 points] and Combined Score [+809 points]. If I could get both GPUs to run @1000Mhz+ I'm sure I could probably crack the 17000 mark. The benchmarks were smooth with Hex-CPUs. To the naked eye I couldn't notice any difference. My GPUs are running on air so heat did become an issue.

*3DMark Vantage:*



[email protected] = *P47325*
[email protected] = P45164

Here is another minor difference in score.

*3DMark Ice Storm:*



[email protected] = P197876
[email protected] = P173914
i7-960 @ 4Ghz = P157635

Now we can see some bigger differences in the score and performance %. The X5660 scored 26% higher than the i7-960. The X5660 performed 14% better than the L5639. The X5660 performed pretty good with the GTX 670s @ 960Mhz.

*3DMark Fire Strike:*



[email protected] = *11205*
[email protected] = 10900
[email protected] = 9787

Using Hex cores definitely makes the benchmark much smoother. The X5660 offered a 14.4% increase over my [email protected] and only 2.7% over the L5639. Fire Strike depends on the GPU.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Real Time Benchmarks*

The real time benchmarks are games that I have played while capturing real time data. Instead of relying on a benchmark tool found in a lot of games nowadays, I play through the levels looking for micro stutter and or delays. The L5639 handled Maxed High End games like Crysis 3, Tomb Raider and Metro: LL etc. Let's see how the X5660 handle Crysis 3,

*GTX 670 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz*

Welcome to the Jungle - 1920x1080p

*[email protected]*
CPU Max Temps:58c
GPU 1: 83c
GPU 2: 71c

Those temps were pretty much steady throughout the benchmark and gameplay. Due to heat concerns I had to run the GPU cores @ 915Mhz instead of 980Mhz.



*FPS:
Avg: 53
Max: 136*
Min: 18

As you can not much has changed in this category. I actually gained 3 frames per second and the frame rate was well above 60fps throughout the level. I'm guessing it's safe to say that 4Ghz-4.2Ghz will be fine for high end gaming with the Hex cores. With no more CPU bottlenecking I've finally hit the max on my graphic cards. I was only getting 25fps to 35fps with my [email protected] Two extra cores make a huge difference. The L5639 and X5660 is fine for high end gaming.



Average Frame time: 19ms
My frame times were slightly better. The game played fine on both CPUs. The higher clocked X5660 gave it a edge over the L5639. However, I'm sure if both CPUs were clocked at the same speed the difference wouldn't matter. just as they do not now. So i7-920 to i7-960 and pretty much all Bloomfield users will see a tremendous upgrade. Gaming wise there is no comparisons.


----------



## PontiacGTX

People with SB/IB/HW give your results

OP could you test BF4,BF3,Crysis 1,2,3,Metro LL,Metro 2033,Alien vs predator 3,Grid 2,CIV 5,Starcraft II?


----------



## Kana-Maru

I don't have BF3 or BF4.


----------



## PontiacGTX

What if I borrow you my origin account?For bf3 and crysis 2.btw is it allowed by origin?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> What I borrow you my origin account?For bf3 and crysis 2.btw is it allowed by origin?


I'm not sure if it's allowed by Origin, but check your Private Messaging for more info.


----------



## Akadaka

How much did the X5660 cost you?


----------



## ssgtnubb

90 on amazon


----------



## kremtok

After reading your review here, I'm strongly considering getting an X5660 to replace my i7 970 due to the power savings and potential for higher clockspeeds. How would you say the two CPU compare? Anything I should know about in considering the switch?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kremtok*
> 
> After reading your review here, I'm strongly considering getting an X5660 to replace my i7 970 due to the power savings and potential for higher clockspeeds. How would you say the two CPU compare? Anything I should know about in considering the switch?


Well what is your i7-960 clock speed and vCore settings? Also post some of your Cinebench R10, R11.5 and R15 benchmarks. You can also post other benchmarks as well [like 7-zip v9.20, WInZip v4.20, Performance Test 8 etc]. There's really nothing special to know about the CPUs. they are used and requires decent cooling at higher speeds just like any other Hex Cores.


----------



## Kana-Maru

BF3 is one of the most gorgeous FPS I've played. There are a lot of great looking games. EA isn't my favorite companies, but they definitely invest in their studios. It was requested to be benchmarked. I also have to thank PontiacGTX for allowing me to benchmark this game on Origin. It took me 2 hours to download 20.3GBs of data. It was worth it. I ran the benchmarks in 1600p, 1080p and 720p. There are a lot of charts, but I'm not going to post the charts. It's way too many charts.



*All benchmarks were tested with Max Settings. My GPUs were at stock settings.
GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 1228Mhz.*

_While playing @ 1600p_
X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
CPU: Max: 52c
GPU 1: Avg. 70c - Max: 76c
GPU 2: Avg. 65c - Max: 72c

*Semper Fidelis [Campaign] @2560 x 1600p:*

Gameplay Duration: 3 minutes 21 secs
Captured 14,690 frames
*FPS Avg: 73fps*
FPS Max: 110fps
FPS Min: 30fps
Frame time Avg: 13.7ms

The game plays great at 1600p. No micro stuttering at all. The input lag and everything was smooth. My highest frame time was 33.0ms, which is no problem at all to me. The Average was 13.7ms which is great. The game is still gorgeous and will be for a very long time. This was level so make your judgment from the other benchmarks.
All Benchmarks were

*Operation Swordbreaker [Campaign] @ 2560 x 1600p:*
Gameplay Duration: 26 minutes 25 secs
Captured 123,237 frames
*FPS Avg: 78fps*
FPS Max: 120fps
FPS Min: 34fps
Frame time Avg: 12.9ms

*Caspian Border [Multiplayer - Conquest 32v32] @ 2560 x 1600p:*
Gameplay Duration: 23 minutes 29 secs
Captured 95,475 frames
*FPS Avg: 66fps*
FPS Max: 106fps
FPS Min: 34fps
Frame time Avg: 15.2ms

*Operation Metro [Multiplayer - Conquest 32v32] @ 2560 x 1600p:*
Gameplay Duration: 13 minutes 1 secs
Captured 58,831 frames
*FPS Avg: 75fps*
FPS Max: 112fps
FPS Min: 41fps
Frame time Avg: 13.3ms

*Noshahr Canals [Multiplayer TDM 32v32] @ 1920x1080p:*
Gameplay Duration: 21 minutes 49 secs
Captured 185,190,frames
*FPS Avg: 141fps*
FPS Max: 201fps
FPS Min: 76fps
Frame time Avg: 7.07ms

*Operation Metro [Multiplayer - Conquest 32v32] @ 1280x720:*
Gameplay Duration: 25 minutes 50 secs
Captured 265,517 frames
*FPS Avg: 171fps*
FPS Max: 201fps
FPS Min: 90fps
Frame time Avg: 5.86ms

Now as you can see the GTX 670 2GB SLI manhandles the Frostbite 2 engine. I'll probably get around to testing the Frostbite 3 engine if I ever get man hands on the game. I will be posting more Real Time Benchmarks soon.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Can someone borrow him bf4 for testing the cpus?

I forgot to remember you that 720 is 1280x720.ops

Well I hope you do thing as this with cryisis 2

+rep (again) for the job


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Can someone borrow him bf4 for testing the cpus?
> 
> I forgot to remember you that 720 is 1280x720.ops
> 
> Well I hope you do thing as this with cryisis 2
> 
> +rep (again) for the job


Sorry about that typo. I just fixed the 720p resolution. Thanks for the rep man and thank for the help with the games [BF3 and Crysis 2: ME]


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry about that typo. I just fixed the 720p resolution. Thanks for the rep man and thank for the help with the games [BF3 and Crysis 2: ME]


Can someone borrow him bf4 for testing the cpus?

That`s not your fault.it`s the Enthusiasm of sharing your job,the nerves of the people that does something useful and wants the good of the followers


----------



## kremtok

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well what is your i7-960 clock speed and vCore settings? Also post some of your Cinebench R10, R11.5 and R15 benchmarks. You can also post other benchmarks as well [like 7-zip v9.20, WInZip v4.20, Performance Test 8 etc]. There's really nothing special to know about the CPUs. they are used and requires decent cooling at higher speeds just like any other Hex Cores.


Sorry, but mine is the i7 970, a hex-core Gulftown. My system is stable at 4.25GHz and shows 1.376V at idle in CPU-z. I was just wondering if there's a substantial difference between it and the X5660, other than that the X5660 has a lower TDP and you seem to clock yours a lot higher than I've seen any other hex-core Intel CPU.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm sorry I meant to type i7-970, not 960. Some say that I've clocked my L5639 higher than most with the x18 multiplier as well. After so many years on the same platform I guess I'm just OC'ing everything in sight. The 32nm are easy to damage from what I've read and experienced. I'm sure others have clocked the Hex cores higher. It's just tricky as hell. The X5660 is better for several reasons. A few being that the QPI Speed is higher on the X5660. X5660 has two QPI links which will allow you to run dual CPUs. It runs pretty cool as well so you don't have to worry about the fans RPM revving up. So far it's one of the best CPUs I've owned to date.

I originally planned to include more i7-970 data initially. I focused more on the high-end SB-E + IVB-E and Haswell. You can run some test and post them here for comparisons if you want. I would love to see your Cinebench 10\R11.5\R15 scores at your current speed. What's the speed of your RAM by the way?


----------



## Akadaka

BF4 looks slightly better than BF3 however I like some things about BF3 better overall I think it was more polished and balanced and I liked sniping more on it, where as BF4 isn't as fun but is still good..


----------



## kremtok

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm sorry I meant to type i7-970, not 960. Some say that I've clocked my L5639 higher than most with the x18 multiplier as well. After so many years on the same platform I guess I'm just OC'ing everything in sight. The 32nm are easy to damage from what I've read and experienced. I'm sure others have clocked the Hex cores higher. It's just tricky as hell. The X5660 is better for several reasons. A few being that the QPI Speed is higher on the X5660. X5660 has two QPI links which will allow you to run dual CPUs. It runs pretty cool as well so you don't have to worry about the fans RPM revving up. So far it's one of the best CPUs I've owned to date.
> 
> I originally planned to include more i7-970 data initially. I focused more on the high-end SB-E + IVB-E and Haswell. You can run some test and post them here for comparisons if you want. I would love to see your Cinebench 10\R11.5\R15 scores at your current speed. What's the speed of your RAM by the way?


That's quite insightful, thank you.

I've never benched before, but if the software is free I suppose that I can run a few passes for you to use in your comparisons. Memory is 1333MHz / 9-9-9-24.


----------



## cyanmcleod

how can you find out if your board supports them x5660? trying to find some info on it but not much out there. i have the ASUS P6X58D-E LGA, shows support for the 990x so i would assume it could use this cpu? if so that is awesome for a cheap upgrade!


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Well done man.. reading this makes me wish I would have held onto one or two of the handful of X5660s and X5670s I came across a few years ago and followed through with making a rig based around it. Unfortunately at the time I was going to build, I had gotten laid off from my job as the company downsized by a third. I managed to sell all 8 (4 each) of them on ebay in less about 4 hours for a very nice little chunk of change that got me through the 6 months before I got back to school though.

BOT, it's crazy to see how well 4 year old Xeons can still hang in there with the IB-E though.


----------



## KingG14

Awesome thread! is the X5650 unlocked like the X5660? it probably is but i want to make sure. Thanks for taking the time to do this







.


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KingG14*
> 
> Awesome thread! is the X5650 unlocked like the X5660? it probably is but i want to make sure. Thanks for taking the time to do this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Yes, all of the Westmere X series Xeons are unlocked. The 5650 will just have a slower stock clock speed, I think 2.66 GHz compared to the X5660's 2.80 GHz stock, and the X5670's 2.93 GHz stock.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> BF4 looks slightly better than BF3 however I like some things about BF3 better overall I think it was more polished and balanced and I liked sniping more on it, where as BF4 isn't as fun but is still good..


I personally liked sniping on Bad Company 2 better. Sniping on BF3 was easy as hell to me. I have yet to play BF4.

Yeah BF4 does look slightly better. Maybe I haven't followed the game close enough to noticed a ton of differences, but I don't see a lot of them. EA DICE probably should just named the engine Frostbite

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kremtok*
> 
> That's quite insightful, thank you.
> 
> I've never benched before, but if the software is free I suppose that I can run a few passes for you to use in your comparisons. Memory is 1333MHz / 9-9-9-24.


Yeah man it's free. Just go to the web-sites and download them. You can get Cinebench R10 from guru3d. Just Google the others and you'll find the websites easily.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyanmcleod*
> 
> how can you find out if your board supports them x5660? trying to find some info on it but not much out there. i have the ASUS P6X58D-E LGA, shows support for the 990x so i would assume it could use this cpu? if so that is awesome for a cheap upgrade!


I'm not sure. Maybe with the latest BIOS upgrade you might. I haven't read anyone using the X5660 with your MB.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> Well done man.. reading this makes me wish I would have held onto one or two of the handful of X5660s and X5670s I came across a few years ago and followed through with making a rig based around it. Unfortunately at the time I was going to build, I had gotten laid off from my job as the company downsized by a third. I managed to sell all 8 (4 each) of them on ebay in less about 4 hours for a very nice little chunk of change that got me through the 6 months before I got back to school though.
> 
> BOT, it's crazy to see how well 4 year old Xeons can still hang in there with the IB-E though.


Sorry to here about your job issues mans. I'm hoping everything is good now that you got back into school. The X58 is still a viable platform that can compete. I'm thinking about upgrading my RAM and GPUs to a Quad 7990 or something else. I don't see any bottlenecks with my current setup. I'm holding tight right now


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

That was 2 and a half years ago, lol. Everything's gravy these days, solid job, mid way through my junior year (pursuing a Hist./ Phil. double major for pre-law is proving to be a bit more of an undertaking than I'd imagined, lol) and upgrading soon from this Bulldozer build to a Haswell i5 build to tide me over until we find out more about Haswell-E. Although after reading this thread and seeing the still relevant level of performance and what the used/refurbished prices look like, I may try to track down an X55xx or X56xx for the guts of a folding and host server rig...


----------



## Rage19420

Awesome write up kana! Got me excited again with my older platform. Repped for sure!

Looks like I'm going to nab a sabertooth board off a chap on craigslist for a decent price. About $70 less then what they are going on eBay. Includes a i7-950 and ram, if I sell the chip my costs on the board would be about $100


----------



## intelfan

Kana, can you do a GTA IV benchmark if you have it please? Thanks. Rep+ for your good work.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> That was 2 and a half years ago, lol. Everything's gravy these days, solid job, mid way through my junior year (pursuing a Hist./ Phil. double major for pre-law is proving to be a bit more of an undertaking than I'd imagined, lol) and upgrading soon from this Bulldozer build to a Haswell i5 build to tide me over until we find out more about Haswell-E. Although after reading this thread and seeing the still relevant level of performance and what the used/refurbished prices look like, I may try to track down an X55xx or X56xx for the guts of a folding and host server rig...


That's good to hear man. Looks like everything in life has gotten much better. Well I can honestly say the X58 is still a pretty good platform. Even if you aren't looking to do heavy overclocks. You might get lucky and find a decently priced SR-2.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> Awesome write up kana! Got me excited again with my older platform. Repped for sure!
> 
> Looks like I'm going to nab a sabertooth board off a chap on craigslist for a decent price. About $70 less then what they are going on eBay. Includes a i7-950 and ram, if I sell the chip my costs on the board would be about $100


That's a great price. Make sure you run some burn in test on it to ensure it's not defective. Even if it is defective the 5 year warranty might be in effect with the Serial Number. Sounds good to me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelfan*
> 
> Kana, can you do a GTA IV benchmark if you have it please? Thanks. Rep+ for your good work.


Thanks man. I'll get around to GTA IV when I finish a few more games. I'm sure you mean with mods right? I'm planning to max it out with mods. I'll be sure to post results as soon as I can.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I found something interesting while play BF3 @ stock clocks with DDR3-1333Mhz.

Operation Swordbreaker [Campaign] @ 2560 x 1600p
*[Stock Clocks+ DDR3-1333Mhz]:*

*Frame rate:*


*Frame Time:*


CPU: Max: 36C
Gameplay Duration: 22 minutes 57 secs
100,692 frames captured
*FPS Avg: 73fps*
FPS Max: 115fps
FPS Min: 42fps
Frame time Avg: 13.7ms

Running with stock CPU settings - 3.0Ghz [x23] - 3.2Ghz [x24] + DDR3-1333Mhz - there are minor differences when running my PC @4.6Ghz+1600Mhz. From my stock test it appears that most games won't require the 3.8Ghz+ overclock in order to enjoy games in Ultra-high resolution modes [16:10 -2560x1600p]. I had no micro stutter or issues at all. 2560x1600p played like a champ @ 100% maxed out-Ultra Settings 1600p. The X5660 CPU continues to impress me. I only lost approximately 5fps from the 4.6Ghz-DDR3-1600Mhz overclock. The RAW numbers don't lie. My frame time only increased 0.8ms which is no problem at all0. My CPU max was only 36C and the room ambient temp was 24c. This is very good to know and I will continue to test the stock clocks vs the overclock stocks during my real time gaming benchmarks. Not for every benchmark, but for high end games like Crysis 3 100% maxed @ 1080p. I have yet to play multilayer with stock settings. There isn't a huge difference in the Campaign thus far.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Could you make the comparison of 720/1080/1600p cpu usage(via task manager) with oc? Btw are you working with crysis 2?


----------



## cyanmcleod

can you try folding or cpu coin mining to get it up to 100% load and see how temps are after 30 minutes or so please. wanting to see if a 4.4 OC on 6 cores is really as stable as we think. if so i am so getting one of these.


----------



## Firehawk

I'm going to pick a few nits here....

Firstly, in your side to side X79-X58 comparison of features, X58 is listed as having SATA 3 and USB 3.0 support. These are not native to the chipset and are only available as add on features that the individual board manufacturers choose to put on via additional chips. The Marvell chips used for SATA 3 are horrendous performers, that you will never get full speeds out of, and a lot of people have issues with the USB chips that were used too. As a result, I don't think they should be included in the comparison.

Secondly, I think a clock for clock comparison would be more informative. Your x5660 is running at 4.8, the 4970X is running at 4.4 and the 3970X at 4.6. While its commendable that you're able to overclock as much as you did, and I like the fact that you show max OC performance, I'd like to see relative performance as well.

All that being said, I like the comparison thus far, and the effort is appreciated. It's good to see X58 isn't too far behind, but I don't think I'm going to spend anymore money on it at this point. I'll put that towards Haswell-E when it comes out. That $300 might buy me 8GB of DDR4.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyanmcleod*
> 
> can you try folding or cpu coin mining to get it up to 100% load and see how temps are after 30 minutes or so please. wanting to see if a 4.4 OC on 6 cores is really as stable as we think. if so i am so getting one of these.


I can do that. Just post some links for me so I can download the programs. I haven't jumped on Bitcoins just yet. I'm still learning about them. I've been so busy with other things in my life. Post some links for me to those downloads man. Thanks.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Could you make the comparison of 720/1080/1600p cpu usage(via task manager) with oc? Btw are you working with crysis 2?


Yes sir. I can do that. I'll do them tomorrow after work I suppose. I've been pretty busy throughout the day. I'm still working with Crysis 2 Campaign and Multiplayer. I didn't have time to benchmark today. I'll also capture the CPU% for Crysis 2 and Crysis 3 as well. Analyzing all of the data takes a while when I'm working on several games. I'm also going to test my Total War II: Rome. It appears that game depends a lot on the CPU from what I've read. Civ V and GTA IV. I'm going to post them as fast as I can.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> I'm going to pick a few nits here....
> 
> Firstly, in your side to side X79-X58 comparison of features, X58 is listed as having SATA 3 and USB 3.0 support. These are not native to the chipset and are only available as add on features that the individual board manufacturers choose to put on via additional chips. The Marvell chips used for SATA 3 are horrendous performers, that you will never get full speeds out of, and a lot of people have issues with the USB chips that were used too. As a result, I don't think they should be included in the comparison.
> 
> Secondly, I think a clock for clock comparison would be more informative. Your x5660 is running at 4.8, the 4970X is running at 4.4 and the 3970X at 4.6. While its commendable that you're able to overclock as much as you did, and I like the fact that you show max OC performance, I'd like to see relative performance as well.
> 
> All that being said, I like the comparison thus far, and the effort is appreciated. It's good to see X58 isn't too far behind, but I don't think I'm going to spend anymore money on it at this point. I'll put that towards Haswell-E when it comes out. That $300 might buy me 8GB of DDR4.


I don't mind the nits. Everything is welcomed. Alright then, so it's safe to say that X79 doesn't have native PCI-E 3.0 support neither then right?. I never said that SATA 3 and USB 3.0 were native. I included them since most enthusiast finish their research before buying a board that doesn't support features they plan to use. I know some motherboards have the add in SATA 6 chipsets. Users who use the Marvell 9182 will find much better performance than those using the 9128 chipsets from what I've read. However, the 9128 chipsets can't be that bad since some users are posting SSD numbers towards 500 MB/s with the latest Marvell drivers. Then again I've never personally tested my SATA III performance on my board with Intel RST since SATA II+RST has been great for my programs so far. Maybe I'll get another SSD and test it out someday. As for the USB chips, I haven't ran into any issues using my USB 3.0. I read more about the SATA III more than the USB 3.0 as far as issues go.

Well it's hard finding a fair comparison since I'm only running 1600Mhz. Everyone else is running ridiculous amounts of RAM speeds to get those higher numbers. I'm one man so I try to pull scores from reputable review sites. Also I will take your advice and compare my [email protected] to a [email protected] that is ranked on HWBOT for a fair comparison.

*Cinebench R11.5*

[email protected]*4.8Ghz* /w DDR3-2134Mhz = 13.82 [+11.6%]
*X5660 @4.8Ghz /w DDR3-1600Mhz = 12.38* [0.0%]

Now as you can see the i7-3960X is only 11.6% faster than my X5660 with the same CPU speed. I would love to test them clock for clock with the same RAM speed. That's just not going to happen. With faster RAM I could tighten that number. Everyone knows Cinebench loves faster RAM with tighter timings. I try to find more comparisons for you and add it to my review. Clock for Clock for those who would like to see those results.

Thanks for the complement and thanks for reading man. Haswell-E is right around the corner and I'm sure many will jump on it. I think I'll hold on to my X58 a bit longer and wait for prices to drop and revisions. I'm hoping heat isn't a issue like it was for Ivy and Haswell. Also what $300? X5660 are low as $150.00 now. Well that is if everyone doesn't buy them so fast.


----------



## rezax58

Just saw your two threads on anandtech....all i can is wow...logged off for good and will never post there again.


----------



## Firehawk

Well I checked Ebay, and didn't see any that cheap. Maybe I missed them.

As for RAM speeds, that's one problem with X58 that's hard to get around. I have seen some people running Samsung LP RAM around 2200 on the X58, but that's with loose timings like CL 13 or so. You have to play with the multipliers and bclock to get it up there. For most applications 1600 is plenty. Its just the benchmarks where you see it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah it's pretty much the benchmarks that require the fastest memory. 1600Mhz is fine for everyday use and gaming. It does look like the $125 and $150 X5660 have sold out man. Sorry. The only X5660 I see now are engineer samples for $150. There is a X5660 for $100, but you have to bid on it.


----------



## Vlasov_581

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AT80614004320AD-INTEL-XEON-X5650-6-CORE-2-66GHz-12MB-6-40GT-s-95W-PROC-/131092988378?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1e85c041da


----------



## Rage19420

I might pull the plug on one of the engineering samples on eBay. Or maybe make an offer on an x5670 for maybe around $200-$225 and see if anyone bites.


----------



## rezax58

Just ordered an x5650. The ad said it's a slbv3 so I'm hoping that it's true and that I won't get a spicy one. Anyone know how to confirm once I receive it?

Now, what do I do with my I7 930? It's one of the best 930 chips out there....hmmm


----------



## Kana-Maru

Good luck on the bidding Rage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> Just saw your two threads on anandtech....all i can is wow...logged off for good and will never post there again.


Sorry I missed your post. I've been hearing that a lot about anandtech. It just seems like a hostile environment, not to mention it was my first created thread. I'm going to be adding my clock for clock - 4960X and 3960X 4.8Ghz.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> Just ordered an x5650. The ad said it's a slbv3 so I'm hoping that it's true and that I won't get a spicy one. Anyone know how to confirm once I receive it?
> 
> Now, what do I do with my I7 930? It's one of the best 930 chips out there....hmmm


Either sell the 930 or keep it for a backup just in case. Also to answer your question about the "slbv3". Once you revieve the X5650, check the stepping in CPU-Z and report back here. The stepping will be the tell tales.


----------



## Rage19420

I thought I read somewhere that to update nobo bios you will need to update with a native i7 9xx processor. In my case I will still hold onto my i7 920 for that purpose.


----------



## rezax58

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Good luck on the bidding Rage.
> Sorry I missed your post. I've been hearing that a lot about anandtech. It just seems like a hostile environment, not to mention it was my first created thread. I'm going to be adding my clock for clock - 4960X and 3960X 4.8Ghz.
> Either sell the 930 or keep it for a backup just in case. Also to answer your question about the "slbv3". Once you revieve the X5650, check the stepping in CPU-Z and report back here. The stepping will be the tell tales.


Good news, i checked a website and the slbv3 were retail chips with B1 stepping. So I should be ok aslong as the seller used the correct info. I'm thinking about keeping my 930 and finding another ud5, or ud7 to complement it. It does 4.4ghz on air at 1.42 vcore and 4.1ghz at 1.26v!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> I thought I read somewhere that to update nobo bios you will need to update with a native i7 9xx processor. In my case I will still hold onto my i7 920 for that purpose.


Good to know. I know for a fact my Ud7 is compatible after a little bit of research. The last release bios from 2010 unlcocked all these feature including 21x multiplier (or was it x20) so I should be good.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's good to here man. I've taken the suggestion from Firehawk and posted the relative performance for all CPUs @ 4.8Ghz [except the i7-920]

*Cinebench R11.5: Clock for Clock - 4.8Ghz Comparison*

After a recent request was made I decided to post the clock for clock comparisons. Instead of comparing the [email protected] to the lower clocked Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge-E; I have posted the clock for clock comparisons @ 4.8Ghz for the i7-4960X, i7-3960X and the X5660 in Cinebench R11.5. Remember that the i7-4960X and the i7-3960X have faster RAM. If I ever upgrade my RAM I will upgrade the benchmarks. It took a while to find the [email protected] so it must pretty rare. I threw the Quad [email protected] in the mix to give those running Bloomfield's below that clock speed an idea of the potential upgrade percentage. Getting Bloomfield's pass the 4.0-4.2Ghz can be a challenge.



[email protected] + DDR3-1866Mhz = 14.58 [-17.7%]
[email protected] + DDR3-2134Mhz = 13.82 [-11.6%]
X5660 @4.8Ghz + DDR3-1600Mhz = 12.38 [0.0%]
i7-920 @4.4Ghz + DDR3-1600Mhz = 7.41 [+67%]

Originally I wrote the Cinebench 11.5 review for the L5639 comparison and added the X5660 results. This should provide a better comparison for those looking to upgrade to the X5660. The X5660 still holds it's ground. Clock for clock coming within 11.6% of the highly clocked 3970X is pretty damn good. The 3970X was taken from HWBOT as well. The i7-4960X increased from 13% to nearly 18%. The X5660 is still within 17.7% of the i7-4960X. The comparison is still a bit one sided since I'm running legacy tech and using lower memory speed. I'm still impressed with the X5660. The X5660 is 67% faster than the [email protected] You don't find a lot of i7-920 running 4.8Ghz without nearly ruining the chip. The i7-4960X is a whopping 96.7% faster than the i7-920. Even if the i7-920 was running 4.8Ghz I'm sure the 4960X would still stomp it by at least 80%. With all of that being said I hope this answers more unasked questions.

I'll get around to gaming benchmarks eventually. I had a long day at work today.


----------



## ruggercb

I first ordered an L5639 from ebay but the seller took his sweet time about shipping, so I've cancelled the transaction, and am now awaiting an X5650. Hoping it works well. The 5650 is "New Bulk" with a 90 day warranty, so that also makes me feel a little better about it.


----------



## rezax58

Received my X5650 today and just finished installing it now. Bios settings are on Auto except for Ram. Already notice a difference. Everything seems to be snappier. There is some noise coming from around the CPU though. It sounds like one of those power saving features intel includes on their chip like on my laptop.



EDIT: 4.2ghz OC


----------



## Kana-Maru

Looks good man







! Run some benchmarks. Also it's a Xeon - it's using the C-states as well and does great with power.saving. Even if I overclock my CPU to 4.8Ghz it will still down clocks to around 2Ghz. At stock clocks it down clocks to 1.6Ghz. How long do you think I will be before you start overclocking it?


----------



## rezax58

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Looks good man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ! Run some benchmarks. Also it's a Xeon - it's using the C-states as well and does great with power.saving. Even if I overclock my CPU to 4.8Ghz it will still down clocks to around 2Ghz. At stock clocks it down clocks to 1.6Ghz. How long do you think I will be before you start overclocking it?


Hey man if you go back to my post I edited with a picture of 4.2ghz. I can safely say that this chip is not power hungry at all. Very similar to my 930!

The cpu coil/static noise is kind of annoying though, I may disable c3/6/9 or whatever it is in bios and see if that stops it.

OH and hope you don't mind me posting these in your thread. I totally understand if you would like me to take it down!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nah man I don't mind you posting at all. It's 100% no issue with me. Glad to see you running 4.2Ghz. That's pretty much all you'll need for gaming. Even if you run a Quad setup, 4.2Ghz should be perfectly fine. Also run Prime95 and Memtest to make sure everything is working properly. IntelBurnTest is great as well. I'm pretty sure you'll be able to hit 4.6Ghz with safe vCore. At least I'm hoping you can. You don't have to take down the pictures man.

I've never heard CPU coil\noise come from my CPU or any that I've ever owned. I hope you can fix that issue.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*The Cousins Bellic + It's Your Call Missions @2560x1600p:*

Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz

Gameplay Duration: 27 minutes 4 secs
Captured 78,263 frames
*FPS Avg: 48fps*
FPS Max: 72fps
FPS Min: 30fps
Frame time Avg: 20.8ms

Using the latest high-end mods makes GTA IV looks fantastic. I'm running the game maxed out + mods. I'm also running all of the unrestricted command lines. The Frame rate is decent and the frame time was great. The game was a little choppy at first, but got better as I continued to play. The game was very playable. It all depends on the area. Some areas will be a bit choppy along with input delay. Other areas are perfectly fine.The fps were as steady as I would like personally, but that isn't a bad thing. I did not use the V-sync option, but I'm sure it would help. The CPU Usage Average was 30%. However, this all changed when I overclocked my CPU [read below].

*Three's a Crowd + First Date Missions @ 2560x1600p:*

Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz

Gameplay Duration: 23 minutes 4 secs
Captured 76,908 frames
*FPS Avg: 55fps*
FPS Max: 94fps
FPS Min: 25fps
Frame time Avg: 18.6ms

After running my overclock settings while increasing my RAM from 1333Mhz to 1600Mhz, GTA IV with mods is much more playable. Not only did I gain 7 frames per second and lowering my frame time average to 18.6ms, the game was very playable. The frame rate was steady. I never benchmark with V-sync for obvious reasons, but with my overclocked X5660 I didn't need to use V-sync to keep the frames steady. If I were to overclock my GPU to 1241Mhz I'm sure I could get well over 60fps. I'm just running stock clocks to keep the heat low and to give everyone an example of stock speeds. There was no input lag and no latency issues. I believe a minor overclock to 3.8Ghz-4.2Ghz would be fine. The CPU Usage Average was on 15% while playing.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> Received my X5650 today and just finished installing it now. Bios settings are on Auto except for Ram. Already notice a difference. Everything seems to be snappier. There is some noise coming from around the CPU though. It sounds like one of those power saving features intel includes on their chip like on my laptop.
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: 4.2ghz OC


what`s better oc you can reach?


----------



## Asus11

this thread makes me want to go back to 1366


----------



## Vlasov_581

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> this thread makes me want to go back to 1366


After playing with some many different chipsets, 1366 was the one that stuck with me


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm planning on holding on to my LGA1366-X58 for a long time. My upgrade itch is eased. I'm still excited for the octo cores, but I hope the prices aren't outrageous. Knowing Intel I'm sure they will be pretty high and you'll have to get the K-version to overclock.


----------



## Bonn93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm planning on holding on to my LGA1366-X58 for a long time. My upgrade itch is eased. I'm still excited for the octo cores, but I hope the prices aren't outrageous. Knowing Intel I'm sure they will be pretty high and you'll have to get the K-version to overclock.


Hell yeah! I'm in the same boat. I'll be going to an Intel 8 core, probably Xeon next. New fileserver with my current rig I think! who's got an overclocked fileserver!?


----------



## Bonn93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks to the widespread news of the hex cores, USED Asus Sabertooth X58's have increased in price. It's going to be hard to find a cheap one now. Anywhere from $230-$300+ is what I've been seeing since late last year. Sabertooth X58 were as low as $110-150, but not anymore.
> Thank man! X58 users should unite. We are still using an extremely viable platform that can still run any graphic card released today. I'm sure the platform does surprise everyone, which is probably why the X58 boards have been skyrocketing over the past year or so. I saw a Sabertooth X58 for $800 brand new on Amazon. Funny thing is someone actually purchased it. Now there's only 1 for $229.99. I'm going to posting my gaming benchmarks soon.
> 
> A lot of the 6-cores have been selling out all across Ebay. Good luck man. I hope you find a nice chip one that's good and not defective.


Man did I just hit the jackpot!

We have a bunch of Dell 710s with dual X5660/ X5650 Hex cores being decommissioned mid this year! May have to pay the company a little bit, but I'll get a bargain.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah I've worked quit a few Dell Power Edges over the years for my job. That's pretty good to hear man. I'm sure you'll get one hell of a deal.

I've been playing Total War: Rome II and man it definitely CPU\GPU dependent. I'll definitely have to do some comparisons. The game 100% maxed out @ 1080p is making my 2GB reference 670 @ stock + CPU @ stock struggle a bit. Playable, but the frame rate isn't all that great. It's very playable though. I'm gonna have to overclock them back to 1241Mhz in order to get better fps and run my CPU @ 4.6Ghz. I can run benchmarks and post my results if anyone cares.

Edit: I cleaned up the very first post. The review should be much easier to navigate through now. Let me know if it's better.


----------



## ruggercb

Got my 5650 today. Benchmarks look promising. It runs almost as well stock as my i7 920 does at 3.8 but I can't get the system to reboot now. It sits there and periodically blinks the power button and cycles the fans. None of the mobo lights come on. It will only go to BIOS if I pull the power cord then plug it back in. After that it boots fine. Would this have to do with the C states? I have everything set to enabled.

I've messed with all the boot orders and AHCI stuff and it hasn't made a difference.


----------



## Bonn93

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Got my 5650 today. Benchmarks look promising. It runs almost as well stock as my i7 920 does at 3.8 but I can't get the system to reboot now. It sits there and periodically blinks the power button and cycles the fans. None of the mobo lights come on. It will only go to BIOS if I pull the power cord then plug it back in. After that it boots fine. Would this have to do with the C states? I have everything set to enabled.
> 
> I've messed with all the boot orders and AHCI stuff and it hasn't made a difference.


New CPU, I would restore your BIOS to defaults and get it booting first. Then start your tweaks prior to OC settings.


----------



## Rage19420

You updated to the latest bios rev?


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> You updated to the latest bios rev?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bonn93*
> 
> New CPU, I would restore your BIOS to defaults and get it booting first. Then start your tweaks prior to OC settings.


Everything is set to default, and I've cleared the CMOS and reinstalled the latest bios. Still only boots after I pull the power cord, then it's fine.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's weird. I really don't know what to suggest. It should run at stock all day. If it's still not working you might want to return it.


----------



## rezax58

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Everything is set to default, and I've cleared the CMOS and reinstalled the latest bios. Still only boots after I pull the power cord, then it's fine.


Try unplugging all case wires from your motherboard and then turn on the pc by using a flat head screwdriver on the jumper. See if that works


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> Try unplugging all case wires from your motherboard and then turn on the pc by using a flat head screwdriver on the jumper. See if that works


It acts just the same. It goes into the loop until I turn off/unplug the PSU, then it boots with the screwdriver. I didn't unplug the reset switch or the HD LED wire. Does that matter? In addition to that, I reseated the CPU and applied the "less is more" method of thermal paste. I also reseated my PCI cards, all the RAM, unplugged the CPU power and MOBO power, reset the bios, cleared the DMI pool and reflashed to the latest revision.

Once I have this thing in Windows, this chip is great! At stock it's running very near ambient temps. I played BF4 last night for almost an hour with it overclocked at 3.8 GHz too and voltages on "auto". No problems. What gives with this boot BS?!?

Thanks everyone for the advice so far.

EDIT I removed all the case wires and that didn't change anything. Also, I set it to sleep from windows and it woke up fine from that. I also ran my hibernate task from task scheduler and it woke fine from that as well.

EDIT 2 After putting the PC to both sleep and hibernate, it restarts and powers off and on normally. I kept thinking it had something to do with the sleep states and whatnot, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about that. I've restarted and powered down multiple times and it's working fine. Crazy! I think I'll leave the BIOS at stock for a while...don't want to tempt fate.









EDIT 3 Well, it was an unfortunate coincidence that made me think it was sleep states. As it turns out, the latest revision of the mobo's bios is what won't let it boot properly. I reverted to what the mobo shipped with and it boots fine. Only problem now is it won't post when I try to OC the X5650. All I've done is leave everything at auto and change the BCLK to 200 and let the ram run @1600, it's rated speed. Gotta reset the CMOS to get back to the bios.

Oh well. At stock it is still some faster than my i7 920 @ 3.8.


----------



## Asus11

hmm time to have some fun


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hmm time to have some fun










Nice board.


----------



## Akadaka

I came from one of the earlier dual cores to x79 3960x 2 years ago it was massive upgrade but 1366 is still modern tech if I had it id stay on it too, even when Haswell-E comes out it won't be much of a upgrade to x79 it will have 2 extra cores which will be good but won't effect real world performance much other than video editing, gaming still isn't maxing out older 6 core models.


----------



## ruggercb

My 5650 is working pretty well now. I have it clocked at 3.5 GHz, idles at 28 C, full load runs at 50 C. For whatever reason, the whole system is a lot cooler, including the video cards. At 3.5 it does a full Blu Ray rip in Handbrake approx 50% faster than my i7 920 @3.8 did. It took a little work, but it was worth it for the results.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> My 5650 is working pretty well now. I have it clocked at 3.5 GHz, idles at 28 C, full load runs at 50 C. For whatever reason, the whole system is a lot cooler, including the video cards. At 3.5 it does a full Blu Ray rip in Handbrake approx 50% faster than my i7 920 @3.8 did. It took a little work, but it was worth it for the results.


your i7 920 was a 45nm chip,these x5650 are 32nm


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> I came from one of the earlier dual cores to x79 3960x 2 years ago it was massive upgrade but 1366 is still modern tech if I had it id stay on it too, even when Haswell-E comes out it won't be much of a upgrade to x79 it will have 2 extra cores which will be good but won't effect real world performance much other than video editing, gaming still isn't maxing out older 6 core models.


You are probably right. I believe people stopped believing in true Intel upgrades a few years ago. Not much has changed after 1366 as far as benchmarks, gaming and everyday use goes. Some people still try to bash the X58 platform from time to time, but it's still a contender. You also forget to mention "benchmarks". I really hope people don't spend a ton of money on DDR4 and\or Haswell-E just to get high benchmark scores. Everyday task rarely makes a difference with the right setup after it's all said and done. Hell added a SSD will make the PC speedier than ever. I'm thinking of setting up RAID soon [with HDDs]. More cores will net better scores, but I wonder if it will be able to hit 5.2-5.4Ghz with safe voltage. More than likely not. I'm getting tired of the 4.6Ghz-4.8Ghz limitations. Of course people can go higher, but you won't be able to run CPUs for that long with high voltages. Games haven't even maxed Hex Cores clocked at 3.6Ghz-3.8Ghz just yet. At least not the high-end games. Maybe the next gen consoles will change that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> My 5650 is working pretty well now. I have it clocked at 3.5 GHz, idles at 28 C, full load runs at 50 C. For whatever reason, the whole system is a lot cooler, including the video cards. At 3.5 it does a full Blu Ray rip in Handbrake approx 50% faster than my i7 920 @3.8 did. It took a little work, but it was worth it for the results.


Congrats and as PontiacGTX said the 32nm makes a big difference. X5650 generate less heat and utilize the C-states, which leads to low voltage and power usage. I run my X5660 @ stock for now and have no issues with everyday task [never goes above 35C at 100% Usage ]. I'm running stock for the low power wattage benefits. I overclock whenever I need to. Lately I've been overclocking for benchmarks.
----

I've been running a lot of benchmarks while playing Total War: Rome II. I've been comparing the CPU speeds-stock vs OC'd @ 1080p 100% maxed. I'll post the results when I get everything typed up. I've already analyzed all of my data.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Total War: Rome II*



*Prologue - The Siege of Capua @1920 x 1080:*

*Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz*
CPU Avg: 28%
CPU Max: 54%
Gameplay Duration: 19 minutes 46secs
23,885 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 20fps*
FPS Max: 55fps
FPS Min: 10fps
Frame time Avg: 49.6ms

I added the CPU Usage info for anyone who wanted to know the difference between stock vs overclock usage. It was pretty late when I performed this benchmark so I forget to log the CPU temperatures.

In the past I found that most games don't rely on the CPU heavily. Most recently High-end games like BF3 for example can run fine without massive CPU overclocks as I've posted. Sometimes the gains aren't worth the power and CPU voltage. Well that isn't the case with Total War: Rome II. This game depends on the CPU a lot. A decently clocked CPU can make your experience pleasant. If your CPU is slow then obviously things won't go over so smoothly with your eyes and key input. As you can see from my benchmark above, I didn't have the best experience.

My Xeon is clocked @ 3.2Ghz, which then down clocks to 3.0Ghz after two cores are being used. Although I played through the Prologue with minor issues for my taste [or just hype for the game], some things can't be ignored. Random stutter, random input lag and low FPS. Input delay and difficulties with the controls due to micro "like" stuttering. Now what makes the "Prologue" different than the "Campaign" is that there is no overworld menu. The game places you directly in a huge battle with hundreds, if not thousands of soldiers on the screen at any given time. The level is pretty large as well. Not to forget to mention that I'm playing the game 100% MAXED as I showed in the picture above. The game is gorgeous, but the gameplay wasn't the best. 20 fps isn't that bad when everything is moving at a steady motion. However, once there's a lot of things happening on screen you can expect anywhere from 17-27 fps. The frame time was all over the place and was literally Spiking rapidly during my benchmark test. Two of my highest spikes were 88.8ms and 104ms! That is very unacceptable; however, it only happened twice respectfully. The experience was passable, but far from decent. Also remember than I'm running the 2GB reference GTX 670 for testing to give a fair CPU comparison. Read below for my overclocked settings.

*Prologue - The Siege of Capua @1920 x 1080: Overclock 4.6Ghz+1600Mhz RAM*

*Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz*
CPU Usage Avg: 27%
CPU Usage Avg: 38%
CPU Temp: Avg: 49C
CPU Max: 54C
Room Ambient: Approx: 22C
Gameplay Duration: 17 minutes 29secs
35,112 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 33fps*
FPS Max: 77fps
FPS Min: 18fps
Frame time Avg: 29.9ms

Now that I've overclocked my CPU to 4.6Ghz and increased my DRAM to 1600Mhz everything is much better now. I gained 13 much needed frames per second. To make things even better, the frame rate dropped 19.7ms from 49.6ms which puts me at 29.9ms; which is very good. The experience was much better. I instantly noticed the increase in fps and smoother gameplay. There was also no input delay. Everything was smooth and the 33fps appears to be constant. The frame per second usually stayed above 40 throughout the benchmark test.

There was no rapid spiking in the frame rates and frame time during the benchmark. In the last test my frame time spiked to ridiculous number, over 100ms. Although it only happened one my overclocked settings were obviously much better. My highest frame time was 55.8ms and 74.7ms. What matters most is the average fps and frame time overall. The Prologue was very enjoyable. I had no slowdowns to steady frame times and frame rates. I'm going to use my 4.2Ghz OC settings instead of 4.6Ghz in my next test to see if there's a big difference between 4.6Ghz and 4.2Ghz. 4.2Ghz will be easy for most overclockers to hit. 100% MAXED in a massive game like this is fine with me. I could always downgrade the graphic to Ultra instead of Extreme. However, I'm sticking with the Extreme + 100% max settings.

*Campaign Mode @1920 x 1080:*

*Campaign - First 2 hours @1920 x 1080:*
*Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz*
CPU Avg: 24%
CPU Max: 100%
CPU Temp Avg: 30c
CPU Temp Max: 37c
Ambient Temp: 19C
Gameplay Duration: 1 hour 57 secs
136,535 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 37fps*
FPS Max: 80fps
FPS Min: 13fps
Frame time Avg: 26.8ms

I figured that I'd benchmark this game as I played it. I really like this game. It's pretty deep like other RTS games. Despite all of the fun I had playing the game, there were some major issues. Before I jump right into the issues I need to distinguish the Prologue from the Campaign. The Campaign is the "story". The prologue obviously is what leads to the Campaign\story, but what makes it different is that the Prologue has no overworld map. The Prologue places you directly in battle and the Campaign allows you to control everything with different menus. The reason I'm explaining this is because you can see that the frames per second is up 17fps in the Campaign [37fps] instead of 20fps in the Prologue. The Campaign doesn't focus solely on decisive battles. However, the overworld view is pretty demanding. Scrolling fast across the map caused my frame rate to drop extremely low [13 - 19fps]. The drop was sharp and unexpected as well. There was a bit of stutter while playing which ultimately leads to input delay.

Overall the game played much better. This was due to the areas being much smaller than the Prologue and having fewer enemies on screen. So battles were a lot better than the Prologue. The average frame times were a lot better, but could not prevent the micro stutter issues on the overworld map. The CPU average was low, but the CPU obviously wasn't moving data quick enough. The CPU actually hit 100% during my play through. This could be a error or it could have happened while the overworld map was stuttering. That's definitely not good, but overall the game was decent and very playable. There were some stutter issues that I could not ignore on the overworld map.

*Campaign - 1 hour 41 minutes @1920 x 1080: Overclock 4.6Ghz+1600Mhz RAM*

*Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz
X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz*
CPU Usage Avg: 22%
CPU Usage Max: 37%
CPU Temp Avg: 45c
CPU Temp Max: 60c
Ambient Temp: 22c
Gameplay Duration: 1 hour 10 mins
189,477 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 47fps*
FPS Max: 89fps
FPS Min: 19fps
Frame time Avg: 21.4ms

I gained 10fps after overclocking the CPU and RAM. The frame time was much better as well. Overall the gameplay was much better. 4.2Ghz will get you 42fps. 4.6Ghz does make a difference, but 4Ghz-4.2Ghz will be fine for playing this game if you have a GTX 670 or anything near the 2GB reference specs.

Hopefully this helps those X58 users who are still wondering if the X5660 or L5639 will be worth it for gaming. Well the answer is yes it will be.


----------



## Artikbot

This post does nothing but further set the grounds for this idea that's been cooking in my head for the past couple of months. Sell the Phenom, the motherboard, and the memory and purchase a Xeon hexa with an X58 motherboard. The rest of my machine is plenty capable of taking it.

Very nice post OP


----------



## Whisky2

Kana-Maru because of you I exchange my old i7 [email protected] to Xeon E5645.

1,3V 19*211 + Turbo


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Whisky2*
> 
> Kana-Maru because of you I exchange my old i7 [email protected] to Xeon E5645.
> 
> 1,3V 19*211 + Turbo


Nice OC.

This thread makes me want to pick up a x58 board for my E5630 I have sitting around.


----------



## Rage19420

Ive been doing some CPU mining on MAX and using 8 of 12 cores.



Should i be worried?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> This post does nothing but further set the grounds for this idea that's been cooking in my head for the past couple of months. Sell the Phenom, the motherboard, and the memory and purchase a Xeon hexa with an X58 motherboard. The rest of my machine is plenty capable of taking it.
> 
> Very nice post OP


Thanks man. I'm going to continue to add more data+benchmarks as I complete them. If you can find the CPU+MB at a good price then go for it. As far as gaming and and video compression\rendering. Faster RAM makes things even better. I love AMD, but Intel has a choke hold on the market. I wish we had more options than Intel, but these Hex cores are great.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Nice OC.
> 
> This thread makes me want to pick up a x58 board for my E5630 I have sitting around.


Do it if you can find a good motherboard for it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Whisky2*
> 
> Kana-Maru because of you I exchange my old i7 [email protected] to Xeon E5645.
> 
> 1,3V 19*211 + Turbo


That's good to hear man. That's pretty good OC as well..How is it so far? I'm sure the benchmarks are looking much better. How is everyday programs running?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> Ive been doing some CPU mining on MAX and using 8 of 12 cores.
> 
> 
> 
> Should i be worried?


I wouldn't be that worried at those temps, but I would be worried if you continue to run the Westmere at those temps for a very long time when it comes to testing, folding or mining. I never really mine for bitcoins that much with the CPU anyways. My personal Load temps must be under 70c [64c-70c] for me to run them for a long time. Anything over 72c can be harmful over time. So yeah I would be a little worried and focus on dropping the temps by adjusting some settings or lowering your ambient temp.


----------



## Whisky2

Quote:


> That's good to hear man. That's pretty good OC as well..How is it so far? I'm sure the benchmarks are looking much better.


Good, but good can turn to better







. Benchmark are looking better, only 3d Mark 2011 shows no difference - P9450 pts, but what can I expect from old CF 5870.
Quote:


> How is everyday programs running?


Four cores are fast enough for me, but whenever I need more multitasking i see the difference.
Especially in Virtual Box when start 2x Linux, win 8 and 2k8 there is a big difference.
Everyday system partition backup with data compression in Acronis is definitely faster.

What can I say less heat, lower power consumption and everything run faster







.

English isn't my first language, so please excuse any mistakes.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's good to hear man. Your English is fine. Yeah these Hex cores are work horses. They will definitely benefit those who game in windowed mode while checking on others things. These will last much longer than the i7-920 and will provide good benefits for gaming.

I'm going to be testing out my streaming results soon. I'm going to see how well my build works with CPU intensive streaming settings. I'm looking for volunteers if anyone is interested.


----------



## Vlasov_581

this thread has become one of my favorite. nice work Kana-Maru


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vlasov_581*
> 
> this thread has become one of my favorite. nice work Kana-Maru


Thanks a lot man. I'll continue to update benchmarks as I complete them. I wish I could get some SB - IB - Haswell data. It's a bit hard gathering a lot of the data for comparisons.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Ok guys I was able to accomplish something good. I broke my old record and hit 5.2Ghz this morning.









http://valid.canardpc.com/tbsew3



I had a few failures and fixed my issues. My room ambient temp is a little warm since my gf turned on the heat earlier. I'll try to run a few benchmarks later, but I can't make any promises right now. I don't like all of that voltage running through my microprocessor.


----------



## Rage19420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Ok guys I was able to accomplish something good. I broke my old record and hit 5.2Ghz this morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/tbsew3
> 
> *Validation Link:*
> http://valid.canardpc.com/tbsew3
> 
> I had a few failures and fixed my issues. My room ambient temp is a little warm since my gf turned on the heat earlier. I'll try to run a few benchmarks later, but I can't make any promises right now. I don't like all of that voltage running through my microprocessor.


Wow, that is awesome!


----------



## kpforce1

I'm just waiting for one of these x56xx to pop up at the right price







Love the thread


----------



## Kana-Maru

How much are you willing to pay? I paid about $200 for mines. Best purchase for my build so far


----------



## Akadaka

I wonder how the X5690 compares to the x5660.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> How much are you willing to pay? I paid about $200 for mines. Best purchase for my build so far


That is what I'm seeing them for... i almost picked up a x5650 for $100 but lost out at the last second







. I really want a x5660 or better but it looks like $200 or so is the going rate for them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> I wonder how the X5690 compares to the x5660.


The additional multipliers of the x5690 is what makes it a nicer option but you will PAY for that lol. I have two x5679's in my Force1 build that I paid quite a bit for a year ago.

HERE is a comparison for them


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> I wonder how the X5690 compares to the x5660.


For the price of the X5690.....it's definitely not worth it. No one is going to let those CPUs [X5690] go for a decent price. Anyone would be better off upgrading their platforms if they are even considering the Xeon X5690. From the looks of the X5690 and the X5660, the X5660 would be the better choice at this point.

A quick looks tell me that the X5690 is easier to overclock, but has a higher TDP rating and requires more power. The X5690 is simply clocked higher with a higher Multiplier making overclocking much easier at lower BLCK

Hell other than the TDP ratings, power usage, higher clock and multiplier\ratio there is *NOTHING* different between them. Just more Intel marketing. The LGA1366 is capable of high clocks, but Intel wants top dollar and so does resellers. I would put the X5660 ahead of the X5690 mainly due to money saved on the monthly+year electric bill. X5660 is easy as hell to overclock as well. 166-BLCK will easily get you 4Ghz with the X5660. Pretty much ever board is able is able to run 133-175 BLCK with little resistance. Going towards 200 and above is where things get tricky.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> That is what I'm seeing them for... i almost picked up a x5650 for $100 but lost out at the last second
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I really want a x5660 or better but it looks like $200 or so is the going rate for them.


Man that's sucks. Sorry to hear about the X5650. $200 or more is the price for the X5660 now. You might be able to find one cheaper. You'll probably have to bid on it though.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> For the price of the X5690.....it's definitely not worth it. No one is going to let those CPUs [X5690] go for a decent price. Anyone would be better off upgrading their platforms if they are even considering the Xeon X5690. From the looks of the X5690 and the X5660, the X5660 would be the better choice at this point.
> 
> A quick looks tell me that the X5690 is easier to overclock, but has a higher TDP rating and requires more power. The X5690 is simply clocked higher with a higher Multiplier making overclocking much easier at lower BLCK
> 
> Hell other than the TDP ratings, power usage, higher clock and multiplier\ratio there is *NOTHING* different between them. Just more Intel marketing. The LGA1366 is capable of high clocks, but Intel wants top dollar and so does resellers. I would put the X5660 ahead of the X5690 mainly due to money saved on the monthly+year electric bill. X5660 is easy as hell to overclock as well. 166-BLCK will easily get you 4Ghz with the X5660. Pretty much ever board is able is able to run 133-175 BLCK with little resistance. Going towards 200 and above is where things get tricky.
> Man that's sucks. Sorry to hear about the X5650. $200 or more is the price for the X5660 now. You might be able to find one cheaper. You'll probably have to bid on it though.


Not to mention all of the data centers running x56xx based servers. I have 38 of them in my data center (2 Xeon CPU's per). I've upgraded 4 of them and it is pricey. Thats why the price of Xeons always stays very high.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Not to mention all of the data centers running x56xx based servers. I have 38 of them in my data center (2 Xeon CPU's per). I've upgraded 4 of them and it is pricey. Thats why the price of Xeons always stays very high.


Trust me I know. I just installed 3 servers [and configured them] running Ivy-Bridge Xeons l and they were pretty pricey. They retail for a arm and leg. OEM is usually the cheapest way for most companies. I just thinking about a SR-2 with dual X5990. High ratio and high frequency would definitely prove to be a future proof build. The X5690 carries the premium price so I'm going to pass unless I find one for a price I can't refuse. Being that I'm using a 6 year old platform it's going to have to be cheap. However, I'm confident the X5660 is all I need for now.


----------



## Akadaka

Kana-Maru I was just wondering why do I get YouTube Stuttering when watching HD videos the buffer is way ahead but it stutters I should not be getting that with a system like mine do others get it is it normal?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> Kana-Maru I was just wondering why do I get YouTube Stuttering when watching HD videos the buffer is way ahead but it stutters I should not be getting that with a system like mine do others get it is it normal?


Ah that's easy. You're using Windows 8.x mate! Just joking, but seriously there were some reports of high latency in Windows 8 when compared to Win 7 and previous OS's. It's a pain in the ass too. Is it happening in different browsers? Even if so it won't matter. I've had problems similar to yours. For me it was the audio constantly clipping and popping. For others it was the video AND audio having latency\stutter issues.

I was having the same issues at one point and it turned out to be some bad adobe drivers at first. Then it turned out I had to increase my IOH and ICH10 voltage. The first thing you can try is to either upgrade or downgrade your Adobe flash drivers. Secondly, check your Java drivers to ensure they are up to date [won't hurt to check:thumb:]. Sometimes it can be Nvidia drivers that causes it. Lastly be sure to make sure you aren't catching lag. The problem is the DPC lag could be hardware or software related, making it hard to pin point. What I would do if I were you be to check your PC for issues.

Next, you'll need to go to his website to download the DPC Latency checker:
http://www.thesycon.de/eng/latency_check.shtml

Here is a picuture of my PC running the Latency Checker:









As you can see I have no issues, but I did have issues with my Xeon L5639 at one point. My audio was clipping and lagging. I needed to increase the voltages as I explained above to get rid of the problems. In your case you'll need to pin point the issue by disabling certain items in Device Manger etc. Read the link above for more info. Hopefully I was able to assist you with this problem. I know personally how big of a pain it can be.


----------



## Akadaka

Well mine is real high 1000-1200 why is it that high??


----------



## Akadaka

Could it be my internet?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> Well mine is real high 1000-1200 why is it that high??


Well as I said it can be either hardware or software related. The link where you downloaded the will explain things more. It's a lot to read, but you'll be better of reading it to understand what to look for easily. You need to start by disabling certain devices in Device Manager to see if that fixes the issues and latency. If that does work then disable another device. Also be sure to read the website since there's a Windows 8 notice at the very top of the page. Continue to read and the link will explain some good steps to finding the issue.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> Could it be my internet?


I doubt if it's your internet at this point. Check and post your internet speed if you think that is it. Being that DPC is finding issues higher than 1000.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well as I said it can be either hardware or software related. The link where you downloaded the will explain things more. It's a lot to read, but you'll be better of reading it to understand what to look for easily. You need to start by disabling certain devices in Device Manager to see if that fixes the issues and latency. If that does work then disable another device. Also be sure to read the website since there's a Windows 8 notice at the very top of the page. Continue to read and the link will explain some good steps to finding the issue.
> I doubt if it's your internet at this point. Check and post your internet speed if you think that is it. Being that DPC is finding issues higher than 1000.


Not sure if I know how to fix it I uninstalled RSTE and Installed RST instead and it made no difference I don't know why it's so high.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well try disabling devices in manager like the LAN etc. DO NOT disable anything that Windows need to run [SATA controller Hard Drives etc.] Otherwise you can try a system restore [if enabled] if it is indeed a software issue conflicting with hardware.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well try disabling devices in manager like the LAN etc. DO NOT disable anything that Windows need to run [SATA controller Hard Drives etc.] Otherwise you can try a system restore [if enabled] if it is indeed a software issue conflicting with hardware.


I have already disabled both my wireless card and my onboard nic both show the same.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Those aren't the only things that you can disable. There's a ton of things in device manager. Also check the drivers for your graphic cards. In the past I've read of those giving the same issues you are experiencing. The website is pretty straight forward with info. How long has this been happening? Did you do something to your PC before this started happening. That can be new hardware or upgrading drivers etc.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Those aren't the only things that you can disable. There's a ton of things in device manager. Also check the drivers for your graphic cards. In the past I've read of those giving the same issues you are experiencing. The website is pretty straight forward with info. How long has this been happening? Did you do something to your PC before this started happening. That can be new hardware or upgrading drivers etc.


I have noticed it for a while I can't remember if it happened on Windows 7, but I just thought it was YouTube and everyone got it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> I have noticed it for a while I can't remember if it happened on Windows 7, but I just thought it was YouTube and everyone got it.


Try other video sites to see if you get a stutter. How are does your videos look locally on your PC? Have you tied different browsers since this has been happening [Chrome\Firefox\IE - etc]? You can also try HTML5 to view youtube videos if you want to test it out. -" https://www.youtube.com/html5 "- You will have to find the main cause or causes of latency.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Star Swarm Stress Test [Benchmark Tool v1.0] - Extreme - Attract @ 1920 x 1080*
Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 966Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz[
CPU Avg: 17%
CPU Max: 41%
CPU Temp Avg: 29c
CPU Temp Max: 32c
Room Ambient: 21c
Gameplay Duration: 6 minutes
7494 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 20fps*
FPS Max: N/A [Benchmark Tool]
FPS Min: 3fps
Frame time Avg: N/A [Benchmark Tool]

*Star Swarm Stress Test [Benchmark Tool v1.0] - Extreme - Follow @ 1920 x 1080*
Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 966Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz
CPU Avg: 15%
CPU Max: 32%
CPU Temp Avg: 29c
CPU Temp Max: 33c
Room Ambient: 21c
Gameplay Duration: 6 minutes
9296 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 26fps*
FPS Max: N/A [Benchmark Tool]
FPS Min: 3.5fps
Frame time Avg: N/A [Benchmark Tool]

*Star Swarm Stress Test [Real Time Benchmarks] - Extreme - Follow @ 1920 x 1080*
Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 966Mhz
*X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz*
CPU Avg: 12%
CPU Max: 25%
CPU Temp Avg: 46c
CPU Temp Max: 51c
Room Ambient: 21c
Gameplay Duration: 6 minutes
13905 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 39fps*
FPS Max: 124fps
FPS Min: 5fps
Frame time Avg: 25.9ms

Alright so I've ran more test for those wondering if the Hex cores are worth it for gaming. In this test I've overclocked my GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI to 966Mhz which boost up to 1241Mhz to take on the Star Swarm Stress Test. It was recently updated on Steam. So it's a pretty decent GPU overclock. I'm comparing my X5660 @ 3.2Ghz-DDR3-1333Mhz and 4.6Ghz-DDR3-1600Mhz. The first two test were ran using only the Benchmark Tool\Stress Test and I did not run my personal tests. However, I did perform my Real Time Benchmarks along with the Star Swarm Benchmark Tool in the last test [4.6Ghz-1600Mhz].

*3.2Ghz DDR3-1333Mhz Results:*
The X5660 @ 3.2Ghz & overclocked GTX 670s with the Extreme Preset appears to playable. When there are a lot of things happening on the screen the game simply drops the frame rate sharply. You can be at 30-40fps and the next second you are rapidly dropping to 10fps; even worse 3 fps. It seemed like a slow motion scene in the Matrix. I was using the benchmark tool so I'm guessing the frame times were near the 180ms-200ms mark. This could simply be a performance issue with the GTX 670 2GB limitation and specs. This benchmark is definitely demanding and should bring most cards to their knees.

*4.6Ghz DDR3-1600Mhz Results:*
Now to lift any bottlenecking I've OC'd my CPU. Anyone running 3.8Ghz Hex-Core and higher should have no major bottlenecks. I also run my CPU overclocked to 4.6Ghz because it only requires 1.36vCore which is safe as it gets with higher overclocks. With all of that being said this Benchmark Tool does rely on a decently clocked Intel CPU or AMDs APU to even it up with better results. I'm comparing the Extreme - Follow @ 1920x1080 results. If you look at the comparisons above you'll see some pretty interesting results. The most obviously being that the Extreme - Follow @ 1920x1080presets showed an increase of 13fps. From 26fps [3.2Ghz] to 39fps [4.6Ghz]. That's actually really good. That's a 50% increase! The frames per second aren't the only tell-tale. If you take a look at the frames that were actually captured, you'll a huge increase of around 50% as well. The CPU can keep up with the GPU which allows for more frames to be captured during the benchmark. Which means you'll have a more pleasant experience while playing. The frame time was a very good as well [25.9ms]. The GTX 670 2GB reference still suffered from the extremely high Frame times. My highest was 140ms which knocked my frames down to 5fps. So as I said above anyone running 3.8Ghz or higher Hex-cores shouldn't really have any bottleneck issues. With that being said this benchmark is rough on graphic cards. I personally prefer to post results from actual gameplay. However, this will do for now. Feel free to compare your GPU scores and CPU speed.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've also posted some more Titanfall Beta gameplay on my Youtube page. Check it out. It's a pretty decent game.



I was on Twitter recently and notice a post from Asus. The post spoke about their "RealBench V2 Leaderboard". I thought I'd give it a shot and compare it to the number 1 leader in the world. I did even better; I uploaded my score to Asus website. The number 1 ranked user is running an i7-3960X @ 5.3Ghz-DDR3-2400Mhz and a GTX 780 Ti. Here are the results and comparisons to my X5660.

i7-3930K @ 5.3Ghz-DDR3-2400Mhz + GTX 780 Ti = 111001 [+26%]
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz-DDR3-1670Mhz + GTX 670 2GB Reference 2-Way SLI = 87926 [0.0%]

Being that my Gaming Rig is dated [6 year platform], it's only 26% slower than the i7-3930K highly overclocked with faster RAM and faster Overclocked GPUs. According to Realbench v2 if I were to upgrade my build to the X79 platform with a highly 5.3Ghz OC CPU, faster 2400Mhz RAM and a pair of highly clocked GPUs I would only gain 26% of performance. In my opinion this is definitely not worth the price of upgrading. I would come off cheaper by keeping my current platform, adding faster RAM and GPU better than the GTX 670 2GB reference models. I'll be sure to upload my results whenever I upgrade my GPUs. As of right now being within 26% is good enough for me to keep supporting my current platform. I'm waiting to see what Haswell-E will bring in terms of performance.

RealBench V2 Leaderboards 2-Way SLI Here:
http://rog.asus.com/rog-pro/realbench-v2-leaderboard/?Laptop=all&CPU=all&gpu=all&Core=all&view=1

My results are here for more proof:
http://rog.asus.com/realbench/show_comment.php?id=750


----------



## ruggercb

Kana-Maru, have you ever had any stability issues with your 5660? My 5650 runs everything fine but every now and then it has boot problems with Windows 8.1. Windows will "auto repair" and the BIOS will revert back to stock speeds. I've had all the voltages set to auto, and LLC/vdroop set to the first step. I thought the vdroop might help but no.

Ram is set on 1600/1667 mhz. CPU I've had on 22 X 160/166. Most everything else is on auto or the lowest multiple available. What are your thoughts?

I apologize if I'm hijacking this thread again for tech support.

BTW love titanfall.


----------



## TheReciever

I wonder if there is anymore of that legendary triple channel ram left in the world









Anyone got some hypers?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Kana-Maru, have you ever had any stability issues with your 5660? My 5650 runs everything fine but every now and then it has boot problems with Windows 8.1. Windows will "auto repair" and the BIOS will revert back to stock speeds. I've had all the voltages set to auto, and LLC/vdroop set to the first step. I thought the vdroop might help but no.
> 
> Ram is set on 1600/1667 mhz. CPU I've had on 22 X 160/166. Most everything else is on auto or the lowest multiple available. What are your thoughts?
> 
> I apologize if I'm hijacking this thread again for tech support.
> 
> BTW love titanfall.


It's not problem at all man. Anyone can feel free to post their questions if they need help, want to brag or anything. I don't care. I don't mind helping either. Tech support is what I do most of the time anyways. Actually all of the time.







Check out my latest Titanfall video I uploaded. I really liked the Beta a lot. It was much better than most generic shooters I play today.

To answer your question........no I haven't had any issues with my X5660 CPU while running at stock. You'll also want to leave your LLC\Vdroop set at Normal if that's a option for you.

Have you made sure your memory and other hardware components are working fine? You might want to stress test at stock settings to ensure nothing else could be causing issues. Try setting your RAM to1333Mhz and test it out. 1333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I wonder if there is anymore of that legendary triple channel ram left in the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone got some hypers?


I'm sure there are. It'll just cost you around $90-$120 I bet.


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's not problem at all man. Anyone can feel free to post their questions if they need help, want to brag or anything. I don't care. I don't mind helping either. Tech support is what I do most of the time anyways. Actually all of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check out my latest Titanfall video I uploaded. I really liked the Beta a lot. It was much better than most generic shooters I play today.
> 
> To answer your question........no I haven't had any issues with my X5660 CPU while running at stock. You'll also want to leave your LLC\Vdroop set at Normal if that's a option for you. The CPU only needs 1.14v to operate with a full load and the peak should be no higher than 1.18v with Auto voltages.
> 
> Have you made sure your memory and other hardware components are working fine? You might want to stress test at stock settings to ensure nothing else could be causing issues. Try setting your RAM to1333Mhz and test it out. 1333
> I'm sure there are. It'll just cost you around $90-$120 I bet.


I should have clarified a little. I've had zero problems at stock speeds, just when I try to OC it I have it hang on windows boot every now and then. I only tried the vdroop while it was overclocked. The only reason I kept it overclocked was Assassin's Creed 4. It's the only thing I've noticed that needed a higher clock speed to run well. Finished that last night though.







Everything else runs great at stock. It's also running at 26C/.912V right now. Gotta love that!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> I should have clarified a little. I've had zero problems at stock speeds, just when I try to OC it I have it hang on windows boot every now and then. I only tried the vdroop while it was overclocked. The only reason I kept it overclocked was Assassin's Creed 4. It's the only thing I've noticed that needed a higher clock speed to run well. Finished that last night though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything else runs great at stock. It's also running at 26C/.912V right now. Gotta love that!


Sorry man. It's so late I probably didn't read it correctly. I would leave Vdroop enabled. I'm not sure why your CPU is having those problems. I've had no issues on Windows 7 with my CPU. For your start up issue it could be several things. Windows 7 has actually been my favorite OS to overclock with. I never worry about startup issues or the OS in general.

I'll try to give you some safe voltage tips. What are your CPU voltage settings with your Overclock settings? I would check that first. Secondly you need to make sure your ULCK is double the DRAM speed [example: DRAM1600Mhz = UCLK -3200]. Make sure it's double and leave it at that for stability. Also check your QPI settings, better yet leave QPI set to AUTO. Try to keep it near stock if possible, which it might not be possible if you overclock to high. To be honest you shouldn't have to change anything, but the vCore, DRAM frequency and the UCLK settings. Everything thing else should perform properly at default settings. Apparently this isn't the case for you, so you slightly increase the IOH and the ICH voltages as well. An increase of one or two notches should be enough. Check your RAM timings to make sure the timings are set to AUTO or to see if they are configured properly. Increase your QPI\DRAM Core Voltage to 1.27v. You'll probably have more luck with the 166 BCLK selection by the way. Set your CPU voltage to 1.26v and leave LLC\Vdroop on.

Then run some IntelBurnTest at the "Standard" level 10 times to see if you can pass. If you can pass then run the Extreme or whatever the highest setting is for 5 passes. If you run into anymore problems just let me know.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Kana-Maru, have you ever had any stability issues with your 5660? My 5650 runs everything fine but every now and then it has boot problems with Windows 8.1. Windows will "auto repair" and the BIOS will revert back to stock speeds. I've had all the voltages set to auto, and LLC/vdroop set to the first step. I thought the vdroop might help but no.
> 
> Ram is set on 1600/1667 mhz. CPU I've had on 22 X 160/166. Most everything else is on auto or the lowest multiple available. What are your thoughts?
> 
> I apologize if I'm hijacking this thread again for tech support.
> 
> BTW love titanfall.


The only time I ever have this type of issue is when I'm overclocking on the X58 platform or something goofy is happening with RAM. Usually its because I forgot to tweak the CPU/IOH clock skew from an overclock but I don't think that is your issue







. How many sticks of RAM are you running and how many GB are they? I'm not running a UEFI BIOS compatible with win 8/8.1 so I can't comment in that regard.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I wonder if there is anymore of that legendary triple channel ram left in the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone got some hypers?


lol, yeah... I still have two sets of 2GB Modules (OCZ 2000 MHz 9-10-9-9 and Corsair XMP 2000 Mhz 9-10-9-9). I'm running 6 4GB modules of Ripjaws 1600 Mhz in my x58 platform right now. Depending on what you are looking for I may be willing to part with the Ripjaws


----------



## TheReciever

I meant for the OP lol so we can see how much x58 will benefit from the extra speed of the ram


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I meant for the OP lol so we can see how much x58 will benefit from the extra speed of the ram


Ahhhhh ok.... OP, You want me to send you a set of my 2000 Mhz OCZ or Corsair for some testing?


----------



## TheReciever

Shh! Be quiet about the results !

X58 motherboards are already hard to buy at a decent price lol


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Shh! Be quiet about the results !
> 
> X58 motherboards are already hard to buy at a decent price lol


lol, you think the x58 is bad? Try finding a nice x48 board... particularly an x48 Rampage Extreme (DDR3 version). I wish I wouldn't have killed the northbridge on mine


----------



## TheReciever

I stopped bothering a while back lol I was going to receive an old Core 2 Quad PC and was wanting to overclock the Q9450 that was in it lol My main experience with overclocking was from the RIIIE, good luck on x48 though lol

Oddly the northbridge was the main issue of my Rampage III Extreme as well lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I meant for the OP lol so we can see how much x58 will benefit from the extra speed of the ram


I'd rather have some of the higher clocked i7-3960X & i7-4960X [@4.8Ghz] running @ Quad-1600Mhz speeds for a better comparison. This never happens since the RAM is usually clocked @ 1866Mz or higher. For the highest benchmarks they are running more than 2000Mhz to squeeze out a few more result points.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Ahhhhh ok.... OP, You want me to send you a set of my 2000 Mhz OCZ or Corsair for some testing?


I would love to test them out! I believe 2000Mhz could be my Sabertooth maximum DRAM as well. I know 2400Mhz would be impossible to run. I'm going to continue to push my MB to the max, but the price of the Triple RAM is simply ridiculous.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I stopped bothering a while back lol I was going to receive an old Core 2 Quad PC and was wanting to overclock the Q9450 that was in it lol My main experience with overclocking was from the RIIIE, good luck on x48 though lol
> 
> Oddly the northbridge was the main issue of my Rampage III Extreme as well lol


There were a number of people who had problems with northbridge heat on the R3E. Apparently Asus either didn't apply the TIM properly or left the clear plastic film on between the TIM and the chip (don't remember which). In either case, if you still have your board, I'd recommend removing the stock heatsink and checking. Applying better TIM while you're at it won't hurt either.

@ruggercb: I agree with Kana-Maru here. Definitely sounds like a stability issue due to low voltages. Try increasing QPI/VTT like he said.


----------



## ruggercb

Leaving everything at stock, I tried to up my ram to it's rated 1600 from 1333, but it wouldn't post so I had to clear the CMOS. I agree with ya'll that it's probly a voltage thing...on my i7 920 I had to up several voltages for stability- "auto" wouldn't cut it. QPI/vtt was 1.4v, and QPI PLL was 1.34, and LLC was Level 2(moderate).

Running some benches, though, and I think I should leave it alone for now.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2502233

It's a nice fast chip even at stock, and the low voltage and heat are great too.


----------



## szeged

Great post OP!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Leaving everything at stock, I tried to up my ram to it's rated 1600 from 1333, but it wouldn't post so I had to clear the CMOS. I agree with ya'll that it's probly a voltage thing...on my i7 920 I had to up several voltages for stability- "auto" wouldn't cut it. QPI/vtt was 1.4v, and QPI PLL was 1.34, and LLC was Level 2(moderate).
> 
> Running some benches, though, and I think I should leave it alone for now.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2502233
> 
> It's a nice fast chip even at stock, and the low voltage and heat are great too.


I can't remember what the QPI PLL is. I've heard of CPU PLL, but I"m probably just being forgetful right now. There are so many options to select and change. You probably have one of those "picky" CPUs. My CPU is sort of like that. If I leave EVERYTHING set at Auto except the DRAM speed it won't boot. It won't run DDR3-1600Mhz. I'd have to change a few just to make the damn thing post. Even if this required slightly more voltages. Your CPU should at least post with 1.27v with BLCK set to 166v [including the other settings I listed].

Your Firestorm score is great and for everyday use your stock settings should be nice. I didn't think that we would still be running stock clocks in 2014 with X58 machines. I run 3.2Ghz stock with 1333Mhz RAM. Everything still runs fine. Even compressing huge video doesn't take a extremely long time with the correct settings. You'll be fine at stock. You will have to take it slow when you are ready to overclock.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> Great post OP!


Thanks man. I will continue to add benchmarks and info as I find it and write it up.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> There were a number of people who had problems with northbridge heat on the R3E. Apparently Asus either didn't apply the TIM properly or left the clear plastic film on between the TIM and the chip (don't remember which). In either case, if you still have your board, I'd recommend removing the stock heatsink and checking. Applying better TIM while you're at it won't hurt either.
> 
> @ruggercb: I agree with Kana-Maru here. Definitely sounds like a stability issue due to low voltages. Try increasing QPI/VTT like he said.


It wasn't the TIM... I had blocks on everything including a custom one on the NB voltage supply. My issue was running two heavily over clocked gtx 480s, a Q9550 at 4.2Ghz and fully populated ram slots running 2000 Mhz... Let's just say that the NB required crazy volts to run it... Like 1.7 V to be exact lol. I still have the REX though


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I can't remember what the QPI PLL is. I've heard of CPU PLL, but I"m probably just being forgetful right now. There are so many options to select and change. You probably have one of those "picky" CPUs. My CPU is sort of like that. If I leave EVERYTHING set at Auto except the DRAM speed it won't boot. It won't run DDR3-1600Mhz. I'd have to change a few just to make the damn thing post. Even if this required slightly more voltages. Your CPU should at least post with 1.27v with BLCK set to 166v [including the other settings I listed].


Every chip is different, he may need more than 1.27v vcore. In your case, to run 1600MHz RAM you probably need to crank up the QPI/VTT. Somewhere closer to 1.35v would probably do it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> It wasn't the TIM... I had blocks on everything including a custom one on the NB voltage supply. My issue was running two heavily over clocked gtx 480s, a Q9550 at 4.2Ghz and fully populated ram slots running 2000 Mhz... Let's just say that the NB required crazy volts to run it... Like 1.7 V to be exact lol. I still have the REX though


Ah, you were talking about the Rampage Extreme. I was talking about the R3E which is what you called it before. The R3E and 2E were x58 boards. Yours, I think, was x48. A different animal, but no less fun to OC.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> There were a number of people who had problems with northbridge heat on the R3E. Apparently Asus either didn't apply the TIM properly or left the clear plastic film on between the TIM and the chip (don't remember which). In either case, if you still have your board, I'd recommend removing the stock heatsink and checking. Applying better TIM while you're at it won't hurt either.
> 
> @ruggercb: I agree with Kana-Maru here. Definitely sounds like a stability issue due to low voltages. Try increasing QPI/VTT like he said.


It was more so a flex in the heatsink itself for mine as well as thermal grease drying up as a result. I was able to mitigate this, just not in the fashion I thought I would have to for such a top tier board lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Every chip is different, he may need more than 1.27v vcore. In your case, to run 1600MHz RAM you probably need to crank up the QPI/VTT. Somewhere closer to 1.35v would probably do it.


That's true. Every CPU is different, but I believe that he should be able to increase his Clock speeds +400Mhz [3.6Mhz] under 1.3v. I said 1.27v strictly for testing purposes since my CPU uses much less. Obviously he'll need a little more of everything if he can't get past the post screen. That's going to be a pretty low BLCK settings if he can't get past that with low voltages.

As for my PC\CPU, I already figured out what I needed to do. This picky CPU needed some specific settings. It had to be 100% correct. QPI speed, Uncore, and other settings etc. The easiest way would be XMP, but that knocks the QPI voltages to way to high for me.


----------



## TheReciever

Just saw the poll lol, I havent seen a land slide like that in a while :thumb:Nice job OP in any case for sharing your experiences


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's true. Every CPU is different, but I believe that he should be able to increase his Clock speeds +400Mhz [3.6Mhz] under 1.3v. I said 1.27v strictly for testing purposes since my CPU uses much less. Obviously he'll need a little more of everything if he can't get past the post screen. That's going to be a pretty low BLCK settings if he can't get past that with low voltages.
> 
> As for my PC\CPU, I already figured out what I needed to do. This picky CPU needed some specific settings. It had to be 100% correct. QPI speed, Uncore, and other settings etc. The easiest way would be XMP, but that knocks the QPI voltages to way to high for me.


I did some messing around last night. This chip OC's super easy IF I update to the latest bios. Leaving everything but BCLK on auto I'm hitting 4 GHz/4.6 turbo and 1600 MHz ram @ BCLK 200. Here's my firestrike...

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2513193

Only problem is it won't POST or let me get to the BIOS unless I turn off the PSU, wait 10 seconds and turn it back on. So frustrating. I know it's not the chip's fault though, more like the motherboard/****y BIOS. Oh my glob, if I could solve this problem...


----------



## kpforce1

I can't wait to see some updated benches/results with the 2000+ Mhz RAM modules


----------



## TheReciever

This thread feels a little more of what OCN is all about!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> This thread feels a little more of what OCN is all about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just saw the poll lol, I havent seen a land slide like that in a while :thumb:Nice job OP in any case for sharing your experiences


Thanks man.







. I'm glad I created my account last year after lurking for awhile. I'm also glad I'm able to give something useful to the OCN community and show that the X58 is still a viable platform. I tried to post this guide+benchmarks on other sites, but the other site modded me for the craziest+paranoid reasons ever.. I would link my topic, but it's not worth it [-it's anandtech forums are horrible and does want beneficial topics].

You have no ideas how many times I thought about upgrading to a X79 through 2013 until I got my Hex-core late in 2013. Now I just want faster memory and a Dual GPU and later a Quad. Thanks to bitcoin and mining I hope it won't cost me a arm and a leg. I wanted a 7990, but I'm waiting now due to prices. I'm surprised by the poll because I wasn't expected 100% Yes. I'm glad I was able to help some people.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> I did some messing around last night. This chip OC's super easy IF I update to the latest bios. Leaving everything but BCLK on auto I'm hitting 4 GHz/4.6 turbo and 1600 MHz ram @ BCLK 200. Here's my firestrike...
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2513193
> 
> Only problem is it won't POST or let me get to the BIOS unless I turn off the PSU, wait 10 seconds and turn it back on. So frustrating. I know it's not the chip's fault though, more like the motherboard/****y BIOS. Oh my glob, if I could solve this problem...


I've been hearing about users who's had the post problem. It could be voltages or some issues with dual bios setup. I don't know. I've never had that issue with my L5639 or the X5660. Your Fire Strike scores are looking better and better man. I'm glad to see you OC the CPU and thanks for posting your scores man. I'm going to need more people to post their scores for comparisons.


----------



## Rage19420

Kana-Maru is the one who got me excited again over the X58 platform. So much so I plunged on a L5639 and hunted down a deal on the elusive Sabertooth board. Now im stalking for a good deal on a 5670 or 5680.

Kana is king!


----------



## TheReciever

Yeah, makes me wish I still had my w3520 and i7 930 from back in the day. There is possibility of going into x58 again but we shall see how things go, potential marriage can be expensive lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> Kana-Maru is the one who got me excited again over the X58 platform. So much so I plunged on a L5639 and hunted down a deal on the elusive Sabertooth board. Now im stalking for a good deal on a 5670 or 5680.
> 
> Kana is king!


More like King Sparadok







. I'm joking that's my youtube name and stuff. I'm probably going to post this review on my blog as well. Thanks for the compliments man. I'm glad you came back to the X58 platform. It's going to be a long time before it's labeled outdated. Gaming wise a core i5 with a 290X can still perform better than the latest consoles to release - Xbox One and Playstation 4. Good luck with the 5670 & 5680.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Yeah, makes me wish I still had my w3520 and i7 930 from back in the day. There is possibility of going into x58 again but we shall see how things go, potential marriage can be expensive lol


I'm surprised to see a lot of people coming back to the X58 platforms. While some people like myself never left, I see more people coming back since the Hex cores performs much better than the latest CPU [i3s-i5s-i7s] due to the extra cores, L3 cache and other things. I hope the potential marriage wors our for you man. I'm thinking about marriage myself so I understand the prices involved.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> More like King Sparadok
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I'm joking that's my youtube name and stuff. I'm probably going to post this review on my blog as well. Thanks for the compliments man. I'm glad you came back to the X58 platform. It's going to be a long time before it's labeled outdated. Gaming wise a core i5 with a 290X can still perform better than the latest consoles to release - Xbox One and Playstation 4. Good luck with the 5670 & 5680.
> I'm surprised to see a lot of people coming back to the X58 platforms. While some people like myself never left, I see more people coming back since the Hex cores performs much better than the latest CPU [i3s-i5s-i7s] due to the extra cores, L3 cache and other things. I hope the potential marriage wors our for you man. I'm thinking about marriage myself so I understand the prices involved.


Yeah, its a magical thing, then Ill have to ask for forgiveness like some of the other guys around here lol

I remember wishing I had enough cash to build x58 when it released and finally settling on Phenom II 965 C2 and honestly enjoyed that performance but man was it amazing running Tri SLI 470's on x58 clocking my i7 930 to 4.4Ghz...good times with extra cash. Now they are cheap enough to be a crime to pass up. Sure online its a pain, but used n craigslist and you have an entire set up for 400-500 sell the cpu and replace it with a hex and your gold for likely another 3-5 years lol


----------



## dpoverlord

Wow I find this amazing.

Love everyone's input. I have an i7 930 at 4ghz. Right now with 2 titans and 6gb of system memory I have been feeling a bit of no love. So I started to look at the 980/990x but for that price, there just is now way.

Kpforce sent me here, and now I def want to buy one of these chips based on these benches I should see a huge improvement. I plan to sell 2 out of my 3 titans. I ran benches in my other titan thread (see below). Any idea the best chip to get out of these? Meaning there were certain "good 930's". I will be going with air cooling, so now I just need to decide where to buy. Then see if this breathes some life.

How though is this at gaming? As some people say(wont quote), Xeons tend to be poor at gaming. Will this keep up?

I am going to start price searching whats the best bet for me to upgrade to and have the best O/C?

5660, 5670, 5680?


----------



## Firehawk

People think the Xeons are poor for gaming because they don't have unlocked multipliers. This, of course, means that on the new 1155 and 1150 sockets where you can't do any base clock OCing you're SOL and are stuck at pretty much stock speeds.

This isn't the case on x58 platforms. The good motherboards can easily get over 200MHz for bclock, many as high as 220. So despite the locked multiplier, you can still get good performance out of them.

Basically, these chips are identical to the 970, 980, etc. with the exception that they have the extra QPI link for multi chip systems.

As for what's best for you....if you want the most performance possible, go with a 5680 or 5690. They have the highest multipliers, so you need less bclock to get to a high speed, and they have a chance of being able to OC higher as well. Bang for buck is probably the 5660.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Wow I find this amazing.
> 
> Love everyone's input. I have an i7 930 at 4ghz. Right now with 2 titans and 6gb of system memory I have been feeling a bit of no love. So I started to look at the 980/990x but for that price, there just is now way.
> 
> Kpforce sent me here, and now I def want to buy one of these chips based on these benches I should see a huge improvement. I plan to sell 2 out of my 3 titans. I ran benches in my other titan thread (see below). Any idea the best chip to get out of these? Meaning there were certain "good 930's". I will be going with air cooling, so now I just need to decide where to buy. Then see if this breathes some life.
> 
> How though is this at gaming? As some people say(wont quote), Xeons tend to be poor at gaming. Will this keep up?
> 
> I am going to start price searching whats the best bet for me to upgrade to and have the best O/C?
> 
> 5660, 5670, 5680?


Yeah those 970s - 980x's and 990xs are way to pricey. Especially for older legacy tech. I'm not sure what people are doing when throw a price tag on the CPUs when there are new CPUs for newer platforms available. If you were to upgrade to a Hex core clocked at 3.8Ghz or higher you'll see big increase. Anything over 4.0Ghz-4.4Ghz should eliminate any bottlenecking for Tri and Quad setups.

As far as gaming goes I've ran several test in my GPU benchmarks and my Real Time Benchmark tests. It's listed on the first page. You should check it out. I was originally using a i7-960 @ 4.1Ghz. In CInebench it scored 7.03, but when I overclocked my X5660 @ 4.8Ghz I saw a massive 76.1% in performance. When I ran my 3Dmark benchmark test I scored much better on everything including graphics and physics. For example here are my 3DMark Ice Storm Benchmark results for the i7-960 @ 4Ghz and the X5660 @ 4.6Ghz

3DMark Ice Storm Benchmark
[email protected] = *P197876*
i7-960 @ 4Ghz = P157635

In a program like 3Dmark that's a pretty decent increase for the upgrade. It is 26% increase and every game I've personally benchmarked has benefited from the Hex cores. Definitely check out the Real-Time Benchmarks for the games I've tested. The Hex cores give better frame rates and frame times over the Quad core. Even at stock some games utilize the Hex cores efficiently leading to a pleasant experience [BF3 is one of those games]. I can definitely tell you that Hex cores are GREAT for gaming and there's no GPU that can bottleneck them. Especially since the newer High-End Xeons aren't that far ahead of this platform and PCI-2.0 still have plenty of bandwidth.

Regarding the CPU you should select........well there are a lot to choose from. The L5639 is a low powered CPU that can be clocked to a reasonable 3.6Ghz-4.0Ghz. That's more than enough to stop bottlenecking in high end games like Crysis 3 100% MAXED and Tomb Raider. My L5639 review is here if you want to take a look at it:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1442498/x58-in-2014-i-was-thinking-about-upgrading-to-x79-or-haswell-l5639-comparison-review

There's also A LOT of test in that topic as well. Now I will admit that I'm LOVING my X5660, but they are hard to find for a decent price. I only paid $200 for mine. They were affordable, but I think a lot of people heard about the results and everyone started purchasing while they were "on sale" for cheap. You just have to be ready to take a chance on one if you find them cheap. The X5670 will cost a little more and should be around $325-$350+. The ONLY difference between the X5670 and the X5660 that I can think of is that the X5670 is literally clocked 0.13Mhz higher than the X5660; and I believe the X5670 has an extra multiple. Therefore making the X5660 better buy if you can find it reasonable cheaper. The X5680 and the X5690 are simply horrible buys. They are clocked higher, but also cost more yearly in the electric bill department. They require more TDP. They have higher multiplier, unfortunately sellers want top dollars - towards $800-$1,000 for them.

Don't forget about the Xeon X5650, L5639, L5645 and the E5645. I can't speak for them all so you'll have to do some research. I have followed them and I actually on the L5639 and have reviews as I stated above. Just take a look and see if you like one of them. You'll definitely want a Hex core on the X58 platform in 2014+. Next gen is here and games will only get better and better for the PC platform. Which will bring more high end cards ready to bottleneck the hell out of 4.0Ghz-4.4Ghz Quad-cores.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> People think the Xeons are poor for gaming because they don't have unlocked multipliers. This, of course, means that on the new 1155 and 1150 sockets where you can't do any base clock OCing you're SOL and are stuck at pretty much stock speeds.
> 
> This isn't the case on x58 platforms. The good motherboards can easily get over 200MHz for bclock, many as high as 220. So despite the locked multiplier, you can still get good performance out of them.
> 
> Basically, these chips are identical to the 970, 980, etc. with the exception that they have the extra QPI link for multi chip systems.
> 
> As for what's best for you....if you want the most performance possible, go with a 5680 or 5690. They have the highest multipliers, so you need less bclock to get to a high speed, and they have a chance of being able to OC higher as well. Bang for buck is probably the 5660.


Yeah I slightly touched on the limitations [that I believe] Intel purposely removed on those platforms. I didn't include the 1155 or the 1150 in my review. Removing the Base Clock was pretty lame, but Intel wants you to pay top dollar to get the most out of your system. The X5660 etc offers better TDP and lower power usage as well. The 970-980x-990x doesn't offer TXT either, but no one will care much for that. Personally I sort of do. No matter what..... all X58 platforms will tap out when several limitations are met. It's just a matter of learning the limitations and working around them while setting the correct options. Same goes for X79 and other MB that can be OC'd. So sometimes having a higher multiplier doesn't always matter and isn't going to break massive\worldwide records without some serious cooling.

As I said above the X5680 and the X5690 would be the worse bang for his buck. Even if you include the higher multiplier and ease to overclock, the prices are to high. Reaching $1,200. Those are upgrading to X79 prices which isn't worth it for one legacy component. No one in their right mind is going to pay between $650-$1200+ on a legacy platform. The X5650 and the X5660 would be a better purchase if you compare price, wattage and performance. The X5670 will cost around $350, but I think it could be a bit much for legacy tech since their are other options available. At this point the best bang for the buck is the X5650 or the X5660. If anyone is thinking about getting them I suggest they jump on them and purchase them. The prices for the Hex cores-LGA1366 have been all over the place lately.

If the prices go up again the X5660 won't be the best bang for the buck.


----------



## dpoverlord

Anyone know if there are batches of the 5650 or 5660 that are king? Trying to buy one now, a person is trying to sell me the 5660 but it says Intel Confidential Q3UX ES Costa Rica AT80614005127AA 3947B545. Sounds like an engineering sample no?

Then there was a 5650 for $105 and it said Intel 09 X5650 Intel XEON SLBV3 Costa Rica 2.66HZ/12M/6.40 3012A692 sounds a little more legit or maybe his photo was just a stock one.

Thoughts?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Anyone know if there are batches of the 5650 or 5660 that are king? Trying to buy one now, a person is trying to sell me the 5660 but it says Intel Confidential Q3UX ES Costa Rica AT80614005127AA 3947B545. Sounds like an engineering sample no?
> 
> Then there was a 5650 for $105 and it said Intel 09 X5650 Intel XEON SLBV3 Costa Rica 2.66HZ/12M/6.40 3012A692 sounds a little more legit or maybe his photo was just a stock one.
> 
> Thoughts?


Yeah it definitely sounds like a engineer sample. I personally avoided the engineer samples since the specs seemed to be all over the place + they aren't suppose to be sold I believe. At least I've read some weird specs on them, but I've never actually tested them out. I was also afraid my MB wouldn't support them, "SLBV6" part# [X5660] is what I have.

The X5650 at $106 would be a steal and much better than the L5639 which I paid $70 for. I would've paid the extra for the X5650. The X5650 matched the X5660, but it has a lower multiplier. It's minor and it's only -1 multiplier. So it's going to be up to you man. Good Luck.


----------



## anubis1127

I decided to find a x58 board to use with a E5630 Xeon.

After work I got it assembled:



Still have to do a bit of cable management, and put the side panels on.

This E5630 really is a neat CPU.


----------



## Rage19420

I never really left the X58 platform. My introduction to a gaming rig was an ibuypower MSI pro e x58 w/i7 920 system bought off craigslist. I often thought about an upgrade to x79, but was put off by the costs vs performance factor. So I kept it and discovered these xeon chips that are available and was excited about the platform again. Upgraded to an Sabertooth board to take full advantage of these chips.

Love what I see so far!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> I decided to find a x58 board to use with a E5630 Xeon.
> 
> After work I got it assembled:
> 
> 
> 
> Still have to do a bit of cable management, and put the side panels on.
> 
> This E5630 really is a neat CPU.


Yeah it's a pretty nice Quad Core. How much did you pay for the CPU? It's missing the SSE4 set, but has everything else







. Are you planning to highly overclock it or run it around 3.8Ghz - 4.1Ghz? You case looks pretty neat to me. I'm sure there's no telling what the cables look like on the back lol.

---
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rage19420*
> 
> I never really left the X58 platform. My introduction to a gaming rig was an ibuypower MSI pro e x58 w/i7 920 system bought off craigslist. I often thought about an upgrade to x79, but was put off by the costs vs performance factor. So I kept it and discovered these xeon chips that are available and was excited about the platform again. Upgraded to an Sabertooth board to take full advantage of these chips.
> 
> Love what I see so far!


I felt the same way man. I had actually started to put a build together. I had a budget of $2000.00 for the X79. I built my gaming myself. I'm so glad I was patient with the platform and didn't upgrade because I though the X58 was outdated in the CPU department. I'm glad I was wrong since Hexa cores are all over the place now. I'm glad I decided to get the Sabertooth X58. Its going to be hard for me to leave the Sabertooth brand after this.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Just to let everyone know I'm going to updating the review. I have to give thanks to kp for allowing me to borrow some DDR3-2000Mhz for a better comparison to the high end 3960X and 4960X. All high end SB-E and IV-E test are using faster RAM. This well let us know exactly how powerful and\or more viable the X58 platform really is.


Yeah, should be interesting to see the comparison, only thing is that they are hard to find and im sure a little pricey as well lol


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Just to let everyone know I'm going to updating the review. I have to give thanks to kp for allowing me to borrow some DDR3-2000Mhz for a better comparison to the high end 3960X and 4960X. All high end SB-E and IV-E test are using faster RAM. This well let us know exactly how powerful and\or more viable the X58 platform really is.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I've also published my review on my blog:
> 
> http://x5660.blogspot.com/?view=sidebar
> 
> You can post comments Anonymously if you want to. I should be receiving the DDR3-2000Mhz RAM later today. Please be patient as I setup my system and try to get the best timings out of the RAM. I'll be updating all week into next week I bet.
> 
> ----
> Yeah it's a pretty nice Quad Core. How much did you pay for the CPU? It's missing the SSE4 set, but has everything else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Are you planning to highly overclock it or run it around 3.8Ghz - 4.1Ghz? You case looks pretty neat to me. I'm sure there's no telling what the cables look like on the back lol.
> 
> ---
> I felt the same way man. I had actually started to put a build together. I had a budget of $2000.00 for the X79. I built my gaming myself. I'm so glad I was patient with the platform and didn't upgrade because I though the X58 was outdated in the CPU department. I'm glad I was wrong since Hexa cores are all over the place now. I'm glad I decided to get the Sabertooth X58. Its going to be hard for me to leave the Sabertooth brand after this.










I can't wait to see what 2000+ Mhz RAM does for the Hex cores







. Funny thing about x58 for me is that I pulled the trigger back in 2010 when I built my i7 920 setup and decided on 2000 Mhz ram even though everyone kept telling me it was a waste of money blah blah...it wasn't until the past month that I ran anything slower than 2000 Mhz RAM in the platform... not to mention I have always run 6 sticks of 2000 Mhz RAM...

My poor 920... I run 1.44+Vcore and +500 to +525 mV on the VTT (~1.7+V on the x58 Classy) on the i7 920 since I've had it lol... everyone talking about high Vcore and VTT killing these chips but I haven't had any issues with mine. Nor have I experienced degradation of the CPU. I mean running the kind of volts I am (particularly the VTT) it seems like I would have started having IMC issues or something by now lol. Hopefully what ever x5650 or x5660 I end up with for the x58 is as resilient as this 920









kp


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ----
> Yeah it's a pretty nice Quad Core. How much did you pay for the CPU? It's missing the SSE4 set, but has everything else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Are you planning to highly overclock it or run it around 3.8Ghz - 4.1Ghz? You case looks pretty neat to me. I'm sure there's no telling what the cables look like on the back lol.


Looking forward to seeing your results with the quicker RAM.

I didn't pay much for the CPU at all. ARK says "Instruction Set Extensions SSE4.2", so its not missing SSE4.







I did probably pay too much for the X58A-UD3R board, I got it from an ocn member used for a bit over $100, but oh well. It should be easy to install other OS's on.



Well my motherboard is the X58A-UD3R, after I got it started looking at some reviews from when it was released, it seems it was a bit of a 'value' x58 board. A lot of the reviewers had trouble over 200mhz on the bclk. Makes me wish I would have spent the extra money and got a Saberkitty, or Rampage board, or even an EVGA board but oh well.

So far I was able to get 210Mhz stable w/ 18x multi, but couldn't POST at 19, or 20x. As you can see in the CPU-Z screenshot I've got it at 4.0Ghz right now, been running a prime95 blend test since last night, seems stable so far.

Haha, yeah, its a huge case, I'll have plenty of room to tidy things up, and tuck everything away neatly behind the mobo tray.


----------



## Tomlintm

very nice cant wait to see what the out come is and not to say 2000mhz+ ram isent fast but i have found a video on comparison of ram that actully goes between 1333 to 2400 speed ram and what the benckmarks say that 1866 ram is actully faster but by a few number tahts why i got the 1866 ram speed chips but i do want to see the benchmarks you are doing


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Looking forward to seeing your results with the quicker RAM.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't pay much for the CPU at all. ARK says "Instruction Set Extensions SSE4.2", so its not missing SSE4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did probably pay too much for the X58A-UD3R board, I got it from an ocn member used for a bit over $100, but oh well. It should be easy to install other OS's on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well my motherboard is the X58A-UD3R, after I got it started looking at some reviews from when it was released, it seems it was a bit of a 'value' x58 board. A lot of the reviewers had trouble over 200mhz on the bclk. Makes me wish I would have spent the extra money and got a Saberkitty, or Rampage board, or even an EVGA board but oh well.
> 
> So far I was able to get 210Mhz stable w/ 18x multi, but couldn't POST at 19, or 20x. As you can see in the CPU-Z screenshot I've got it at 4.0Ghz right now, been running a prime95 blend test since last night, seems stable so far.
> 
> Haha, yeah, its a huge case, I'll have plenty of room to tidy things up, and tuck everything away neatly behind the mobo tray.


210 BLCK isn't bad.... not to mention the low VCORE on your OC is pretty darn good! Shoot, I'll take anything at or below 1.3V for 4+ gigglehurtz







I have to start tweaking IOH/ICH voltages and clock skews when I start getting over 210-215 BCLK on my x58 Classified 760 board. Granted I've hit 228 BCLK for some high voltage benches but I would hardly call it stable lol


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> 210 BLCK isn't bad.... not to mention the low VCORE on your OC is pretty darn good! Shoot, I'll take anything at or below 1.3V for 4+ gigglehurtz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have to start tweaking IOH/ICH voltages and clock skews when I start getting over 210-215 BCLK on my x58 Classified 760 board. Granted I've hit 228 BCLK for some high voltage benches but I would hardly call it stable lol


Yeah, I was hoping the vcore would be lower, but whatever, it is fine. 210 x 18 was pretty stable, but I couldn't even get the board to POST at 20, maybe later I'll try tweaking some stuff, it could have been my RAM timings maybe. I'll get 4.0 stable, and then work my way up to 4.2Ghz, the max multi is 20, so I'm thinking around 4.2ghz is where I'll top out with this board, and chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Looking forward to seeing your results with the quicker RAM.
> 
> I didn't pay much for the CPU at all. ARK says "Instruction Set Extensions SSE4.2", so its not missing SSE4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did probably pay too much for the X58A-UD3R board, I got it from an ocn member used for a bit over $100, but oh well. It should be easy to install other OS's on.
> 
> 
> 
> Well my motherboard is the X58A-UD3R, after I got it started looking at some reviews from when it was released, it seems it was a bit of a 'value' x58 board. A lot of the reviewers had trouble over 200mhz on the bclk. Makes me wish I would have spent the extra money and got a Saberkitty, or Rampage board, or even an EVGA board but oh well.
> 
> So far I was able to get 210Mhz stable w/ 18x multi, but couldn't POST at 19, or 20x. As you can see in the CPU-Z screenshot I've got it at 4.0Ghz right now, been running a prime95 blend test since last night, seems stable so far.
> 
> Haha, yeah, its a huge case, I'll have plenty of room to tidy things up, and tuck everything away neatly behind the mobo tray.


Sorry about that. I thought those were missing some instructions. If ARK says it then it's true. That's a pretty nice overclock and very nice Vcore as well. Looking good.

----

I got the RAM now I just have to do some stability test. Then I'll get around to start running benchmarks and gaming etc. I don't expect a big difference for gaming, but we will see. I'll also be sure to run some test using the 1866Mhz speed.


----------



## dpoverlord

Didnt buy the engineering sample, I am open to the market now


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry about that. I thought those were missing some instructions. If ARK says it then it's true. That's a pretty nice overclock and very nice Vcore as well. Looking good.
> 
> ----
> 
> 
> 
> *I got the RAM now I just have to do some stability test.* Then I'll get around to start running benchmarks and gaming etc. I don't expect a big difference for gaming, but we will see. I'll also be sure to run some test using the 1866Mhz speed.


Saweet.... glad they arrived unscathed







. I never had any issues up to 2100 Mhz (when I could get the IMC to cooperate at that speed that is lol). Usually I had them a 2000- 2080 Mhz.


----------



## Timeofdoom

I've an offer from a guy selling 5xX5650's for 239$ a pop. I'm really tempted to go for it, although I fear it'll be more of a sidegrade than an upgrade from my [email protected] (Even if I do manage to hit 4.4-4.6 on it).

Input?


----------



## dpoverlord

high price


----------



## dpoverlord

Was offered a 5660 for closer to $200 but it only has hit 3.8 to 4ghz on 1.35V. He said his O/C testing was only minutes, do you think I could get this higher on air? My 930 hits around 4.1-4.4 on 1.35V

On the other hand for half this price I can snag chinese 5650 for $79-$100 but it looks fairly worn.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Was offered a 5660 for closer to $200 but it has only hit 3.8 to 4ghz on 1.35V. he only O/C for 10 minutes, do you think I could get this higher on air?


Hard to say, X58 has so many different ways to go about an overclock and refining your stability, then you have consider the quality of PSU and motherboard that supports it


----------



## dpoverlord

I feel like $200 is high though when a 5650 goes for around $100. I asked him if he did it on air. My 930 I got to around 4.1 to 4.4GHZ on my setup.... I am really tempted to buy it but then there is that 5650 for $79ish


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> I feel like $200 is high though when a 5650 goes for around $100. I asked him if he did it on air. My 930 I got to around 4.1 to 4.4GHZ on my setup.... I am really tempted to buy it but then there is that 5650 for $79ish


If its a legit retail x5650 $200 isn't terribly high, if its an ES chip, then I wouldn't pay that much for it.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> I wonder if there is anymore of that legendary triple channel ram left in the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone got some hypers?


I do: WS220UB2GB








I have ES 5660 coming, too.
Hopefully they're as good as retail








They're on ebay right now for $150
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> I've an offer from a guy selling 5xX5650's for 239$ a pop. I'm really tempted to go for it, although I fear it'll be more of a sidegrade than an upgrade from my [email protected] (Even if I do manage to hit 4.4-4.6 on it).
> 
> Input?


Too expensive
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-CPU-X5650-2-66GHz-Six-Core-LGA1366-SLBV3-Processor-Clean-Pulls-/251437220626?pt=CPUs&hash=item3a8ad38312
..and it *is* an upgrade

I think I got the single-core Cinebench up to 1.44 with L5639


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> If its a legit retail x5650 $200 isn't terribly high, if its an ES chip, then I wouldn't pay that much for it.


The 5650 for $100 looks like this:


The 5660 I havent seen but he said he got 3.8/4ghz on 1.35V with a 10 min overclock.... I could get that X5650 for $100 but in that photo it looks pretty beat up no? Then I am wary of the 5660 if only hits 4ghz but as he said it never was really O/C'd


----------



## cdoublejj

How many 6 core 1366 Xeons did they make? i happen to have dual quads in my server and dual 6 cores might be nice.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Saweet.... glad they arrived unscathed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I never had any issues up to 2100 Mhz (when I could get the IMC to cooperate at that speed that is lol). Usually I had them a 2000- 2080 Mhz.


That's good to hear. I'm running them @ 1288Mhz with the default timings and I'm having no issues running the system with them. I did increase the tRAS for slightly better performance. I'm gonna have to try some different things with these RAM module settings.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> The 5650 for $100 looks like this:
> 
> 
> The 5660 I havent seen but he said he got 3.8/4ghz on 1.35V with a 10 min overclock.... I could get that X5650 for $100 but in that photo it looks pretty beat up no? Then I am wary of the 5660 if only hits 4ghz but as he said it never was really O/C'd


If you don't mind lapping the IHS, I wouldn't worry about that too much. I think I would rather take a CPU that hasn't ever been OC'd, over one that has been overvolted its whole life.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> If you don't mind lapping the IHS, I wouldn't worry about that too much. I think I would rather take a CPU that hasn't ever been OC'd, over one that has been overvolted its whole life.


Yeah the guy on anandtech is selling his 5660 for $195 but he said he ran it at stock and when he did try O/C it only hit around 4ghz with his 10 min of tinkering at 1.35. If I can find one for $150-$175 I will jump on it. I assume the Xeon 5660 should overclock like the 930. I plan to run it on air like my 930 and I am going to get another 6GB of my ram
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231223

Do you think 6x2GB will hold me back? I already own 6GB and could def use some more.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Yeah the guy on anandtech is selling his 5660 for $195 but he said he ran it at stock and when he did try O/C it only hit around 4ghz with his 10 min of tinkering at 1.35. If I can find one for $150-$175 I will jump on it. I assume the Xeon 5660 should overclock like the 930. I plan to run it on air like my 930 and I am going to get another 6GB of my ram
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231223
> 
> Do you think 6x2GB will hold me back? I already own 6GB and could def use some more.


It may be a bit more stress on the IMC, but other than that, no. I'm only using 3 DIMMS, but plan on trying 6 once I get my OCs stabilized.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Yeah the guy on anandtech is selling his 5660 for $195 but he said he ran it at stock and when he did try O/C it only hit around 4ghz with his 10 min of tinkering at 1.35. If I can find one for $150-$175 I will jump on it. I assume the Xeon 5660 should overclock like the 930. I plan to run it on air like my 930 and I am going to get another 6GB of my ram
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231223
> 
> Do you think 6x2GB will hold me back? I already own 6GB and could def use some more.


I wouldn't touch that last CPU you posted with a stick. Especially when there are so many more to choose from. Also you should ask for pictures of the bottom. It looks pretty beat up and 1.35v doesn't sound to good. He could be a rookie overclocker. I'm running 12GBs and that's going to be way more than enough for you.6GBs would be enough since I rarely see games using a lot of RAM, but 12GBs will set you up for a long time. I've ran 12GBs [6x2GBs] for years now with no issues. I personally need 12GBs due to the programs I use [they are memory hogs and require it]. Daily you''ll probably never go above 2GBs - 2.5GBs. Even if you game with mods 6GBs to 8GBs will be enough. Since it's triple you can't do 8GBs. 12GBs will be fine if you want to spend the money for them and need them.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I wouldn't touch that last CPU you posted with a stick. Especially when there are so many more to choose from. Also you should ask for pictures of the bottom. It looks pretty beat up and 1.35v doesn't sound to good. He could be a rookie overclocker. I'm running 12GBs and that's going to be way more than enough for you.6GBs would be enough since I rarely see games using a lot of RAM, but 12GBs will set you up for a long time. I've ran 12GBs [6x2GBs] for years now with no issues. I personally need 12GBs due to the programs I use [they are memory hogs and require it]. Daily you''ll probably never go above 2GBs - 2.5GBs. Even if you game with mods 6GBs to 8GBs will be enough. Since it's triple you can't do 8GBs. 12GBs will be fine if you want to spend the money for them and need them.


Just want to clear a few things since it seems were confused.

6GB of system memory in my system right now is not good enough. I am maxing out at 6GB with just google chrome really. It's enough for games (with everything turned off), but I would like to have more. If I can snag a kit for $40 why not (new is $67).

GPU wise I have 2 Titans and unloaded my third (I think I may need 3), and they hit around 90C with not much O/C

CPU Wise, that photo was of the X5650, DEFINITELY NOT going for it.

The *X5660* is going for about $190 shipped, I am going to ask him for photos to see if he will take it. He said he runs it at stock and did a test O/C for 8 min. If that gets to 4GHZ maybe we can squeeze a few more out of it on air? But lets say it doesn't go over 4ghz, *Do you feel it would be a worthwhile upgrade over my i7-930 @ 4.1-4.4ghz?* I was hoping to get it to 4.4-4.5


----------



## TheReciever

6GB in chrome alone? Thats either an issue of chrome or lazy internet surfing lol

It would make for a great upgrade just for the breathing room alone


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Just want to clear a few things since it seems were confused.
> 
> 6GB of system memory in my system right now is not good enough. I am maxing out at 6GB with just google chrome really. It's enough for games (with everything turned off), but I would like to have more. If I can snag a kit for $40 why not (new is $67).
> 
> GPU wise I have 2 Titans and unloaded my third (I think I may need 3), and they hit around 90C with not much O/C
> 
> CPU Wise, that photo was of the X5650, DEFINITELY NOT going for it.
> 
> The *X5660* is going for about $190 shipped, I am going to ask him for photos to see if he will take it. He said he runs it at stock and did a test O/C for 8 min. If that gets to 4GHZ maybe we can squeeze a few more out of it on air? But lets say it doesn't go over 4ghz, *Do you feel it would be a worthwhile upgrade over my i7-930 @ 4.1-4.4ghz?* I was hoping to get it to 4.4-4.5


Well in that case for for the 12GBs if 6 isn't enough. Easy. A lower clocked Hex core will out perform a Quad core easily. At stock my X5660 @ 3.0Ghz [x23] outperforms my [email protected] It's simple as that. You might get the X5660 to 4.4Ghz. Hopefully with safe Vcore\offset and getting to 183 - 191 BLCK with little to no problems.

Nice. I'm sure you'll find a good CPU sooner or later. Just keep looking.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> 6GB in chrome alone? Thats either an issue of chrome or lazy internet surfing lol
> 
> It would make for a great upgrade just for the breathing room alone


Hahaha yeah 20 tabs Sometimes. Then vlc a few other open windows. Haven't had any issues, but if I can snag more ram cheap at one point why not ;-) going to see if I can get a slightly better deal than 190 on the chip.

Good to know though that at 4ghz it's still better than my 930. Now I have to see what I can get for my 930. Which is best in my opinion.


----------



## Akadaka

Try get X5660 or Higher I also use a lot of ram for web browsing 4-5GBs just on tabs, I usually like to run a game in the background too.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Hahaha yeah 20 tabs Sometimes. Then vlc a few other open windows. Haven't had any issues, but if I can snag more ram cheap at one point why not ;-) going to see if I can get a slightly better deal than 190 on the chip.
> 
> Good to know though that at 4ghz it's still better than my 930. Now I have to see what I can get for my 930. Which is best in my opinion.


In my mind, it makes sense as your opening up overhead so that 4 cores can focus specifically on one task, per se gaming. while the remaining threads can handle backend tasks


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've asked anandtech to remove my review from their site:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=36114600#post36114600

I wonder if they will reveal the ban-hammer on me. I don't really want my stuff there anymore and can careless for the site mods.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> Try get X5660 or Higher I also use a lot of ram for web browsing 4-5GBs just on tabs, I usually like to run a game in the background too.


Really? What browser? I use several browsers. The heaviest on the RAM being Firefox with a ton Add-ons running. Even if I have 35+ tabs open I'm not even cracking the 2.5 RAM usage.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've asked anandtech to remove my review from their site:
> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=36114600#post36114600
> 
> I wonder if they will reveal the ban-hammer on me. I don't really want my stuff there anymore and can careless for the site mods.
> Really? What browser? I use several browsers. The heaviest on the RAM being Firefox with a ton Add-ons running. Even if I have 35+ tabs open I'm not even cracking the 2.5 RAM usage.


IE11 and Chrome, IE uses a lot of ram with tabs open but I really like how good it's become it loads up google.com a lot faster than Chrome web pages feel smoother.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've asked anandtech to remove my review from their site:
> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=36114600#post36114600
> 
> I wonder if they will reveal the ban-hammer on me. I don't really want my stuff there anymore and can careless for the site mods.
> Really? What browser? I use several browsers. The heaviest on the RAM being Firefox with a ton Add-ons running. Even if I have 35+ tabs open I'm not even cracking the 2.5 RAM usage.


Wow. Ill stop there because even though OCN is lenient I would be banned for the words that are transcribing in my head at the moment..

To be fair though, he might be running additional displays with vlc which will add a bit to RAM use, at least it did for me when I use to play movies on my HDTV I had

EDIT: how long does it take to get my account registered with them? Im still waiting on the confirmation link like 20 minutes now


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> Too expensive
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-CPU-X5650-2-66GHz-Six-Core-LGA1366-SLBV3-Processor-Clean-Pulls-/251437220626?pt=CPUs&hash=item3a8ad38312
> ..and it *is* an upgrade
> 
> I think I got the single-core Cinebench up to 1.44 with L5639


STOP DOING THAT! RIGHT NOW!!!1!








You know what you're doing!
Stop doing it, because you're doing it too well!
Stop tempting me so much!

...Because you'll end up having me buying one, just for the ****s n' giggles, even if it'll be DOA.









Edit:
...
Currently being tempted by a Sabertooth x58. Any idea if it'll support a x5650 from "get-go" (e.g. without the need for a bios upgrade?).


----------



## TheReciever

I registered so I could post there and man, the only thing I can do is log in. That site is ridiculous and the forum is a mess. Im glad I signed with OCN lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> IE11 and Chrome, IE uses a lot of ram with tabs open but I really like how good it's become it loads up google.com a lot faster than Chrome web pages feel smoother.


I use IE as well. Not that much though. I remember when I used IE in the past on XP. It would slow my old Dell down to a crawl after being on for weeks unless I restarted the PC _. I've stuck with Firefox for the longest now.

_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Wow. Ill stop there because even though OCN is lenient I would be banned for the words that are transcribing in my head at the moment..
> 
> To be fair though, he might be running additional displays with vlc which will add a bit to RAM use, at least it did for me when I use to play movies on my HDTV I had
> 
> EDIT: how long does it take to get my account registered with them? Im still waiting on the confirmation link like 20 minutes now


lol you'll be surprised what I was thinking after I got modded over there. Other users spoke out so they banned me for a week to take the pressure from themselves. Apparently the mods have a bad reputation that I knew nothing about since I only created a account and posted only in the Hexa core topics on the site. The moment I create a topic BAM modded and banned....damn. I'm not sure how long it takes to get the account registered since I did more reading than posting normally. Should be soon.

Also I understand. More RAM does allow for more multitasking while gaming and doing other things.

@ Timeofdoom

Buy it man. They are so cheap now how can you pass up the potential power. All of my benchmarks were ran using 1600Mhz RAM so it'll give you a decent expectation limit. The X5650 is almost equal to the X5660. The only different is that the X5650 has -1 multiplier I believe. Other than that it's all the same


----------



## kpforce1

I know I'm an odd ball but I use Opera browser lol.... it doesn't use much RAM at all







. I have 15+ tabs open all day long. As soon as I open IE to do some stuff my RAM usage goes up 10 fold







.

Kana-Maru- any progress with the RAM/OC settings? I'm not familiar with your board but I had to run the MCH Strap at 1600 Mhz on the x58 classy so it had correct timing for running 2000 Mhz RAM.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Forgive me father, for I have sinned.

Ok, I did it alright!? Stop looking at me with those eyes!









(Actually I am looking forward to this







but I also have to find a good board for it. I have been looking into the x58 Sabertooth, since it's features suit my needs, but the price is rather steep for an older/used board.)
Would you guys minding giving me some input again?


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I use IE as well. Not that much though. I remember when I used IE in the past on XP. It would slow my old Dell down to a crawl after being on for weeks unless I restarted the PC _. I've stuck with Firefox for the longest now.
> lol you'll be surprised what I was thinking after I got modded over there. Other users spoke out so they banned me for a week to take the pressure from themselves. Apparently the mods have a bad reputation that I knew nothing about since I only created a account and posted only in the Hexa core topics on the site. The moment I create a topic BAM modded and banned....damn. I'm not sure how long it takes to get the account registered since I did more reading than posting normally. Should be soon.
> 
> Also I understand. More RAM does allow for more multitasking while gaming and doing other things.
> 
> @ Timeofdoom
> 
> Buy it man. They are so cheap now how can you pass up the potential power. All of my benchmarks were ran using 1600Mhz RAM so it'll give you a decent expectation limit. The X5650 is almost equal to the X5660. The only different is that the X5650 has -1 multiplier I believe. Other than that it's all the same
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Well you shouldnt be surprised to know that both of the threads have been locked, with one of them being deleted...didnt take long for them to show their habits


----------



## dpoverlord

I ordered the 5660 for $185 after shipping and everything... Fingers Crossed that I got a good deal.









Then since my fan controller (Digidoc 5 rest its soul after 14 years) died I spent another $50 on 2 fans and a controller:

I bought an NZXT Grid internal 10 channel fan hub
https://www.nzxt.com/product/detail/123-grid-fan-hub

Then not sure I did the right thing but I decided to replace my Panaflo 92x92x25 42CFM fan with a 58CFM version adds about 5 more decibels.... VS the SilenX 14decibel 42CFM fan.

Think it will influence cooling? I have these 2 fans basically blowing on the GPUS and then 2 120mm SILENX fans on the heatsink one on each side blowing towards the back of the case to 2 80mm outakes:


----------



## Akadaka

Nice let us know what it clocks as and if your happy with the performance and extra cores..


----------



## Quantium40

Geez.... two x5650's for $130 bucks a pop. That is super tempting for my SR-2, but I really don't need it. Gah the price point is so good now though.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quantium40*
> 
> Geez.... two x5650's for $130 bucks a pop. That is super tempting for my SR-2, but I really don't need it. Gah the price point is so good now though.


And you already have the SR-2


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Well you shouldnt be surprised to know that both of the threads have been locked, with one of them being deleted...didnt take long for them to show their habits


I didn't know this. Thanks for the heads up and expected nothing less from anandtech forum. I should've done a bit more research on them instead of lurking in the Hexa Core topics. I'm done with that site anyways. There are a lot of better sites like overclock.net out there. I enjoy it here a lot.


----------



## cdoublejj

how many arms does a fella have to give up for 2 X5690s? My mobo doesn't have any OC options on the mobo.


----------



## dpoverlord

I think I should do another round of benching and in game benchmarks.

Anyone have suggestions? Its been 7 months since I did any. I dont know how to bench:
Skyirm
Thief
etc

I have tons of games and can bench i7-930 at 4ghz vs X5660 at 4ghz so it's an even bench. If anyone wants to make some suggestions these are the games I can bench if you tell me the best way.



http://imgur.com/TvivhA3



I have already done a bunch of benches per my sig on my 930 but why not do more now after windows has been burnt in. Would be more interesting since not everyone does a fresh installation of windows every bench


----------



## Kana-Maru

Dang man that's a lot of games.

I have already benched games on the very first page. I have some newer benches I haven't posted yet. The Hexa cores will always beat the Quad cores. A 3.6Ghz hexa core or higher clocks will manhandle many games out there. Even my X5660 at STOCK clocks w/ DDR3-1333Mhz RAM manhandled the Battlefield 3 Frostbite 2 Engine running SLI [check the first page under real time benchmarks]. Some specific games that depends on the CPU a lot will benefit from the Hexa cores obviously. Total War: Rome II and GTA IV are some of those games. Star Swarm is another.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/90#post_21744681

Crysis 3 for instance ran like crap using my [email protected] When I installed my X5660 I gained a ton of frames. Went from 25fps-35fps and horrible frame time to 53fps with my overclocked X5660.

Now all of this was done using 1600Mhz RAM. I'm still in the process of running 2000Mhz RAM and I'll post my results soon. However, there's no need to go through a million games lol. It's already proven my friend. Even a stock Hexa core will outperform most overclocked Quads [depending on the game]. A minor overclock will just dominate.


----------



## dpoverlord

How did you run the test in Crisis and BF4? I am down for that. I just did thief and at Very High settings it gets 20FPS (totally maxed out) when I lowered it to normal / some high it was playable.


----------



## ruggercb

I've been working on lowering my Vcore/Vtt and it's going pretty well. Lowered the temps on the 5650 to 29C idle @ 1.248.

I ran the Thief bench all maxed out including max SSAA @ 1080P and it only raised the temp 2-3 degrees.

I also did my best real world stress test. Ripped a blu ray in Handbrake. Worked great, fast and fairly cool.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been working on lowering my Vcore/Vtt and it's going pretty well. Lowered the temps on the 5650 to 29C idle @ 1.248.
> 
> I ran the Thief bench all maxed out including max SSAA @ 1080P and it only raised the temp 2-3 degrees.
> 
> I also did my best real world stress test. Ripped a blu ray in Handbrake. Worked great, fast and fairly cool.


Very nice. Those temps are looking good. You still have plenty of room to increase the Vcore as well. Are you planning to use the Offest voltage for the CPU?


----------



## kpforce1

Well, I just picked up a x5650







... I should have it by Wed. of next week. I can do some side by side testing with 2000 Mhz RAM for your thread Kana


----------



## TheReciever

BENCHMARRRRKKKKKSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Very nice. Those temps are looking good. You still have plenty of room to increase the Vcore as well. Are you planning to use the Offest voltage for the CPU?


It's performing so well now I don't think I'm going to mess with it much more. What do you mean by offset voltage for the CPU?

I have noticed when I change the BCLK/voltage neither the BCLK or voltage changes dynamically any more like it does at stock, even though I have all the C states enabled and whatnot. At least it doesn't say it does. Is that normal?


----------



## dpoverlord

I am looking for more ram Thief at high / med settings runs around 30FPS not the best with 2 Titans going to use this as the bench for the new Xeon:

Edit: Seems I deleted what I meant to write


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> I am looking for more ram Thief at high / med settings runs around 30FPS not the best.


Have you got a Xeon X5000 series yet?


----------



## dpoverlord

seems my edit never went in


----------



## ShortyDoo

what do you all think of a dual x5650 for running a media server? I know this review has been primarily focused on gaming but I wanted your opinions on how well it would be up to the task. I'm mainly concerned about transcoding multiple files for multiple device streams all at once. I'm looking at a supermicro system for hopefully mid 500. thoughts?


----------



## dpoverlord

So my Xeon 5660 just came in the mail. Any difference in how we overclock this compared to the I7-930/920?


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> So my Xeon 5660 just came in the mail. Any difference in how we overclock this compared to the I7-930/920?


I think the X5660 is better at overclocking.


----------



## dpoverlord

just wiped it down with Vodka. Why Vodka had no alcohol 


http://imgur.com/g8WgfDy


*First test run through next text before changing CPUS:*


Spoiler: Test on I7-930



STOCK i7-930 @ 4ghz before Xeon Change
Firemark Extreme Score = 7312 stock


3d Mark11
DPOVerLord i7 930 @ 4.0GHz - 2 xEVGA Titan @ 936Mhz (core) / 1552Mhz (mem) - P15178
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8061403




Doing a load of benchmarks since its been a few months to see if the system runs slower after 5-6 months


----------



## dpoverlord

Ok Xeon is installed I loaded with my stock i7-930 settings thoughts?


----------



## dpoverlord

How did you get the multiplier to 23 my x58 board accepts 23 but then it changes to 21


----------



## dpoverlord

I got to 4.5ghz but something in my settings has to be off since bench wise I am getting lower benchmarks than I did with the 930. Any ideas?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> How did you get the multiplier to 23 my x58 board accepts 23 but then it changes to 21


I'm guessing you are asking me that question. The Xeons wlll down clock no matter what you set it to which is a great thing. Unfortunately not all motherboards perform the same when it comes to multipliers for Xeons. After you set the multiplier to x23. However, you can try this = After setting the multiplier to x23, disable all C-states settings, restart and check CPU-Z. That's simply for testing purposes. If it doesn't work then you'll have to work around x21 or leave x24 with C-States enabled.


----------



## dpoverlord

Booted up with the Xeon got to 4ghz with the same settings as my 930.

Then moved the multiplier to X23 and got to 4.5ghz.

The problem is bench wise I do not see a difference with this chip to the 930.

Any idea what settings I have that are wrong?

Iwas under the impression it would perform better. Right off the bat I am getting a higher overclock (4,5GHZ vs 4.2ghz on the 930), but it does not seem to be performing better.

Really would love some help on getting the most out of this chip.

These are my settings right now:

Code:



Code:


2. > Advanced Frequency Settings [Press Enter]
CPU Clock Ratio............................:21
CPU Frequency ........................(GHz):4.03GHZ 192x21
> Advanced CPU Core Features [Press Enter]
Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech..................:Disabled <<<<yes this is right
SHOULD THIS BE DISABLED?
CPU Cores Enabled..........................: ALL
CPU Multi Threading........................: ENABLED
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)....................:DISABLED just while your benching for a stable over clock, when stable this can be Enabled

C3/C6/C7 State Support.....................:Disabled this always stays disabled, even after a stable o/c or even if your running stock

CPU Thermal Monitor........................:Auto <<<<change to Enabled
CPU EIST Function..........................:DISABLED just while your benching for a stable over clock, when stable this can be Enabled

Bi-Directional PROCHOT.....................:Enabled
QPI Clock Ratio............................: X36
QPI Link Speed........................(GHz): 6.91GHZ
Uncore Clock Ratio.........................:X13
Uncore Frequency......................(MHz): 2496Mhz
>>>>> Standard Clock Control
Base Clock(BCLK) Control...................:Enabled
BCLK Frequency(MHz)........................:192 <<<<change 191
Extreme Memory Profile(X.M.P.).............:Disabled
System Memory Multiplier (SPD).............:6
SHOULD THIS BE 8?
Memory Frequency(MHz)......................:1066 1152
PCI Express Frequency(MHz).................Auto: <<<<change 100 this can be left to auto but some use the 100mhz as that's what auto will run @ I have mine set to 101mhz as its more stable on my o/c GPU

>>>>> Advanced Clock Control
CPU Clock Drive (mV).......................:800mV
PCI Express Clock Drive (mV)...............:900mV
CPU Clock Skew (ps)........................:0
IOH Clock Skew (ps)........................:0
> Advanced Memory Settings [Press Enter]
Extreme Memory Profile(X.M.P.).............:Disabled
System Memory Multiplier (SPD).............:6
SHOULD THIS BE 8?
Memory Frequency(MHz)......................:1066. 1152
Performance Enhance........................:Standard <<<< this is fine
SHOULD I HAVE THIS SET FOR TURBO OR EXTREME?!
DRAM Timing Selectable (SPD)...............:Quick <<<<this is fine
Should this be AUTO
Profile DDR Voltage........................:1.5V
Profile QPI Voltage........................:1.175V
Channel Interleaving.......................: 6 AUTO
Rank Interleaving..........................: 4 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C
> Channel A, B, & C Timing Settings [Press Enter]
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
Cas Latency Time...........................:7 AUTO
tRCD.......................................:7 AUTO
tRP........................................:7 AUTO
tRAS.......................................:20 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Advanced Timing Control
tRC........................................: 27 AUTO
tRRD ......................................:4 AUTO
tWTR ......................................:4 AUTO
tWR........................................:8 AUTO
tWTP.......................................:19 AUTO
tWL........................................:7 AUTO
tRFC.......................................:60 AUTO
tRTP.......................................:4 AUTO
tFAW.......................................:16 AUTO
Command Rate (CMD) ........................:1 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Misc Timing Control
B2B CAS Delay..............................: - AUTO
Round Trip Latency.........................:58 AUTO
> Channel A, B, & C Turnaround Setting [Press Enter]
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Reads Followed By Reads
Different DIMMs............................:6 AUTO
Different Ranks............................:5 AUTO
On The Same Rank...........................:1 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Writes Followed By Writes
Different DIMMs............................:6 AUTO
Different Ranks............................:6 AUTO
On The Same Rank...........................:1 AUTO
> Advanced Voltage Settings [Press Enter]
>>> CPU
LoadLine Calibration.......................: AUTO <<<<change to Level 2
CPU Vcore..................................:1.31250V
xDynamic Vcore(DVID).......................: 0.0 AUTO
QPI/VTT Voltage............................:1.335V
CPU PLL....................................:1.8V
>>> MCH/ICH
PCIE.......................................:AUTO
QPI PLL....................................:1.200V
IOH Core...................................:AUTO
ICH I/O....................................:AUTO
ICH Core...................................:1.2V
>>> Dram
DRAM Voltage...............................:1.5V
DRAM Termination...........................:AUTO
Ch-A Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-B Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-C Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-A Address VRef..........................:AUTO
Ch-B Address VRef..........................:AUTO
Ch-C Address VRef..........................:AUTO

> Miscellaneous Settings [Press Enter]
Isochronous Support........................: Enabled
Virtualization Technology..................: Enabled
Edited by kev8792 - 8/1/13 at 7:35am











Right now I am at 4.5ghz by changing to x23 I figure maybe my ratio in QPI is off...



For example benches I ran so far:

ALL TESTS 5000x2560[/B]

Taking this from my pre benchmark thread.


Spoiler: Firemark Extreme i7-930 Score Test 7312 Xeon Score 7271



Not much as changed from the original 7680x1600 score of 7699. Seems it takes a 6% performance hit with time and going to portrait mode

Graphics Score 8317
Physics 9803
Graphic 1 46.66
graphic 2 29.52
physics 31.12
Combined 14.88

*Xeon @4.45ghz*

Graphics Score 7924
Physics 15108
Graphic 1 45.80
graphic 2 27.61
physics 47.96
Combined 14.10
*this is weird as well since this has the 930 5% faster I am going to check video settings.*


My Titan is now 100MHZ higher and my CPU is 500mhz higher than what my 930 was and Thief for example is 6FPS slower than the 930 at normal settings.

*Thief Normal Settings*


Spoiler: Thief Normal i7-930



*I7-930 Benchmark has an avg FPS of 28.3*






Spoiler: Thief Normal Xeon 4.45GHz



*Xeon @ 4.5GHX has an AVG FPS*




*Metro Light 6 months later*


Spoiler: I7-930 3/14 bench




Last run we had an avg of 30.39fps I only did 1 run again and had an Avg of 31.27


I ran this on the Xeon and it ran slower as well more around 27FPS Will run a 3 run batch now

*Batman set to Max settings Everything*


Spoiler: i7-930 Max



Whats interesting is that the Titans utilized 4.7GB of Memory w/ an avg 32 FPS






Spoiler: Xeon @ 4.5GHZ Maxed out graphics settings



Same exact Benchmarks only off by 1 fps on Average


----------



## Kana-Maru

Did my input help you reach the multiplier you wanted [x23]?

I believe I see two bottlenecks, possibly three. I'm sure you are unknowingly bottlenecking the hell out of your rig lol. Post your RAM settings for me please.

Edit:
Nevermind. I see your RAM settings [1146Mhz]. Run Cinebench 11.5 and post your results. In the meantime I'll type up everything you should change in your BIOS settings. You need try to hit 1600Mhz or higher. Reach your highest Memory Frequency then start tightening the RAM timings.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Did my input help you reach the multiplier you wanted [x23]?
> 
> I believe I see two bottlenecks, possibly three. I'm sure you are unknowingly bottlenecking the hell out of your rig lol. Post your RAM settings for me please.
> Edit:
> Nevermind. I see your RAM settings [1146Mhz]. Run Cinebench 11.5 and post your results. In the meantime I'll type up everything you should change in your BIOS settings. You need try to hit 1600Mhz or higher. Reach your highest Memory Frequency then start tightening the RAM timings.


Edit: Cinebench below, but my ram FYi is G Skill 3 x 2GB DDR3 1600 PC# 12800 Model: Model F3-12800CL9T-6GBNQ


Spoiler: Cinebench Score CPU 11.17PTS OpenGL 44.99FPS







*These are my settings right now Xeon @ 4.48GHZ*

*2. > Advanced Frequency Settings [Press Enter]*


Spoiler: Photo






CPU Clock Ratio............................: *23X*
CPU Frequency ........................(GHz):4.48GHZ 195x23

*> Advanced CPU Core Features [Press Enter]*


Spoiler: Photo Advanced CPU Core Features






Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech..................:ENABLED
CPU Cores Enabled..........................: ALL
CPU Multi Threading........................: ENABLED
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)....................ISABLED
C3/C6/C7 State Support.....................isabled
CPU Thermal Monitor........................:Enabled
CPU EIST Function..........................ISABLED just while your benching for a stable over clock, when stable this can be Enabled
Bi-Directional PROCHOT.....................:Enabled

*2. > Advanced Frequency Settings CONTINUED [Press Enter]*
QPI Clock Ratio............................: X36
QPI Link Speed........................(GHz): 7.02GHZ
Uncore Clock Ratio.........................:X13
Uncore Frequency......................(MHz): 2535hz
*>>>>> Standard Clock Control*
Base Clock(BCLK) Control...................:Enabled
BCLK Frequency(MHz)........................:185
Extreme Memory Profile(X.M.P.).............isabled
System Memory Multiplier (SPD).............:6 _Should I change this?_
Memory Frequency(MHz)......................:800 1170
PCI Express Frequency(MHz).................100
>>>>> Advanced Clock Control
CPU Clock Drive (mV).......................:800mV
PCI Express Clock Drive (mV)...............:900mV
CPU Clock Skew (ps)........................:0
IOH Clock Skew (ps)........................:0

*> Advanced Memory Settings [Press Enter]*


Spoiler: Photo of Memory settings






Extreme Memory Profile(X.M.P.).............isabled
System Memory Multiplier (SPD).............:6
SHOULD THIS BE 8?
Memory Frequency(MHz)......................:800 1170 *This used to say :1066. 1152*
Performance Enhance........................:Standard
DRAM Timing Selectable (SPD)...............:Quick
Should this be AUTO
Profile DDR Voltage........................:1.5V
Profile QPI Voltage........................:1.175V
Channel Interleaving.......................: 6 (says this number both spots)
Rank Interleaving..........................: 4 (says this number both spots)



Spoiler: Channel A, B, & C> Channel A, B, & C Timing Settings



>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
Cas Latency Time...........................:6 *SET TO 7*
tRCD.......................................:6 *SET TO 7*
tRP........................................:6 *SET TO 7*
tRAS.......................................:15 *SET TO 20*
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Advanced Timing Control
tRC........................................: 20 AUTO
tRRD ......................................:4 AUTO
tWTR ......................................:3 AUTO
tWR........................................:6 AUTO
tWTP.......................................:16 AUTO
tWL........................................:6 AUTO
tRFC.......................................:44 AUTO
tRTP.......................................:3 AUTO
tFAW.......................................:12 AUTO
Command Rate (CMD) ........................:1 AUTO

>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Misc Timing Control
B2B CAS Delay..............................: - AUTO
Round Trip Latency.........................:52 [*58]*





Spoiler: Channel A Settings



*> Channel A, B, & C Turnaround Setting [Press Enter]*]
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Reads Followed By Reads
Different DIMMs............................:6 AUTO
Different Ranks............................:5 AUTO
On The Same Rank...........................:1 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Writes Followed By Writes
Different DIMMs............................:6 AUTO
Different Ranks............................:6 AUTO
On The Same Rank...........................:1 AUTO




Advanced Voltage Settings [Press Enter CPU Voltage Sttings]


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






CPU Listing current settings not Normal]
LoadLine Calibration.......................: Level 2
CPU Vcore..................................:1.31250V *just changed to 1.3*
xDynamic Vcore(DVID).......................: 0.0 AUTO
QPI/VTT Voltage............................:1.335V *Just changed to 1.295V*
CPU PLL....................................:AUto
>>> MCH/ICH
PCIE.......................................:AUTO
QPI PLL....................................:1.200V
IOH Core...................................:AUTO
ICH I/O....................................:AUTO
ICH Core...................................:1.2V
>>> Dram
DRAM Voltage...............................:Auto
DRAM Termination...........................:AUTO
Ch-A Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-B Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-C Data VRef.............................:AUTO
Ch-A Address VRef..........................:AUTO
Ch-B Address VRef..........................:AUTO
Ch-C Address VRef..........................:AUTO
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *matroska*
> 
> If your sticks are PC12800=1600MHz, it should be at 800MHz. If the deafult spec of it is PC10600=1333MHz they are fine.


----------



## Akadaka

Your using so much RAM 5gb out 6gb?


----------



## dpoverlord

:thumb:Yeah I cant seem to figure out whats taking out all the memory. Google Chrome just seems to SAP all my memory up


Can someone help with my settings / what my ram should be this is driving me nuts.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Try to hide some of your post. It's cluttered. Your 4.4Ghz score is looking about right. I'm going to overclock my CPU to X5660 @ 4.4Ghz w/1600Mhz just to compare really quick.

Also what do you mean what should your RAM be? 1600Mhz and above with tight timings that are stable will be your best bet. Increase your Uncore Frequency as you overclock your RAM.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Bi-Directional PROCHOT.....................:Enabled
> QPI Clock Ratio............................: *X36*
> QPI Link Speed........................(GHz): 6.91GHZ
> Uncore Clock Ratio.........................*:X13*
> Uncore Frequency......................(MHz): 2496Mhz


13x would be a strange choice for an i7. 13X is for Slow mode isn't it? That's for getting bclk, not performance, AFAIK. Is there a reason for using 13x?
Quote:


> Uncore & QPI Features:
> QPI Link Speed .............................. x36
> Uncore Frequency .......................... (Always 2x memory Multi or 2x +1)
> Isonchronous Frequency ..................[Enabled]


So for 36X QPI i allus used 17x or 18x for uncore.... and x8 for memory. Would that put your ram beyond limits or?

PC3 10700. 1333MHz - well, faster ram would improve benchmarks..

Edit: Ah, I see I did use it on my 950 when I had 1333 ram....6x

I upgraded after that Corsair GT 2000MHz in it ATM, though it's sort of a spare rig now.

This is LSDmeASAP's template from back then:
Quote:


> Advanced CPU Features:
> CPU Clock Ratio ................................ [20x]
> Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech .................. [Enabled]
> CPU Cores Enabled ............................ [All]
> CPU Multi Threading .......................... [Enabled]
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) ................... [Disabled]
> C3/C6/C7 State Support .................... [Disabled]
> CPU Thermal Monitor ......................... [Enabled]
> CPU EIST Function ............................ [Disabled]
> Virtualization Technology ................... [Enabled] << Disabled if you do not use Vmware or Virtual PC Programs
> Bi-Directional PROCHOT ..................... [Enabled]
> 
> Uncore & QPI Features:
> QPI Link Speed .............................. x36
> Uncore Frequency .......................... (Always 2x memory Multi or 2x +1)
> Isonchronous Frequency ..................[Enabled]
> 
> Standard Clock Control:
> Base Clock (BCLK) Control ................ [Enabled]
> BCLK Frequency (MHz) .....................
> PCI Express Frequency (MHz) ........... [100]
> 
> C.I.A.2 [Disabled]
> 
> Advanced Clock Control:
> CPU Clock Drive ..............................[800mV]
> PCI Express Clock Drive ................... [900mV]
> CPU Clock Skew ............................. [0ps]
> IOH Clock Skew ............................. [0ps]
> 
> Advanced DRAM Features:
> Performance Enhance ...................... [Standard]
> Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P) ......... [Disabled]
> System Memory Multiplier (SPD) ........ [AUTO]
> DRAM Timing Selectable (SPD) .......... [Manual]
> 
> Channel A + B + C
> 
> Channel A Timing Settings:
> ##Channel A Standard Timing Control##
> CAS Latency Time ......................
> tRCD .......................................
> tRP .........................................
> tRAS .......................................
> 
> Below values may be left in Auto if you like, generally this is fine. For those users who DO Set advanced timings manually, please see some of my thoughts and findings about these settings and rules here
> XtremeSystems Forums - View Single Post - Gigabyte EX58-UD5/Extreme Discussion Thread
> 
> ##Channel A Advanced Timing Control##
> tRC ........................................ (Should be = tRAS + tRP or above for stability)
> tRRD .......................................
> tWTR ...................................... (Must be Write to Read Delay/Same Rank - (tWL + 4)
> tWR ........................................
> tWTP ....................................... (tWTP Must = tWR + tWL + 4)
> tWL ........................................ (tWL Must be CAS Latency -1)
> tRFC .......................................
> tRTP .......................................
> tFAW ......................................
> Command Rate (CMD) ................
> 
> ##Channel A Misc Timing Control##
> Round Trip Latency ...................
> 
> B2B CAS Delay ..........................
> 
> Advanced Voltage Control:
> 
> CPU
> Load Line Calibration ................. [Disabled]
> CPU Vcore ...............................
> QPI/VTT Voltage 1.150v ............
> CPU PLL 1.800v .......................
> 
> MCH/ICH
> PCIE 1.500v ...........................
> QPI PLL 1.100v .......................
> IOH Core 1.100v .....................
> ICH I/O 1.500v .......................
> ICH Core 1.1v ........................
> 
> DRAM
> DRAM Voltage 1.500v ..............
> DRAM Termination 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-A Data VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-B Data VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-C Data VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-A Address VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-B Address VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]
> Ch-C Address VRef. 0.750v [AUTO]


----------



## Kana-Maru

There is no Uncore Clock Ratio setting on my board so I can't speak about that. I only have Uncore Frequency option. I do have ways to get to those settings I suppose. 1600Mhz x2 [uncore 3200Mhz] will be sufficient for that speed, but I think he'll probably run the DRAM right below 1600Mhz. x8 will probably be the Memory and x16 Uncore.

Finally ran Cinebench R11.5 @ 4.4Ghz with DDR3-1536Mhz.

*11.43 pts*

That's only a 2.3% difference from your score dpoverlord. I told you that your 4.4Ghz score sounded about right. 4.4Ghz will give you all the speed you'll really need for gaming and programs that rely on the CPU.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Try to hide some of your post. It's cluttered. Your 4.4Ghz score is looking about right. I'm going to overclock my CPU to X5660 @ 4.4Ghz w/1600Mhz just to compare really quick.
> 
> Also what do you mean what should your RAM be? 1600Mhz and above with tight timings that are stable will be your best bet. Increase your Uncore Frequency as you overclock your RAM.


Tried clearing it up.Ram has always been my weak point with this board, if you might be able to guide me the correct way of fixing it, would be great. I was always under the impression that clock speed trumps ram speed since the increase in performance from faster ram is 1-4%

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Bi-Directional PROCHOT.....................:Enabled
> QPI Clock Ratio............................: X36
> QPI Link Speed........................(GHz): 6.91GHZ
> Uncore Clock Ratio.........................:X13
> Uncore Frequency......................(MHz): 2496Mhz
> 
> 
> 13x would be a strange choice for an i7. 13X is for Slow mode isn't it? That's for getting bclk, not performance, AFAIK. Is there a reason for using 13x?


I dont remember the exact reason why we went with 13 its in the x58 forum somewhere will look it up in the morning I think it was to get the high BCLK clock. Should my QPI of X36 stay there way as well? Or should I just change Uncore to x18
Quote:


> Uncore & QPI Features:
> QPI Link Speed .............................. x36
> Uncore Frequency .......................... (Always 2x memory Multi or 2x +1)
> Isonchronous Frequency ..................[Enabled]
> 
> So for 36X QPI i allus used 17x or 18x for uncore.... and x8 for memory. Would that put your ram beyond limits or?
> 
> PC3 10700. 1333MHz - well, faster ram would improve benchmarks..
> 
> Edit: Ah, I see I did use it on my 950 when I had 1333 ram....6x


My ram is G Skill
DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)
Timing 9-9-9-24
Cas Latency 9
Voltage 1.5V - 1.6V

I am not sure I understand what to put for my mom timings from above. Think you could give me some guidance?

Does this change anything
.
Quote:


> That's only a 2.3% difference from your score dpoverlord. I told you that your 4.4Ghz score sounded about right. 4.4Ghz will give you all the speed you'll really need for gaming and programs that rely on the CPU.


Let's tweak this first since right now my i7 930 at 4ghz performs better in games, so for me I don't see the benefit of this yet as its not an upgrade.

Edit alcan changed the settings to above and it won't boot. Long fast multiple beeps


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Tried clearing it up.Ram has always been my weak point with this board, if you might be able to guide me the correct way of fixing it, would be great. I was always under the impression that clock speed trumps ram speed since the increase in performance from faster ram is 1-4%


It's no problem man. These 2000Mhz RAM modules are simply giving me a headache. I'll be updating info on those very soon. Tighter RAM timings makes a big difference regardless of the clock speed. My [email protected] was pulling 10.22 pts. After I tightened my RAM and ran test to make sure everything was stable, I scored 10.37 pts. Maybe minor to some people, but it made my score much better. Clock speed does matter as well, but a lot of top scores come from the correct timings. No matter if the timings are loose or tight. It depends on the CPU, platform, RAM and settings. In your case getting your RAM frequency right, then tightening the speeds will matter the most on the X58. Of course once you get comfortable with your OC CPU speed to make sure everything is stable.

Quote:


> I dont remember the exact reason why we went with 13 its in the x58 forum somewhere will look it up in the morning I think it was to get the high BCLK clock. Should my QPI of X36 stay there way as well? Or should I just change Uncore to x18
> Let's tweak this first since right now my i7 930 at 4ghz performs better in games, so for me I don't see the benefit of this yet as its not an upgrade.


Your QPI is fine for now. A =stock X5660 w/ 1333Mhz RAM will outperforms the i7-930 @ 4Ghz easily. You have a upgrade, it's just problem isn't with the CPU it's elsewhere. You are bottlenecking something and I'll try to help. In the meantime set your X5660 to stock settings [enable everything on the CPU including C- states] and run those benchmarks again with CPU-Z screenshots on the RAM and CPU info.

I'll try to get you some settings to test out based on your current voltage. I'm using a different board, but I'm sure you'll understand everything.


----------



## alancsalt

Yeah, shouldn't you be able to run ram 8x and 17x or 18x uncore? That would improve bench results. And think that other guys right about turbo giving extra multi...check it...try those settings;
Quote:


> Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech .................. [Enabled]
> CPU Cores Enabled ............................ [All]
> CPU Multi Threading .......................... [Enabled]
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) ................... [Disabled]
> C3/C6/C7 State Support .................... [Disabled]
> CPU Thermal Monitor ......................... [Enabled]
> CPU EIST Function ............................ [Disabled]
> Virtualization Technology ................... [Enabled] << Disabled if you do not use Vmware or Virtual PC Programs
> Bi-Directional PROCHOT ..................... [Enabled]


See if you get the extra multi. 1600MHz ram might limit bclk, but should handle overclocking. (with ddr2 my 1066 would do 1115). Guess I'd test that with ram on Auto, but if you get the extra multi that may not matter.

23 x 200 is 4.6MHz with ram at 1600....

(Allways keep track of what you change so you can revert if the change does not work out.)

Sorry for butting in Kana-Maru. This idea has made me a bit nostalgic for the old 1366. You've done this with a Xeon, so you'll know the differences.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nah man it's cool. I have no issues







. I'm glad to see people still interested in the X58 platform and discussing in 2014. I'm sure we will help him get over his bottleneck issue sooner or later. I'm not sure how much vCore his CPU will require to run 4.6Ghz, but I'm guessing it'll be over Intel recommended max. He's having some issues with gaming performance so I'm going to try and help him with that.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's no problem man. These 2000Mhz RAM modules are simply giving me a headache. I'll be updating info on those very soon. Tighter RAM timings makes a big difference regardless of the clock speed. My [email protected] was pulling 10.22 pts. After I tightened my RAM and ran test to make sure everything was stable, I scored 10.37 pts. Maybe minor to some people, but it made my score much better. Clock speed does matter as well, but a lot of top scores come from the correct timings. No matter if the timings are loose or tight. It depends on the CPU, platform, RAM and settings. In your case getting your RAM frequency right, then tightening the speeds will matter the most on the X58. Of course once you get comfortable with your OC CPU speed to make sure everything is stable.
> Your QPI is fine for now. A =stock X5660 w/ 1333Mhz RAM will outperforms the i7-930 @ 4Ghz easily. You have a upgrade, it's just problem isn't with the CPU it's elsewhere. You are bottlenecking something and I'll try to help. In the meantime set your X5660 to stock settings and run those benchmarks again with CPU-Z screenshots on the RAM and CPU info.
> 
> I'll try to get you some settings to test out based on your current voltage. I'm using a different board, but I'm sure you'll understand everything.


Ok, I just dont really know how to "Tweak my timings" Hence the problem. I just booted and had to lower my BLCK 3 times since it would not boot at 4.5GHZ. I am not sure if its a timing issue but I changed
QPI to 1.335V
CPU Vcore to 1.3125V
BCLK to 189 providing me 4.35GHZ

QPI Link Speed .............................. x36
Uncore Frequency .......................... 18
SPD to 8 (if set to 60 it would not reach 1600 right now it hovers around 800 -1566


Spoiler: Photos of settings:









Quote:


> ee if you get the extra multi. 1600MHz ram might limit bclk, but should handle overclocking. (with ddr2 my 1066 would do 1115). Guess I'd test that with ram on Auto, but if you get the extra multi that may not matter.
> 
> 23 x 200 is 4.6MHz with ram at 1600....
> 
> (Allways keep track of what you change so you can revert if the change does not work out.)


Yes I will have to start monitoring changes. I have the stock changes that loaded up to 4ghz from my i7-930.

I will keep a log after this:

Right now I have the multi unlocked at X23







, However, I think the reason I had X13 was so that my memory would not limit my Overclock. Hence when I raised it to 1600mhz the system would not boot. I was able to lower the BLCK to 189 which gives me 4.35GHZ (not *4.5*, and it boots going to run an intel burn test.

I think the Ram could be holding back the O/C or is influencing it since right now at stock temps I am around 29-40C at full load I started to reach 70C.

Now my case is not full cooled since its lying on the floor but I need to take a cat nap be back in 3 hrs. Let me know what you think is the next step mind is groggy now


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've taken this from one of your previous post:

>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
Cas Latency Time...........................:7 AUTO
tRCD.......................................:7 AUTO
tRP........................................:7 AUTO
tRAS.......................................:20 AUTO
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Advanced Timing Control
tRC........................................: 27 AUTO

Those are the settings I'm speaking about when I speak about changing the RAM timings. Usually the lower the better, but this isn't always the case. However, in your case the lower will be the better. First things first. We have to get you a stable settings. Once you get everything set you'll be ready to mess around with those RAM timings. In the meantime continue to leave it at auto. So please set your X5660 to STOCK and AUTO settings in the BIOS and run your gaming benchmarks so we can have a baseline. You can do this now if you want. Run the same test your ran earlier including Cinebench R11.5 @ stock settings.


----------



## dpoverlord

Ran Thief again to see if it made a difference I got the same response on FPS as I did when I was at 4.5

See below:
I7-930 bench
Ultra Settings Barely playable but stressful


Spoiler: Thief Ultra









Spoiler: Mix of Normal / Blend settings: avg FPS 22. I tend to take off all AA






Straight Normal Settings

*Thief Normal Settings*


Spoiler: Thief Normal i7-930



*I7-930 Benchmark has an avg FPS of 28.3*






Spoiler: Thief Normal Xeon 4.45GHz



*Xeon @ 4.5GHX has an AVG FPS*




Just seems odd that it clocks lower in games than an i7-930


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah that's pretty weird since I'm getting a much difference experience while playing Thief. Then again I'm playing @ 1920x1080p and I have already compared my X5660 @ stock vs overclock settings.

Edit:

Set your MB to default settings. Try these settings. Anything I don't include, just leave it set to Auto. Disable anything extra you won't need on your board. This includes USB 3.0 and other chipsets you won't be using [RAID controllers etc.]

*2. > Advanced Frequency Settings*
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) = Disabled
C3/C6/C7 State Support = Disabled

BLCK = 200
QPI Clock Ratio = x36
QPI Link Speed = 7.20 G\Ts
Uncore Clock Ratio = x18
Uncore Frequency = 3200Mhz

*>>>>> Advanced Clock Control*
Memory Frequency = 1600Mhz
PCI Express Frequency = 101Mhz
Profile DDR Voltage = 1.50V
Profile QPI Voltage = 1.32V

*> Channel A, B, & C Timing Settings*
>>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
Cas Latency Time.= Auto
tRCD = Auto
tRP = Auto
tRAS = Auto
tRC = Auto

*>>> CPU*
Load Line Calibration = Auto
CPU Vcore = 1.33 _[1.3125v -1.3375v]_
QPI/VTT Voltage = 1.32V
CPU PLL = 1.80v

If there's anything I forgot please let me know. Try those settings and see if you can POST and boot to WIndows.


----------



## kpforce1

I always reset the BIOS to default when putting a different CPU in. I thought you were supposed to? I never used profiles from a different chip.

I should get my replacement x5650 toady or tomorrow to compare.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Well you shouldnt be surprised to know that both of the threads have been locked, with one of them being deleted...didnt take long for them to show their habits


I'm not liking that forum so much.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> I'm not liking that forum so much.


The irritating part of it all is they have proven to display the ability to delete the thread. Will they? Nope, all they care about (as they have plainly displayed) is ad revenue going through the site. Being that K-Maru's review put them on the top of the list they like it where it is despite the fact that the thread is locked.

AnandTech just lost all credibility from me forever at this point, and sadly took them less than 20 minutes to do it too


----------



## Kana-Maru

Just wanted to give you guys a head up about my Castlevania Review. It's live.

Castlevania: Lords of Shadows 2 Full Review
http://spara2pennies.blogspot.com/2014/03/castlevania-lords-of-shadows-2-review.html

I should be done with my Thief review very soon.










*Thief @ 1920x1080 - Very High [100% Maxed]*



Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 966Mhz
X5660 @ 3.2Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1333Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 25 minutes 36 seconds
117,328 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 76fps*
FPS Max: 97fps
FPS Min: 19fps
*Frame time Avg: 13.1ms*

I've been so busy with the new RAM that I haven't had time to post my Thief Very High Settings. Running stock speed gave me some pretty good results. There was minor stuttering during the loading process, but nothing major. The game was smooth I had no issues at all. This was expected since the game is using the Unreal Engine 3. While the engine is 10 years old it still looks fantastic. The Xeon handled this game well at stock speeds, but this isn't it's full potential.

*Thief - Overclocked Xeon*

*Thief @ 1920x1080 - Very High [100% Maxed]*



Stock GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 966Mhz
*X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz*
Gameplay Duration: 22 minutes 19 seconds
145,111 Frames Captured
*FPS Avg: 108fps*
FPS Max: 116fps
FPS Min: 25fps
*Frame time Avg: 9.22ms*

My overclocked Xeon still proves that Hexa cores are great for gaming. I increased in just about every stat I recorded. This time around I didn't capture the CPU temp or the CPU Usage. I gained 32 frames per seconds on average and dropped my frame time down 3.88ms. This game is looking very nice. I can't wait to see what the Unreal Engine 4 will bring regarding graphics. Ignore the fps that reads off the chart, those high FPS readings are from the loading screen.


----------



## OCmember

I also am sporting a sweet Xeon. I'm curious on how the new UE4 engine will use multi-core processors.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I also am sporting a sweet Xeon. I'm curious on how the new UE4 engine will use multi-core processors.


I wouldn't get my hopes up very high there.

@Kana-Maru You know..You can probably delete your OP in that thread on anand.

or edit and leave *snip


----------



## TheReciever

Definitely worth looking into


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> I wouldn't get my hopes up very high there.


Why, what have you read, or know? Are you just assuming on the basis of the past game engines not supporting multi core cpus? Which I can understand but I'm just hoping UE4 will be more supportive.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> @Kana-Maru You know..You can probably delete your OP in that thread on anand.
> 
> or edit and leave *snip


I can't edit the topics or delete the threads because the mods purposely locked the threads purposely. They didn't want me to delete my thread or edit my post. They obviously need the hits, but those mods are horrible.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> The irritating part of it all is they have proven to display the ability to delete the thread. Will they? Nope, all they care about (as they have plainly displayed) is ad revenue going through the site. Being that K-Maru's review put them on the top of the list they like it where it is despite the fact that the thread is locked.
> 
> AnandTech just lost all credibility from me forever at this point, and sadly took them less than 20 minutes to do it too


I didn't even know they deleted the topics that fast. I wish I would have knew more about that forum before posting. I would've never posted my review there for such a greedy forum site. However, that is still my review and they don't own it. They own none of it.

I left another topic for anandtech to remove my review. They are starting to tick me off.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah that's pretty weird since I'm getting a much difference experience while playing Thief. Then again I'm playing @ 1920x1080p and I have already compared my X5660 @ stock vs overclock settings.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Set your MB to default settings. Try these settings. Anything I don't include, just leave it set to Auto. Disable anything extra you won't need on your board. This includes USB 3.0 and other chipsets you won't be using [RAID controllers etc.]
> 
> *2. > Advanced Frequency Settings*
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) = Disabled
> C3/C6/C7 State Support = Disabled
> 
> QPI Clock Ratio = x36
> QPI Link Speed = 7.20 G\Ts
> Uncore Clock Ratio = x18
> Uncore Frequency = 3200Mhz
> 
> *>>>>> Advanced Clock Control*
> Memory Frequency = 1600Mhz
> PCI Express Frequency = 101Mhz
> Profile DDR Voltage = 1.50V
> Profile QPI Voltage = 1.32V
> 
> *> Channel A, B, & C Timing Settings*
> >>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
> Cas Latency Time.= Auto
> tRCD = Auto
> tRP = Auto
> tRAS = Auto
> tRC = Auto
> 
> *>>> CPU*
> Load Line Calibration = Auto
> CPU Vcore = 1.33 _[1.3125v -1.3375v]_
> QPI/VTT Voltage = 1.32V
> CPU PLL = 1.80v
> 
> If there's anything I forgot please let me know. Try those settings and see if you can POST and boot to WIndows.


Just got up, I need raid since my ssds are raid 0.

Will reset to stock to with these settings now take it now x23 multi.


----------



## Lionvibez

You may need to install a Modded Raid Rom into your bios since x58 doesn't pass the trim command to a Raid 0 array by default.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> You may need to install a Modded Raid Rom into your bios since x58 doesn't pass the trim command to a Raid 0 array by default.


Welcome to OCN!


----------



## Lionvibez

Thank you i've been on and off of this site for years.

The reason I joined is i'm currently on a 58x setup still.

However i've already made the move from 920 d0 to 970.

Curious to see how guys are doing with the Xeon's i've been following this on the anandtech forum also.


----------



## dpoverlord

My 930 right now benches better in games but I think I bottlenecked my Xeon so everyone is helping me. How do I check trim I molded my board last year and don't know if I did it then


----------



## TheReciever

What kind of clocks were you able to achieve? The 970 was what the 3930k is today so it was quite popular for a time


----------



## Lionvibez

i'm currently at 200x21 and 4.2Ghz at 1.28vcore

DDR3 1600 7-8-7-20 1T

And to be honest that is already a 1Ghz overclock from stock speed and i'm happy to leave it there.

I can hit higher clock speeds but I don't want to be putting 1.4v into my chip.

And to my original post I've modded my bios to pass the trim command to my Raid 0 array that's why I know he will need it.


----------



## TheReciever

Not bad, back then 4.0Ghz was the defacto frequency. With that amount of vcore you can likely achieve higher clocks.

Of course not everyone is looking to push the limit


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> i'm currently at 200x21 and 4.2Ghz at 1.28vcore
> 
> DDR3 1600 7-8-7-20 1T
> 
> And to be honest that is already a 1Ghz overclock from stock speed and i'm happy to leave it there.
> 
> I can hit higher clock speeds but I don't want to be putting 1.4v into my chip.
> 
> And to my original post I've modded my bios to pass the trim command to my Raid 0 array that's why I know he will need it.


Where is the 1T and 2T in the gigabyte bios.

Also what mod did you use for trim? I just booted up my system bringing to stock

The worst is having to enter these in portrait mode my neck hurts lol


----------



## Lionvibez

Agreed.

My original built date for this system is from oct 2009.

I'm waiting to see how Haswell E will do (6core or 8core) and the pricing on DDR4 memory and will make the jump.

This box will be retired to server duty or a VM machine.

Thus Far x58 has been an outstanding performer and lasted longer than any of my machines so far, and I still laugh when my friend was trying to get me to save money to build a AMD system back in 2009 and I said no i'm going intel this round. And almost 5 years later my machine still runs everything great while his AMD system he built at the time struggles now.


----------



## Lionvibez

hey DP I don't have that board so I can't say where.

i'm currently on a Asus p6t Deluxe V2.

For the TRIM mod info you need to start here.

http://www.win-raid.com/t202f28-TRIM-in-RAID-seems-possible-for-all-Intel-chipsets-from-P-up.html

guess I should have posted the rest of my specs also.

Intel Core i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.28v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T | 7970 Ghz Twin Frozr 3GB | EVGA 650 SC Physx | Logitech G15+G500 | Intel 320GB G2 Raid 0 | WD 1TB Black Storage | ESATA 2TB Green | CM 690 II Advanced | Razor Vespula | D-link DGL-4500 | HP ZR24w | Logitech Z560 | X-FI Titanium | Corsair Pro Series Gold AX750


----------



## Blameless

QPI/DMI info in the OP's chart is misleading.

On an single CPU LGA-1366/X58 platform, the QPI link does nothing but connect the CPU to the IOH, and the IOH is nothing but a QPI to PCI-E bridge. From the IOH you get your 36 PCI-E lanes, plus your 4x PCI-E/DMI lanes.

On a single socket LGA-2011setup You have a 40 lane PCI-E controller, and 4 more PCI-E/DMI lanes, both connected directly to the CPU.

Anyway, my point is that listing QPI and PCI-E separately on for the LGA-1366/X58 setup makes it seem that it has more I/O than the LGA-2011 setup. This is factually incorrect; the LGA-2011 platform has more (and lower latency) I/O.


----------



## dpoverlord

COMMENTS IN CAPS
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Set your MB to default settings. Try these settings. Anything I don't include, just leave it set to Auto. Disable anything extra you won't need on your board. This includes USB 3.0 and other chipsets you won't be using [RAID controllers etc.]
> 
> *2. > Advanced Frequency Settings*
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) = Disabled
> C3/C6/C7 State Support = Disabled
> *Ii LEFT THE OTHERS ON AUTO*
> 
> QPI Clock Ratio = x36
> QPI Link Speed = 7.20 G\Ts
> Uncore Clock Ratio = x18
> Uncore Frequency = 3200Mhz
> 
> *i CANT SET QPI LINK AND UNCORE FREQUENCEY BUT i SET THE CLOCK AND UNCORE. THE ONLY WAY TO GET UNCORE FREQ TO 3200MHZ IS TO SET THE CLOCK RATIO TO X24 NOT SURE HOW TO GET THE QPI LINK SPEED TO 7.2 ITS AT 4.8GHZ RIGHTNOW*
> 
> *>>>>> Advanced Clock Control*
> Memory Frequency = 1600Mhz
> PCI Express Frequency = 101Mhz
> Profile DDR Voltage = 1.50V
> Profile QPI Voltage = 1.32V
> 
> *I DONT HAVE AN OPT[ON TO CHANGE THE MEMORY FREQUENCY ITS GREYED OUT TO 800 / 800. IF I CHANGE THE SPD TO 8 I GET 1066, BUT IF I CHANGE THE BLCK IT INFLUENCES THE SPEED OF THE MEMORY FREQUENCY. FOR I.E. IF BLCK IS SET TO 200 AND SPD TO 8 I WILL GET 1600. WHAT SHOULD I DO HERE?
> I SET IT TO AN SPD OF 12 TO GET 1600
> *
> 
> *> Channel A, B, & C Timing Settings*
> >>>>> Channel A, B, & C Standard Timing Control
> Cas Latency Time.= Auto
> tRCD = Auto
> tRP = Auto
> tRAS = Auto
> tRC = Auto
> 
> *>>> CPU*
> Load Line Calibration = Auto
> CPU Vcore = 1.33 _[1.3125v -1.3375v]_
> QPI/VTT Voltage = 1.32V
> 
> *I ONLY HAVE 1.315 AND 1.335 I SET IT T. 1.335*
> 
> CPU PLL = 1.80v
> 
> If there's anything I forgot please let me know. Try those settings and see if you can POST and boot to WIndows.





Spoiler: Photos of Bios









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aximous*
> 
> Sorry I meant the uncore ratio. On the old series it was advised to maintain a 2.0 uncore:dram ratio meaning that if you had 8x memory multiplier you set the uncore to x16, now with 32nm you can go lower for example I'm running a x14 uncore multi with 8x memory multi, that gives a 1.75 ratio which is in the middle of the previously mention range. This can lead to lower uncore voltages for example. A rule of thumb for the uncore multi could be to set it to 2 times the memory multi minus 2 then you can change it 1 step lower or 2 step higher. I hope this helps.
> 
> The QPI should always be set to x36 as that is the lowest after slow mode.
> 
> Edit: other than what I mentioned here I usually follow this guide and it works great.
> 
> One more thing that changes from 45nm to 32nm is some voltages, max uncore is 1.4V, max PLL is 2.0V I think these are the only different ones.





Spoiler: Base clock benches



*Thief* @ base clock
min 9.8 max 31.8 avg 21.7fps

*Cinebench:*
7.53



refollowing the guide step 1:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





Code:



Code:


Advanced CPU Features:               
        CPU Clock Ratio 23
        CPU Frequency   4.53
Advanced Frequency Settings             
        Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech       Enabled
        CPU Cores Enabled       All
        CPU Multi Threading     Enabled
        CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) Disabled
        C3/C6/C7 State Support  Disabled
        CPU Thermal Monitor     Enabled
        CPU EIST Function       Disabled
        Bi-Directional Prochot  Enabled
Uncore & QPI Features               
        QPI Link Speed  x36
        Uncore Frequency        14
Standard Clock Control          
        Base Clock (BCLK) Control       Enabled
        BCLK Frequency (MHz)    197
        PCI Express Frequency (MHz)     101
        C.I.A.2 Disabled
Advanced Clock Control          
        CPU Clock Drive 800
        PCI Express Clock Drive 900
        CPU Clock Skew  0
        IOH Clock Skew  0
Advanced Ram Features           
        Performance Enhance     Standard
        Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)    Disabled
        System Memory Multiplier (SPD)  8
        DRAM Timing Selectable  Quick
        Channel Interleaving    6
        Rank Interleaving       4
Channel A + B + C               
Channel A Timing Settings               
        Channel A Standard Timing Control       
        CAS Latency Time        Auto
        tRCD    Auto
        tRD     Auto
        tRAS    Auto
        Channel A Advanced Timing Control       
        tRC     Auto
        tRRD    Auto
        tWTR    Auto
        tWR     Auto
        tWTP    Auto
        tWL     Auto
        tRFC    Auto
        tRTP    Auto
        tFAW    AUTO
        Command Rate    1
        Channel A Miscellaneous Timing Control  
        Round Trip Latency      AUTO
        B2B CAS Delay   AUTO
Advanced Voltage Control                
CPU             
        Load Line Calibration   Level 2
        CPU Vcore 1.16250v      1.60125
        Dynamic Vcore (DVID)    
        QPI/VTT Voltage 1.355v
        CPU PLL 1.8v    1.5v
MCH/ICH         
        PCIE 1.5v       1.54v
        QPI PLL 1.1v    1.16v
        IOH Core 1.1v   1.20v
        ICH I/O 1.5v    1.5v
        ICH Core 1.1v   1.14v
DRAM            
        DRAM Voltage 1.5v       1.68v
        DRAM Termination .75v   AUTO
        CH-A Data Vref .75v     AUTO
        CH-B Data Vref .75v     AUTO
        CH-C Data Vref .75v     AUTO
        CH-A Address Vref .75v  AUTO
        CH-B Address Vref .75v  AUTO
        CH-C Address Vref .75v  AUTO
Miscellaneous Settings          
        Virtualization Technology       Disabled
        Isonchronous Frequency  Enabled


----------



## dpoverlord

Also the Xeon seems to be fluctuating under load, does this make sense?
I tried it on a x23 multiplier and it went from 4.5 at idle to 2.4 under load.

Then on x21 it did the same thing.
I have
Intel Turbo Disabled (was enabled for x23)
CPu Cores enabled ALL
CPU Multi Threading ENABLED
C1E Disabled
C3/c6/c7 State Disabled
CPU Thermal Monitor Enabled
CPU EIST Function DISABLEd
Bi Directional Prochot Disabled


Further testing is showing that the multiplier is whats fluctuating. What causes the Multiplier to fluctuate? It goes from 21 to 15 to 10 to 8


----------



## alancsalt

I don't know. Thermal protection?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> Thank you i've been on and off of this site for years.
> 
> The reason I joined is i'm currently on a 58x setup still.
> 
> However i've already made the move from 920 d0 to 970.
> 
> Curious to see how guys are doing with the Xeon's i've been following this on the anandtech forum also.


Hey man and welcome to OCN. X58 users unite! Sorry that's a slogan I started using all over the place lol. It got kind lonely as a X58 user here for a while. The 970 and above are still great CPUs as well. i7-965 is still decent as well I suppose. I saw your other posts about your rig and ram timings. 4.2Ghz is a great speed. I'm trying to find the sweet spot with my offset settings so I can start running 4.4Ghz 24/7. Running stock has actually been 100% fine for me so far. I usually overclock when I have a lot of videos to edit and compress. Your rig looks great. We will see how much of a increase Haswell-E brings. I can't wait to compare scores in CPU benchmark section.

Well I actually hit a pretty high clock. 5.2Ghz and had it validated. A user suggested that I upload my benchmarks and speeds to HWBOT.
http://cdn.overclock.net/1/17/17ac074e_fu6xdu.jpeg

I'm still running Real-Time Gaming Benchmarks™ for game like Thief, which was posted on the previous page. Stock clocks vs Overclock settings. kp also sent me some RAM to test the platform with 2000Mhz RAM. So far it's been a pain in the ass, but my system latency is much lower. I'm just trying to figure out way I can't get the benefit of the higher speeds. It's a on going process.

anandtech is really bugging me. I didn't know that site was a crazy mod central. They locked my topic for the smallest infractions. I should have deleted my topic then, but I didn't know how hostile it was there.. They claimed that I have a site, as if I own this [OCN] site and I'm trying to bring traffic here for profit. Some of the users there were cool, but others weren't so easy going. The mods are obviously horrible and hypocrites in my opinion.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Also the Xeon seems to be fluctuating under load, does this make sense?
> I tried it on a x23 multiplier and it went from 4.5 at idle to 2.4 under load.
> 
> Then on x21 it did the same thing.
> I have
> Intel Turbo Disabled (was enabled for x23)
> CPu Cores enabled ALL
> CPU Multi Threading ENABLED
> C1E Disabled
> C3/c6/c7 State Disabled
> CPU Thermal Monitor Enabled
> CPU EIST Function DISABLEd
> Bi Directional Prochot Disabled
> 
> 
> Further testing is showing that the multiplier is whats fluctuating. What causes the Multiplier to fluctuate? It goes from 21 to 15 to 10 to 8


Sorry man. I forgot to add *200 BCLK.* My apologies. Add 200 BCLK and all of the same settings I posted. All Xeons will fluctuate. In my OP under the L5639 recap I explained how this worked. Basically it depends on how many scores are being used. Even with C-States disabled these power saving beast will downclock.


----------



## dpoverlord

Ah so this is the issue I am having...

At idle it stays at 4.1ghz

under max load (intel burn test, prime95, I believe gaming as well) the cpu speed goes from 4.1ghz to 2.2ghz.

This would be a definite reason as to why I am seeing low benches. goign to bring it back aroudn to stock since I am running the vcore very high.

I basically was following the i7-930 guide
http://www.overclock.net/t/538439/guide-to-overclocking-the-core-i7-920-or-930-to-4-0ghz/0_70


Spoiler: Method #1: Optimizing for max performance per watt.



This method takes by far the most amount of time but for many its worth it in terms of its power efficiency.

Begin by going into the bios and changing your voltage to your vid and setting qpi/uncore (vtt) to 1.25 (I have raised this due to concerns about droop at 1.2) and vdimm to 1.65 (Most boards can't do this 1.66 is safe, ignore your spaz bios warnings; you are not going to explode anything, although if you do, it's not my fault. Set it to 1.64 if it helps you sleep easier. I recommend at this point to be working with either the 21x multiplier if possible in order to keep your ram as much out of the equation as possible. 20X has known problems and 19x will land you with high ram speeds quicker which will require raises in the qpi/uncore voltage sooner.

Open up real temp and run prime 95 with 8 threads and check stability for an hour at least (The more the better. I recommend overnight just to make sure all is good). Record your settings on a piece of paper or email them to yourself. Make sure to have realtemp open in order to watch your temperatures. Temperatures should not exceed 80-85 during prime. During normal use for extended periods, they should never see these kinds of temperatures. I like to keep mine below 70 for normal usage.

After its stable go into the bios and increase the bclk by 10 and repeat the process. Find the max bclk for your stock vid (or any voltage, if you'd like by lowering by smaller amounts when you find an unstable clock. This will help you know what you can run at any given voltage.

See below for known prime 95 errors and how they relate to your settings (also some settings to try for stability). Once you get to the clocks you want, I recommend running prime for at least 16-24 hours. I have in fact had errors in the 14th hour so it's good to know that you're truly stable.

See also below for optimizing your ram settings.



Will Lower the VDimms and see if it makes a difference
EDIT: Lower lowered my Vcore from my 1.65 test to 1.35 and QPI/VTT to 1.315

Loading intel burn test and right now it reads:
Core @ 4.1ghz multi @ 23 temps are between 59-60C

So it seems that even though EIST and C3 is shut off that it still thermal throttles the CPU at the high rates. It will boot into windows fine so how are we to find the max clock?

*Kana* I have the multi set to 23 do you want me to move the BLCK to 187 for a 4.3ghz setup and start there?

*EDIT2:* Loaded with your settings Kana
BLCK= 187
Multi X23
However my QPI Link Speed is only 6.73GHz not the 7.2 you wanted
Then Uncore is set to x18 which ggives an Uncore Clock Ratio of 3666MHZ

Running Intel Burn test and Prime 95 together and Temps are ranging between 68-70C on Maximum Load.

*Edit* got error 003b and prime 95 shut off 2x going to raise Vcore


----------



## equlizer

Still rocking X58 with i7 [email protected] 3.7ghz 191 Bclk here as well with 2x Evga gtx 780 dual classified cards. I don't plan on upgrading anytime soon either.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> QPI/DMI info in the OP's chart is misleading.
> 
> On an single CPU LGA-1366/X58 platform, the QPI link does nothing but connect the CPU to the IOH, and the IOH is nothing but a QPI to PCI-E bridge. From the IOH you get your 36 PCI-E lanes, plus your 4x PCI-E/DMI lanes.
> 
> On a single socket LGA-2011setup You have a 40 lane PCI-E controller, and 4 more PCI-E/DMI lanes, both connected directly to the CPU.
> 
> Anyway, my point is that listing QPI and PCI-E separately on for the LGA-1366/X58 setup makes it seem that it has more I/O than the LGA-2011 setup. This is factually incorrect; the LGA-2011 platform has more (and lower latency) I/O.


Sorry for the late reply I just got back to my PC and saw your post. I'm sure that we all know that QPI ONLY connects the CPU to the IOH-X58. The IOH is much more than a QPI to PCI-E bridge, not even close. The IOH works it's butt off, so does the DMI & ICH. QPI replaces the FSB. At least most people know that by now. The IOH does support x4-DMI lanes, not to be confused with PCI-E lanes. DMI is connects the IOH to the ICH. DMI is a point to point connection so it isn't going anywhere, it is also bi-directional-full duplex. DMI is completely different and is used for legacy bridges. Some people confuse DMI-x4 transfer rate with PCI-E generation 1 transfer rate. Just because they share technology similarities and move at the same speeds doesn't mean they do the same things. Later there were updates to the IOH specs, but Intel completely removed the QPI. I believe you confusing this with some practices MB manufactures used hoping to get high speeds from certain components. However, DMI does work very similar to PCI-E, they should not be confused.

The QPI has nothing to do with the PCI-E as far as point to point connections goes. The LGA-2011 DMI has nothing to do with the PCI-E as far as connections goes. The X58 PCI-E is connection to the IOH and the X79 PCI-E is connected directly to the CPU. Intel dropped the QPI on the X79 and moved the updated DMI in order to connect the CPU and X79.

X58 supports 36 PCI-Lanes x16 and to help you understand this better I will write out the PCI-E gen 2 - X58 configurations.

1. x16 - x16 - N/A
2. x8/x8- x8/x8 - /x4
3. x4/x4/x4/x4 - x4/x4/x4/x4 - x2/x2

That's it. 36 PCI lanes = X58 chipset.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Ah so this is the issue I am having...
> 
> At idle it stays at 4.1ghz
> 
> under max load (intel burn test, prime95, I believe gaming as well) the cpu speed goes from 4.1ghz to 2.2ghz.
> 
> This would be a definite reason as to why I am seeing low benches. goign to bring it back aroudn to stock since I am running the vcore very high.


That's backwards. Under load it should hit 4.1Ghz and idle @ 2.2Ghz. You have to monitor while their is a load. Anytime you have this CPU running it will automatically downclock.

Quote:


> *Kana* I have the multi set to 23 do you want me to move the BLCK to 187 for a 4.3ghz setup and start there?
> 
> *EDIT2:* Loaded with your settings Kana
> BLCK= 187
> Multi X23
> However my QPI Link Speed is only 6.73GHz not the 7.2 you wanted
> Then Uncore is set to x18 which ggives an Uncore Clock Ratio of 3666MHZ
> 
> Running Intel Burn test and Prime 95 together and Temps are ranging between 68-70C on Maximum Load.
> 
> *Edit* got error 003b and prime 95 shut off 2x going to raise Vcore


Set the BLCK to 200 and run the settings I suggested in my last post. Then post your results.


----------



## dpoverlord

*EDIT:* Tried a few times with a 21 / 23 multiplier and it failed to boot, I can boot though with my i7-930 settings going to try again.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> QPI Clock Ratio = x36
> QPI Link Speed = 7.20 G\Ts
> Uncore Clock Ratio = x18
> Uncore Frequency = 3200Mhz
> 
> i CANT SET QPI LINK AND UNCORE FREQUENCEY BUT i SET THE CLOCK AND UNCORE. THE ONLY WAY TO GET UNCORE FREQ TO 3200MHZ IS TO SET THE CLOCK RATIO TO X24 NOT SURE HOW TO GET THE QPI LINK SPEED TO 7.2 ITS AT 4.8GHZ RIGHTNOW
> 
> >>>>> Advanced Clock Control
> Memory Frequency = 1600Mhz
> PCI Express Frequency = 101Mhz
> Profile DDR Voltage = 1.50V
> Profile QPI Voltage = 1.32V
> 
> I DONT HAVE AN OPT[ON TO CHANGE THE MEMORY FREQUENCY ITS GREYED OUT TO 800 / 800. IF I CHANGE THE SPD TO 8 I GET 1066, BUT IF I CHANGE THE BLCK IT INFLUENCES THE SPEED OF THE MEMORY FREQUENCY. FOR I.E. IF BLCK IS SET TO 200 AND SPD TO 8 I WILL GET 1600. WHAT SHOULD I DO HERE?
> I SET IT TO AN SPD OF 12 TO GET 1600


@dpoverlord, First things first, did you reset your CMOS since installing the chip? Are you running the latest version of the BIOS?

You can't set frequencies directly on X58, everything is based off bclock and a multiplier or ratio thereof. So to get 7.2 QPI you have to have x36 ratio and 200 MHz bclock. Same with uncore, and memory. If you want to get 1600 MHz memory with a lower bclock, you have to increase the multiplier.

For Bloomfield chips, like your old 930, Uncore MUST be at least twice (x2) the multiplier of the memory. If your running memory at x8, uncore had to be x16 or higher.

For Gulftown chips like the X5660, Uncore must be at least 1.5 times that of memory. Meaning x8 memory multiplier forces a x12 uncore. This is a good thing because cranking the uncore up too much enabled slow mode on a lot of chips so the lower multi helps avoid that.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> @dpoverlord, First things first, did you reset your CMOS since installing the chip? Are you running the latest version of the BIOS?
> 
> You can't set frequencies directly on X58, everything is based off bclock and a multiplier or ratio thereof. So to get 7.2 QPI you have to have x36 ratio and 200 MHz bclock. Same with uncore, and memory. If you want to get 1600 MHz memory with a lower bclock, you have to increase the multiplier.
> 
> For Bloomfield chips, like your old 930, Uncore MUST be at least twice (x2) the multiplier of the memory. If your running memory at x8, uncore had to be x16 or higher.
> 
> For Gulftown chips like the X5660, Uncore must be at least 1.5 times that of memory. Meaning x8 memory multiplier forces a x12 uncore. This is a good thing because cranking the uncore up too much enabled slow mode on a lot of chips so the lower multi helps avoid that.


Ok I think I understand that.
A. No I didnt take the chip out I just reset to stock and built from there. It was not loading before strictly due to unstable settings. I believe I have gotten past that. Here is where I am now. I am on round 2 changing the vcore lower to see if it makes a difference. So far its at 4.6 (_most likely not stable)_
Basically on this chip:

Test it with
SPD x8
Uncore x12
QPI x36

With a BCLK of 200 I get 1600MHZ memory.

A lot of the previous settings failed to boot. I just did a test with:
Multiplie X23
QPI = X36 ---> 3600 QPI link
Uncore of x16 --> 1600Mhz
BLCK 200
SPD - 8
Vcore = 1.55V
QPI/ VTT - 1.355V

CPU Speed = 4.6GHZ So far no throttling but the temp at idle is 40-50 and at full Prime95 load hits 90C. going to reboot and see if I can scale back the Vcore.

*Edit* lowerd from 1.55 to 1.4 got BSOD 08 seems there is not enough Vcore in it. will scale back from a 4.6 overclock


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Ok I think I understand that.
> 
> Basically on this chip:
> 
> Test it with
> SPD x8
> Uncore x12
> QPI x36
> 
> With a BCLK of 200 I get 1600MHZ memory.
> 
> A lot of the previous settings failed to boot. I just did a test with:
> Multiplie X23
> QPI = X36 ---> 3600 QPI link
> Uncore of x16 --> 1600Mhz
> BLCK 200
> SPD - 8
> Vcore = 1.55V
> QPI/ VTT - 1.355V
> 
> CPU Speed = 4.6GHZ So far no throttling but the temp at idle is 40-50 and at full Prime95 load hits 90C. going to reboot and see if I can scale back the Vcore.


You getting the proper performance yet also I'd think about finding some cheap RAM sticks 6GB is a insult to a X5660 lol.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> You getting the proper performance yet also I'd think about finding some cheap RAM sticks 6GB is a insult to a X5660 lol.


I need more Ram!!! I have 3x2GB and need more. If I go to 24 / 32 GB will it affect my O/C? I need more than 6 GB *100%* I am just unwilling to spend $60 on 6GB on the 3 x 2 GB package going around of G Skill.

*Question* Do you guys recommend any better ram for this board? Should I go 3 more 3x2GB G Skills _$60 and gets me 12GB_ or should I go for a total change and something like 3x8gb or 6x4gb? Ram is so expensive these days, would appreciate any recs.

In other news I changed around my settings

With a BCLK of 200 I get 1600MHZ memory.

A lot of the previous settings failed to boot. I just did a test with:
Multiplie X23
QPI = X36 ---> 3600 QPI link
Uncore of x16 --> 1600Mhz
BLCK 200
SPD - 8
Vcore = 1.55V
QPI/ VTT - 1.355V

CPU Speed = 4.6GHZ So far no throttling but the temp at idle is 40-50 and at full Prime95 load hits 90C. going to reboot and see if I can scale back the Vcore.








Edit lowerd from 1.55 to 1.4 got BSOD 08 seems there is not enough Vcore in it. will scale back from a 4.6 overclock

Then changed from 1.4 to 1.5 and it ran the thief benchmark fine. Now time for Prime then scaling to tweak...

*Heaven 4.0 Maxed Settings*


Spoiler: 8050 x1600 Benches!



3 - Way Titan no O/C - Score 957 / 38FPS






Spoiler: 4800 x 2560 Benches!



2 Way Titan no O/C - Score 530 / 21.1FPS






Spoiler: Firemark Extreme i7-930 Score Test 7312 Xeon Score 7271



Not much as changed from the original 7680x1600 score of 7699. Seems it takes a 6% performance hit with time and going to portrait mode

Graphics Score 8317
Physics 9803
Graphic 1 46.66
graphic 2 29.52
physics 31.12
Combined 14.88

*Xeon @4.45ghz*

Graphics Score 7924
Physics 15108
Graphic 1 45.80
graphic 2 27.61
physics 47.96
Combined 14.10





Spoiler: 3d Mark11 i7-930



DPOVerLord i7 930 @ 4.0GHz - 2 xEVGA Titan @ 936Mhz (core) / 1552Mhz (mem) - P15178
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8061403




*Ran Thief. Interesting note the GPU was throttling from 1100MHZ to 950 to 1084MHZ*

I7-930 bench
Ultra Settings Barely playable but stressful


Spoiler: Thief Ultra



I7-930

Xeon @ 4.5GHZ
Min 4.7
Max 26.3
AVG 17.7

Xeon @ 4.4GHZ STABLE RD 3 tighter timings
Min - 9.9
Max = 26.2
AVG 18.1





Spoiler: Mix of Normal / Blend settings: avg FPS 22. I tend to take off all AA






Straight Normal Settings

*Thief Normal Settings*


Spoiler: Thief Normal i7-930



*I7-930 Benchmark has an avg FPS of 28.3*






Spoiler: Thief Normal Xeon 4.45GHz



*Xeon @ 4.5GHX has an AVG FPS*






Spoiler: Thief Xeon 4.6GHZ



Min FPS 20.6
Max FPS 48.3
AVG FPS 30.8





Spoiler: Thief Semi Stable 4.51GHZ



Min 19.8
Max 50.2
AVG 31



Just ran Cinebench and get a CPu point of 11.30


Spoiler: Cinebench 4.5GHZ XeonScore CPU 11.17PTS OpenGL 44.99FPS




Cinebench 4.5GHZ RD2 settings XeonScore CPU 11.48 With Kanas help
Cinebench Stable 4.4GHZ RD3 Score 11.32



*Metro Light 6 months later*


Spoiler: I7-930 3/14 bench




Last run we had an avg of 30.39fps I only did 1 run again and had an Avg of 31.27


I ran this on the Xeon and it ran slower as well more around 27FPS Will run a 3 run batch now

*Batman set to Max settings Everything*


Spoiler: i7-930 Max



Whats interesting is that the Titans utilized 4.7GB of Memory w/ an avg 32 FPS






Spoiler: Xeon @ 4.5GHZ Maxed out graphics settings



Same exact Benchmarks only off by 1 fps on Average



*With new 4.4 Stable settings
Min 28
Max 48
AVG 33*
This is a 17% improvement over the 930 based on max frame rates however AVG FPs was similar


----------



## dpoverlord

Passed Intel Burn Test:
Standard and High

Temps ran at 85-max 90C

In Game temps in Thief earlier were 60.

I really am fond of getting a 4.6GHZ Overclock, however, if intel burntest hovers at 85-90C Prime will too for 24 hrs and I dont want to run it that high.

At this point I am going to look at lowering the Vcore..

But year Muse I need Ram open to suggestions Just $120+ seems really high no?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I also am sporting a sweet Xeon. I'm curious on how the new UE4 engine will use multi-core processors.


With so much tech I'm sure they will depend more on the CPU this time around. UE3 still looks extremely good by today graphical standards. I can only imagine what UE4 will bring to the table with great developers.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Passed Intel Burn Test:
> Standard and High
> 
> Temps ran at 85-max 90C
> 
> In Game temps in Thief earlier were 60.
> 
> I really am fond of getting a 4.6GHZ Overclock, however, if intel burntest hovers at 85-90C Prime will too for 24 hrs and I dont want to run it that high.
> 
> At this point I am going to look at lowering the Vcore..
> 
> But year Muse I need Ram open to suggestions Just $120+ seems really high no?


12GB kit http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231358 g skills looks very cheap.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> 12GB kit http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231358 g skills looks very cheap.


Is it better to just get another 3 x 2 GB? Since I already have 6gb? Or does it affect O/C speeds:

See:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231225 I already have 3x2GB of this


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Is it better to just get another 3 x 2 GB? Since I already have 6gb? Or does it affect O/C speeds:
> 
> See:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231225 I already have 3x2GB of this


I'm not sure but 18gb ram sounds better than 12gb.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The IOH is much more than a QPI to PCI-E bridge, not even close.


How do you figure?

QPI bus goes in 40 PCI-E lanes come out (DMI is essentally a group of four modified PCI-E lanes). This is the very definition of a bridge, and the part doesn't do anything else.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> QPI replaces the FSB.


Only in the sense that it connects the chipset to the CPU. LGA-1366 chipsets do not have memory controllers, so QPI only handles I/O on single socket platforms.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The IOH does support x4-DMI lanes, not to be confused with PCI-E lanes.


They _are_ very similar.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I believe you confusing this with some practices MB manufactures used hoping to get high speeds from certain components.


I am not confusing anything.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The QPI has nothing to do with the PCI-E as far as point to point connections goes.


Which is why you have the X58 IOH...which is a glorified bridge chip.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The LGA-2011 DMI has nothing to do with the PCI-E as far as connections goes. The X58 PCI-E is connection to the IOH and the X79 PCI-E is connected directly to the CPU. Intel dropped the QPI on the X79 and moved the updated DMI in order to connect the CPU and X79.


All of which I already stated.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> X58 supports 36 PCI-Lanes x16 and to help you understand this better I will write out the PCI-E gen 2 - X58 configurations.
> 
> 1. x16 - x16 - N/A
> 2. x8/x8- x8/x8 - /x4
> 3. x4/x4/x4/x4 - x4/x4/x4/x4 - x2/x2


None of this has anything to do with anything, and isn't completely correct (there are more lane possibilities) regardless.

You have not addressed the issue I originally brought up. Your chart makes it look like QPI and PCI-E are separate I/O on the X58, they are not. All I/O reaching the CPU must pass through the IOH and the QPI. You cannot add QPI and PCI-E/DMI bandwidth, because all of it must ultimately fit into the QPI.


----------



## dpoverlord

From my understanding though the X58 Mobo does not react well to different types. Meaning if I have 3 x 2GB I want to stay with another 3 x 2GB I dont want to change out to

1 set 3x2
one set 3 x 4


----------



## dpoverlord

*Update*
Kana & I had a pow wow on Steam and fine tuned the system for going on 4+ hrs.... No idea how to explain how grateful I am... This is why I love OCN!!!l

First +Rep and I dont know how to say how awesome you are for taking the time and answering my zillion questions.

Next I am going to run the chip on prime over night but yeah 4.6GHZ @ 1.5V what was I thinking

Right now we have 2 benches

4.4GHz QPI - 3762MHZ BLCK @ 209 Core Speed @ 4389MHZ DRAM @ 836MHZ
FSB DRAM 2:8
Timings 10-11-11-31








CPUZ LINK 4.37

For fun I really wanted to get to 4.5GHZ
4514MHZ QPI 3869MHZ Multi x21 Bus 214 DRAM @ 859MHZ
timings: 10-12-12-31
CPUZ Link 4.5GHZ
*Intel Burn test failed at this and did not want to tweak*

4431.30Mhz QPI 3798MHZ x21 Bus 210 @ 844mhz
timings 10-12-2-31
CPU Z LINK
Passed 10 cyclesere running together though.iled when these 2 were run

*EDIT*














drum roll!!! Success!! I have to thank Kana for the countless hours he just spent 1 on 1 helping me out. Also I want to shout out to Alcan and everyone else in this thread that helped! I scaled back to a solid *4.41GHZ* from 4.35 and 4.54.

We tightened the timings as well. With Intel Burntest completed temps ranges from 65-70C
CPU-Z Validation


Spoiler: PICTURES






Stock temps run at 25-30C


----------



## Kana-Maru

4.4Ghz all day. Uses way less vcore. Safer and 100Mhz won't kill your results for anything. 4.5Ghz continued to fail the stability testing. Which means it's going to require more vCore. You can't even post without 1.5V for 4.6Ghz. 4.4Ghz is the best solution for now.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"


Alright let's do some quoting








Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"
> QPI bus goes in 40 PCI-E lanes come out (DMI is essentally a group of four modified PCI-E lanes). This is the very definition of a bridge, and the part doesn't do anything else.


Just read below. Different platforms.

Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"
> They are very similar.


Which is exactly why I said and I quote "Some people confuse DMI-x4 transfer rate with PCI-E generation 1 transfer rate. Just because they share technology similarities and move at the same speeds doesn't mean they do the same things."

Not only that, but QPI is similar to both PCI-E and RAM as well. Obviously they behave differently and are used for different tasks, but should not be confused.

Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"
> I am not confusing anything.


Obviously you are, but we are all entitled to our opinions. You are confusing my intentions with the comparison;

Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"
> Which is why you have the X58 IOH...which is a glorified bridge chip.


Ummm...yeah its a northBRIDGE chip. It has to communicate with everything including the internal components within itself. Constantly running with no rest. The hottest chip on the board. It's definitely more than a glorified bridge. It's simply legacy tech. Intel switched it up with the X79 though, which was a terrific move on their part.

Quote:


> 0name="Blameless"
> None of this has anything to do with anything, and isn't completely correct (there are more lane possibilities) regardless.
> 
> You have not addressed the issue I originally brought up. Your chart makes it look like QPI and PCI-E are separate I/O on the X58, they are not. All I/O reaching the CPU must pass through the IOH and the QPI. You cannot add QPI and PCI-E/DMI bandwidth, because all of it must ultimately fit into the QPI.


Yes I can and I did for a reason. If my chart looks like that then I'm sure most will see the diagrams for both the X58 and X79 at some point, that is if they want to know anything about the platforms. Now I see why you are so confused. As I said above I was clearly comparing both platforms based on the numbers.What you saying is obvious. Everyone with eyes can see the X58 diagram - PCI-E runs through the IOH and X79 runs directly to the CPU.

As I said in my review. They are using different platforms and I'm sure a lot of tech heads have seen the diagrams and how both of them work. I don't think it's going to confuse anyone that cares or knows about both of these platforms.

X79= 40 Lanes
X58= 32 Lanes

I'm not going into the obvious difference in the platforms layouts themselves. We all know X58 was before Intel connected the PCI-E directly to the CPU. If some don't then that's understandable....google the diagrams.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> From my understanding though the X58 Mobo does not react well to different types. Meaning if I have 3 x 2GB I want to stay with another 3 x 2GB I dont want to change out to
> 
> 1 set 3x2
> one set 3 x 4


I don't have my xeon yet and I hope the IMC is improved from the first gen i7's. My experience was if you run 6x2GB sticks of RAM you will more than likely have to up mess with some voltages. On my 920 I had to up VRAM and VTT voltages for 6 sticks vs 3. HOWEVER, that was 2000+ Mhz and much more stressful on components than 1600... not to mention on a quad core. @ 1600-1800Mhz the only issues I've see on the 920 is when using larger capacity sticks (4GB+) and 6 of them.

I am assuming here: Given that servers tend to run MUCH more RAM than the average power user (all be it @ 1333Mhz vs 1600+), I think the Xeon's IMC would be much better with driving more (and larger) RAM modules than the 1st gen i7's did. That is an assumption though because I cannont test my x5650 yet







. I have two sets of Ripjaw 1600Mhz (6 sticks of 4GB) and that will be a good test for the hexcore. My 920 looses RAM modules when I try anything more than 1760Mhz no matter what kind of voltages and tweaking I do.


----------



## ladcrooks

c ikey some of them benches slash my i7920









but in the real world i am


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> anandtech is really bugging me. I didn't know that site was a crazy mod central. They locked my topic for the smallest infractions. I should have deleted my topic then, but I didn't know how hostile it was there.. They claimed that I have a site, as if I own this [OCN] site and I'm trying to bring traffic here for profit. Some of the users there were cool, but others weren't so easy going. The mods are obviously horrible and hypocrites in my opinion.
> Sorry man. I forgot to add *200 BCLK.* My apologies. Add 200 BCLK and all of the same settings I posted. All Xeons will fluctuate. In my OP under the L5639 recap I explained how this worked. Basically it depends on how many scores are being used. Even with C-States disabled these power saving beast will downclock.


I've been a member on the Anantech forum since 2002.

Alot has changed as of late.

The mods have been in overdrive because of a ton of fan boy rage all over the forum. Marketing shills and just people straight up trolling. So they have to toughen up sadly and sometimes that means excessive warnings over little small stuff. If you follow the forum rules and ignore some of the fan boys its still a great environment. Its however no longer as free as it once and the mods are working to clean up the forums. So I can understand why some people have been put off, but it was just the timing that you joined the site. There is alot of very knowledgeable long time members on that site that are happy to help and contribute. So don't put all of us in the same boat


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> I've been a member on the Anantech forum since 2002.
> 
> Alot has changed as of late.
> 
> The mods have been in overdrive because of a ton of fan boy rage all over the forum. Marketing shills and just people straight up trolling. So they have to toughen up sadly and sometimes that means excessive warnings over little small stuff. If you follow the forum rules and ignore some of the fan boys its still a great environment. Its however no longer as free as it once and the mods are working to clean up the forums. So I can understand why some people have been put off, but it was just the timing that you joined the site. There is alot of very knowledgeable long time members on that site that are happy to help and contribute. So don't put all of us in the same boat


there is a fine line between moderation, and making accusations of trying to steal ad revenue from them. Then locking the thread so that you may not even contest it, then when you go to contest it, the thread is deleted.

It sounds like to me the anandtech mods would much rather act like children and help the misinformation being spread on those forums


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> there is a fine line between moderation, and making accusations of trying to steal ad revenue from them. Then locking the thread so that you may not even contest it, then when you go to contest it, the thread is deleted.
> 
> It sounds like to me the anandtech mods would much rather act like children and help the misinformation being spread on those forums


I wasn't on the forum to see those thread and it being locked etc.

So i'm going to assume this is a recent change or the rules have changed for this stuff recently.

But no point trying to figure what there reasons are only the mods know. My point was just to let you know there are still helpful members on the that forum and I certainly don't blame anyone on OCN for feeling the way they do about it.

I don't want to take this thread off topic tho so no more mention of anandtech from me.

Where can I find the rules for this forum?


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I don't have my xeon yet and I hope the IMC is improved from the first gen i7's. My experience was if you run 6x2GB sticks of RAM you will more than likely have to up mess with some voltages. On my 920 I had to up VRAM and VTT voltages for 6 sticks vs 3. HOWEVER, that was 2000+ Mhz and much more stressful on components than 1600... not to mention on a quad core. @ 1600-1800Mhz the only issues I've see on the 920 is when using larger capacity sticks (4GB+) and 6 of them.
> 
> I am assuming here: Given that servers tend to run MUCH more RAM than the average power user (all be it @ 1333Mhz vs 1600+), I think the Xeon's IMC would be much better with driving more (and larger) RAM modules than the 1st gen i7's did. That is an assumption though because I cannont test my x5650 yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I have two sets of Ripjaw 1600Mhz (6 sticks of 4GB) and that will be a good test for the hexcore. My 920 looses RAM modules when I try anything more than 1760Mhz no matter what kind of voltages and tweaking I do.


From what i've seen on X58 board is can be picky so its usually best to stick with the same brand memory and same size sticks.

Quality of memory does also matter.

With my modules i'm running 6x2GB at stock voltage for my memory so 1.65v. Memory overclocks do differ from Bloomfield to Gulftown because of the different uncore speed so something to also consider.

Have anyone actually seen any gains with DDR 2000+ memory I would think the tripple channel nature of X58 shouldn't benefit much aslong as your using DDR3 1600 modules.


----------



## kpforce1

Doh!!! It looks like I have to take my entire x58 rig apart and pull the board out to do a hard mod for the Westmere CPU's....







I don't think I can get the iron in the tight spaces around the blocks to solder the two places I have to on the x58 classified 760 V1.0.







That sucks.... so much for an "easy" upgrade lol.

For anyone that has an x58 classy 759 or 760 V1.0 here are the pins that have to be shorted:


----------



## TheReciever

What does that enable?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> What does that enable?


The use of Westmere CPU's (the hexcores we are talking about that have dual QPI links) on the older x58 classy boards like mine







. You also have to have the newest version 83 BIOS from EVGA as well.


----------



## TheReciever

Someone posted no on the Poll!!! Grab your pitchforks and torches gents! Were going huntin tonight! #huntingtonight


----------



## Rage19420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> I wasn't on the forum to see those thread and it being locked etc.
> 
> So i'm going to assume this is a recent change or the rules have changed for this stuff recently.
> 
> But no point trying to figure what there reasons are only the mods know. My point was just to let you know there are still helpful members on the that forum and I certainly don't blame anyone on OCN for feeling the way they do about it.
> 
> I don't want to take this thread off topic tho so no more mention of anandtech from me.
> 
> Where can I find the rules for this forum?


Rules are here, they are very relaxed here.









http://www.overclock.net/a/terms-of-service


----------



## dpoverlord

*Kana* 1:50pm It sems that Prime95 hanged ("Prime95 Stopped Working"), How do I find out how far into it that it stopped? The Max Temps it hit were 75C


Spoiler: Crash





Code:



Code:


Problem signature:
  Problem Event Name:   APPCRASH
  Application Name:     prime95.exe
  Application Version:  27.9.1.0
  Application Timestamp:        50c8c9bb
  Fault Module Name:    prime95.exe
  Fault Module Version: 27.9.1.0
  Fault Module Timestamp:       50c8c9bb
  Exception Code:       c0000005
  Exception Offset:     000000000026a1cd
  OS Version:   6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.4
  Locale ID:    1033
  Additional Information 1:     9246
  Additional Information 2:     92462e9b0fad0bde9f3f83798773ec27
  Additional Information 3:     f9ba
  Additional Information 4:     f9ba891a550138f68b677cf5c901588e







Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



[Wed Mar 05 09:13:33 2014]
FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.5, expected less than 0.4
Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.


Quote:


> I doubt you need more than 6Gb of RAM. My quadcore has 6gb and even with over 100 processes running & 20 web pages open, while transcoding a video, it peaks at 5Gb used. If you want to add 6Gb more, that's more than enough, so $60 & be done with it. As far as V core, doesn't your board have a setting for offset voltage instead of fixed, or dynamic? Works best here when I offset +.3 volts to stock. Voltage is dynamic & when CPU needs it, it gets up to 1.46 volts, but when not under load, pulls less & creates less heat.


Yeah but I def need more ram, I will look into another 3x2GB I guess... I could go 3 x 4GB
Not Sure maybe Kana knows about the *dynamic... Anyone know*? So I will up the Vcore a bit and see if that changes anything.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I don't have my xeon yet and I hope the IMC is improved from the first gen i7's. My experience was if you run 6x2GB sticks of RAM you will more than likely have to up mess with some voltages. On my 920 I had to up VRAM and VTT voltages for 6 sticks vs 3. HOWEVER, that was 2000+ Mhz and much more stressful on components than 1600... not to mention on a quad core. @ 1600-1800Mhz the only issues I've see on the 920 is when using larger capacity sticks (4GB+) and 6 of them.
> 
> I am assuming here: Given that servers tend to run MUCH more RAM than the average power user (all be it @ 1333Mhz vs 1600+), I think the Xeon's IMC would be much better with driving more (and larger) RAM modules than the 1st gen i7's did. That is an assumption though because I cannont test my x5650 yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I have two sets of Ripjaw 1600Mhz (6 sticks of 4GB) and that will be a good test for the hexcore. My 920 looses RAM modules when I try anything more than 1760Mhz no matter what kind of voltages and tweaking I do.


Wait you have extra ram then? 6 x 2 and 6 x 4gb? Shoot me a message I would be interested! 

Gigabyte says:

Code:



Code:


6 x 1.5V DDR3 DIMM sockets supporting up to 24 GB of system memory(Note 1)
Dual/3 channel memory architecture
Support for DDR3 2200/1333/1066/800 MHz memory modules
Support for non-ECC memory modules
Support for Extreme Memory Profile (XMP) memory modules

Does this mean I cant get 8 x 3 gb? Right now my timings are 7-8-7-22


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> It sounds like to me the anandtech mods would much rather act like children and help the misinformation being spread on those forums


Yeah they were talking about hits and how it's ranked high. It's obviously for profit and I don't want any of my content or work there. Some users have spoken to me about how they get rid of helpful topics and simply locks them. Of course I learned of this after the fact.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Someone posted no on the Poll!!! Grab your pitchforks and torches gents! Were going huntin tonight! #huntingtonight


LOL it changed to (2) No votes now. I put hard work into this review. Seriously everyday after work I was typing on it and benchmarking like hell. My gf was looking at me sideways because I was so into the Hex cores. I'm definitely grabbing my pitchfork and torch lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> I wasn't on the forum to see those thread and it being locked etc.
> 
> So i'm going to assume this is a recent change or the rules have changed for this stuff recently.
> 
> But no point trying to figure what there reasons are only the mods know. My point was just to let you know there are still helpful members on the that forum and I certainly don't blame anyone on OCN for feeling the way they do about it.
> 
> I don't want to take this thread off topic tho so no more mention of anandtech from me.


I completely understand that their are helpful members there. I was one of them. Also they changed the rules LITERALLY after they locked my topics. The same day there was a update. Imagine my surprise coming home from work seeing my topic locked due to infractions. Then the mod tells me to check the rules, only to see that the rules were updated the same day. BS if you ask me. I've asked them nicely to remove my content and now I'm simply going to have to take matters into my own hands.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Apparently my chip is taking a trip 'round the U.S.: from Texas to Mississippi to Kentucky.
..And meanwhile, in China, my motherboard is apparently being handed around in Hong Kong.
I don't even..


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah they were talking about hits and how it's ranked high. It's obviously for profit and I don't want any of my content or work there. Some users have spoken to me about how they get rid of helpful topics and simply locks them. Of course I learned of this after the fact.
> LOL it changed to (2) No votes now. I put hard work into this review. Seriously everyday after work I was typing on it and benchmarking like hell. My gf was looking at me sideways because I was so into the Hex cores. I'm definitely grabbing my pitchfork and torch lol.
> I completely understand that their are helpful members there. I was one of them. Also they changed the rules LITERALLY after they locked my topics. The same day there was a update. Imagine my surprise coming home from work seeing my topic locked due to infractions. Then the mod tells me to check the rules, only to see that the rules were updated the same day. BS if you ask me. I've asked them nicely to remove my content and now I'm simply going to have to take matters into my own hands.


I have been on anandtech since 1999, its a good community however, I have been using OCN for the last year and am def more involved here. I also use Hardforum. I just find the community here a lot more helpful. Not to say hardforum and anandtech are bad just each has its own purposes
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Apparently my chip is taking a trip 'round the U.S.: from Texas to Mississippi to Kentucky.
> ..And meanwhile, in China, my motherboard is apparently being handed around in Hong Kong.
> I don't even..


Maybe they knew that your name here was Time of Doom... Not going to lie thats a really funny post.

*PRIME95*
Failed again after 1 hr. It ran for about 3 hrs last night. Now only 1 hr set to the the highest settings. If I change the ram usage to 13000m on Prime95 it seems to run for countless hours. Interesting no? Is it possible its a ram setting? Temps hovered around 60-70C

*RAM*

Got a great deal on the ebay for $34 for 3x2GB of the same ram I have. Should be here Monday, anything I should know about how this should be run? Looser timings, etc?


----------



## dpoverlord

Intel Burn test ran 15 threads no problem

Prime 95 is failing after 1-2 hrs raised Vcore not much of a difference. Its stopping on a worker, not getting a BSOD, is it possible its a mem timings issue?


Spoiler: Prime Error



Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: prime95.exe
Application Version: 27.9.1.0
Application Timestamp: 50c8c9bb
Fault Module Name: prime95.exe
Fault Module Version: 27.9.1.0
Fault Module Timestamp: 50c8c9bb
Exception Code: c0000005
Exception Offset: 000000000044ed45
OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.4
Locale ID: 1033
Additional Information 1: 2fda
Additional Information 2: 2fdaafef519ecd37ee530e10e7a5537a
Additional Information 3: 57a8
Additional Information 4: 57a8c7ccd202b601859a7195a28d3c2c



Just changed Load Line to level 2
Lowered QPI VTT from 1.35 to 1.335
IO Core to 1.2 *from 1.1*
ICH Core to 1.2 *from 1.1*

Disabled Virtualization Technology.

Other programs seem to be fine, do you think its a memory thing or just need more vcore?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Ummm...yeah its a northBRIDGE chip. It has to communicate with everything including the internal components within itself. Constantly running with no rest. The hottest chip on the board. It's definitely more than a glorified bridge.


The X58 IOH is not a northbridge, not by most definitions, certainly not by Intel's (http://www.intel.com/support/glossary.htm). It contains no memory controller, and does very little but facilitate the bridging of the PCI-E and DMI to QPI (it has other, minor functions, but they are a tiny fraction of it's total I/O capabilities).

The X58 is only the hottest chip on the board because it's a large chip (it's a 5520 with the extra QPI disabled) built on an old process (65nm), and does have a large amount of (enabled) I/O. It's not doing any more work than many similar switches/bridges.

It most certainly is just a glorified bridge chip. The 5520 server variant made from the same wafers/dies, with a larger feature set, is specifically described as a "QPI to I/O bridge". Indeed, this is the very definition of an IOH (I/O Hub).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> IO Core to 1.2 *from 1.1*
> ICH Core to 1.2 *from 1.1*


Changing these is unlikely to do anything as neither the IOH nor ICH directly impact anything related to CPU or memory stress tests.

You shouldn't need more IOH voltage unless you are running high BCLKs with a lot of PCI-E lanes in use, and the ICH voltage should almost never need to be touched unless you have increased PCI-E frequency.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> is it possible its a mem timings issue?


Yes, it's possible.


----------



## skummm

@ DP Overlord.

2 things.

1: these chips like low CPU PLL (I run mine @ 1.4v, standard is 1.8v)

2: you can run these chips at 1.5 Uncore: RAM, so for 1600mhz ram run Uncore at 2400mhz


----------



## dpoverlord

Skummm

Isnt the default CPU PLL 1.8v does it lower temps to lower this #?

Also 1:5 Uncore based on my current settings

I have:
X36 QPI
X18 Uncore

QPI Link is 3779MHZUnc


----------



## skummm

If you have reset your uncore to 1.5 then that's fine now









Yes, lowering CPU PLL does lower temps, at least it did for me


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skummm*
> 
> If you have reset your uncore to 1.5 then that's fine now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, lowering CPU PLL does lower temps, at least it did for me


Ok
x36
7.56GZ
x18
3780MHZ

changed CPU PLL to 1.5V


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> The X58 IOH is not a northbridge, not by most definitions, certainly not by Intel's (http://www.intel.com/support/glossary.htm). It contains no memory controller, and does very little but facilitate the bridging of the PCI-E and DMI to QPI (it has other, minor functions, but they are a tiny fraction of it's total I/O capabilities).
> 
> The X58 is only the hottest chip on the board because it's a large chip (it's a 5520 with the extra QPI disabled) built on an old process (65nm), and does have a large amount of (enabled) I/O. It's not doing any more work than many similar switches/bridges.


Love that spin.

Ok I see that I'm dealing with someone that is very literal. That's fine. The IMC is directly on the CPU so we know there is no memory controller on the X58-ICH, this is nothing new. It's the hottest chip because it took the place of the Northbridge. Oh wait I gotta get literal, it's not a northbridge - doesn't have a IMC, but runs a crap load of data between the PCI-E lanes to the CPU, transmit data from the ICH to the CPU. Stay up on the Intel terminology no matter what they re-name them, the components have been around forever [same for AMD] - QPI=FSB - X58=Northbridge [no MC] - ICH=Southbridge......sorry if you dislike those comparisons. It simply makes it easier for some people to understand when I'm helping them overclock.

So now you are leaving the original complaint [QPI - PCI-E \ DMI ] in favor or the IOH? Ok yeah it appears you are simply trying to find something to debate about at this point. I guess you finally realized that QPI doesn't contain PCI-E lanes







or use them to communicate between the CPU and the IOH. I'm not sure why you went into the voltages and increasing the power. I thought you original issue was with my chart.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Doh!!! It looks like I have to take my entire x58 rig apart and pull the board out to do a hard mod for the Westmere CPU's....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think I can get the iron in the tight spaces around the blocks to solder the two places I have to on the x58 classified 760 V1.0.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That sucks.... so much for an "easy" upgrade lol.
> 
> For anyone that has an x58 classy 759 or 760 V1.0 here are the pins that have to be shorted:


I have that same board. 760 Rev.1.0 83 bios.. I decided on an i7 970 for that one.. bought an X5660 for my Asrock board.. was an easy drop in and I Knew it would work because I tested it with an L5639


----------



## TheReciever

Guys hows the Xpower for overclocking?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I have that same board. 760 Rev.1.0 83 bios.. I decided on an i7 970 for that one.. bought an X5660 for my Asrock board.. was an easy drop in and I Knew it would work because I tested it with an L5639


I was able to solder mine without taking anything out of the case woot!







. The bad x5650 I got (missing cap on bottom of CPU) works but will not utilize one of the RAM channels lol. Sees it, just can't do anything with it so two sticks work.

I did a quick shake down runs and was able to get 4,4Ghz with:
220 BCLK
2200MHz RAM 11-12-11-30 T1 (dual channel because 3rd not working on CPU)
QPI was 3980 MHz (or 39 something)
Turbo off (my board limited me to a 20x multi with it off)
VCORE 1.42
VTT 1.65


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I was able to solder mine without taking anything out of the case woot!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . The bad x5650 I got (missing cap on bottom of CPU) works but will not utilize one of the RAM channels lol. Sees it, just can't do anything with it so two sticks work.
> 
> I did a quick shake down runs and was able to get 4,4Ghz with:
> 220 BCLK
> 2200MHz RAM 11-12-11-30 T1 (dual channel because 3rd not working on CPU)
> QPI was 3980 MHz (or 39 something)
> Turbo off (my board limited me to a 20x multi with it off)
> VCORE 1.42
> VTT 1.65


If you keep turbo, and Speed-step on you _should_ be able to get that higher multi. This is what I used to get the 18 multi on my Asrock Board.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> If you keep turbo, and Speed-step on you _should_ be able to get that higher multi. This is what I used to get the 18 multi on my Asrock Board.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I had to leave Turbo off because it jumps to the 23x multi on cores 1 and 2 and 22x on the rest like it should (23* 220=5.06Ghz) and that requires to much VCORE for an initial shakedown bench run







. Maybe when I have some more time I will try to hit 5Ghz lol... besides, this is the garbage chip that can only use 2 Memory channels (till I solder a new cap on the back of the CPU) so I may do that


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I had to leave Turbo off because it jumps to the 23x multi on cores 1 and 2 and 22x on the rest like it should (23* 220=5.06Ghz) and that requires to much VCORE for an initial shakedown bench run
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Maybe when I have some more time I will try to hit 5Ghz lol... besides, this is the garbage chip that can only use 2 Memory channels (till I solder a new cap on the back of the CPU) so I may do that


The C-states are responsible for the multiplier jump I believe. I'm glad to that you are making the best out of that garbage CPU. I see you are running the VTT pretty high as well. Shoot for 5Ghz if you date, but be careful not the burn the board up. Some chipsets are just waiting to be killed.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Guys hows the Xpower for overclocking?


I've read reviews on it in the past. It overclocked pretty good, but I'm not sure if they support the 6 core Xeons. I believe the Xpower can get over the 200+ BLCK hump as well. I've seen some get near 220 BCLK, but I'm sure that depends on a lot of things.


----------



## kpforce1

Some quick stuff.... got to go to bed:


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The C-states are responsible for the multiplier jump I believe. I'm glad to that you are making the best out of that garbage CPU. I see you are running the VTT pretty high as well. Shoot for 5Ghz if you date, but be careful not the burn the board up. Some chipsets are just waiting to be killed.
> I've read reviews on it in the past. It overclocked pretty good, but I'm not sure if they support the 6 core Xeons. I believe the Xpower can get over the 200+ BLCK hump as well. I've seen some get near 220 BCLK, but I'm sure that depends on a lot of things.


Do we have a list to look through for decent boards that can do that? OEM and aftermarket?


----------



## dpoverlord

So success on Memtest!! Stable for about 24 hours. Now I am benching and moving some files. Also did a rewiring job for a healthier overclock take a look!
Memtest stable with the overclock!


Also, just redid my whole case:


Spoiler: Before:









Spoiler: After











going to get a 120MM fan to help push more of that air on the titans


----------



## kpforce1

What model case is that Dp?


----------



## dpoverlord

My relic which I love. Custom modded Lian Li PC-70 USB from 2001 cost me about 1k for case and mods with digidoc 5 back in the day to do it.

Front panel does nto always stay on now and the feet snapped off :-( Love the case though:thumb:


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> My relic which I love. Custom modded Lian Li PC-70 USB from 2001 cost me about 1k for case and mods with digidoc 5 back in the day to do it.
> 
> Front panel does nto always stay on now and the feet snapped off :-( Love the case though:thumb:


Look at the 1st page of my build log : cheers:


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Look at the 1st page of my build log : cheers:


WoW!

So you flipped it upside down dremeled the bottom put some brackets, reinforcement.... This is actually feasible. Then I take it you had to reinforce the cant think... must sleep but LOOKS GREAT! Will ask ya ?'s later

Check out my semi new build log:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1470370/digidoc-v-fan-unit-eol-need-help-learning-and-finding-out-how-to-change-over-to-a-new-unit/0_70#post_21908598


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> WoW!
> 
> So you flipped it upside down dremeled the bottom put some brackets, reinforcement.... This is actually feasible. Then I take it you had to reinforce the cant think... must sleep but LOOKS GREAT! Will ask ya ?'s later
> 
> Check out my semi new build log:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1470370/digidoc-v-fan-unit-eol-need-help-learning-and-finding-out-how-to-change-over-to-a-new-unit/0_70#post_21908598


Yeah I did some stuff to it







.... we'll chat about it via PM's.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> So success on Memtest!! Stable for about 24 hours. Now I am benching and moving some files. Also did a rewiring job for a healthier overclock take a look!
> Memtest stable with the overclock!
> 
> 
> Also, just redid my whole case:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Before:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: After
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> going to get a 120MM fan to help push more of that air on the titans


So how better is your system running now with more RAM and is X5660 a decent upgrade for you?


----------



## dpoverlord

Waiting on the other 6gb then will bench. But so far 3dmark 11 gave me 500 more points. However fps is different. Did you see my thread about 2vs3vs4 SLi? Check my signature will be posting a big update there


----------



## dpoverlord

Installed the ram (_went from 3 dimms 3 x 2GB G skill to 6 dimms 6x2GB_ )but system won't boot stuck at start screen and lists it as 8gb and stalls out


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






Any ideas?

Edit: putting pairs of ram in at a time.

Boots at 4gb
When I put 4dimms I get your Computer is experiencing overclocking issues and has been reset to default.

What voltages do I have to change?


Spoiler: Screenshot



[


This is the boot screen on 4 dimes. I upped the voltage and got this dram is at 1.58 Qpi was upped to 1.3375


Spoiler: Screenshot







Also did a check of 2 stocks per slot it will boot fine so I know it's not a ram channel issue


Spoiler: Screenshot







Edit:
Did a hard cmos reset and can boot into windows fine but now have to figure how to get my OC back to 4.4ghz


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Installed the ram (_went from 3 dimms 3 x 2GB G skill to 6 dimms 6x2GB_ )but system won't boot stuck at start screen and lists it as 8gb and stalls out
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Edit: putting pairs of ram in at a time.
> 
> Boots at 4gb
> When I put 4dimms I get your Computer is experiencing overclocking issues and has been reset to default.
> 
> What voltages do I have to change?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Screenshot
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> 
> This is the boot screen on 4 dimes. I upped the voltage and got this dram is at 1.58 Qpi was upped to 1.3375
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Screenshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also did a check of 2 stocks per slot it will boot fine so I know it's not a ram channel issue
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Screenshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> Did a hard cmos reset and can boot into windows fine but now have to figure how to get my OC back to 4.4ghz


Running 6 sticks vs 3 requires more VTT in my experience. You also need to set the command rate to 2T instead of 1T. Try this before increasing VTT.


----------



## dpoverlord

Ok I believe I had the command rate at 1T. that must be why. Isnt 2T slower? I wonder how much I am losing by going with 6 sticks. I wonder if I can trade them in from 6 sticks to 3 sticks.


----------



## kpforce1

When running 6 sticks in general, you have to change the command rate to 2T otherwise you will probably have RAM disappear at 1600Mhz+. You will be fine with 6 sticks, I've always run 6 sticks in my x58 rig.







You just may have to tweak a few things thats all


----------



## dpoverlord

GOT it!

So yeah 2T it would boot at 1 but only showed at 8GB then failed.

Rebooted and faile dat 6 dimms.

Then changed cas to auto and its at 10-12-12-31 far cry from the 7-8-7-22

Will try to bring it down lower but stats wise mem Freq is 840MHZ QPI @3780MHZ, running 4.4ghz

Edit: running at 9-9-9-24 now will try tweaking it more later. It's funny I got more ram and now more memory is being shown used at startup LOL..

4.29Gb out of 12GB good god. Google Chrome = INEFFICIENCY


----------



## Firehawk

If you're adding more ram, I'd suggest running it stock to make sure everything works there first. If not, then you may have a bad dimm or a bad slot in which case you should test it with one dimm in each slot individually.

I don't know why people were saying there are problems with mismatched ram and x58, though. I'm running a 3x2GB set of OCZ and a 3x4GB set of HyperX, both 1600MHz. They work perfectly together, so long as I slow the timings on the OCZ to those of the HyperX which isn't much at all.

Your OC will have to change slightly now anyway. Adding more ram puts more load on the IMC, so you're practically guaranteed to need more VTT. The impression I got when I was thinking of upgrading is that the load on the IMC is more a function of total quantity of ram instead of number of slots occupied. But I'm inclined to believe that even if that were the case, 3x8GB would still be slightly easier than 6x4GB, in my opinion. I could be completely off the mark here though.

On the topic of 8GB sticks, since it was asked a while ago, most x58 boards can handle them, but are only certified for 4GB sticks because the 8GB sticks didn't exist when x58 motherboards were being sold new. Basically try at your own risk, but a 48GB system would be nice if you can use the headroom.

As for Windows, its like one of those animals that will grow in size to fit its environment. Give it more ram, it will take advantage of it.


----------



## dpoverlord

Yeah I see that right now I got the 12gb working 9-9-9-24 2t doing a test clock of the cpu at 4.56ghz. Benching it on prime right now with the titans at 1150 and seems my max overclock is 200 on the memory

Overclock wise here are the results:

We moved from 928/1000MHZ to 1150MHZ / 3105 on the Titans

CPU overclock to 4566ghz from 2.8GHZ

12GB of RAm @ 868mhz T2

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/mwcpa/
http://valid.canardpc.com/vzzz7p


----------



## clawlan

In an effort to breath more life into my X58, I upgraded from an i7 930 to a Xeon X5650. Finally got around to OC'ing this weekend and there were the results:






I had my bclock stable at 220 (x15 multi), but my memory couldn't handle being OC'd past 210, and at 210, i had to kick the voltage from 1.25 to 1.325 but my air cooler couldn't keep up at that level, so I backed it down to 200 with a x20 multi and everything is smooth as silk. I am wondering though if I would have better luck with a higher multi and lower bclock?


----------



## Timeofdoom

Well, my mobo (Asus Rampage III) just arrived from Hongkong with DHL (And it looks alright, can't see any techinical faults or any unnatural, low-quality swapped-in parts), so not all hope is lost.
Or maybe it is, 'cuz *FedEx* is shipping the CPU and apparently they didn't bother tracking the package outside of the U.S., so my last T&T place was "Sent by international shipping".
(also - slower than DHL from Hongkong? When shipping from TX by FedEx? Really?)
Fun







.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clawlan*
> 
> In an effort to breath more life into my X58, I upgraded from an i7 930 to a Xeon X5650. Finally got around to OC'ing this weekend and there were the results:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had my bclock stable at 220 (x15 multi), but my memory couldn't handle being OC'd past 210, and at 210, i had to kick the voltage from 1.25 to 1.325 but my air cooler couldn't keep up at that level, so I backed it down to 200 with a x20 multi and everything is smooth as silk. I am wondering though if I would have better luck with a higher multi and lower bclock


You should get more on the x5660 I am at 4.56ghz stable but do 4.45.

Put your memory timings on auto, and
Spd to 8
Then copy my values and let me know what you get.

Overclock wise here are the results:

We moved from 928/1000MHZ to 1150MHZ / 3105 on the Titans

CPU overclock to 4566ghz from 2.8GHZ

12GB of RAm @ 868mhz T2

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/mwcpa/
http://valid.canardpc.com/vzzz7p

Settings:


Spoiler: Stable 4.56GHZ Will roll back to 4.4 though



Code:



Code:


Advanced CPU Features:               Current settings
        CPU Clock Ratio 21
        CPU Frequency   4566GHZ
Advanced Frequency Settings             
        Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech       Disabled
        CPU Cores Enabled       ALL
        CPU Multi Threading     Enabled
        CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) Disabled
        C3/C6/C7 State Support  Disabled
        CPU Thermal Monitor     Auto
        CPU EIST Function       Disabled
        Bi-Directional Prochot  Auto
Uncore & QPI Features               
        QPI Clock Ratio X36
        QPI Link Speed  7.56GT
        Uncore Clock Ratio      X16
        Uncore Frequency        3780MHZ
Standard Clock Control          
        Base Clock (BCLK) Control       
        BCLK Frequency (MHz)    215(210 Works as well and is less heat intensive
        PCI Express Frequency (MHz)     101
        C.I.A.2 
Advanced Clock Control          
        CPU Clock Drive 800
        PCI Express Clock Drive 900
        CPU Clock Skew  0
        IOH Clock Skew  0
Advanced Ram Features           
        Performance Enhance     Standard
        Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)    Disabled
        System Memory Multiplier (SPD)  8
        DRAM Timing Selectable  Quick
        Channel Interleaving    6
        Rank Interleaving       4
Channel A + B + C               
Channel A Timing Settings               
        Channel A Standard Timing Control       These can all be changed below I had it once set to 9 9 9  -24 3 dimms did 7-8-7-22
        CAS Latency Time        9
        tRCD    9
        tRD     9
        tRAS    24
        Channel A Advanced Timing Control       Auto
        tRC     Auto
        tRRD    Auto
        tWTR    Auto
        tWR     Auto
        tWTP    Auto
        tWL     Auto
        tRFC    Auto
        tRTP    Auto
        tFAW    Auto
        Command Rate    1
        Channel A Miscellaneous Timing Control  Auto
        Round Trip Latency      Auto
        B2B CAS Delay   Auto
Advanced Voltage Control                
CPU             
        Load Line Calibration   Level 2
        CPU Vcore 1.16250v      1.4
        Dynamic Vcore (DVID)    
        QPI/VTT Voltage 1.335
        CPU PLL 1.8v    Auto
MCH/ICH         
        PCIE 1.5v       Auto
        QPI PLL 1.1v    Auto
        IOH Core 1.1v   Auto
        ICH I/O 1.5v    Auto
        ICH Core 1.1v   Auto
DRAM            
        DRAM Voltage 1.5v       1.5
        DRAM Termination .75v   Auto
        CH-A Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-B Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-C Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-A Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-B Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-C Address Vref .75v  Auto
Miscellaneous Settings          
        Virtualization Technology       Disabled
        Isonchronous Frequency  Enabled


----------



## clawlan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> You should get more on the x5660 I am at 4.56ghz stable but do 4.45.
> 
> Put your memory timings on auto, and
> Spd to 8
> Then copy my values and let me know what you get.
> 
> Overclock wise here are the results:
> 
> We moved from 928/1000MHZ to 1150MHZ / 3105 on the Titans
> 
> CPU overclock to 4566ghz from 2.8GHZ
> 
> 12GB of RAm @ 868mhz T2
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/mwcpa/
> http://valid.canardpc.com/vzzz7p
> 
> Settings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Stable 4.56GHZ Will roll back to 4.4 though
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Advanced CPU Features:               Current settings
> CPU Clock Ratio 21
> CPU Frequency   4566GHZ
> Advanced Frequency Settings
> Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech       Disabled
> CPU Cores Enabled       ALL
> CPU Multi Threading     Enabled
> CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) Disabled
> C3/C6/C7 State Support  Disabled
> CPU Thermal Monitor     Auto
> CPU EIST Function       Disabled
> Bi-Directional Prochot  Auto
> Uncore & QPI Features
> QPI Clock Ratio X36
> QPI Link Speed  7.56GT
> Uncore Clock Ratio      X16
> Uncore Frequency        3780MHZ
> Standard Clock Control
> Base Clock (BCLK) Control
> BCLK Frequency (MHz)    215(210 Works as well and is less heat intensive
> PCI Express Frequency (MHz)     101
> C.I.A.2
> Advanced Clock Control
> CPU Clock Drive 800
> PCI Express Clock Drive 900
> CPU Clock Skew  0
> IOH Clock Skew  0
> Advanced Ram Features
> Performance Enhance     Standard
> Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)    Disabled
> System Memory Multiplier (SPD)  8
> DRAM Timing Selectable  Quick
> Channel Interleaving    6
> Rank Interleaving       4
> Channel A + B + C
> Channel A Timing Settings
> Channel A Standard Timing Control       These can all be changed below I had it once set to 9 9 9  -24 3 dimms did 7-8-7-22
> CAS Latency Time        9
> tRCD    9
> tRD     9
> tRAS    24
> Channel A Advanced Timing Control       Auto
> tRC     Auto
> tRRD    Auto
> tWTR    Auto
> tWR     Auto
> tWTP    Auto
> tWL     Auto
> tRFC    Auto
> tRTP    Auto
> tFAW    Auto
> Command Rate    1
> Channel A Miscellaneous Timing Control  Auto
> Round Trip Latency      Auto
> B2B CAS Delay   Auto
> Advanced Voltage Control
> CPU
> Load Line Calibration   Level 2
> CPU Vcore 1.16250v      1.4
> Dynamic Vcore (DVID)
> QPI/VTT Voltage 1.335
> CPU PLL 1.8v    Auto
> MCH/ICH
> PCIE 1.5v       Auto
> QPI PLL 1.1v    Auto
> IOH Core 1.1v   Auto
> ICH I/O 1.5v    Auto
> ICH Core 1.1v   Auto
> DRAM
> DRAM Voltage 1.5v       1.5
> DRAM Termination .75v   Auto
> CH-A Data Vref .75v     Auto
> CH-B Data Vref .75v     Auto
> CH-C Data Vref .75v     Auto
> CH-A Address Vref .75v  Auto
> CH-B Address Vref .75v  Auto
> CH-C Address Vref .75v  Auto
> Miscellaneous Settings
> Virtualization Technology       Disabled
> Isonchronous Frequency  Enabled


thanks for the info. i have the 5650, not the 5660, so i am not sure how much of a difference that makes. Also, my mobo won't let me select a 21 multiplier, jumps to 22 from 20 for some reason.


----------



## kpforce1

lol, my replacement x5650 some how ended up going to Jersey... from Chicago :/ I'm in Southern Indiana for crying out loud. Thankfully the first one I got works (only two memory channels) so I could at least get my setup squared away for the hex core.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Damn I hope you eventually get your X5660. Also if you guys are getting TItanfall let me know. I'm going to be playing that for awhile tonight. I'm going to be streaming the game as well.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Also if you guys are getting TItanfall let me know. I'm going to be playing that for awhile tonight. I'm going to be streaming the game as well.


EUropa. Doesn't unlock untill 13/3 here.








But have fun!


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> When running 6 sticks in general, you have to change the command rate to 2T otherwise you will probably have RAM disappear at 1600Mhz+. You will be fine with 6 sticks, I've always run 6 sticks in my x58 rig.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just may have to tweak a few things thats all


This depends on your memory.

i'm running 6x2GB at 7-8-7-20 1T.

But in general with most sticks it does require lower timings.

If you mix and match brands you usually have to do this also.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> EUropa. Doesn't unlock untill 13/3 here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But have fun!


Couldn't add you since there are 304 results. My new mic hasn't been delivered yet so I'll be limited to the old Xbox 360 headsets for communication. Man the quality is so bad on the PC when using those.


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clawlan*
> 
> thanks for the info. i have the 5650, not the 5660, so i am not sure how much of a difference that makes. Also, my mobo won't let me select a 21 multiplier, jumps to 22 from 20 for some reason.


You will also need a lot of voltage to hold that stable 24/7 stable.

1.5+ is quite abit over the 1.35vcore limit intel recommends.

Your cooling will have to be up to par!


----------



## dpoverlord

Add me up got to level 14 today Dpoverlord


----------



## Kana-Maru

Added.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> This depends on your memory.
> 
> i'm running 6x2GB at 7-8-7-20 1T.
> 
> But in general with most sticks it does require lower timings.
> 
> If you mix and match brands you usually have to do this also.


What CPU, motherboard, and overclock are you running? Not many people can run 1T with 6 sticks no matter what the RAM type on the x58 platform.. not without some pretty good advanced timing tweaks. I think the real factor is how much of an overclock you are running and the chips IMC capability. With 6 2000Mhz 2GB sticks I could not run 1T.

-Edit-

Found what you were running... i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.28v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T


----------



## Timeofdoom

Preloading Titanfall right now...that is one huge game, even bigger than rumoured. (49.99GB)

@Kana, you should search for me using OCNTimeofdoom. (I tried searching for you - Xeon-Kana-Maru??)


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> What CPU, motherboard, and overclock are you running? Not many people can run 1T with 6 sticks no matter what the RAM type on the x58 platform.. not without some pretty good advanced timing tweaks. I think the real factor is how much of an overclock you are running and the chips IMC capability. With 6 2000Mhz 2GB sticks I could not run 1T.
> 
> -Edit-
> 
> Found what you were running... i7 970 @ 4.2Ghz 1.28v | TRUE Black Rev.C + Scythe S-Flex 1600 rpm x2 | Asus P6-T Deluxe V2 | 12GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 7-8-7-20 1T


High quality Mushkin memory helps










200x21

And I have seen what you have with the DDR3 2000 sticks higher timings 2t. When I was building timings were more important to me than overall frequency so I wanted the lowest latency DDR3 1600 modules I could find. Bought the first 3x2 set in 2009, in 2011 I made sure to special order the 2nd identical set directly from mushkin as they were harder to find.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Preloading Titanfall right now...that is one huge game, even bigger than rumoured. (49.99GB)
> 
> @Kana, you should search for me using OCNTimeofdoom. (I tried searching for you - Xeon-Kana-Maru??)


I changed my name to my YouTube\&Twitch name. I'm adding you now.


----------



## dpoverlord

Anyone here have any tips for nvida inspector profile settinsg for titanfall? Getting bad framerates on my end.


----------



## kpforce1

New drivers came out today HERE


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks. I'm upgrading my drivers now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Anyone here have any tips for nvida inspector profile settinsg for titanfall? Getting bad framerates on my end.


I think I read that you have to do a few things to get rid of the forced V-sync. I'm sure the driver update will help that kp posted.


----------



## dpoverlord

I installed the driver update and had to set a lot of the settings to low. Weird thing is frame rate stays the same on low or high. LOL


----------



## Timeofdoom

Well, I received both my mb and cpu today. Swapped out the mb, put in the cpu, put on the cooler, connected the ssd, put in 1 stick of ram in my dram 1A socket and put in a old hd5870. It posted.
Connected everything, put in my hd7970 and 7950 and suddenly: qled cpu red. It didn't post. I dont know what happened. I
tried reseating the cpu to no avail. Tried clearing cmos, reseat the battery, checked the cpu pins, change bios (dualbios mb)... it still doesnt post.
Either the bios is outdated or the mb/cpu just fried itself, even though I didnt notice any smoke, sparks or otherwise unnatural issues.
The mb is the asus rampage 3 extreme. Apparently Im not alone with these kinda issues.
I doubt I can get my hands on another 1366 cpu to test with before the return (ebay) deadline, so thats not an option.


----------



## Brett0712

First off, I want to thank Kana and everyone else for the vast amount of information in this thread!

With that said, I recently pulled my X58 parts out of the closet to breathe some new life into them after my gaming laptop bit the dust. My X58 setup consisted of a GA-EX58-UD3R (rev2), i7-960, 6x2gb Corsair 1600mhz ram, and an EVGA GTX 280. After doing some research on the best upgrade path I picked up a GTX 770 and a Xeon L5639. I was able to OC the L5639 to a stable 3.8ghz (211bclk and pretty low voltage) and was pleased with the results but figured I wanted to give a X5650 a try. So, I just received my X5650 last week and have been toying with it a bit. Unfortunately I wiped out the settings I had for the L5639 at 3.8ghz so I started over with the X5650. I am able to run it up to 4.0ghz with pretty low voltage but I am having a hard time reaching a stable OC at 200x22=4.4ghz without a large jump in voltage. In order to make it into windows I need to be running ~1.36V and that is not stable. It will post at around 1.3V but needs the 1.36V to get into Windows.

Looking at some of the other bios templates that have been posted in here it looks like I may be overlooking something. Would anyone mind pointing me in the right direction?

Thanks!


----------



## Timeofdoom

Welp. When I get back to the board I'm gonna give it a last go - I've had the battery and power cord out all day, to clear the CMOS (also, some people wrote, on another forum, that leaving the MB be without power for a while seems to "revive it" on a q led error on cpu).
I'm also gonna have a closer look at the pins, even though I don't have a microscope at hand.
Just can't believe that it posted the first time I started it and that it suddenly died on me.

But it's definitely not the BIOS being outdated - I can flash the MB fine through a "ROG" USB port, even if I cant get to post.

So it boils down to:
1) bent pins
2) dead CPU (unlikely though? Since I actually could flash BIOS and it does heat up while on?)
3) dead MB (everything seems A-OK. All lights are fine n' dandy - though I get no post sound and only get a black screen)
4) Both.
5) Unknown noob error from me while I installed the board? I've been thinking, since I have a H100 which only requires *a* pin in it's 3-pin power-connector (Used for monitoring RPM, it uses a molex 4-pin on the side for the "real power"), could that somehow cause the MB not to post, since I plugged it into the CPU_FAN? (Which would cause the mobo to think that there's no CPU cooling installed, since it doesn't see any power draw on CPU_FAN?)

Real pain in the..








I might just have to ask for a refund/replacement from the seller.

And before you ask - the R3E can run the Xeon's. I've seen CPU-Z screenshots of it - although I don't know what BIOS they were using.


----------



## kpforce1

I FINALLY got the "good" x5650 lol.... the USPS really screwed up on the delivery







. Instead of 3 days it took 8 days







The good news is that It actually sees all three channels of RAM and can use them. The first x5650 I got was missing a cap on the bottom... apparently it was related to the data transfer or something on the 3rd memory channel. Now I have a semi working x5650 and a fully working x5650 for the low price of $120







Woot!

Kana, I should be able to get some benchmarks done with this processor soon.


----------



## Firehawk

@Timeofdoom: Go back to the setup that booted for you. You said you had it working with a simple setup and then changed 20 things at once. See if that original setup still works, if so you can start narrowing down the problem. Then you can change one thing at a time. Add one stick of ram, then another, etc.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> First off, I want to thank Kana and everyone else for the vast amount of information in this thread!
> 
> With that said, I recently pulled my X58 parts out of the closet to breathe some new life into them after my gaming laptop bit the dust. My X58 setup consisted of a GA-EX58-UD3R (rev2), i7-960, 6x2gb Corsair 1600mhz ram, and an EVGA GTX 280. After doing some research on the best upgrade path I picked up a GTX 770 and a Xeon L5639. I was able to OC the L5639 to a stable 3.8ghz (211bclk and pretty low voltage) and was pleased with the results but figured I wanted to give a X5650 a try. So, I just received my X5650 last week and have been toying with it a bit. Unfortunately I wiped out the settings I had for the L5639 at 3.8ghz so I started over with the X5650. I am able to run it up to 4.0ghz with pretty low voltage but I am having a hard time reaching a stable OC at 200x22=4.4ghz without a large jump in voltage. In order to make it into windows I need to be running ~1.36V and that is not stable. It will post at around 1.3V but needs the 1.36V to get into Windows.
> 
> Looking at some of the other bios templates that have been posted in here it looks like I may be overlooking something. Would anyone mind pointing me in the right direction?
> 
> Thanks!


Thanks man. I'm glad more X58 users are doing a few minor upgrades to their builds. GTX 770 should last you for a awhile.

It appears that you have hit your max. A lot of the X5650\X5660 tops off at You can try increasing the QPI\VTT a bit. 1.35v for the QPI\VTT should be more than enough. If you are struggling to post then I believe you might have already got to your highest point. Make sure to keep the CPU PLL low or set to AUTO unless you want a dead X5650\L5639. After a certain point these Xeons love the power and that becomes a problem. Another thing you can try is to disable the C-states and EIST settings. If that doesn't work then 4.0Ghz will be fine for just about anything you'll be running on your PC. Stock settings do just fine on my PC and I usually run Stock most of the time unless I need more CPU speed. 4.0Ghz will simply be overkill for gaming, especially for a single GTX 770.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I FINALLY got the "good" x5650 lol.... the USPS really screwed up on the delivery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Instead of 3 days it took 8 days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The good news is that It actually sees all three channels of RAM and can use them. The first x5650 I got was missing a cap on the bottom... apparently it was related to the data transfer or something on the 3rd memory channel. Now I have a semi working x5650 and a fully working x5650 for the low price of $120
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woot!
> 
> Kana, I should be able to get some benchmarks done with this processor soon.


About time they got it right. PM me your results ASAP. I've been busy streaming a ton of games and doing other things. I really need those results for comparison to my 2000Mhz results. You lucked out on the price as well. Congrats. Just tell me your highest stable overclock. I also found out some more info with my Xeon X5660, but I'm testing just to verify. I'll post the results once I get everything finished.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> About time they got it right. PM me your results ASAP. I've been busy streaming a ton of games and doing other things. I really need those results for comparison to my 2000Mhz results. You lucked out on the price as well. Congrats. Just tell me your highest stable overclock. I also found out some more info with my Xeon X5660, but I'm testing just to verify. I'll post the results once I get everything finished.


For the sake of testing I'm going to run 4.4Ghz with a 200 BCLK to get 1600 and 2000Mhz RAM speeds and then I will see how far I can clock it. I'm about half way done with the 1600Mhz tests... it takes forever and I haven't even started on the real world gaming benchmarks yet


----------



## Timeofdoom

Welp. I found a local dude selling his pretty old asus P6T deluxe for about ~80$. Im gonna contact him and tell him that I'll buy his board if I can come around his place and actually get it to boot with my x5650. If i can, Ill return the Rampage and if I cant, I return the x5650. Either or scenario.
I just dont hope it's the case of both being dead. That would really suck.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah man that would really suck. Good luck with all of that. Hopefully everything works out for you.


----------



## kpforce1

I have some synthetic benches done and ready to compare. You want me to just post them here?


----------



## Kana-Maru

PM me.


----------



## Asus11

alot of the people not reaching higher overclocks, maybe it is due to the motherboard as people forget 1366 was dependent on a good motherboard for best overclocks

how high can a x5650 cpu overclock? what is the average top limit? or what is possible in real terms?

also would a x5650 bottleneck sli titans


----------



## Moomanpoo

Just wanted to say I am thankful for this thread, and the one on [H]ardocp. About 2-3 weeks ago I purchased a X5650.

This sucker was so easy to overclock. On my Asus Rampage II Gene I was easily able to get 200x22 for 4.4ghz on 1.31v. Prime95 was stable for 10 hours, and passed IBT easily.

For Memory I picked up 12gb G.skill kit from newegg. It was one of the last 6 stick kits I have seen around the net, and its really cheap, and 1.5v instead of 1.65v for my old Crucial Tracer sticks.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231350

All and All you cannot go wrong with these chips if you are still using a 920-950 I7.

Just my 0.02c


----------



## Moomanpoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> alot of the people not reaching higher overclocks, maybe it is due to the motherboard as people forget 1366 was dependent on a good motherboard for best overclocks
> 
> how high can a x5650 cpu overclock? what is the average top limit? or what is possible in real terms?
> 
> also would a x5650 bottleneck sli titans


Depends on the resolution or the game. You can't just say it would be CPU limited if you run at 1080p. Of course if you are running 1080p and SLI titans....then yea that comment itself says it all. Now if you are running at 1080p120hz well then yes you will be CPU limited in some games.

But to give you an example I was CPU limited with a 5ghz 2700k when gaming on a 120hz 1080p monitor while playing BF3 (multiplayer 64 man) and BF4.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah man that would really suck. Good luck with all of that. Hopefully everything works out for you.


Well, the guy who were about to sell me his P6T bailed from the deal.
So now I'm looking up a sabertooth for less than 200$.
Mind telling me what BIOS are you using Kana?

EDIT: I just found a nice offer from a guy, who doesn't have a 1366 proc anymore, but can turn on his sabertooth and it would light up n' all. Less than 55$!
Gonna have a lookie at this one - even if it turns out it doesn't work, it's just so cheap, it doesn't even matter.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moomanpoo*
> 
> Depends on the resolution or the game. You can't just say it would be CPU limited if you run at 1080p. Of course if you are running 1080p and SLI titans....then yea that comment itself says it all. Now if you are running at 1080p120hz well then yes you will be CPU limited in some games.
> 
> But to give you an example I was CPU limited with a 5ghz 2700k when gaming on a 120hz 1080p monitor while playing BF3 (multiplayer 64 man) and BF4.


2560 x 1440? ok if it does get CPU limited how much does it compare to a 3930k in a the same situation?


----------



## Moomanpoo

Depends on the clock speed. But I do not think a 6core would bottleneck your titans in SLI at 1440p. If its 1440p60hz (If the X5650 is overclocked). This is from my experience of course and I could be wrong, but your target is staying above 60fps at all times, and I think a X5650/X5560 overclocked would be more then enough.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moomanpoo*
> 
> Depends on the resolution or the game. You can't just say it would be CPU limited if you run at 1080p. Of course if you are running 1080p and SLI titans....then yea that comment itself says it all. Now if you are running at 1080p120hz well then yes you will be CPU limited in some games.
> 
> But to give you an example I was CPU limited with a 5ghz 2700k when gaming on a 120hz 1080p monitor while playing BF3 (multiplayer 64 man) and BF4.


I personally don't think he'll have any problems with SLI if he can reach a decent overclock. You were limited because you were running a 2700k @ 5Ghz, but it's still a Quad core at the end of the day no matter how high you clock it. There could've been other limiting factors as well. A lower clocked Hex would still outperform your Quad @ 5Ghz in many test including Cinebench R11.5 I bet. I believe a Hex core clocked at 3.8Ghz will be within less of a percent of a [email protected] The extra cores makes a big difference [trust me]. There was also a user here that runs SLI Titans at ridiculous resolutions and he has seen increases in gaming performance. So no I don't believe there will be any bottlenecking going on if he can reach a decent overclock,.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> 2560 x 1440? ok if it does get CPU limited how much does it compare to a 3930k in a the same situation?


It'll be hard to say without any data. I'm playing at 1080p, 1400p and 1600p, but I only have a GTX 670 2GB Reference that I can decently overclock whenever I need to. I'm waiting to see what Nvidia and AMD will bring to the table right now. I'm planning on getting the next high end GPUs running in Quad SLI or Crossfire X. I'll probably start with SLI first then move on the Quad. So maybe I'll be able to throw some Quad GPU data out there soon.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Well, the guy who were about to sell me his P6T bailed from the deal.
> So now I'm looking up a sabertooth for less than 200$.
> Mind telling me what BIOS are you using Kana?
> 
> EDIT: I just found a nice offer from a guy, who doesn't have a 1366 proc anymore, but can turn on his sabertooth and it would light up n' all. Less than 55$!
> Gonna have a lookie at this one - even if it turns out it doesn't work, it's just so cheap, it doesn't even matter.


Nice! Hopefully you can get your hands on it for a nice price. I'm running the 1402 BIOS revision. Easy to update and I've had no problems with it. This Sabertooth X58 has been so damn good while using several CPUs that it's going to be hard for me to stop using this brand in future builds. I hope Asus keeps the brand and warranty service going for Haswell-E and Skylake-E. I'm not sure when I'll be upgrading, but I don't think it'll be anytime soon.


----------



## OCmember

These chips are great! Lovin my X5660! Just have it at a mild 3.9GHz o.c. @ 1.23v That's pretty good for that chip speed. My old 920 would be sucking around 1.36v just to keep stable at that speed. 32nm is just great!


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice! Hopefully you can get your hands on it for a nice price. I'm running the 1402 BIOS revision. Easy to update and I've had no problems with it. This Sabertooth X58 has been so damn good while using several CPUs that it's going to be hard for me to stop using this brand in future builds. I hope Asus keeps the brand and warranty service going for Haswell-E and Skylake-E. I'm not sure when I'll be upgrading, but I don't think it'll be anytime soon.


I hope that it's a pretty recent bios on this guys board, otherwise I probably won't be able to boot - and he ofc cant flash it without a proc.
Actually would the x5650 not basically be the same as a 970x/980x-chip (supported since bios 0308 on sabertooth) or is it more like the 990x (0602) or the 980 (1101)?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I guess you finally realized that QPI doesn't contain PCI-E lanes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or use them to communicate between the CPU and the IOH.


You intentionally misrepresent me. I never made such a statement, nor even came close to implying such a thing.

I said that all data going into the IOH reaches the CPU via QPI. The IOH bridges the QPI with the PCI-E bus and other minority I/O.

There has been no spin in my posts, just a literal accounting of the facts of the matter, facts which stand behind my opinion of your chart as misleading.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> These chips are great! Lovin my X5660! Just have it at a mild 3.9GHz o.c. @ 1.23v That's pretty good for that chip speed. My old 920 would be sucking around 1.36v just to keep stable at that speed. 32nm is just great!


I have similar results. When I first got my X5660 I was able to hit 4Ghz within the first 30 minutes of owning it. The best part was the low Vcore that I pointed out in my review. I just loaded it up and it's still stable and passes the tests. I've made a few changes to the BIOS and Here's a screenshot:










I'm going to focus on running this setting with offset enabled.

After running IntelBurnTest there were my temperatures:

Ambient Temp: 22c
CPU Temp Min: 24c - 25c [idle]
CPU Temp Max 63c
*CPU Temp Avg: 52c-56c*
Vcore: 1.22v

Those are some pretty good temps. Especially the idle temps. I'll report more as I complete my test.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> I hope that it's a pretty recent bios on this guys board, otherwise I probably won't be able to boot - and he ofc cant flash it without a proc.
> Actually would the x5650 not basically be the same as a 970x/980x-chip (supported since bios 0308 on sabertooth) or is it more like the 990x (0602) or the 980 (1101)?


0603 and up should support Hex cores that aren't i7s [Xeons etc] as far as I know. 0602 might, but I can't say for sure. You'll probably wan to take your chances with the latest [1402] or at least 1201/

The X5650 [x23] is basically the same as the X5660 [x24] with -1 multiplier making it a great a purchase. I'm not to sure about the i7-970x\980x comparisons at the moment.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> After running IntelBurnTest there were my temperatures:
> 
> Ambient Temp: 22c
> CPU Temp Min: 24c - 25c [idle]
> CPU Temp Max 63c
> *CPU Temp Avg: 52c-56c*
> Vcore: 1.22v
> 
> Those are some pretty good temps. Especially the idle temps. I'll report more as I complete my test.


Those are some nice temps, especially on a 620.


----------



## OCmember

I've been able to hit that vcore with all 6 cores at 3.9GHz No turbo on. I've got a BCLK of 170 goin. Crazy thing is, it's my daily rig. I've never overclocked my daily rig since 2005 or so. I have full confidence of this thing running at that speed with no problem, if there is anything to worry about it's memory stability and I think that's at 1020MHz which I've had no problems at that speed before. I love this simple drop in 'upgrade' Seeing that I went and built my dream rig with my evga system this is what I hope retirement will be like = smooth sailing!

I'm waiting for a nice GPU to put in my i7 970 rig which I plan on keeping a while also. That machine is using the same board I've had in it for a while. The thing about the evga 760 A1 is, it's a rev 1. EVGA won't trade it for a rev. 1.1 They offered to mod it for some $60 dollars or so.. hence the i7 970. That chip was never overclocked and used in a college kids 3d rendering machine. I think when I get it up and running I'm going to push to 5GHz on it


----------



## Lionvibez

You are going to need some serious cooling to hit 5Ghz on a 6core westmere chip.

Water or better!


----------



## Asus11

its crazy how an x5660 is so much more than a x5650, is there a big reason why? I mean where im from anyway the price difference is pretty big

can I get an x5650 to 4.6ghz? is that possible?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I've been able to hit that vcore with all 6 cores at 3.9GHz No turbo on. I've got a BCLK of 170 goin. Crazy thing is, it's my daily rig. I've never overclocked my daily rig since 2005 or so. I have full confidence of this thing running at that speed with no problem, if there is anything to worry about it's memory stability and I think that's at 1020MHz which I've had no problems at that speed before. I love this simple drop in 'upgrade' Seeing that I went and built my dream rig with my evga system this is what I hope retirement will be like = smooth sailing!
> 
> I'm waiting for a nice GPU to put in my i7 970 rig which I plan on keeping a while also. That machine is using the same board I've had in it for a while. The thing about the evga 760 A1 is, it's a rev 1. EVGA won't trade it for a rev. 1.1 They offered to mod it for some $60 dollars or so.. hence the i7 970. That chip was never overclocked and used in a college kids 3d rendering machine. I think when I get it up and running I'm going to push to 5GHz on it


Dude, I could mod it for you for free just pay shipping lol. Thats how easy it was for me to do. I even have a chip to test the board with before sending it back to you. I'm sure that the board is out of EVGA's warranty period anyway. I had a post earlier in the thread on the two points that have to be soldered.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> its crazy how an x5660 is so much more than a x5650, is there a big reason why? I mean where im from anyway the price difference is pretty big
> 
> can I get an x5650 to 4.6ghz? is that possible?


Yes, but you will have to use some higher voltages on the core and QPI/VTT for sure. My chips haven't been as good when it comes to voltages though.... to run 4.6Ghz I have to run 1.5V on my x5650. I dunno, maybe my board just makes me have to run higher voltages. I wish I would have seen the batch number for my chip... Kana, I think we need to start getting overclocking data for the chips based on batch number







.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Those are some nice temps, especially on a 620.


Thanks. It has been a great buy so far. I'm glad I picked up the 620 more than ever now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> its crazy how an x5660 is so much more than a x5650, is there a big reason why? I mean where im from anyway the price difference is pretty big
> 
> can I get an x5650 to 4.6ghz? is that possible?


Anything is possible. You'll need a good board and a good CPU for that matter. As long as you don't need ridiculous amount of voltage to reach 4.4Ghz you should be fine. There's no way to tell until you get your hands on it and work it the CPU. The price difference is pretty large, but I'm sure it's simply due to the "larger number". You can't go wrong with a X5650 and I'm sure a lot of the sellers don't know this.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I wish I would have seen the batch number for my chip... Kana, I think we need to start getting overclocking data for the chips based on batch number
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


That would be nice, but I'm not pulling off my 620 again. I have the older model before they made it easier to install and that thing is a ***** to get right.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Alright I finally go around to overclocking my offset voltage. I have my [email protected] running with some mixed issues. No BSODs. I've ran several stability test and sometimes they pass with flying colors, but sometimes they fail. I know that the CPU is getting the correct amount of voltage. I"m thinking it might be a issue with Intel Turbo settings. So far I'm getting the best of both words. A good CPU OC and very nice power saving features. I'll post my results so far:

*- 65 minute everyday usage [web browsing, Youtube, MS Office etc]*
[email protected]
Ambient: 21c
CPU Temp Idle: 23c-25c
CPU Temp Max: 33c
*CPU Temp Avg: 24c*

*Voltage:*
Idle: 0.96v - 1.12v [varies and depends on the CPU Usage %]
Average: 1.04v

*IntelBurnTest v2.54 results*
Ambient: 21c
CPU Temp Max: 52c
*CPU Temp Avg: 46c*

*Voltage:*
*100% Load: 1.22v*

So far so good. Great results. I'm going to run more test and stream some games on twitch. I'll post my results when I finish. Also were the hell is the OCN bar that allows me to add bold, italic and format my post. Anyone else having this issue?


----------



## Blindsay

Is it just me or are the SR-2's hard to find and expensive now? I was looking on ebay and the only 2 there were like $600+ for the board only


----------



## ozlay

this tread makes me want to bring my SR2 up to 5ghz


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Dude, I could mod it for you for free just pay shipping lol. Thats how easy it was for me to do. I even have a chip to test the board with before sending it back to you. I'm sure that the board is out of EVGA's warranty period anyway. I had a post earlier in the thread on the two points that have to be soldered.


It's just two points? Do you have a diagram of it? I've seen a couple and download the pics but they seem sketchy an vague.


----------



## ruggercb

Kana, and anyone else for that matter- Feel free to add me in Titanfall if you want. I'm not the best but I always play the objective. Finally grabbed a Mic. Origin name = ruggercb
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Damn I hope you eventually get your X5660. Also if you guys are getting TItanfall let me know. I'm going to be playing that for awhile tonight. I'm going to be streaming the game as well.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> It's just two points? Do you have a diagram of it? I've seen a couple and download the pics but they seem sketchy an vague.


Yes, it is only two points. Just to clerify you do have the x58 classy 760 V1.0 correct? If so view my post a few pages back. I posted pictures. Also this can be done and the board still works fine with we uad cores. The last thing is make sure you update the BIOS to the latest version before running a hexcore.

HERE is my post. I can post pictures of my board later


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Yes, it is only two points. Just to clerify you do have the x58 classy 760 V1.0 correct? If so view my post a few pages back. I posted pictures. Also this can be done and the board still works fine with we uad cores. The last thing is make sure you update the BIOS to the latest version before running a hexcore.
> 
> HERE is my post. I can post pictures of my board later


Yes. It's the same board. As of right now though I have an i7 970 sitting in it and it's ready to be worked. If I decide to sell it off and look into another X5660 I'll be revisiting those pics. Thanks much, man!


----------



## Carbon00ace

Hello Kana-Maru,
I have an i7-960 and have been budgeting (~$700 for proc, mobo, etc) for an upgrade to the Haswell line but after reading all 39 pages for the last hr I am definitely reconsidering. The performance gains that you note on your upgrade from the 960 to the x5660 is phenomenal and I'm thinking of pulling the trigger as I have found a pretty good deal on a x5660.

I play MMO's and FPS's and have noticed performance issues (I have heard that MMO's are very cpu dependent) with the 960. My level of expertise is low but I do have some friends that are a lot more tech savvy than myself. I originally purchased the pc from Maingear but I have upgraded the graphics card and added an SSD over the years but still not quite hitting the performance I would like. The unit came with a proprietary closed loop cooler - MAINGEAR LiquidX 1750. I would probably get another cooler and would like a recommendation on one (leaning towards the h80i).

I read about the work you put in with DP and would need some assistance with the Overclock. I've read guides but until I go in and actually overclock the information won't resonate.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks. It has been a great buy so far. I'm glad I picked up the 620 more than ever now.
> Anything is possible. You'll need a good board and a good CPU for that matter. As long as you don't need ridiculous amount of voltage to reach 4.4Ghz you should be fine. There's no way to tell until you get your hands on it and work it the CPU. The price difference is pretty large, but I'm sure it's simply due to the "larger number". You can't go wrong with a X5650 and I'm sure a lot of the sellers don't know this.
> That would be nice, but I'm not pulling off my 620 again. I have the older model before they made it easier to install and that thing is a ***** to get right.


I managed to get 2 x x5650 cpus for very very cheap for instance around half the price of a x5660 (in my country), already have a r3e & 12gb dominator gt 2000mhz.. hopefully I can do some good overclocks







the reason I ask all these questions is that im thinking of going back to x58 and using the saved money on a second graphics card instead


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> Kana, and anyone else for that matter- Feel free to add me in Titanfall if you want. I'm not the best but I always play the objective. Finally grabbed a Mic. Origin name = ruggercb


I added you. I put all of my info on very first page before the Review. So you can add me on Steam and other websites if you want. I'm down to play whenever you want. I've got my new mic now so I'm all set as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carbon00ace*
> 
> Hello Kana-Maru,
> I have an i7-960 and have been budgeting (~$700 for proc, mobo, etc) for an upgrade to the Haswell line but after reading all 39 pages for the last hr I am definitely reconsidering. The performance gains that you note on your upgrade from the 960 to the x5660 is phenomenal and I'm thinking of pulling the trigger as I have found a pretty good deal on a x5660.
> 
> I play MMO's and FPS's and have noticed performance issues (I have heard that MMO's are very cpu dependent) with the 960. My level of expertise is low but I do have some friends that are a lot more tech savvy than myself. I originally purchased the pc from Maingear but I have upgraded the graphics card and added an SSD over the years but still not quite hitting the performance I would like. The unit came with a proprietary closed loop cooler - MAINGEAR LiquidX 1750. I would probably get another cooler and would like a recommendation on one (leaning towards the h80i).
> 
> I read about the work you put in with DP and would need some assistance with the Overclock. I've read guides but until I go in and actually overclock the information won't resonate.


I was on the same page with you man. I was considering a Haswell upgrade and decided that if I do upgrade it would have to Hex core. Mainly because the Quad Cores weren't a true upgrade IMO. I was on X79 path, but I'm glad I decided to stay patient since the i7-960 was still decent for what I used it for. I got a Hex core and now I'm never looking back to Quad Cores again. Yeah the performance over my i7-960 was great and I'm sure you'll see great results as well. For MMOs and FPS you'll definitely need a Hex core. What GPU model do you have installed?

My CPU cooling suggestions would be Corsair H100i, Corsair H105, or my old 620 cooler lol. I can honestly say that the 620 has been great against everything I've thrown at it so far. I also don't mind helping you overclock. It might be a bit easier since we have the same MB. If you can find a good X5660 for a good price go for it. Just make sure there isn't any visible cosmetic damage. Definitely check for that after you've received it. Haswell-E is right around the corner, but you'll have to spend some good money for it. Hex cores will hold you over for awhile.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> I managed to get 2 x x5650 cpus for very very cheap for instance around half the price of a x5660 (in my country), already have a r3e & 12gb dominator gt 2000mhz.. hopefully I can do some good overclocks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the reason I ask all these questions is that im thinking of going back to x58 and using the saved money on a second graphics card instead


That would be a smart thing to do. PCI-e 2.0 still manhandles the latest and greatest high end GPUs.


----------



## Carbon00ace

GPU is an EVGA GTX 770 SC. The reason I was looking at the h80i is space for the rad. The cooler I'm using now is -

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=7622498&Sku=SYX-602849OH&csid=ITD&recordsPerPage=10&body=REVIEWS#CustomerReviewsBlock

I could not find a support link to the model and I have a single fan on it. Would this Cooler in your opinion do the job to hit an OC of 4.2?


----------



## Kana-Maru

You mean would the h80i do the job for 4.2Ghz? Yeah I believe it will do more than 4.2Ghz.


----------



## Moomanpoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You mean would the h80i do the job for 4.2Ghz? Yeah I believe it will do more than 4.2Ghz.


I have an Antec 920 on my X5650 @ 4.4ghz with no problems. IBT showed 83c as max temps for me.


----------



## Asus11

how hot do these chips get im going to do custom watercooling ?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moomanpoo*
> 
> I have an Antec 920 on my X5650 @ 4.4ghz with no problems. IBT showed 83c as max temps for me.


hopfully custom water cooling could get closer to 60c?

also ive noticed my bios on the board is 0404 is that compatible with the xeons? or would I need to flash to a newer one?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> how hot do these chips get im going to do custom watercooling ?
> hopfully custom water cooling could get closer to 60c?
> 
> also ive noticed my bios on the board is 0404 is that compatible with the xeons? or would I need to flash to a newer one?


My loop keeps my x5650 below 60*C doing pretty much anything. That is @ 4.4Ghz. I have a 780 classy, x5650, full x58 classy board blocks a 280, 240, and two 140 rads with dual pumps. My ambient temp is 20-22C


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Moomanpoo*
> 
> I have an Antec 920 on my X5650 @ 4.4ghz with no problems. IBT showed 83c as max temps for me.


That's not telling us anything if you don't give us the ambient temperature during your test. An accurate ambient temperature as well. 83c is a bit high. I usually shoot for 70c-75c for the max. I try to keep my average in the 60s.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> how hot do these chips get im going to do custom watercooling ?
> hopfully custom water cooling could get closer to 60c?
> 
> also ive noticed my bios on the board is 0404 is that compatible with the xeons? or would I need to flash to a newer one?


Flash to the latest BIOS and use a USB within the BIOS to do it. I'd do it just to be safe. Make sure your PC doesn't lose power during the update process. Custom water cooling should get it closer to 60c, but I'm using a closed loop cooler and I still get great temps so it's your call.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> My loop keeps my x5650 below 60*C doing pretty much anything. That is @ 4.4Ghz. I have a 780 classy, x5650, full x58 classy board blocks a 280, 240, and two 140 rads with dual pumps. My ambient temp is 20-22C


sounds like as fridge you got running there

I will only be using a 360mm XT ek rad and will buy a 240mm aswell soon


----------



## Timeofdoom

Well, I've got a Sabertooth incoming. Here's to it not being broken somehow - seller did say he'd update the BIOS before shipping it, so there's that.









I just don't hope it's the actual CPU being dead, 'cause that would mean the guy from Texas fleeced me with it (but if it works, it should be great - it's from batch SLBV3).


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Well, I've got a Sabertooth incoming. Here's to it not being broken somehow - seller did say he'd update the BIOS before shipping it, so there's that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just don't hope it's the actual CPU being dead, 'cause that would mean the guy from Texas fleeced me with it (but if it works, it should be great - it's from batch SLBV3).


my 2 CPU's arrived today, both are SLBV3? is that a good batch? also they both look pretty new as far as CPU's go


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> my 2 CPU's arrived today, both are SLBV3? is that a good batch? also they both look pretty new as far as CPU's go


That isn't the batch number







.... the batch number is the longer alpha numeric one below


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> That isn't the batch number
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .... the batch number is the longer alpha numeric one below


ops my bad I knew that!, I mean revision whatever its called are they favored to be better at overclocking etc the SLBV3?


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> ops my bad I knew that!, I mean revision whatever its called are they favored to be better at overclocking etc the SLBV3?


Well, besides the SLBV3, there's only the ES-chips which are Q3QN,Q3QU and Q4EJ, which are apparently pretty good chips, but requires higher voltages.

On the SLBV3-side, there is two steppings: AT80614004320AD (first stepping) and BX80614X5650 (2nd stepping). No idea if there's any noticable difference though. I suppose the usual: "stability" and lower voltages at standard clocks.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Well, besides the SLBV3, there's only the ES-chips which are Q3QN,Q3QU and Q4EJ, which are apparently pretty good chips, but requires higher voltages.
> 
> On the SLBV3-side, there is two steppings: AT80614004320AD (first stepping) and BX80614X5650 (2nd stepping). No idea if there's any noticable difference though. I suppose the usual: "stability" and lower voltages at standard clocks.


isn't BX the retail box ? well I checked mine via intels website & its not a retail must be oem


----------



## Carbon00ace

I just purchased an x5660 SLBV6, I can provide the serial number. Does any body have any info on these?


----------



## dpoverlord

what you get it for carbon?


----------



## Carbon00ace

$230.00. It was the best deal I could find from a pretty reputable company. The stock they have arrived not to long ago and are OEM. I have pics if you want to check them out.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's not a bad price at all.


----------



## dpoverlord

Good price! I got really lucky getting mine for $195.

Also,

I would really value everyones input, when I get the RMA Titans I am doing a whole round of testing, if you could go to the thread Swolern and I put together of 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 way SLI Titan scaling on 1440p surround vs 1600p surround.

I plan to do a whole new round of testing:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1415441/7680x1440-benchmarks-plus-2-3-4-way-sli-gk110-scaling/350_70#post_21973783

I would appreciate your input very much!

P.S Kana love to give you some positive feedback whats your blog again? Anything I can do to help you for taking all that time!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Good price! I got really lucky getting mine for $195.
> 
> Also,
> 
> I would really value everyones input, when I get the RMA Titans I am doing a whole round of testing, if you could go to the thread Swolern and I put together of 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 way SLI Titan scaling on 1440p surround vs 1600p surround.
> 
> I plan to do a whole new round of testing:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1415441/7680x1440-benchmarks-plus-2-3-4-way-sli-gk110-scaling/350_70#post_21973783
> 
> I would appreciate your input very much!
> 
> P.S Kana love to give you some positive feedback whats your blog again? Anything I can do to help you for taking all that time!


Can't wait for those results with your new OC'd Hexa core. My blog is on blogspot - spara2pennies - [Google it]. I actually just posted some things on there today. I have the rest of my info added to my very first post. I've posted this review and formatted it on my blog as well. I'll PM you the rest. I'll keep an eye out for those Titans surround results.


----------



## Schmuckley

eh..I purchased an SLBv6..nowhere near as good as Kana-Maru's









It'll do around 4.3 easily..after that it's a fight.
PS:I don't like the VRM/NB sinks on Sabertooth x58








They were overheating until I aimed a Panaflo @ them.


----------



## ruggercb

The more I use my 5650 the more I like it. I figured out the voltage offset finally and now have the vcore running between .944 idle and 1.184 at 3.66 GHz. Powerful AND efficient.


----------



## dpoverlord

So so far sli does not seem to be scaling as well so for ****s and giggles I got the 5660 to 4.6ghz and in game the most the temps reach are 56C


----------



## TheReciever

What of the benches with RAM at 2000Mhz?


----------



## Vlasov_581

just snagged an x5680 for $225 off eBay. here's hoping that it's good OC chip


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> eh..I purchased an SLBv6..nowhere near as good as Kana-Maru's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It'll do around 4.3 easily..after that it's a fight.
> PS:I don't like the VRM/NB sinks on Sabertooth x58
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were overheating until I aimed a Panaflo @ them.


Sorry to hear that. 4.3Ghz-4.4Ghz is still great for a Hexa-Core. 3.6Ghz-4Ghz is all you'll really need anyways for gaming and everyday usage. They CPU will take care of any task you throw at it in now time. Anything more than 4Ghz is money and helps with the benchmarks, I didn't overclock my CPU to high clocks overnight, but then again I think I did. To get everything stable it takes a few days and sometimes a few weeks. There are many settings that you can tweak and get better results. I would be careful with certain voltages though. These 32nm can easily be destroyed.

I love the heatsinks on the Sabertooth X58. I've never expereinced any overheating problem. Even on the hottest days the heatsinks help get rid of the heat. If you are having issues you can always remove them and add your own TIM.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> The more I use my 5650 the more I like it. I figured out the voltage offset finally and now have the vcore running between .944 idle and 1.184 at 3.66 GHz. Powerful AND efficient.


That's great man. I had my CPus around those same voltages. I'm trying a 4Ghz offset. I've posted on this in a previous post. Check here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/370#post_21962545

It's so damn tricky to get it right.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> What of the benches with RAM at 2000Mhz?


We are still getting those number together. we might have come to a conclusion. Running 2000Mhz on my board is a huge task since it's rated at 1866Mhz. I've overclocked the RAM to 2200Mhz though and it's stable.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vlasov_581*
> 
> just snagged an x5680 for $225 off eBay. here's hoping that it's good OC chip


Great price and good luck man.


----------



## Brett0712

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks man. I'm glad more X58 users are doing a few minor upgrades to their builds. GTX 770 should last you for a awhile.
> 
> It appears that you have hit your max. A lot of the X5650\X5660 tops off at You can try increasing the QPI\VTT a bit. 1.35v for the QPI\VTT should be more than enough. If you are struggling to post then I believe you might have already got to your highest point. Make sure to keep the CPU PLL low or set to AUTO unless you want a dead X5650\L5639. After a certain point these Xeons love the power and that becomes a problem. Another thing you can try is to disable the C-states and EIST settings. If that doesn't work then 4.0Ghz will be fine for just about anything you'll be running on your PC. Stock settings do just fine on my PC and I usually run Stock most of the time unless I need more CPU speed. 4.0Ghz will simply be overkill for gaming, especially for a single GTX 770.
> About time they got it right. PM me your results ASAP. I've been busy streaming a ton of games and doing other things. I really need those results for comparison to my 2000Mhz results. You lucked out on the price as well. Congrats. Just tell me your highest stable overclock. I also found out some more info with my Xeon X5660, but I'm testing just to verify. I'll post the results once I get everything finished.


Thank man, I really appreciate the input! I will give your advice a try and see what I end up with.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Well, I'm probably gonna receive my Sabertooth here this monday. It's gonna be my first time on the 1366 platform - any good generic OC guides or explanations out there?


----------



## bill1024

First post, just wanted to say thanks for all the info here.
I just got running an Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with a x5650, it seems to be working real well.
Had it up to 4ghz 1.3V 53c on air prime95 blend stable. Memory was around 14xx 8-8-8-24 1n.
But I think I will keep it around 3.5ghz and mem 1600 8-8-8-24 1n, it was 1.225V and 48c prime95 blend stable
I have a dual socket Asus Z8NA server with 2 X5660 CPUs . But there isnow way to OC that oard that I know of.
I am so glad to see the low prices of used Server class CPUs.and that they are being put to good use.
Thanks again.
Bill


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well the X5660 is still amazing me.

I was multi-tasking like crazy last night while using the stock settings [3Ghz during load]. I was running a heavily HD render video. Went from approx. uncompressed\lossless 45GB to a manageable compressed 618MB and I didn't have to change the resolution] with little to no visual lost. At the same time I was converting a MP4 to another format and uploading a video to Youtube. My CPU Load was 90% - 100% and peaked at 33c. I was still able to use my PC with no hiccups. I was even able to load up a few videos on Youtube\Netflix and watch them with no issues at all. Even went to Comedy Central and all of the videos played with no issues. I figured the videos might be jumpy since I was doing so much at stock settings, but my PC never slowed down. I thought about loading up a game just to see how good or bad it would perform, but I didn't.

-Converting video format
-Rendering \ heavily compressing HD video 45GB to 618MB
-Uploading YT video
-Watching videos online

I guess next time I'll play a game on Steam or something.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Well, I'm probably gonna receive my Sabertooth here this monday. It's gonna be my first time on the 1366 platform - any good generic OC guides or explanations out there?


There are tons of them out there. Just use google and you'll find at least 5 easily. You can always ask people here. Many will help including myself.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> First post, just wanted to say thanks for all the info here.
> I just got running an Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with a x5650, it seems to be working real well.
> Had it up to 4ghz 1.3V 53c on air prime95 blend stable. Memory was around 14xx 8-8-8-24 1n.
> But I think I will keep it around 3.5ghz and mem 1600 8-8-8-24 1n, it was 1.225V and 48c prime95 blend stable
> I have a dual socket Asus Z8NA server with 2 X5660 CPUs . But there isnow way to OC that oard that I know of.
> I am so glad to see the low prices of used Server class CPUs.and that they are being put to good use.
> Thanks again.
> Bill


Welcome to the site. Seems like you have a lot of PCs. I'm also glad that X58 finally has more affordable upgrades. The RAM is still much to high, but DRAM has been like that. I believe I was reading were they will have to drop the prices soon. 4Ghz on your X5660 will be more than enough for anything for awhile. Hex-cores just run circles around plenty of programs with little to no issues.


----------



## dpoverlord

So curiously every game I run uses max 40-50% cpu usage and I have not seen the cpu go over 45/50C. I am tempted to add more volts and go to 4.8ghz thoughts? Strictly to see if it makes a difference in games.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Don't focus on CPU Usage or Temps for that matter. The higher the CPU OC the more FPS you should gain. This isn't always the case for all games and all cards. If you are already maxing your cards then the extra OC will be pointless. For instance there is minor difference for 4.4Ghz and 4.6Ghz for gaming. Going past 4.2Ghz doesn't even seem like it's worth it. Those little extra 100-200mhz are minor. Maybe 1fps - 5fps gain. Your biggest issue was the Vcore it took to boot with 4.5Ghz - 4.6Ghz. I don't care how low the temperatures are, you still can't pump a crap load of voltage into the chip with risking some serious damage to the CPU itself. Probably potential damage to other components as well. You can go for it, but don't be surprised if your degrade your chip and OC performance. Don't be surprised if you struggle to even hit 4.4Ghz or 4.2Ghz. It's your money my friend.

You temps look great for your OC. I've already done 4.8Ghz OC in games. It's not worth it if you can hit 4.6Ghz and so on.....> 4.6Ghz isn't with it if you can get to 4.4Ghz. 4.2Ghz is all you really need and anything high is money. It all depends on your VCORE and TEMPs. The last thing you want to do is ruin the poor chip. I think I'm done hitting ridiculous speeds with my chip. I'm afraid I may be witnessing some degrading myself. It's easy to do with these 32nm, but I'm still hitting 4.6Ghz with no issues. I'm just noticing some issues with OC that were once stable. Trust me, be grateful and enjoy a good OC.


----------



## Timeofdoom

So our mail here is inefficient and I'll have to pick it up today after work. I think I'm gonna go for a 4.2 Ghz and QPi/DRAM ratio of 2 for 24/7 if I can hit it off. That should be more than enough.


----------



## Schmuckley

http://valid.canardpc.com/ev925l

The chip wasn't too bad once i kicked it in the tail..

umm..FYI...don't ever be @ 1.7v and move the OV jumper on that board..
chip ate the whole 2.1v..
It did not like it..
PS:I'd recommend to never use the OV jumper on Sabertooth..I tried it with other chips..they didn't like it..even @ voltages lower than 1.7


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nice.

Ok guys I've finally been running my setup long enough to post some data. I've also ran another quick stability test. This time I've ran IntelBurnTest. This program is the only program that I know of that can make your CPU melt. It also does a great job as far stability goes.

*X5660 @ 4.2Ghz*

-Stable & Passed Multiple Stability Test
Ambient Temp: 20c
CPU Temp Min: 22c [Idle]
CPU Temp Max: 58c [peak during stability test]
*CPU Temp Avg: 39c - 45c* 100% Load

Voltage: Offset
Idle: 0.98v - 1.03v
Load: 1.25v

Usually throughout the day my temps hover around 23c - 25c while idle. This is great since I can get the power saving benefits as well as the great OC speeds. No need to push a constant 1.25v into the CPU when it is not needed. In Cinebench R11.5 I scored 10.41 pts [4Ghz - x23]. So far I've had no issues. No BSODs and no freezing. I'm going to continue to run my PC like this. I could probably increase the Vcore a little more and squeeze out 4.4Ghz offset, but that would require a little more vcore. I'm more focused on getting great speed and low temperatures. Stock speeds have also been very good as well. This will help me render and compress files quicker.


----------



## Carbon00ace

Guys,

Before I install the x5660 and Cooler this weekend I want to run some benchmarks on my current 960 and check temps. What programs should I use or is there a guide on here that I can reference?

What I have tried in the past was cpu z and prime 95. Would these suffice to check monitor temps and speeds?

Thanks,


----------



## joostflux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carbon00ace*
> 
> Guys,
> 
> Before I install the x5660 and Cooler this weekend I want to run some benchmarks on my current 960 and check temps. What programs should I use or is there a guide on here that I can reference?
> 
> What I have tried in the past was cpu z and prime 95. Would these suffice to check monitor temps and speeds?
> 
> Thanks,


Those two will work for stress testing and seeing specs on the processor such as current clock speed, voltages, etc. But for temps you definitely want to use another program. I personally use Real Temp and it works great. Not to mention it's free!


----------



## Timeofdoom

I give up. Same story on the sabertooth. Actually i get a red cpu led and dram led and no post, no speaker sound.
I guess I got fleeced when I purchased this x5650.
I tried clearing cmos, single dram stick, single gpu and absolute minimum required things for a sucessful post and bios navigation.
No go. MemOK! was useless.
I guess Imma return this board as well and pretty much stick with my FX the next couple of years.

I guess I just have the ****tiest luck.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Timeofdoom sorry to hear that man. I'm not sure what happened with that Rampage 3 extreme, but I think the CPU might have been your problem. Two motherboards have died. You have a crappy CPU man. That's what it sounds like to me. Especially if the MBs came from working builds. I'm beginning to get a bit worried about the low priced X5650s and X5660 as well as other Xeons. I usually only buy from bulk sales [company] instead of a single buyer selling a single chip, I believe single buyers have either ruined the chip, have a CPU that doesn't PC or perform well....... or are looking for the "golden chip" and selling the scraps for little to nothing.

Having the CPU and RAM Q-Led can mean several things. I think the CPU is definitely having some issues, but I believe the RAM is fine. Do you have another CPU you can use or borrow? The L5639 has skyrocketed in price. I hope I didn't have anything to do with that spike as well as the other Xeon spikes. I don't believe it's your MB or RAM. I think that CPU is faulty as hell.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Timeofdoom sorry to hear that man. I'm not sure what happened with that Rampage 3 extreme, but I think the CPU might have been your problem. Two motherboards have died. You have a crappy CPU man. That's what it sounds like to me. Especially if the MBs came from working builds. I'm beginning to get a bit worried about the low priced X5650s and X5660 as well as other Xeons. I usually only buy from bulk sells instead of a single buyer, I believe single buyers have either ruined the chip, have a CPU that doesn't PC or perform well....... or are looking for the "golden chip" and selling the scraps for little to nothing.
> 
> Having the CPU and RAM Q-Led can mean several things. I think the CPU is definitely having some issues, but I believe the RAM is fine. Do you have another CPU you can use or borrow? The L5639 has skyrocketed in price. I hope I didn't have anything to do with that spike as well as the other Xeon spikes. I don't believe it's your MB or RAM. I think that CPU is faulty as hell.


Thanks for the cheer up Kana, but I don't really have another CPU at hand - and I already tried reaching out (when I had the R3E) on local forums and to friends but apparently nobody seems to have these chips around anymore or something.

So I'm just not gonna bother.
It sucks, but I'm gonna return the motherboard..
..and as for the chip... it would actually cost me so much to return it in shippings, that it'd cost more than the price of the chip itself. So I'm not quite sure what to do with it. I guess I might as well dump it before it claims anymore motherboards.









I guess I'll stick with my original plan - wait a couple of generations and see what small-formfactor CPU and GPU (Or APU, mind you. DDR4 is around the corner, which might make them legit) offerings we'll have by then.








Or I might just go for a console as a "value/social investment", since I'm gonna start at my bachelor at Uni this Summer, so I'm gonna be a "broke" student the next 3+ years.

In the end, this didn't cost me that much, everything considered. 200$ or so, with what, the chip costs and the return shippings.
Just utterly sucks, that's all.


----------



## bill1024

I have had good luck with the resellers, 2 x5660 and a x5650. But with the Asus boards you have to have the latest bios installed, if it is not a WS class board.
My P6T deluxe V2 came and would not post or do anything. Knowing I did not have an i7xxx cpu to flash the bios.
I ordered a preflashed bios chip for the board on e-bay for 13.05$ and as soon as I installed it, the board came to life and works great.
I can link to the board I bought of e-bay and tell you what he took as an offer if ya like.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have had good luck with the resellers, 2 x5660 and a x5650. But with the Asus boards you have to have the latest bios installed, if it is not a WS class board.
> My P6T deluxe V2 came and would not post or do anything. Knowing I did not have an i7xxx cpu to flash the bios.
> I ordered a preflashed bios chip for the board on e-bay for 13.05$ and as soon as I installed it, the board came to life and works great.
> I can link to the board I bought of e-bay and tell you what he took as an offer if ya like.


Nah, Im good. The sabertooth I ordered was supposed to have the newest bios, but its still like that. I just want to return it, get rid of chip and get this frustrating experience outta the back of my head yknow. But ty for the thought.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm sure you was looking for a nice budget build. Hate it didn't wok out for you as it has for a lot of other users. There's nothing wrong with consoles. I play PC and consoles. Mostly PC lately. You can always catch some decent builds for a good price if you are patient. Since Haswell-E is coming you might be able to get a decent upgrade as people update to the latest and greatest.


----------



## Lionvibez

Kana those are great temps.

Is this rig water cooled?

Also do you prefer to overclock with turbo enabled or disabled?


----------



## PachAz

I mean im really impressed but this little project like finding a good used xeon, motherboard and some ram is really not worth it in the end I believe. If you alreaddy have a good x58 motherboard and ram, sure feel free to find a used xeon 56xx, but I see little point trying to make such a build from scratch. If you are gaming you better off buying a used i7 from sandy, ivy or haswell generation, it will probably cost less, motherboard and ram included. Specially since these builds are getting mote popular, the used prices will increase.

But yeah, you make a good demonstration of how powerfull and future proof the x58 plattform actually was and those people that were building high end rigs 5 years ago can get really nice boost in todays game and apps buy getting a xeon 56xx and OC it to 4.5-5ghz.

Im not sure the x79 plattform will be as future proof as the x58 though, because as we can see in your tests the 5660 is even close to the 39xx and 49xx. But overall the life cycle seem to be longer as fas as intel is concearned. The i5 2500k is alreaddy 3 years old and still going strong which is a good example of intels superiority in cpus. I think the term future proof nowadays has little to do regarding the upgrade possiblites like cpu and ram, but the fact that the cpu and ram itself, despite outdated still match the performance of new hardware, and here the xeon 5660 is a good example. Even the sany bridge cpus are a good example because they perform similar to the haswell in terms of performance and they are 3 years old. Talk about good "investments" people made back then.


----------



## bill1024

I guess it depends on what you plan on doing with it. I have 300$ in a board and x5650 cpu.
If you are just playing games it may be a bit much, but for folding @ home or crunching boinc these are great work horses.
With my Phenom II 1045T @ 3.2ghz and a 660Ti I can play any game I want, but crunching x5650, way out performs the 1045T.
The memory I had laying around, 4 sticks of 4gb so I put three of them to work and have an extra one if one fails.
My dual x5660 folds as good as my 4 processor hex core AMD 8425.

On another note, I have seen dual intel 1366 boards for 100$ and pc3-1333 EEC Samsung 1gb ram as low as 5$ a stick


----------



## PachAz

Thats is what I mean, if you can get things cheap, I would do such a build myself. But thats another story.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> Kana those are great temps.
> 
> Is this rig water cooled?
> 
> Also do you prefer to overclock with turbo enabled or disabled?


Thanks. Well it's kinda water cooled







It is. I'm running a closed loop water cooler - Antec Kuhler 620 with dual fans push\pull. This cooler has been great since I installed it years back. It has cooled my X5660 at high vcore and I've actually hit 5.4Ghz with it, but it required so much voltage that I didn't want to take a screenshot. I simply restarted to get the voltage back down to a reasonable level.

Yes I overclock with Turbo enabled. If I run into any issues I'll try to disable turbo, but that usually never solves my issues so I leave it enabled if I'm going for x24 and dropping the multiplier. For extremely high overclocks [4.8Ghz - 5.2Ghz - 5.4Ghz] disable Turbo sometimes. It all depends on what I'm trying to do.

I'm actually compressing 94.1GBs down to about [hopefully] 600MBs-700MBs, but no higher than 800MBs as I'm typing this. The ambient temp is 23c and during the compression and render I'm averaging 52c during the 70%-95% load. I leave a little so I can do other things on the PC. So this cooler is outdated, but still puts up great numbers for half the price of the newer coolers in 2013 - 2014 for me personally.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> I mean im really impressed but this little project like finding a good used xeon, motherboard and some ram is really not worth it in the end I believe. If you alreaddy have a good x58 motherboard and ram, sure feel free to find a used xeon 56xx, but I see little point trying to make such a build from scratch. If you are gaming you better off buying a used i7 from sandy, ivy or haswell generation, it will probably cost less, motherboard and ram included. Specially since these builds are getting mote popular, the used prices will increase.


Well I'm not understanding what's the point of this portion of the post because I specifically said in my very first post that this guide was for X58 users. Those who might be on the fence and trying to decide to upgrade. Instead of spending a ton of cash you can get very affordable Xeons that are unlocked and easy to overclock for the average enthusiast. Everyone knew the prices would rise, including myself, which is why I was trying to get everyone to buy one before the word of mouth spreads. Well it did spread and did so at a very rapid pace. I purchased my Xeon L5639 for $75 in December 2013. Now they all seem to be moving towards the $160 - $200 mark . I look at the X58 upgrade from both sides and I will not criticize someone for building a X58 from scratch.. If AMD users or even people on newer platforms [SB\IB\Haswell] could upgrade their current machines for under $300 bucks WHY NOT







. Going the high end X79 Hexa route is going to cost you at least $800 or more and that $500 plus different could be spent on a GPU or SSD or whatever. That's the point. Even if you are building from scratch you could get a used X58 board and a used Xeon L56xx for under $125 - $200 and a X56xx for under $275 - $300 [prior to the X58 MB and X58 Xeon price hike]. Slightly increasing the BLCK would instantly put you in the high end range as far as performance goes. Not to mention the low price you paid for the performance.

So you have to look at this from a different angle. Even if you were building from scratch it wouldn't be so bad since their are complete X58 builds for little to nothing out there online. People are trying to get rid of them so why not buy and capitalize since they don't know about these Hexa Cores. So if people build from scratch and get their money's worth I'm definitely not going to criticize them. I would congratulate them since they didn't fall victim to the Intel small percentage increase hype game.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> But yeah, you make a good demonstration of how powerfull and future proof the x58 plattform actually was and those people that were building high end rigs 5 years ago can get really nice boost in todays game and apps buy getting a xeon 56xx and OC it to 4.5-5ghz.


Thanks for reading my reveiw. That's funny because a lot of people have told me for years that nothing is "future proof". I laughed at them then and I laugh at them now. The X58 was more future proof than the platforms that came after it. Some of those platforms are dead now and underpowered compared to the X58 [and was underpowered before]. A Xeon X56xx at 4.5Ghz is already overkill and will burn up without a decent setup and good ambient temps. A Xeon L5639 @ 3.8Ghz - 4.1Ghz is all anyone will ever need in this day and age for a ton of programs and gaming. Unless you are just trying to get e-peen points on benchmarks etc, 3Ghz is more than enough for daily use. Even for programs that require a lot from the CPU. 4Ghz is just money for the price per performance with these Hexa Cores.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> Im not sure the x79 plattform will be as future proof as the x58 though, because as we can see in your tests the 5660 is even close to the 39xx and 49xx. But overall the life cycle seem to be longer as fas as intel is concearned. The i5 2500k is alreaddy 3 years old and still going strong which is a good example of intels superiority in cpus. I think the term future proof nowadays has little to do regarding the upgrade possiblites like cpu and ram, but the fact that the cpu and ram itself, despite outdated still match the performance of new hardware, and here the xeon 5660 is a good example. Even the sany bridge cpus are a good example because they perform similar to the haswell in terms of performance and they are 3 years old. Talk about good "investments" people made back then.


The i5-2500K is pretty good if you can overclock it to a decent clock speed. The stock settings is pretty damn slow. However, a highly clocked i5-2500K @5Ghz is almost as good a stock Xeon Hexa-Core at 3Ghz with DDR3-1333Mhz RAM. The term "future proof" has always been about matching the future releases as far as performance goes. In the tech field everyone knows that components released today wil lbe outdated 6-10 months later. That's how rapid these technology companies move and I personally love it. That's the only way I've understood it over the pass 10 yeears or so.

Sandy Bridge-E is a great example since they overclock well and performs great on a newer platform, but at the end of the day they still share the SAME platform with Ivy Bridge-E. IV-B = That's not really a upgrade at all especially since SB-E tends to overclock higher than IV-E. We all know Intel plays the 5% - 10% hype game when they release their Dual, Quads and Hexa CPUs. I've also noticed some wierd trends that I believe Intel has used to keep the price of their high end CPUs sky high. I'm continuing my small investigation.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I guess it depends on what you plan on doing with it. I have 300$ in a board and x5650 cpu.
> If you are just playing games it may be a bit much, but for folding @ home or crunching boinc these are great work horses.


I agree. These are great work horses. I just got around to reading your post. I see my price point was correct. $300 for a X56xx and a X58 board is a great investment compared to the more expensive options. Not to mention you can still play high end games with no CPU bottlenecking. The CPU will also allow the more frames to be rendered which ultimately allows a smoother experience while playing.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm actually compressing 94.1GBs down to about [hopefully] 600MBs-700MBs, but no higher than 800MBs as I'm typing this.


Kana, if those are gameplay footage videos, I recommend you to look into using Dxtory with a x264 codec for recording. With a proper setup, you have have near-ish FRAPS quality at 20-22GB per hour.
If this is of interest to you, I learned of this over at Techpowerup's forums: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/dxtory-and-x264-codec.169823/

EDIT. look at post #3


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Kana, if those are gameplay footage videos, I recommend you to look into using Dxtory with a x264 codec for recording. With a proper setup, you have have near-ish FRAPS quality at 20-22GB per hour.
> If this is of interest to you, I learned of this over at Techpowerup's forums: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/dxtory-and-x264-codec.169823/
> 
> EDIT. look at post #3


Thanks, but I already use x264 in several recording and rendering programs.It does look very good and the files are extremely small with no quality loss. It's also less stressful on the CPU while recording and I don't notice any drop in the fps. I have Dxtory and haven't used it in awhile, but I might try those settings eventually. I like using FRAPS from time to time for several reasons. Now since I can turn 94.1GBs into 1GB [with good quality] I have no issues using FRAPS, but it isn't my main recording program at all. I actually don't use FRAPs that much at all. It's just too much and there are plenty of better programs that have way more benefits out there like DXtory.

Once again thanks for the heads up. I will get around to using Dxtory again.


----------



## trailrunnerx

Hi, add me to the X5660 club. I probably honestly don't NEED a 5660, my i7 930 4.0Ghz is still running strong at around 1.28v, and gaming has been for the most part a smooth experience with SLI GTX660 (Asus DC2OC versions), but figure at $160 shipped for a hexacore I'd take the extra HP for video conversion, etc and get the benefit of a lower TDP and hopefully be a bit more power efficient. Other components include an EVGA x58 SLI LE mobo, Corsair Dominator 1600 RAM, Corsair H80i AIO cooler, Crucial M4 SSD, Toshiba 2GB HD. I was honestly on my way out of the platform until I read this article and realized that I couldn't get anywhere near the performance for $160 or so, even though I could I could have gotten a pretty good deal on a Haswell or Ivy and even have a z77 1155 mobo laying around that a friend game me.


----------



## Carbon00ace

Just got my x5660 and h80i (this was a mutha f'n B to install) installed! stock ambient temps ~ 23c and stock Prime 95 ~ 44c. So far I'm happy with it but did have a boot issue when loading an X.M.P profile in the AI tuner.


----------



## OCmember

I hope my Xeon (X5660) system and i7 970 lasts for 10 more years


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trailrunnerx*
> 
> Hi, add me to the X5660 club. I probably honestly don't NEED a 5660, my i7 930 4.0Ghz is still running strong at around 1.28v, and gaming has been for the most part a smooth experience with SLI GTX660 (Asus DC2OC versions), but figure at $160 shipped for a hexacore I'd take the extra HP for video conversion, etc and get the benefit of a lower TDP and hopefully be a bit more power efficient. Other components include an EVGA x58 SLI LE mobo, Corsair Dominator 1600 RAM, Corsair H80i AIO cooler, Crucial M4 SSD, Toshiba 2GB HD. I was honestly on my way out of the platform until I read this article and realized that I couldn't get anywhere near the performance for $160 or so, even though I could I could have gotten a pretty good deal on a Haswell or Ivy and even have a z77 1155 mobo laying around that a friend game me.


Welcome to the site. I thinking about making a Official Xeon X56xx Club, but I haven't gotten around to it yet. I guess I will make a topic for the Official X56xx club later tonight or tomorrow. I need to make a official banner or something. Anyone here with Photoshop skills? If not, I'l come up with a official banner or something in awhile. Since we have some users that are buying them I guess it won't be such a failure for a official topic. If you were using a i7-930 then yeah you NEEDED a Hexa Core. These chips will lift the bottleneck and allow you to increase your frame times which will lead to better gaming performance [more FPS!]. You get plenty of more power efficiency. 95W TDP and you can easily clock them around 3.8Ghz-4.4Ghz rather easily. I'd say that's a steal for $160 shipped. Glad you didn't get the Haswell or Ivy. Sure they have low latency and is on a modern platform, but you'll get more performance out of the Hexa cores and punish the Quad Cores clock for clock and even with a lower clock comparison. A Hexa core clocked at 3.9Ghz or 4Ghz will perform at the same level as highly clocked i7-4770k [Haswell] @ 4.7Ghz - 4.9Ghz. Plus the Hexa core would perform better I would imagine. High end is High end period.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carbon00ace*
> 
> Just got my x5660 and h80i (this was a mutha f'n B to install) installed! stock ambient temps ~ 23c and stock Prime 95 ~ 44c. So far I'm happy with it but did have a boot issue when loading an X.M.P profile in the AI tuner.


That's because The X.M.P profile with the X5660 is all over the place. Don't use those settings they give you. It's better to just set it up yourself and save the headache. X.M.P almost always cause boot issues because specific settings are to high or to low to POST or boot. I'll try to help you when I get a little time.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I hope my Xeon (X5660) system and i7 970 lasts for 10 more years


Unless programs just skip from Quad to Octo-cores I don't see why the Hexa cores won't be viable for another 10 years lol. From what I've read a lot of programs still doesn't utilize Hexa Cores yet. If Intel continues their 5% - 15% increments for performance increase I'm sure you'll have nothing to worry about. If I can get another 4 years out of my X58+X5660 I'd be happy and even after then I'm sure I'll still use it for legacy purposes and rendering.


----------



## bill1024

160$ is a good price for the x5660, I paid 200 each for two when I upgraded my dual Asus server from two E5620 quad cores last July.
Then A couple weeks ago I picked up my x5650 for 125, and an Asus P6T Deluxe V2, for 175$
Besides the 12 cores the board will do SLI, I plan on moving some Videocards around and will put two 660Ti on this build.
That should last a few years as my game/folding/crunching rig.

I am not sure what way to go. I can get 4ghz with the mem at 14xx 8-8-8-24 or I can do 3.52ghz with mem at 1600 8-8-8-24 1n.
What CPU benchmark program is a good one these days?
I always felt raw CPU speed wins out most of the time,
But 3.53ghz 1.225V and 49c 1600 8-8-8-24 1n is not too shabby for a 2.6ghz processor.
This thing runs full100% load 24/7/365


----------



## Carbon00ace

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you Kana!!

I spent a couple of hours with Kana last night getting to a very stable 4.4 OC. This gentlemen took almost four hours of his time working with me past midnight to get it right and I cannot thank him enough.

Kana also provided a ton of knowledge and really knows his stuff. It was a supreme pleasure hanging out shooting the breeze and getting to know you sir.

Carbon


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carbon00ace*
> 
> Thank you, Thank you, Thank you Kana!!
> 
> I spent a couple of hours with Kana last night getting to a very stable 4.4 OC. This gentlemen took almost four hours of his time working with me past midnight to get it right and I cannot thank him enough.
> 
> Kana also provided a ton of knowledge and really knows his stuff. It was a supreme pleasure hanging out shooting the breeze and getting to know you sir.
> 
> Carbon


Thanks a lot for for the kind words man. it was nothing at all. I'm glad we were able to get you all the way to 4.4Ghz with minor issues with an offset voltage so you don't lose the power efficiency. I hope everything is still going good as far as stability and game performance. These hexa cores should have you set for the types of games that you play. It was a lot easier since we share the same board as well.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> 160$ is a good price for the x5660, I paid 200 each for two when I upgraded my dual Asus server from two E5620 quad cores last July.
> Then A couple weeks ago I picked up my x5650 for 125, and an Asus P6T Deluxe V2, for 175$
> Besides the 12 cores the board will do SLI, I plan on moving some Videocards around and will put two 660Ti on this build.
> That should last a few years as my game/folding/crunching rig.
> 
> I am not sure what way to go. I can get 4ghz with the mem at 14xx 8-8-8-24 or I can do 3.52ghz with mem at 1600 8-8-8-24 1n.
> What CPU benchmark program is a good one these days?
> I always felt raw CPU speed wins out most of the time,
> But 3.53ghz 1.225V and 49c 1600 8-8-8-24 1n is not too shabby for a 2.6ghz processor.
> This thing runs full100% load 24/7/365


Memory affects overall performance very little, typically. Unless you're running a very memory intensive program, or using onboard video (not applicable in this case), I would go with the higher CPU clock.

Are you sure you can't adjust the memory multiplier to give you the best of both worlds? What bclock and multipliers are you using?


----------



## thomasz

Very helpful review!







I'm thinking of getting one.


----------



## ssgtnubb

Talking with my IT manager today about this as we are scrapping some old servers. Low and behold one of them had a 5650 in her that was gifted to me. Gonna try this out for sure on my system. They have some ram for me if needed, not sure how it'll work with my G Skill so will see.


----------



## RX7-2nr

x5650s for $130 on Ebay are very tempting.


----------



## TheReciever

Most of the time they are OBO and will let them go for 100


----------



## KingG14

Finally installed my X5650 after a month of it siting on the shelf, and the crazy thing is that I overclocked it to a stable 4.6ghz on my very first overclocking attempt! I even reached a stable 4.7ghz in my second attempt sadly the motherboard bclk won't go up any further without instability issues.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Memory affects overall performance very little, typically. Unless you're running a very memory intensive program, or using onboard video (not applicable in this case), I would go with the higher CPU clock.
> 
> Are you sure you can't adjust the memory multiplier to give you the best of both worlds? What bclock and multipliers are you using?


Been a little busy, nice weather finally so I got the Mustang out and got her all cleaned up and went for a ride.

Anyway, with the P6T D V2 I have the x5650 at 4ghz 20 x 200bclock and my memory is right at 1600 9-9-9-25 2n.
I have the cpuV at 1.2750v,, QPI 1.2975v It is prime 95 blend stable 50c 6 cores.
8-8-8-24 1n was too tight so I tried loosening the timings and that made all the difference
Folding at home 100% loaded it is at 52-54c

I will let it run a couple days and see how it looks.
Thanks


----------



## trailrunnerx

Got my 5660 in on Saturday but have been swamped so haven't installed it yet. With my current chip i7 930 I have gotten it stable at 4.0ghz with memory at 7-8-7-24 1522mhz or so. (Corsair Dominator 1600 c8) The max bclk I could get with this config is 191 I'm using an eVGA TR757 SLI LE mobo by the way throwing way more volts at it (I'm at 1.325v) didn't seem appealing so I'm hoping that I can get at least 4.0 at a lower voltage from my 5660. I'll let you guys know as I get it installed and tuned today or tomorrow.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Is it harder to get to 5Ghz on LGA1366 6 core compared to LGA2011 6 core?

I have a X58 SLI. Should I stick with my 920 D0 or get a hex core for about $150?


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I have a X58 SLI. Should I stick with my 920 D0 or get a hex core for about $150?


This is what I'm trying to figure out too. I've been looking for batch info on the x5650 to make sure which to get. I'm also wondering about single core performance. A lot of the benchmarks that are listed are heavily threaded, of course that's going to look good with a 12 thread processor.

I'd like to see how a 4 ghz x5650 stacks up against a 4 ghz i7 920. Im going to look through this thread, but it's so huge I don't have time to do it right now.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssgtnubb*
> 
> Talking with my IT manager today about this as we are scrapping some old servers. Low and behold one of them had a 5650 in her that was gifted to me. Gonna try this out for sure on my system. They have some ram for me if needed, not sure how it'll work with my G Skill so will see.


That sounds good. If the RAM matches the configuration you already have then it'll probably work. I rarely [actually never seen] see 1600 RAM that didn't work. If id doesn't then you might have to do a little tweaking, but nothing major.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Anyway, with the P6T D V2 I have the x5650 at 4ghz 20 x 200bclock and my memory is right at 1600 9-9-9-25 2n.
> I have the cpuV at 1.2750v,, QPI 1.2975v It is prime 95 blend stable 50c 6 cores.
> 8-8-8-24 1n was too tight so I tried loosening the timings and that made all the difference
> Folding at home 100% loaded it is at 52-54c
> 
> I will let it run a couple days and see how it looks.
> Thanks


Your temps are good as well. I've peaked at 52c in the last couple of days. I'm running 4.2Ghz 1.275-1.28v now. I'm running my RAm lower than the rated frequency for good temps, low voltages and performance.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Is it harder to get to 5Ghz on LGA1366 6 core compared to LGA2011 6 core?
> 
> I have a X58 SLI. Should I stick with my 920 D0 or get a hex core for about $150?


Do yourself a favor and upgrade to the Hex-core. That i7-920 is going to choke on high end AAA games. My [email protected] bottlenecked my build along with GTX 670 2 way SLI. Otherwise you can stick with the budget 920.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> This is what I'm trying to figure out too. I've been looking for batch info on the x5650 to make sure which to get. I'm also wondering about single core performance. A lot of the benchmarks that are listed are heavily threaded, of course that's going to look good with a 12 thread processor.
> 
> I'd like to see how a 4 ghz x5650 stacks up against a 4 ghz i7 920. Im going to look through this thread, but it's so huge I don't have time to do it right now.


Single Core? Everyone is going to use all of their cores and look for the overall performance. I did a single "Single Core" for one of my test [Cinebench R10]. There's a lot of things people are missing in my review. Some people don't know that I've benchmarked games and ran various GPU test. You guys should check out the entire review when you get a chance, not just the CPU portion. THe single cores in the X56xx [or Xeons-2 cores] has a turbo. I've actually listed several single core test. High-end X58 and X79 CPUs fails = Haswell-Z87-i7-4770K prevails in single core test. 4770K single core just owns everything from several reviews I've read since it was released. Overall performance obviously goes to Hexa-Cores and that's what people want.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Not everything is going to use 6 core though, so looking at heavily threaded benches exclusively may be misleading. I'm not saying your info is bad, I'm just wondering single thread performance to be able to see all sides. A lot of your tests are at extremely high clocks too, I don't imagine many of these cpus are going to get 4.6. That was why I specified 4 ghz. Games are largely gpu bound so there is not a great deal of variance.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I understood your post and took no offense. I was simply stating that I did indeed post one single core. The 4770K beats everything in Single Core tests so don't expect much in that area unless you plan to go Haswell Quad [you'll read that in a lot of reviews as well]. Some users here are hitting 4.2Ghz-4.4Ghz with no problems on the regular. My test were conducted at only 200mhz above some of their setups. My 4.8Ghz was solely to compete with the much faster and higher clocked X79 Hexa-Cores This was suppose to be mainly a Hexa Core review = X58 vs X79 High end CPUs and GPU\gaming results. I simply included my i7-960 comparisons for those running Quads and wondering. Some of the data [i7-920\960] was put there to compare with the L5639 as well.

Everything I've used so far personally has utilized all of my cores and that includes gaming.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> That was why I specified 4 ghz. Games are largely gpu bound so there is not a great deal of variance.


I beg to differ. Throwing my Hexa-Core in the loop with Crysis 3 [and other titles] made worlds of difference as I showed in my Real Time Gaming GPU section. With the realistically high Quad Core overclock and 2 GTX 670's, I was only getting a stuttering 25-35FPS. Extremely inconsistent and was really not playable at all maxed out. I knew that my setup should allow at least 50fps 100% MAXED @ 1080p.

The moment I slapped in my L5639 @ stock [DDR-1333Mhz] the stutter issues were gone and playable. Performed a easy overclock and everything was smooth and I averaged 50fps easily. Now that I've put in my X5660 I have no issues with gaining frame rates and lowering my frame times. To think that the heavily GPU games won't get some really good benefits from the Hexa-core just isn't true from test I've performed with others with Quad cores. Same game comparison that I'll eventually get around to posting here and on my blog. 3.8Ghz is more than all you'll need for high-end gaming. Check out my Battlefield 3 GPU test. I'm going to get around to posting my Battlefield 4 test eventually.

I can run some 4Ghz test for you easily if you want. In CinebenchR11.5 I score a 10.41 with lower clocked DDR3-1400mhz RAM. I could knock the RAM up and tighten the timings to get better. 10.41pts is good for a minor overclock with a little trade off in the RAM department.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Alright guys. The temperatures have picked up here and the weather moving towards 26c and higher outside. I've finished my test and I'll post my temps here.

*X5660 @ 4.2Ghz - Offset Vcore [Stable]

61 Hour Test [2 1/2 Day Test] - Temps and Voltage*

*Day Ambient Temp = 24c [purposely high for testing]*
Night Ambient Temp = 18c

CPU Temp Max: 51c [100% Load]
CPU Temp Min: 22c
*CPU Temp Avg: 27c [2 in a half days avg]*

CPU Voltage Max: 1.28v [only when needed]
CPU Voltage Min: 0.96v
*CPU Voltage Avg: 1.05v [yes only 1.05v average for a hefty 4.2Ghz overclock!]*

I can deal with 27c CPU average on warm days. Running the A/C instantly knocks the temps down to about 24c - -25c during the hottest hours which looks much better. I think I might just let my build run like this for awhile.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *3DMark Fire Strike:*
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] = *11205*
> [email protected] = 10900
> [email protected] = 9787
> 
> Using Hex cores definitely makes the benchmark much smoother. The X5660 offered a 14.4% increase over my [email protected] and only 2.7% over the L5639. Fire Strike depends on the GPU.


That physics score is insane, nearly 17000. My 920 at 4.2 with HT on got 10500.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1555087
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *Cinebench R10:*
> 
> *Click here for the results:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: X5660 Cinebench R10 Results
> 
> 
> 
> *Multi-Core*
> 
> 
> *Single-Core*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xeon X5660 Performance Increase [+] \ Decrease [-]
> 
> *Multi-Core - Overclocked:*
> i7-4960X @ 4.4Ghz = 42967 [-14%]
> i7-3970X @ 4.6Ghz = 41359 [-9.7%]
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 37685 [0.0%]
> i7-4770K @ 4.6Ghz = 36644 [+3%]
> i7-3770K @ 4.8Ghz = 32738 [+15.1%]
> L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 32627 [+15.5%]
> i7-920 @ 4.4Ghz = 25143 [+50%]
> 
> *Singe Core - Overclocked*
> i7-4770K @ 4.6Ghz = 9288 [-33.5%]
> i7-3770K @ 4.8Ghz = 8467 [-21.7%]
> i7-4960X @ 4.4Ghz = 8037 [-15.5%]
> i7-3970X @ 4.6Ghz = 7699 [-10.7%]
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 6953 [0.0%]
> L5639 @ 4.1Ghz = 5862 [+18.6%]
> 
> Cinebench R10 is pretty old, but still useful. Well the Open GL isn't that useful for me, but the CPU benchmark scores are. In the Multi-core test the Xeon L5639 actually does pretty well. The i7-4960X is 31.7% faster than the Xeon L5639 @ 4.1GHz and 71% faster than the i7-920 @ 4.4Ghz. The i7-4770K [Quad-Core] clearly outperforms the other CPUs core for core in Cinebench R10 Single Core. The i7-4960X is only X5660 14% better in the Multi-Core benchmark. I7-920 and i7-960 users will definitely see a lot of performance gains if they choose to upgrade to the X5660 or the L5639.


I downloaded and ran Cinebench R10 since you had some single thread results in there.


----------



## trailrunnerx

Got the x5660 installed today. So far I'm not able to get it stable at anywhere near the 191 bclk I had on my i7 930. I've had it at boot to Windows at 4.2ghz (cpu-z showed a 23 multi and think 184 bclk but running ibt immediately blue screened. I've thrown as much as 1.312v at it but have heard these 32nm chips don't eat up voltage like the 45nm Bloomfield so not sure if I should go higher?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> That physics score is insane, nearly 17000. My 920 at 4.2 with HT on got 10500.
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1555087


Well I am running 2-Way SLI so that helps. The X5660 just gives the GPUs more than enough.

Quote:


> I downloaded and ran Cinebench R10 since you had some single thread results in there.


Oh so you finally found my single core test in the review eh? :







:. I probably should've used CinebenchR11.5 & Cinebench R15 instead of R10 single core. I'm sure I still have my L5639 Single Core score for R11.5+R15.

As I've said the 4770K just smashes everything in single core test across the board. It's very efficient and is 52% quick than your i7-960. Your single thread is quicker than the L5639, but the L5639 has more cache and more cores so it wins by default [and even at a lower clock than the Quads].

All thought your i7-920 is faster than the L5639 in the older CinebenchR10 test the L5639, the [email protected] stomps it by 34% overall making it more efficient period. [multi-core = complete CPU, not just one core].
Hey post your CinebenchR11.5 and R15 single scores as well. Can I get your RAM timing CPU-Z shot as well?

I hate to say it, but the budget i7-920 days are over [and have been over for sometime now thanks GPUs that need more]. With more efficient and Hexa cores available, $150 is simply a steal for all of the benefits you'll gain, but if you want to feel good about your i7-920 that's fine as well. My old i7-960 was great Quad, but is simply not enough. I'm just happy I can lift that Quad Core bottleneck off my system. The Quads simply CANNOT handle high end setups for gaming and other high end tasks I run on my PC. There's so many reasons why they can't as well. I can never vision myself going back to Quad cores.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trailrunnerx*
> 
> Got the x5660 installed today. So far I'm not able to get it stable at anywhere near the 191 bclk I had on my i7 930. I've had it at boot to Windows at 4.2ghz (cpu-z showed a 23 multi and think 184 bclk but running ibt immediately blue screened. I've thrown as much as 1.312v at it but have heard these 32nm chips don't eat up voltage like the 45nm Bloomfield so not sure if I should go higher?


They usually don't eat up voltage until high clocks, but every CPU is different. You might have to check some other settings. Make sure your RAM timings are good and check other voltages as well. Once you hit the 4.2Ghz speed sometimes you'll have to feed more voltage into the CPU. 4.2Ghz - 4.5Ghz really needs a decent amount for some people. Since you are running x23 I'm guessing you have EIST+Turbo turned off. Are you running C-State functions as well?


----------



## trailrunnerx

Kana, right now I just ran IBT and it completed as opposed to blue screen but said it was unstable. I have it at 175 bclk, 21x but it seems to automatically go up to 23x according to cpu-z, which gives me 4015mhz so 4ghz







The vcore I had set at 1.275 QPI at 1.30 DIMM at 1.60 I'm about to up the voltage a touch as temp only hit 51c under a Corsair H80i. If I can get this stable I might be satisfied with 4.0 as that's what I was getting from the 2.8 ghz i7 930 but it was sucking down 1.35v vcore iirc btw turbo is on, speedstep on cstate set to off


----------



## Kana-Maru

Alright let me know what happens. Is you RAM rated to run at 1.60v? I've usually only see 1.5v and 1.65v. Also the x23 multiplier is odd. With the X5660 you should get x24 if you have EIST+Turbo+C-States enabled. Otherwise you should have a static multiplier. Does your multiplier drop lower than x21 when Idle?

If you want to run a few test and everything you can set your multiplier to [Auto] - 175 BCLK, then try to run with CPU voltage 1.32v. Set the RAM to 1.65v and 9-9-9-24. In windows check CPU-Z to make sure it says 1.32v. Make sure EIST\Turbo\C-States are enabled. I guess everything else can be set to Auto.


----------



## dpoverlord

I am at 1. 335v


----------



## trailrunnerx

Ok, finally stable. Got the CPU stable at 175 bclk turbo is on, cpu-z reads 4015 MHz and shows a 23x multiplier even though I can only set it to 21x in BIOS,1.282vcore, 1.35v qpi vtt, 1.65v memory, 10x memory multi (1753mhz) 11-11-11-29 2t (Dominator 1600mhz RAM) and passed IBT. I need to test whether it performs better with memory oc w looser timings or slightly under clocked with 7-8-7-21 tight timings. Multi drops to 12x during idle/light use. That's all for now I have a date lol


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well I am running 2-Way SLI so that helps. The X5660 just gives the GPUs more than enough.
> Oh so you finally found my single core test in the review eh? :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :. I probably should've used CinebenchR11.5 & Cinebench R15 instead of R10 single core. I'm sure I still have my L5639 Single Core score for R11.5+R15.


Yeah, I was at work when I posted originally. I didn't have time to sit down and read all 500 posts. When I got home I went through it and found a lot more info. So many programs and games are still only making use of 4 threads that the 12 threads that these CPUs offer is often not used anywhere near its potential. That was my reason for wondering the single core performance. If per-core performance is lacking, everyday tasks and lightly threaded apps will suffer. It looks like your X5660 at 4.8 is about 15% faster than my 920 at 4.2. Clock for clock they should be pretty comparable. I was worried that the 5650 would be significantly weaker.
Quote:


> As I've said the 4770K just smashes everything in single core test across the board. It's very efficient and is 52% quick than your i7-960. Your single thread is quicker than the L5639, but the L5639 has more cache and more cores so it wins by default [and even at a lower clock than the Quads].
> 
> All thought your i7-920 is faster than the L5639 in the older CinebenchR10 test the L5639, the [email protected] stomps it by 34% overall making it more efficient period. [multi-core = complete CPU, not just one core].
> Hey post your CinebenchR11.5 and R15 single scores as well. Can I get your RAM timing CPU-Z shot as well?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> It looks like your X5660 at 4.8 is about 15% faster than my 920 at 4.2. Clock for clock they should be pretty comparable. I was worried that the 5650 would be significantly weaker.


My L5639 is 34% faster than your i7-920. My X5660 is 55% faster than your i7-920. GPU performance wise the Hex cores will easily run high end games at stock smoother vs a highly overclocked Quad. Of course that depends on your GPU and what graphical settings you have enabled. I'm speaking maxed. My lower clocked X5660 @4Ghz with 1400Mhz RAM is 44.18% faster than your i7-920 @ 4.2Ghz.

As far as single core goes to Haswell-4770K. It's the best one on the market right now as far as I know. So does that mean that the i7-4770K is going to outperform a i7-3930K? Heck no. You can take the single core scores for what they are worth, but I can definitely see the difference with my L5639 and X5660.

So I still have my L5639 single core data. Let's compare really quick since I'm in a bit of a rush:

*Cinebench R11.5*
*[email protected]* - _DDR3-1600Mhz_ = *1.46 pts*
*[email protected]* - _DDR3-1333Mhz_ = *1.41 pts*

The i7-920 single core score is 3.5% higher. The multi-core score favors the L5639 by 34%. No contest. I gladly spent a measly $75 on the L5639 and wouldn't think twice about a i7-920 budget Quad.

Moving on to R15

*Cinebench R15
[email protected] - DDR3-1600Mhz = 129 cb
[email protected] - DDR3-1333Mhz = 125 cb

The i7-920 single core is only 3.2% fast than L5639, even less than R11.5. The multi-core score still favors the Xeon L5639 by nearly 48% over the i7-920. No contest. My $75 was well spent compared to the budget Quad. Even when compared to my i7-960 there is no contest. The Quads can't even come close to the overall performance and that includes gaming as well as other tasks like video rendering\compression etc.

I'll load up some games and max them out starting with older titles like Bad Company 2 and so on. I guess I'll try out Batman: Arkham Asylum and the other Batman titles as well. I'm not sure how well the UE3 engines will run with multi cores so I'll definitely have to try different game engines. I'll have to get around to running the CPU test to see how many cores and threads are utilized during gameplay and\or benchmarks. From what I've seen a lot of the game benefit from Hexa-cores for several reasons and single core usage isn't one of those reasons. If the game truly only use 4 threads I'll check and see. In the meantime you can clearly see the difference from a overclocked Hex vs a stock\lower clocked Hex.

Edit: I'm not sure why a lot of my test are bold, but overclock.net hasn't worked well with firefox for weeks now.*


----------



## trailrunnerx

Any insight if I should run a 2:8 memory multi and tight timings on my ram @14xx MHz or 2:10 multi on the ram with looser timings at 17xx MHz? I'm probably not 100% done tweaking as I think I can do 4.2 stable with a bit of fine tuning


----------



## notyettoday

This thread single handedly got me into 1366/xeon combos







I started with a maximus iv gene and got a w3520 to 4ghz stable, and I just got my hands on a BNIB P6TD Deluxe for $ 30! so for 60 I'm up and runnin


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My L5639 is 34% faster than your i7-920. The X5660 is 55% faster than your i7-920. GPU performance wise the Hex cores will easily run high end games at stock smoother vs a highly overclocked Quad. Of course that depends on your GPU and what graphical settings you have enabled. I'm speaking maxed. My lower clocked X5660 @4Ghz with 1400Mhz RAM is 44.18% faster than your i7-920 @ 4.2Ghz.


For like the 35th time, I'm talking about single core performance.









You've already listed plenty of benches showing that a 4.8 ghz 12 thread processor gets really high scores in synthetic benchmarks that use all available CPU resources. Yes, we know that. Unfortunately not many programs are going to use your CPU to it's full capability like cinebench will, hence the importance of it's single core performance and the reason why I have been researching it. The _overwhelming majority_ of programs still only use 4 or fewer threads....not 12. In this situation, remember this is the overwhelming majority of the time, your extra 8 threads will make no difference. When you are relying on 4 threads, the individual performance really matters. When you are relying on 12, not so much because the same work is spread over more workers.

You are acting as if the fact that these CPUs score so high in benchmarks that utilize all 12 threads, that their lightly threaded performance doesn't matter. That's like saying that a Formula 1 race car is perfect for driving around the city and going to work because it goes really fast on a racetrack. I'm not trying to prove the 920 is better, I know it's not. I'm trying to show you that running a heavily threaded benchmark and declaring "My CPU is xx% faster" doesn't really make any sense in real world applications. How many games do you think are using 12 threads? You're looking at one side of a two sided coin. The single core performance is just as important as fully threaded performance because of the fact that so many programs only utilize so much. It would show much less bias in your thread if you included this info in your tests. More info is never a bad thing.

I put an offer in on an X5650 on ebay. The first guy sent me a counteroffer for $1 less than his original buyout, I declined. I put in another offer to another seller and have not heard anything back yet, it's been almost a day..


----------



## TheReciever

I think your missing also the added allowable overhead it can handle due to the 2 extra physical cores which allows the utilized cores to work at full capacity.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> -trailrunnerx-
> Any insight if I should run a 2:8 memory multi and tight timings on my ram @14xx MHz or 2:10 multi on the ram with looser timings at 17xx MHz? I'm probably not 100% done tweaking as I think I can do 4.2 stable with a bit of fine tuning


Personally I would run 14xx with tighter ram timings. If you can run 17xx with no stability issues that wouldn't hurt either, but I always prefer tighter RAM timings due to the types of programs I use.

Quote:


> -notyettoday-
> This thread single handedly got me into 1366/xeon combos I started with a maximus iv gene and got a w3520 to 4ghz stable, and I just got my hands on a BNIB P6TD Deluxe for $ 30! so for 60 I'm up and runnin


Nice and thanks for reading. I'm glad you were able to find some good deals. I really need to get around and posting that X58-Xeon Official Club topic. I'll try to post it this weekend.

Quote:


> -RX7-2nr-
> For like the 35th time, I'm talking about single core performance.


Which is why I compared the SINGLE CORE SCORES as well. You clearly didn't post my single core results and went straight to what you wanted to talk about. - http://tinyurl.com/lsryjry - Now that's the entire post along with the Single Core results. I also understand that you are speaking solely about single core score and I'd rather give up a little single core [3% literally] score for a lot more overall performance any day of the week as I pointed out in my last post.

Quote:


> -RX7-2nr-
> You've already listed plenty of benches showing that a 4.8 ghz 12 thread processor gets really high scores in synthetic benchmarks that use all available CPU resources. Yes, we know that. Unfortunately not many programs are going to use your CPU to it's full capability like cinebench will, hence the importance of it's single core performance and the reason why I have been researching it. The overwhelming majority of programs still only use 4 or fewer threads....not 12. In this situation, remember this is the overwhelming majority of the time, your extra 8 threads will make no difference. When you are relying on 4 threads, the individual performance really matters. When you are relying on 12, not so much because the same work is spread over more workers.


If the Hexa-core won't use all of the cores then why are you looking to buy a Xeon then? Have you used my computer while I was at work or something, because I'm definitely utilizing all of my cores for the high end [CPU heavy] programs that I'm using. I use my PC for a lot of reasons and money making is involved so I really need to be efficient. I need to get certain files processed quicker and render different types of files as they are requested. Sometimes I have to use high end programs at the same time due to deadlines. I really have to multitask a lot. The Hexa core allows me to do this with no issues. These are a few reasons I looked into upgrading to X79 Hexa-core. Instead of upgrading I noticed some decently priced Hexa-cores on the X58 platform.

The other reason was high end GAMING. The extra cores definitely helps the GPU to process way more information than a 8MB-Quad Core ever could. I've used the Quad for many years and certain high end games such as Crysis 3 100% maxed @ 1080p LITERALLY kicked the Quad core ass period, even with 2 GTX 670s stock or overclocked. Then Tomb [email protected] 100% Maxed finally put the nail in the coffin. I struggled to hit maintain a constant 30-35fps [usually a micro stuttered 25fps] in Tomb Raider maxed.. Struggling at 1080p [Crysis 3] is not a good thing when you want to play @ 1400p or 1600p. Those were my wake up calls to let me know that my X58-Quad core was outdated for high end gaming. Installed the Xeon L5639 and I averaged 50fps in Crysis 3 and 68fps @ 1600p in Tomb Raider. Not to mention 20ms and 14ms frame times respectfully allowing for an extremely nice gameplay experience with no input lag. I don't even want to think about the frame times the crazy micro stutter Quad Core was putting up.

Just to let you know I'm not relying on anything and I got your point so please understand my point. I already know what you have been saying since your first post regarding single core performance and I've already addressed it with my comment above. Losing a measly 3% for a much better overall performance gain for the programs "I use" and especially for gaming is worth it. If you find one for cheap then you are simply getting a good ass deal







so why not upgrade for little to nothing, but you seem to not understand that from my post.
Quote:


> -RX7-2nr-
> You are acting as if the fact that these CPUs score so high in benchmarks that utilize all 12 threads, that their lightly threaded performance doesn't matter. That's like saying that a Formula 1 race car is perfect for driving around the city and going to work because it goes really fast on a racetrack. I'm not trying to prove the 920 is better, I know it's not. I'm trying to show you that running a heavily threaded benchmark and declaring "My CPU is xx% faster" doesn't really make any sense in real world applications. How many games do you think are using 12 threads? You're looking at one side of a two sided coin.


I'm not acting any type of way and I'm not declaring anything. I posted my results so take them however you want to take them. I simply posted this review to compare to other high end X79 CPUs, not Quad cores, hence the like for like clocked i7-Extreme Edition speeds that I could find. They [Quads] are there to give certain users an idea of their performance just in case some were wondering. I've said it at least 35 times right









> I'd gladly lose 3% single core score for a large and affordable overall performance any day of the week. Also if you want to prove your point with the single core that's fine and we all already understand this, but I've noticed a huge increase while using my PC and several programs I've used for some time now.

Regarding your Formula 1 comparison......Your name is RX7, so lets say you MS3 which get's 263 horsepower, but only gets 18 in the city and 25 on the highway at stock. Fast car except the mpg sucks big time. You add your own aftermarket parts to the car and make it even more powerful. Just because you are making it faster doesn't mean you are losing miles on the mpg. The intake could [actually will] allow more airflow which could increase mpg well past 15%+ if you are willing to pay for it. Some people also flash their ECUs as well for air/fuel ratio benefits. So lets say you are now pushing 315hp and getting 30 on the highway from modifications, but it's not 35-40mpg like everyone else. In "YOUR" mind that's a loss of performance. Well who cares because you have a fast sports car that's decently efficient for your mpg needs and the overall performance is much better than a lot of the other cars. If your needs are more focused on low mpg then get the low end car. My point is just because something is much faster overall doesn't mean it can't be just as efficient with small decrease certain areas. -3% in a single core test isn't going to take away all of the benefits the Xeons have over your i7-920 Quad

The Xeon L5639 losing an extremely minor 3%. 3% isn't [or shouldn't] be a moot point if you are getting so much more overall, so I can't even begin to understand your argument or logic. Do you think you are really going to notice the difference in everyday applications when it comes to single core performance at a 3% difference? You'll definitely notice the multi score difference instantly for programs that are CPU heavy [and high end gaming].
Quote:


> -RX7-2nr-
> I put an offer in on an X5650 on ebay. The first guy sent me a counteroffer for $1 less than his original buyout, I declined. I put in another offer to another seller and have not heard anything back yet, it's been almost a day..


From the way you speak about Hexa cores why are you even looking into buying one lol. Seems like you'd rather stick with the extremely slightly more powerful single core i7-920. Since you'll see no benefits from everyday tasks eh? If I can't get you to realize that 3% is absolutely nothing in the real world then I don't know what to tell you. I can easily tell you that 48% and 55% will show you a big difference.
Quote:


> -TheReciever-
> I think your missing also the added allowable overhead it can handle due to the 2 extra physical cores which allows the utilized cores to work at full capacity.


There we go. Gaming wise this allows for the GPU to render more frames which leaded to a more pleasant experience. I witnessed no GPU bottlenecking even at stock settings. Overclocking them was simply money since it allowed more frames to be rendered in the same amount of time, which increased the overall frames rate. So it's pretty much a win win especially if you can find them at a affordable price.


----------



## trailrunnerx

Update: Prime 95 failed about 35m in to the blend test so the cpu isn't totally stable yet. I ended up having to run the ram under clocked with tighter timings as it would fail out when overclocked. Found the c-states control in bios and now get a 24x multi which drops to 23x when I start prime or ibt. With the 24x multi I'm at almost 4.2 ghz (4190mhz) so that's faster than my i7 930 was running. I have to work 8am-10pm tonight so unsure if I'll touch it later but will probably tweak a bit to get it dialed in. Even when I set vcore to 1.30 in BIOS cpu-z reports 1.25-1.26 in Windows so I'm thinking it may need a little more juice. RAM is at 1422mhz 8-8-8-24 timings which is lower than it's rating. Temps only go to 52c under ibt. Thinking I'm having a harder time tuning this because I left turbo, c-states off on my i7 so there were less variables.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Your Xeon at stock was faster than your i7-930 so that's nothing to worry about. You might have to take the long way around to overclock since the quick and dirty way didn't work out for you. Determine your highest BCLK that you can boot with. If you have already figured that you you need to lower your RAM speed and shoot for 3.6Ghz with a set multiplier or in other words don't set the multiplier\CPU ratio to Auto. with no EIST\Turbo or C-states enabled for testing purposes]. If it passes then increase the voltage along with he multiplier. If you RAM can't handle the higher overclock [1600+] then you'll be better off running it a bit lower than usual or at least for testing purposes. Once you pass the 4Ghz-4.1Ghz mark the voltage really goes up. To hit 4.2Ghz most users have to run 1.3+........from what I've seen 1.335v or higher for 24/7 runs. You'll just have to keep testing it to see.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Why do you keep getting so defensive? It seems like you still just don't understand why I'm asking this. I asked you for some single core results to see how these server CPUs stack up against regular desktop CPUs. You have omitted single core from your review entirely. I felt that you omitted it because the 12 thread performance looks so much impressive than single. *This is plain and simply biased and misleading.* As you said, "3% difference single, 55% difference multi"

*This entire time you have played it as if I was trash talking the Xeon because I was asking for some single thread overclocked results. I'm not.* I'm trying to get information that you have seemingly purposely omitted from your tests. You didn't even run single thread in your Cinebench screenshots.


----------



## ssgtnubb

I like this thread and the amount of activity that has gone in it. Mostly the thread as gone above and beyond where a normal thread goes. I'd like to ask for the community that it's not derailed by the issue of single core performance.


----------



## RX7-2nr

How it is considered derailed by discussing an aspect of these CPUs performance that has been utterly ignored?

* I too think it's a great thread and I like the information presented. I just don't understand the pushback and constant defensive attitude of the OP. I never once have said that these Xeons are inferior to an i7, but I've been accused by him 2 or 3 times now. There is no need to do that. There is also no need to try to make a big deal out of it when I ask why no single thread benches were ran, when they are equally as important as the multithread run.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> How it is considered derailed by discussing an aspect of these CPUs performance that has been utterly ignored?
> 
> * I too think it's a great thread and I like the information presented. I just don't understand the pushback and constant defensive attitude of the OP. I never once have said that these Xeons are inferior to an i7, but I've been accused by him 2 or 3 times now. There is no need to do that. There is also no need to try to make a big deal out of it when I ask why no single thread benches were ran, when they are equally as important as the multithread run.


Agreed, I would use the term called thread crapping to be honest.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> *This entire time you have played it as if I was trash talking the Xeon because I was asking for some single thread overclocked results. I'm not.* I'm trying to get information that you have _seemingly purposely omitted from your tests_. You didn't even run single thread in your Cinebench screenshots.


When I read this, I am reading a jab thrown at the OP. While OP is not beyond reproach, your choice of words is quite _poor_.


----------



## PachAz

Sure the x56xx is a catch if youre on a x58 system, but im sure a clocked i5 at 4.8-5ghz will perform better in most games using 4 or less cores. Many games still only use 1 core though.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Agreed, I would use the term called thread crapping to be honest.
> When I read this, I am reading a jab thrown at the OP. While OP is not beyond reproach, your choice of words is quite _poor_.


My choice of words is fine. If you read more into it than I typed, that's your issue. There are two tests, multi and single. Only multi, which the Xeons will obviously dominate on, was ran. I've felt like I was under attack from Kanu ever since asking about it. He's been completely defensive and acted as if I were trying to say the Xeons are bad processors or that an i7 is better. "If you just want to feel good about your 920" and stuff like that. It's completely unnecessary.

From the beginning I've said that I'm just trying to get info. Fact is a 4.8 ghz 12 thread synthetic benchmark result doesn't mean a lot in real world performance. It's an impressive number for sure, but it does not necessarily translate well to day to day use for the average user. If you use specific programs that can take advantage of it sure, heavy multitasking would also be very much improved as well. Day to day use was my reason for asking if he had single thread results, and I've stated this multiple times now. I'm not trying to prove that an i7 is better.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> My choice of words is fine. If you read more into it than I typed, that's your issue.


Case in point.

You are the one requesting information here, I dont know why being humble is such a commodity these days. You also might want to consider the amount of flak he may get for his purchasing decision, supplemented with the debilitating sense of professionalism here on OCN that seems to be widespread.

There are a great many references for you to choose from in this thread to compare to.


----------



## RX7-2nr

If you have anymore comments about this PM me instead of clogging up the thread with your bickering. I stated my point clearly in my previous response to you.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> If you have anymore comments about this PM me instead of clogging up the thread with your bickering. I stated my point clearly in my previous response to you.


Again, case in point.

Noted.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> You have omitted single core from your review entirely. I felt that you omitted it because the 12 thread performance looks so much impressive than single. *This is plain and simply biased and misleading.* As you said, "3% difference single, 55% difference multi"


http://tinyurl.com/lsryjry <---- there's your Xeon L5639 Single Core CinebenchR11.5 and R15 test I compared to your i7-920. I politely asked you to post your results and I compared them with what I have. There's nothing biased about it, I've stated the single core performance as well as the overall performance which was my main goal. I ran as many test as I could. If you didn't get what you were looking for in my review then know I tried to supply as many test as I could. Not only that but I was working 10 hour shifts so excuse me for not including every test imaginable. Not to mention the GPU test as well. If you don't except my test or results then that's fine, single core score wasn't a big issue. Turns out it was a 3% issue that has turned into this big debate.. Let's just drop this all together as ssgtnubb stated and others are getting at.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssgtnubb*
> 
> I like this thread and the amount of activity that has gone in it. Mostly the thread as gone above and beyond where a normal thread goes. I'd like to ask for the community that it's not derailed by the issue of single core performance.


I agree. I never mind a little debate regarding CPU\Platform\anything\results tech etc, but this is dragging on way to long even after Single Core comparisons were posted and discussed. I won't be derailed by the continuing single core discussion since it's already been posted and compared.

Edit:
Looks like I missed some post in-between my post. At least the single core stuff is over now.


----------



## trailrunnerx

Home from my long 15hr day of work and am going to work on this beastie a bit. Really want to see it stable on ibt maximum stress and prime 95 blend because well, I'm a perfectionist and just because it'll load windows and play games I won't be happy until she is rock solid stable for 24/7 even though that's not really the purpose of this machine. I'm just weird I guess!


----------



## Asus11

just dropped a x5650 in after updating bios to 0505.. anyone get weird hanging somtimes when switching on PC?

it was hanging & switching from 60/84 Q Codes

but got into windows all fine now after switching it off & switching it back on, happened a few times in the past thats why I updated bios thinking it would cure it


----------



## trailrunnerx

Well, got everything all stabilized finally, ended up at about 4.25ghz multicore and almost 4.4 single core. However I managed to somehow damage my sli link ribbon cable while installing the new processor so haven't been able to see any gains in gaming, until my replacement SLI arrives sometime later this week. I imagine since I've managed to exceed the clock speed of the old i7 930 plus the 2 extra physical cores that it's going to give me a pretty decent FPS bump when I'm able to put it through it's paces. Glad I found this thread before abandoning this rig for an x79 based setup as price-wise I was only willing to go for a i7-4820.


----------



## Asus11

whats max safe for these chips under water?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> just dropped a x5650 in after updating bios to 0505.. anyone get weird hanging somtimes when switching on PC?
> 
> it was hanging & switching from 60/84 Q Codes
> 
> but got into windows all fine now after switching it off & switching it back on, happened a few times in the past thats why I updated bios thinking it would cure it


I'm not familiar with that motherboard, but I have no weird hanging [X5660]. Could be the CPU itself I suppose.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trailrunnerx*
> 
> Well, got everything all stabilized finally, ended up at about 4.25ghz multicore and almost 4.4 single core. However I managed to somehow damage my sli link ribbon cable while installing the new processor so haven't been able to see any gains in gaming, until my replacement SLI arrives sometime later this week. I imagine since I've managed to exceed the clock speed of the old i7 930 plus the 2 extra physical cores that it's going to give me a pretty decent FPS bump when I'm able to put it through it's paces. Glad I found this thread before abandoning this rig for an x79 based setup as price-wise I was only willing to go for a i7-4820.


That's good to hear. Sucks that your SLI bridge got damaged though. I'm sure it shouldn't take long for that small part to make it to your home. I was ready to spend upwards towards $2000.00 on a X79 build last year or I was going to wait to see what Haswell-E would bring. Later in the 2013 I noticed these Hex cores and took a chance and it has worked out perfectly so far. I'm DDR4 is going to be expensive for awhile so I'll have time to wait for better prices whenever I decide to upgrade. I can also put the money that I was going to spend on the X79 build towards other things like GPUs, SSDs etc. I think later this year I'll be ready to drop the GTX 670s. I might switch over to AMD since they are appearing to get their act together in the driver department.


----------



## hathornd

That is really neat, the whole Xeon in a desktop for cheap. Good benchmarks, some good information.

I don't understand the last 2 pages though. People are ganging up on this RX7 guy because he is pressing for single-core results? It's weird to me... In the same way that Intel users say their chips are superior to AMD because of single-thread performance, I gather this guy just wants to hear about the single-thread performance so he can choose whether or not to buy one to replace his 8-core 920? I mean, 12 cores is nice and all, a bit more useful than a 920 or what-not because of more cores, but the vast majority of people aren't going to run simultaneous video-encoding in win7 and benchmarks in linux or something. It doesn't seem that he is thread-crapping honestly.

If it is 3% slower single-thread, and the user isn't going to be running any programs or utilities (other than synthetic benchmarks) that will produce the 40% increase (makes sense, 8/12 = 66 so the 12-core has 33% more cores), then what is the point of upgrading? If you just browse and occasionally rip videos, and game, then you won't use anywhere near 12 cores. I also agree with RX7 too, if it is only faster multi-core in synthetic benchmarks, you can't post a headline saying that it is 50% faster than xxx processor.

I mean, this IS OCN though. I guess 12 cores is more extreme than 8 and in that sense, more desirable.


----------



## mistax

After reading through this. It has tingle my curiosity and I was wondering if getting a x5660 would be an upgrade over a 970, or is the x5660 basically a server version of the 980x.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mistax*
> 
> After reading through this. It has tingle my curiosity and I was wondering if getting a x5660 would be an upgrade over a 970, or is the x5660 basically a server version of the 980x.


advantages I can think of is that they run cooler because they are 95w instead of 130w, also gives more room for better overclocks etc

another reason is price, usually half the price of a i7 980x, but you may stumble on ram issues idk, but ive had some hiccups with my x5650 not sure if its ram or something else but sometimes computer hangs
then I have to off it then restart then it boots properly, not sure if anyone else in this thread has experienced the same but just putting my personal experience out there


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'd have to agree with the RAM issues, however my issues were minor. I had left my RAM set to AUTO after reaching a high overclock [4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz], but my PC wouldn't POST. The RAM was set to run at Auto 9-9-9-24. I had to manually set the RAM timings to 9-9-9-24 and I posted and had no issues with stability. This only happened twice, but now I manually set my timings just to make sure I don't get any false flags while overclocking.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mistax*
> 
> After reading through this. It has tingle my curiosity and I was wondering if getting a x5660 would be an upgrade over a 970, or is the x5660 basically a server version of the 980x.


As Asus11 stated the price and lower TDP ratings definitely help for a cooler experience. I suppose you can compare your benchmark scores to see if it would really be worth it. With a i7-970 I think you would be fine with that CPU. I can't see the benefits of upgrading from the 970 if you can hit anything between 3.9Ghz - 4.4Ghz. There are more benefits for the X5660, but none that you'd probably find with it at this point.


----------



## mistax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'd have to agree with the RAM issues, however my issues were minor. I had left my RAM set to AUTO after reaching a high overclock [4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz], but my PC wouldn't POST. The RAM was set to run at Auto 9-9-9-24. I had to manually set the RAM timings to 9-9-9-24 and I posted and had no issues with stability. This only happened twice, but now I manually set my timings just to make sure I don't get any false flags while overclocking.
> As Asus11 stated the price and lower TDP ratings definitely help for a cooler experience. I suppose you can compare your benchmark scores to see if it would really be worth it. With a i7-970 I think you would be fine with that CPU. I can't see the benefits of upgrading from the 970 if you can hit anything between 3.9Ghz - 4.4Ghz. There are more benefits for the X5660, but none that you'd probably find with it at this point.


alright thank you =) i've just been holding on tight since i got my 970 during intel sale so it was a very good deal for 200 and replacing my q6600 roughly 3 years back. Haven't seen the need to upgrade to any of the new hexacore since for streaming purposes the 970 is still very good.


----------



## PachAz

Since we are talking about xeon cpus, what xeon cpus are there to be used with the 1155 plattform? And how good will these be compared to the i5 3570k and i7 3770k in games? Maybe this could be a way to get those 6-cores on the 1155 plattform and hence get a unexpected and cheap future upgrade? Just curious, im young :/.


----------



## TheReciever

The problem with that is SB and later Xeon platforms are locked down to my knowledge


----------



## PachAz

What a shame, I would love to have a underrated non-locked 6 core for the 1155 socket.


----------



## TheReciever

Its probably why the SR-X never reached the same respect level as the SR-2


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Its probably why the SR-X never reached the same respect level as the SR-2


That's exactly what it was. The newer architectures don't really support base clock OCing, and the multipliers are locked, so you can't do anything except run them stock. Needless to say the enthusiasts were unenthused.


----------



## TheReciever

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> That's exactly what it was. The newer architectures don't really support base clock OCing, and the multipliers are locked, so you can't do anything except run them stock. Needless to say the enthusiasts were unenthused.


Precisely


----------



## RX7-2nr

My 5650 got here today. I installed it, booted at stock for a while, but then the urge to tweak started to set in. I got into windows with 200x23, but wasn't sure where to set the vcore so I just put it to 1.3v. It's crashed a couple times, but I've got a feeling it's going to be a nice clocker after I iron the bugs out.

It's tough finding info about overclocking westmere-ep.

A little voltage bump seems to have helped the crashes, but I've done no stress testing aside from maybe a minute of IBT to see the temps.


----------



## dpoverlord

Still running mine at 4.45ghz in games I get 30-42C and it does nto seem to use a lot of the CPU. Its almost as if games dont really use 100% of the cpu anymore. Anyone else notice this? Curious if I would get higher FPS on X79 but then again at this point I will wait for X99


----------



## PachAz

Higher fps probably little, but for a very high cost, like 100 bucks per 0.5 fps







.


----------



## mechwarrior

hi guys just bought an x5660 es chip (engineering sample) not sure if this chip would be good?
what are your taught s. paid $125 au


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Still running mine at 4.45ghz in games I get 30-42C and it does nto seem to use a lot of the CPU. Its almost as if games dont really use 100% of the cpu anymore. Anyone else notice this? Curious if I would get higher FPS on X79 but then again at this point I will wait for X99


I dropped down to 4.2Ghz-4Ghz myself for several reasons. I'll kick up the clock speed if I really have some major programs to use. That's good that games aren't using 100% of the CPU. Your setup was stressing the hell out of that i7-930 for it to hit 100%. It's going to be hard to get high CPU usage with these hexa cores while gaming. When I compare my test to other websites that perform GPU test I literally see no gains\no difference in FPS when compared to X79. I'm matching X79 with GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI frames rates. Crysis 100% maxed out still gets the same fps I'm getting on the X58 platform. So this is just my experience with my build across several reliable websites.

PachAz said $100 per 0.5fps, but I think it's less fps than that lol. I'm not sure what X99 will offer gaming wise since no game is bottlenecking the Hexa cores running DDR3-1333 @ stock and probably won't bottleneck them for awhile. X99 is going to be all about the price and performance with me. I sure I can easily go through 2015 with my current build. I do have higher hopes for the X99, but I'm not spending a arm and a leg for a another CPU+CPU Cooler+MB+Case combo since I'll need all of those things _.

_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mechwarrior*
> 
> hi guys just bought an x5660 es chip (engineering sample) not sure if this chip would be good?
> what are your taught s. paid $125 au


Good price. I've never took a chance on the ES chips since you never know what' you'll get. I've read some issues with some EA CPUs so I guess you'll have to install it and let us know how good or bad it is.


----------



## dpoverlord

I agree however, I am curious since the platform itself switching to X99 I feel will give more bandwidth and performance. When you look at benches people def are scoring higher than I am. I am more peeved right now that Titanfall does not really support SLI. With Titans it suffers and does nothing. in game the CPU averages 30C and 30# usage


----------



## PachAz

I will get the x100 plattform and hexa titan black







. Hope you underatand jokes xd.


----------



## mechwarrior

so i just ran 3dmark11 on my [email protected] (1.325v) here are my results
score13387
graphics:17296
physics:8277
combine:7570
looking forward to testing my x5660 es chip

Add to compare
Valid result
ScoreP13387 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670(2x) and Intel Core i7-920 Processor

Graphics Score
17296

Physics Score
8277

Combined Score
7570


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mechwarrior*
> 
> so i just ran 3dmark11 on my [email protected] (1.325v) here are my results
> score13387
> graphics:17296
> physics:8277
> combine:7570
> looking forward to testing my x5660 es chip


I can't remember if you have the 2GB reference GTX 670s or not, but I have ran the test @ 4Ghz as well. I'll compare my X5660 score to your i7-920:

i7-920 @ *4Ghz* [1.325v]
vs
X5660 @ *4Ghz* [1.22v]

*Score:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = *13387*
X5660 @ 4Ghz = *16030* +20%

*Graphics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = *17296*
X5660 @ 4Ghz = *18959* +10%

*Physics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = *8277*
X5660 @ 4Ghz = *11495* +39%

*Combine:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = *7570*
X5660 @ 4Ghz = *10234* +35%

Hopefully this gave you some 4Ghz Hexa Core insight. Be sure to post your results since I'm sure you were possibly planning to do that. You'll definitely enjoy your Hexa core upgrade. My 4.6Ghz results can be viewed on the first page.

Edit:
If you saved a screenshot of your 3DMark 11 test could you please post the frames rates as well for GT1, GT2, GT3, GT4, PT, CT. I'd like to compare those as well.

[physics driver was outdated during this run]


----------



## mechwarrior

hi kana
i don't have a screen shot of my 3dmark score and i dont know about where frame rates are in 3dmark?
happy to run it again.

forgot to mention running 3dmark basic. gt1, gt2 score dont show up and can only run in performance setting


----------



## mechwarrior

got the full version ran extreme preset


----------



## mechwarrior

this is with performance reset


----------



## sergec19

got my x5660 today and love it!
after 1hour testing and overclocking im already at 4.59Ghz without crashing! trying for more


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> got my x5660 today and love it!
> after 1hour testing and overclocking im already at 4.59Ghz without crashing! trying for more


Sounds good. I would personally let it run all night while I'm sleep using different tests for at least a well to insure nothing will cause a BSOD\Freezing\Restart at the worst times. Nice Vcore as well.
----

mechwarrior I have to re run my test. I forgot that I'm using a old and outdated physics driver. I have to use a older driver to play Batman: Arkham Asylum properly while streaming. I'll update and run the test again.


----------



## sergec19

Thanks! Maybe i can lower vcore more just set something random lol...
Yeah im working at it. Let it run some tests yesterday like cinebench and 3dmark ,.. Try prime tonight! I come from a i7 [email protected] 4.4 ghz .. Im happy!
Only strange i cant select MP 22x and 24x








It goes straigt from 21x to 23x
And if i select 23x 200mhz cpu-z shows me 4.6ghz but all other shows 4,2ghz and benchmarkscore is same as 4,2ghz..


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Thanks! Maybe i can lower vcore more just set something random lol...
> Yeah im working at it. Let it run some tests yesterday like cinebench and 3dmark ,.. Try prime tonight! I come from a i7 [email protected] 4.4 ghz .. Im happy!
> Only strange i cant select MP 22x and 24x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It goes straigt from 21x to 23x


Be careful about setting things\options at random lol. You can't select x22 or x24 multiplier since x21 is what the platform is using to determine the frequency _. From my understanding several factors decides this, but I'm sure Intel has it setup this way. The motherboard will always use x21 as the target frequency which can easily throw your off while overclocking. In order to get the x24 [x22 haven't see it yet] it will depend on settings [C-states + EIST] and what cores are currently being used.. I've explained how the cores downclock in my review on the first page. You'll probably never see x22 that often since it depends on the cores being used. I'm still performing a few test with this myself.

_
Quote:


> And if i select 23x 200mhz cpu-z shows me 4.6ghz but all other shows 4,2ghz and benchmarkscore is same as 4,2ghz.


As I stated above the programs\BIOS will read the x21 multiplier every time. Well at least programs like Cinebench and a few of the 3D Mark programs. Some programs will read 2.80Ghz no matter what. It looks like your CPU is downclocking from 4.6Ghz to 4.2Ghz. Disable C-States and EIST and run the benchmarks again. Open CPU-Z for monitoring. The programs should still show 4.2Ghz, but you should continue to run 4.6Ghz without downclocking. Hope I was able to help you with this. It can easily get confusing.


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Be careful about setting things\options at random lol. You can't select x22 or x24 multiplier since x21 is what the platform is using to determine the frequency _. From my understanding several factors decides this, but I'm sure Intel has it setup this way. The motherboard will always use x21 as the target frequency which can easily throw your off while overclocking. In order to get the x24 [x22 haven't see it yet] it will depend on settings [C-states + EIST] and what cores are currently being used.. I've explained how the cores downclock in my review on the first page. You'll probably never see x22 that often since it depends on the cores being used. I'm still performing a few test with this myself.
> As I stated above the programs\BIOS will read the x21 multiplier every time. Well at least programs like Cinebench and a few of the 3D Mark programs. Some programs will read 2.80Ghz no matter what. It looks like your CPU is downclocking from 4.6Ghz to 4.2Ghz. Disable C-States and EIST and run the benchmarks again. Open CPU-Z for monitoring. The programs should still show 4.2Ghz, but you should continue to run 4.6Ghz without downclocking. Hope I was able to help you with this. It can easily get confusing._


Thanks for fast answer! No all settings are safe and good only vcore i set random to the max i wanted.. And i will lower it if my max overclock is reached with that vcore..








Eist c1 states are off ,
No i ment.. if i set 200x23 : 4,6ghz my cinebench score is the same as i set 200x21: 4,2ghz. Cpu-z is showing 4,6ghz but cinebench 4,2ghz. And my score is equal to 4,2ghz.. So i think its stuck on 21x .. I really dont get this..
Sorry for bad english


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Thanks for fast answer! No all settings are safe and good only vcore i set random to the max i wanted.. And i will lower it if my max overclock is reached with that vcore..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eist c1 states are off ,
> No i ment.. if i set 200x23 : 4,6ghz my cinebench score is the same as i set 200x21: 4,2ghz. Cpu-z is showing 4,6ghz but cinebench 4,2ghz. And my score is equal to 4,2ghz.. So i think its stuck on 21x .. I really dont get this..
> Sorry for bad english


Sorry I misunderstood you. I see you got lucky with the Vcore and that's great







. Sounds like you have some bottlenecking going on somewhere. Check your RAM timings and your RAM speed\frequency. The only time I've had a similar situation like yours is when my RAM was basically bottlenecking my Cinebench test. I'm definitely calling RAM bottlenecking on this one. Check your RAM timings and attempt to run closer to the rated speed. If this doesn't fix your issue then I'll definitely know what your problem is.

---

Ok mechwarrior I have the results with out newer scores. I also have the latest driver ---> 337.50 BETA with the latest physics driver as well.

GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI _

i7-920 @ *4Ghz* [1.325v]
vs
X5660 @ *4Ghz* [1.22v]

*Performance Score:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = P13489
X5660 @ 4Ghz = P16271 +21%

*Graphics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 17237
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 19394 +13%

*Physics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 8524
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 11471 +35%

*Combine:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 7678
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 10299 +34%
---

*Extreme Score:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = X5752
X5660 @ 4Ghz = X6561 +14%

*Graphics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 5519
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 6255 +13%

*Physics:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 8575
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 11460 +34%

*Combine:*
i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 5809
X5660 @ 4Ghz = 6333 +9%

The scores got a lot tighter in the extreme preset. I was planning on getting AMD R9 295X2, but once I saw that $1499 price mark I was pretty much in "Aww Hell Nawl" mode. I'm just not spending that type of cash for a Dual GPU. That's a damn near two brand new mid range\high end PC builds. That's also along the Quad GPU price point. I'd rather buy another GTX 670 since I'll know I'll spend less that $250 for it. I'm sticking with the GTX 670 2-Way for now. I'm going be comparing the AMD R9 295X2 to my GTX 670 2GB SLI on my blog with several games for comparisons. I'll have to get the R9 295X2 scores from the several websites for comparisons._


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry I misunderstood you. I see you got lucky with the Vcore and that's great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Sounds like you have some bottlenecking going on somewhere. Check your RAM timings and your RAM speed\frequency. The only time I've had a similar situation like yours is when my RAM was basically bottlenecking my Cinebench test. I'm definitely calling RAM bottlenecking on this one. Check your RAM timings and attempt to run closer to the rated speed. If this doesn't fix your issue then I'll definitely know what your problem is.
> 
> ---
> 
> Ok mechwarrior I have the results with out newer scores. I also have the latest driver ---> 337.50 BETA with the latest physics driver as well.
> 
> GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI _
> 
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz [1.325v]
> vs
> X5660 @ 4Ghz [1.22v]
> 
> *Performance Score:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = P13489
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = P16271 +21%
> 
> *Graphics:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 17237
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 19394 +13%
> 
> *Physics:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 8524
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 11471 +35%
> 
> *Combine:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 7678
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 10299 +34%
> ---
> 
> *Extreme Score:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = X5752
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = X6561 +14%
> 
> *Graphics:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 5519
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 6255 +13%
> 
> *Physics:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 8575
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 11460 +34%
> 
> *Combine:*
> i7-920 @ 4Ghz = 5809
> X5660 @ 4Ghz = 6333 +9%
> 
> The scores got a lot tighter in the extreme preset. I was planning on getting AMD R9 295X2, but once I saw that $1499 price mark I was pretty much in "Aww Hell Nawl" mode. I'm just not spending that type of cash for a Dual GPU. That's a damn near two brand new mid range\high end PC builds. That's also along the Quad GPU price point. I'd rather buy another GTX 670 since I'll know I'll spend less that $250 for it. I'm sticking with the GTX 670 2-Way for now. I'm going be comparing the AMD R9 295X2 to my GTX 670 2GB SLI on my blog with several games for comparisons. I'll have to get the R9 295X2 scores from the several websites for comparisons._


No problem mate! Thats possible!
I got 1 time it recognized only 2gb of the 6gb ram .. Ram is running @ 1263mhz cl9 2N i think. (Not home now) i can only select 1263mhz or 17xxmhz and thats to fast for my dominator 1600mhz cl8.. I try to tighten it to cl7 2N.. But im quite happy if it runs perfect on 219x21: 4,59ghz








Thanks to youre review i bought the x5660 (160€) and very happy, saved me alot of money instead of the x79 platform!

Edit: its my 3rd overclocking pc so im noobie


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> No problem mate! Thats possible!
> I got 1 time it recognized only 2gb of the 6gb ram .. Ram is running @ 1263mhz cl9 2N i think. (Not home now) i can only select 1263mhz or 17xxmhz and thats to fast for my dominator 1600mhz cl8.. I try to tighten it to cl7 2N.. But im quite happy if it runs perfect on 219x21: 4,59ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks to youre review i bought the x5660 (160€) and very happy, saved me alot of money instead of the x79 platform!
> 
> Edit: its my 3rd overclocking pc so im noobie


That's good to hear man. Now you'll have some extra money to put towards other things like SSDs, games, monitors or a more powerful GPU. I don't see these Hexa Cores getting outdated very fast.
---

Ok I need some opinions. I need to know if you guys think I could potentially damage my CPU by running it with high overclocks and low voltage. My CPU is running at:

4Ghz w/ *1.20vCore* - 1600Mhz
&
3.8Ghz w/ *1.16vCore* - 1600Mhz
_[idle for both is 2.4Mhz]_

Now this is nothing short of amazing since I'm trying to keep my CPU as cool as possible by using lower voltages for the warmer days ahead of us. Well the weather is all over the place, but some days can get pretty warm. So does anyone think this could be a potential problem for 24/7 use. Both speeds have passed the Standard IntelBurnTest with no issues and I'm running Prime95 right now with no errors.

Thoughts.....opinions.....anyone? I can post a screenshot if anyone needs me too.

*Edit:*

Prime95 100% highest so far is only 53c [room ambient is 23c]


----------



## RX7-2nr

Mine at 4.6 with 1.33v hits 55c in IBT. Probably a couple c lower in prime95. If youre getting 50s youre fine. 50c is nothing on a cpu.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That wasn't my question, but no need to answer since everything ran fine overnight. I'm going to stick with 4.2Ghz w/ Offset for the power efficiency benefits + everything else that comes with it.

Finally got around to playing Battlefield 4. I don't care much for the multiplayer or the series any longer. BF3 just didn't do what previous BF did for me. BF4 is no exception, but hey got it cheap and it's good for benchmarking and some of the most beautiful graphics in the market. It's sort of like Crysis 3 to me.....a good benchmarking tool.

*Battlefield 4 100% Maxed [Ultra] - 2560x1600p*



*Stock* GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz _[337.50 BETA Drivers]_
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz

Gameplay Duration:1hour 3mins 58secs
Captured 235,043 frames
*FPS Avg: 62fps* [62.25]
_FPS Max: 139fps_
_FPS Min: 30fps_
*Frame time Avg: 15.2ms*

From what I remember seeing the CPU never went above 55C [Max] and the average was 44C [Avg], CPU Usage Avg was around 27%

I'm not sure what happened, but I'm guessing the drivers and updates made a big difference. I find it hard to believe that I'm matching GPUs like the 7990, GTX 780 SLI, 7970[CFX] & GTX 690 and even beating some of them in the tests. Then again I compared my benchmark results to GPUs test that were ran last October and November. Not only that I'm running stock [915mhz] settings. Maybe I should just get another GTX 670 and setup Triple SLI. The only thing that's stopping me from doing that is the 2GB limitation sadly







, but I guess I'll ride it out until they can no longer deliver.

I have yet to benchmark 1080p, but I will soon enough. There are just so many other games I'm playing. I'll get around to running more test soon.


----------



## PachAz

I guess that 30 fps is some kind of fps drop spike, happens some times to me as well, like 1-2 times in each session played. But 60 average is kinda nice. But I do think the 2gb limitation of the gtx 670 is an issue in high resolutions. At 1080p you will benefit from a 6 core intel in bf4, specially using 2 high end cards. I dont get what the issue is though, unless you play competitive and must have all ultra in bf4 theres no need to focus too much on the hardware you have. And if you would wanna play competitive you wouldnt want to play on all ultra anyways. OP what games do you play actually? Also tri sli 670, what would that be good for really? I dont see what you are trying to achieve, since using a xeon for gaming from the first place is kinda odd these days. Core per core performance is really important as we have seen and im affraid xeon cpus have very weak cores compared to the cheaper ivy and haswell cpus, which are excelent in both multicore games and apps as well as sincle thread games.

If im not wrong, didnt alot of people sell their 960,970, 980 and 990 cpus and their whole system because they saw people got better performance in bf3 with the i2600k and i7 3770k? Or even the i5 for that matter.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> I guess that 30 fps is some kind of fps drop spike, happens some times to me as well, like 1-2 times in each session played. But 60 average is kinda nice. But I do think the 2gb limitation of the gtx 670 is an issue in high resolutions. At 1080p you will benefit from a 6 core intel in bf4, specially using 2 high end cards. I dont get what the issue is though, unless you play competitive and must have all ultra in bf4 theres no need to focus too much on the hardware you have. And if you would wanna play competitive you wouldnt want to play on all ultra anyways. OP what games do you play actually? Also tri sli 670, what would that be good for really? I dont see what you are trying to achieve, since using a xeon for gaming from the first place is kinda odd these days. Core per core performance is really important as we have seen and im affraid xeon cpus have very weak cores compared to the cheaper ivy and haswell cpus, which are excelent in both multicore games and apps as well as sincle thread games.
> 
> If im not wrong, didnt alot of people sell their 960,970, 980 and 990 cpus and their whole system because they saw people got better performance in bf3 with the i2600k and i7 3770k? Or even the i5 for that matter.


Yeah those split second 30fps dips only happened when the game was trying to load another [new] area quickly. 60fps is kinda nice? I thought I would score much lower than that so it did exceed my expectation. I'm seeing the GTX 690 score less than 60fps in some test as well as the 7990. Those CPUs are way faster than my setup. I'm going to replay the first mission again to see what I get with a different physics driver to see what I get.

What issue? I never said there was a issue, I'm just posting my benchmarks. I had to run 4.6Ghz because this game isn't a joke at higher resolution. My GPUs were handling plenty of data that 4Ghz couldn't handle for my standards. Playing competitive or not, it doesn't hurt to have the best of both worlds. Also BF4 and BF3 for that matter wasn't that competitive to me at all due to all of the rubber band issues and horrible netcode. Hit detection is also random and there's a new game breaking, for online competition, invisible glitch that EA DICE is rushing to fix. It has upset a lot of gamers.

Regarding the GTX 670 Triple SLI - that's why I said the only thing that's stopping me is the 2GB limitation. From time to time you can catch one for around $100 which isn't that much to me at all to add Triple SLI. Also the GTX 670 Triple SLI is good for gaming at higher resolutions [1440p, 1600p] for sure. It'll definitely hold me over much longer, but the 2-way SLI is doing fine right now I suppose. I'm not even getting into another Single Core debate since I've already addressed that issue regarding the X58 platform. I've already stated that Haswell and even Sandy for that matter has the best single core performance a few pages back and this is shown on the very first page as well. This is no surprise to anyone and we all knew that the 4770K had great single core performance before and after it was released. In my case, I'm seeing tons of performance gains over my i7-960 and I'm glad other are as well. Once again please remember that this review was for High-End X79 Hexa Cores, not Quad cores or single core scors. Those others are there solely for comparisons or in case others wanted to know. The main focus has and always have been the X58 platform, cheap upgrade and X79 Hexa cores. Also gaming.

I don't know or care what people did with their i7-960\980 or 990s. Also who would upgrade from a 970\980\990 anyways to a i2600K or 3770K anyways? That doesn't even make sence especially for just one game. If people did do that, then that's their decision. I'm more focused on my build and benchmarking games. I've only had this CPU for only 4 months and every game that bottlenecked my i7-960 has failed to do so. Next up will be the Metro games [2033 + Last Light].


----------



## PachAz

The only reason you got bottlenecked was because the i7 960 was particularty slow and or you play games that take advantage of more cores. But yeah I understand your point, I just hope people dont get misslead believing that they will get some major boost in games by adding a x56xx to their 1366 system instead of buying a new one...for gaming that is.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well as far as gaming goes I've seen big increases in gaming compared to my i7-960, actually that's a understatement....HUGE increases. I've spoken with others who also saw benefits of using a Hexa core on the X58 platform. If you go and read through my review the Hexa Cores themselves provides a boost by overclocking them. The numbers don't lie. The more I overclock my CPU the better frame tiime and frame rates I get out of my GTX 670s which increases game paerformance. My X5660 @ stock [3.0Ghz x23] simply dominated the Quad core in Crysis 3 @ 1080p.

You can say whatever you want about: _"I just hope people dont get misslead believing that they will get some major boost in games by adding a x56xx to their 1366 system instead of buying a new one...for gaming that is."_, but that is the main reason for posting my gaming results to show that they do make a difference in gaming. Crysis 3 is still one of the hardest games to max @ 1080p\1200p\1440p\1600p. If a Quad core @ 4.2Ghz is micro stuttering to hell and only getting a inconsistent 20 something to 30 something fps, but a overclocked L5639 @ 3.8Ghz- 4Ghz is average a STEADY 50fps @ 1080p [X5660 = 53fps] then the Quad is clearly under performing. That goes for other games like Metro: 2033\Last Light\Tomb Raider and other high end graphical titles as well. The Quads just won't let a high end card do enough work from what I've witnesses. It can get frustrating, but these Hexa cores will definitely hold X58 users over for sometime.

I'm not trying to mislead anyone. You take a chance when you buy anything. My test are here to show the proof and to show what you can expect from the X5660 \ L5639 performance especially if you have similar setups.

So once again I'm not trying to mislead anyone. I can personally say my X5660 has been great for gaming as well as other programs outside of gaming. Not only that, but I'll continue to post the proof and compare similar systems whenever I can.


----------



## aznplayer213

Hi guys I bought a x5650 and have been playing with the clocks. I know that with C1E support the multiplier drops depending on number of cores used. Anybody see a large difference turning it off (in terms of performance and heat)? I have it turned off and my temps went up only 1 to 2 c...


----------



## cala86

Hi everybody and thank you so much Kana-Maru for the work you are doing! Trying to extend the lifetime or our system is something very important...gives more sense to the money we spent on x58, 5 years ago in my case.

Now i own a p6t, 12 gb corsair 1333dhx, i7 920 [email protected],[email protected],20 (181x21),gtx [email protected]; enermax modu82+ 525w. With powerful cards like a 780ti which is not far away from yours 2x 670, or a gtx880, at full hd res the cpu, as your tests and many others confirm, limits those monster of vga. But, the doubt is: at 1600p, the cpu limited situation is not solved? Top vga, will work better with a xeon, or at high resolution like 1600p and why not, 4k, the 920 will do the job??

Thanks!

Inviato dal mio LG-C660 con Tapatalk 2


----------



## freeagentt

Nice x5660. I have an x5690 ES that needs 1.55 for 4.8









I almost want a new one now!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cala86*
> 
> Hi everybody and thank you so much Kana-Maru for the work you are doing! Trying to extend the lifetime or our system is something very important...gives more sense to the money we spent on x58, 5 years ago in my case.
> 
> Now i own a p6t, 12 gb corsair 1333dhx, i7 920 [email protected],[email protected],20 (181x21),gtx [email protected]; enermax modu82+ 525w. With powerful cards like a 780ti which is not far away from yours 2x 670, or a gtx880, at full hd res the cpu, as your tests and many others confirm, limits those monster of vga. But, the doubt is: at 1600p, the cpu limited situation is not solved? Top vga, will work better with a xeon, or at high resolution like 1600p and why not, 4k, the 920 will do the job??
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Inviato dal mio LG-C660 con Tapatalk 2


Thanks a lot man. I'm glad to help as many X58 users as I can. I'm personally waiting to see what Haswell-E will offer, but I'm sure I won't be so quick to upgrade. I'm more focused on getting another GPU with more VRAM\Shader Units\ROPs and other specs. The review is mostly for those who might want to upgrade. If someone doesn't need to then they can keep using what they have been using. I paid good money for my setup and continue to pay money into my setup. I'm trying to get the most out of the X58 platform since I love overclocking on the platform.

I couldn't quite understand if you were asking a question after your last statement above. I'll try to address the second half of your post nonetheless. Your X58 build is still solid. I can't speak for everyone, but my CPU limitations are solved. Gaming on the i7-960 overclocked was not pleasant at 1440p\1600p. Based on my experience with the 960, I doubt if a 920 will be able to handle 4K. Then again I believe that the X58 architecture will be to blame for that. The newer platforms are quicker since the PCI-E is linked directly to the CPU itself as well as other platform benefits. You can only push so much data through. It feels good to get the most out of games that I wish to play at 1600p. The limitations has now become my graphic card issue. Games will continuously require more speed and VRAM at higher resolutions. I only game at 1080p\1200p\1440p\1600p and 720p if I'm streaming.

Now I would LOVE to perform some benchmarks with the X5660 + High end GPUs @ 3840×2160 and 5760x1200. My current setup won't allow me to get THAT extreme right now. Whenever I upgrade my graphics cards I'm definitely going to perform more 4K resolution. I'm more than likely going to purchase a new monitor as well at some point. Hopefully sooner than later.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freeagentt*
> 
> Nice x5660. I have an x5690 ES that needs 1.55 for 4.8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I almost want a new one now!










I think you'll be fine with the X5690. You'll be taking a gamble by downgrading lol. I usually run 4.2Ghz or 4.6Ghz with offset voltage to drop those high temps and high voltages. 4.8Ghz is usually reserved solely for CPU benchmarking or games that will require more whenever I upgrade my GPUs. 1.55 is pretty high though. I believe I hit 5.2Ghz wih 1.53v. Those high voltages make me cringe.


----------



## freeagentt

Heheh yeah I know. For X58 I started off with a 965XE ES, wich of course was a C0.. It did [email protected] 1.4. It clocked the exact same way as the 970 that came after it. Both would do 4.2 with 1.55v.. but barely. I traded my 970 and a few bucks to get this x5690 a bout 3 years ago.

While everyone was ditching their hardware to get the latest and greatest, I just sat back with what I had. I see a lot of people comparing their 920s and such to these Westmeres and Gulftowns, but they cant.. single core performance has already been increased just by the difference in cache alone. I built this thing in 2009, and it has been a great machine. Sure the newer quads are faster in single threaded situations.. But even to this day it destroys almost everything AMD, and the only thing faster is a newer, or higher clocked hexa in heavy compute apps, such as encoding, etc. The bang for the buck is there if you already have your x58 stuff, and just need a cpu.

I just looked at ebay a few days ago, and the price on x58 stuff has gone up a fair bit.

As for voltages, every cpu is different, some crave more voltage, and run cool, some hate voltage and run hot.


----------



## ssgtnubb

Quick question on something I was noticing and wanted yall's input, on my 950 I always noticed my core temps where within 1-2 degree's of each other, on the Xeon it seems to be a larger margin with some within that range and a couple other's that could be in the 5-7 degree difference than the average?

All in all things are going good with my 5650, need to tweak some things.

Switching over my system feels lighter in some regards but the best improvement I had bar none was the overall temp drop. My 950 sat around 35-37 and the xeon is on average around 22, that is amazing in my mind.

Edit: Bam my 900th post!


----------



## freeagentt

You could try more paste, I see a 3-6c spread across the six cores when loaded. My old 970 was bad with a 10-12c spread no matter what I did. I use that clunky old as5 that everyone doesn't like anymore









The quality of the ihs on my x5690 is what I noticed right away compared to my old 970.. To be fair, the 970 was a fairly early retail example.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *freeagentt*
> 
> Heheh yeah I know. For X58 I started off with a 965XE ES, wich of course was a C0.. It did [email protected] 1.4. It clocked the exact same way as the 970 that came after it. Both would do 4.2 with 1.55v.. but barely. I traded my 970 and a few bucks to get this x5690 a bout 3 years ago.
> 
> While everyone was ditching their hardware to get the latest and greatest, I just sat back with what I had. I see a lot of people comparing their 920s and such to these Westmeres and Gulftowns, but they cant.. single core performance has already been increased just by the difference in cache alone. I built this thing in 2009, and it has been a great machine. Sure the newer quads are faster in single threaded situations.. But even to this day it destroys almost everything AMD, and the only thing faster is a newer, or higher clocked hexa in heavy compute apps, such as encoding, etc. The bang for the buck is there if you already have your x58 stuff, and just need a cpu.
> 
> I just looked at ebay a few days ago, and the price on x58 stuff has gone up a fair bit.
> 
> As for voltages, every cpu is different, some crave more voltage, and run cool, some hate voltage and run hot.


Damn 4.1Ghz with 1.4v and that 4.2Ghz vcore is just to high. I will admit that I thought about ditching my X58 for a long time. Especially when Sandy and later Ivy came+ the X79. When I looked at the set backs of the platforms that released afterwards I thought it'll be safe to stick with what I had [i7-960-X58]. It's been proven that clock for clock the Xeons perform better during the single core test. I was actually reading this today. It's minor overall though. Also that's my entire point....if you are on a X58 and need a decent upgrade that doesn't cost a ton of money, the Xeons are right there.

I also noticed the price hike for a lot of X58 merchandise on ebay. I"m glad I caught my CPUs while they were cheap. I saw the Asus Sabertooth X58 sky rocket for a while. It actually went to MSRP and above in some cases. As well as other X58 boards.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssgtnubb*
> 
> Quick question on something I was noticing and wanted yall's input, on my 950 I always noticed my core temps where within 1-2 degree's of each other, on the Xeon it seems to be a larger margin with some within that range and a couple other's that could be in the 5-7 degree difference than the average?
> 
> All in all things are going good with my 5650, need to tweak some things.
> 
> Switching over my system feels lighter in some regards but the best improvement I had bar none was the overall temp drop. My 950 sat around 35-37 and the xeon is on average around 22, that is amazing in my mind.
> 
> Edit: Bam my 900th post!


Congrats on your 900th post. I only passed 300 recently. You issue could be a couple of issues actually. Have you used different temperature monitoring programs just to verify? Could be TIM or something. I did notice that two or three of my cores are usually lower by 5c - 10c. I noticed that the moment I switched from the Quad to the Hexa cores. They get pretty cool with good ambient temps, a good cooler and thermal paste. At stock my X5660 has get as low as 18 and never go above 32c under a full load. So I agree that the temps are pretty amazing with these CPUs.


----------



## ssgtnubb

I've got a new H105 cooling it down, haven't tried changing the paste as I was so impressed with seeing the temps so low, have a couple cores in the teens when idle which is just something I'm not used to seeing.


----------



## trailrunnerx

Hey looks like some pretty impressive numbers some of your x5650 and 5660 are putting up. I'm beginning to think maybe my mobo is holding me back, as a lot of you seem to be able to run 200 BCLK or above and I can do that only with a very low multi. Once I get up to 21x about the best I can boot at is 191 from my experimentation so far. That being said the system flies and I *probably* don't need the extra 400 or so mhz anyway. Just a little let down that it's probably there in the chip but mobo won't play nice.


----------



## cala86

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks a lot man. I'm glad to help as many X58 users as I can. I'm personally waiting to see what Haswell-E will offer, but I'm sure I won't be so quick to upgrade. I'm more focused on getting another GPU with more VRAM\Shader Units\ROPs and other specs. The review is mostly for those who might want to upgrade. If someone doesn't need to then they can keep using what they have been using. I paid good money for my setup and continue to pay money into my setup. I'm trying to get the most out of the X58 platform since I love overclocking on the platform.
> 
> I couldn't quite understand if you were asking a question after your last statement above. I'll try to address the second half of your post nonetheless. Your X58 build is still solid. I can't speak for everyone, but my CPU limitations are solved. Gaming on the i7-960 overclocked was not pleasant at 1440p\1600p. Based on my experience with the 960, I doubt if a 920 will be able to handle 4K. Then again I believe that the X58 architecture will be to blame for that. The newer platforms are quicker since the PCI-E is linked directly to the CPU itself as well as other platform benefits. You can only push so much data through. It feels good to get the most out of games that I wish to play at 1600p. The limitations has now become my graphic card issue. Games will continuously require more speed and VRAM at higher resolutions. I only game at 1080p\1200p\1440p\1600p and 720p if I'm streaming.
> 
> Now I would LOVE to perform some benchmarks with the X5660 + High end GPUs @ 3840×2160 and 5760x1200. My current setup won't allow me to get THAT extreme right now. Whenever I upgrade my graphics cards I'm definitely going to perform more 4K resolution. I'm more than likely going to purchase a new monitor as well at some point. Hopefully sooner than later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you'll be fine with the X5690. You'll be taking a gamble by downgrading lol. I usually run 4.2Ghz or 4.6Ghz with offset voltage to drop those high temps and high voltages. 4.8Ghz is usually reserved solely for CPU benchmarking or games that will require more whenever I upgrade my GPUs. 1.55 is pretty high though. I believe I hit 5.2Ghz wih 1.53v. Those high voltages make me cringe.


Thanks for answering! Sorry, i did not explained so easy, maybe it is my not perfect english







The meaning of my question was: At 1600p, a x5650/5660 is worth the money,is needed to unleash the full power of top level vga, or my 920 will be good enough? at 1080p the answer it is YES but at higher resolution? That's all !


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trailrunnerx*
> 
> Hey looks like some pretty impressive numbers some of your x5650 and 5660 are putting up. I'm beginning to think maybe my mobo is holding me back, as a lot of you seem to be able to run 200 BCLK or above and I can do that only with a very low multi. Once I get up to 21x about the best I can boot at is 191 from my experimentation so far. That being said the system flies and I *probably* don't need the extra 400 or so mhz anyway. Just a little let down that it's probably there in the chip but mobo won't play nice.


I thought you were running 4.2Ghz awhile back and can you select x23 in the BIOS? 191 will still get you nearly 4.6Ghz and 4.4Ghz after the drop. You'll need all of the C-states enabled and EIST. It'll probably take a lot of Vcore to run at that base speed [4.6Ghz] though. If you want to test your BCLK limit just try 192 bclk and drop the CPU multiplier to x14 or x16, then see if you can boot into windows. Every motherboard is different, but you can PM me and I'll see if I can help hit 4.2Ghz or 4.4Ghz.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cala86*
> 
> Thanks for answering! Sorry, i did not explained so easy, maybe it is my not perfect english
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The meaning of my question was: At 1600p, a x5650/5660 is worth the money,is needed to unleash the full power of top level vga, or my 920 will be good enough? at 1080p the answer it is YES but at higher resolution? That's all !


Oh ok I understand now. Well that all depends. What are your specs, how many graphic cards do you have, what types of games do you play? My i7-960 Quad could NOT handle Crysis 3 with one or two GPUs @ 1080p without lowering several settings, so the answer is NO for some games at 1080p. Tomb Raider was decent with one GPU, but still didn't hit 60fps maxed with a Quad @ 1080p, but did go above 60fps with my Hexa with one card [forgot to enable SLI during a test and found out]. From what I've experienced and tested, the Hexa core does great for higher resolutions like QHD+WQXGA even at stock clocks for a lot of the games that I've tested.

I always wondered why my single GPU and multi GPU [SLI] benchmarks were *a lot lower* than benchmarks posted on a lot of PC websites+reviews. Example: Crysis 3 scores around 50-55fps with GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI on several websites @ 1080p. When I ran my Quad i7-960 with GTX 670 25GB 2-Way SLI I was only getting a choppy ass 20-35fps. It was so laggy that I simply lowered the settings. MSAA and a few other settings were usually the blame, but it helps make the game look so nice. After installing the hexa cores I instantly had a much better experience and averaged 50 - 53fps with much better frame times as well. So the Quad CPU was bottlenecking both my Single Card and Dual GPU setup. So even at 1080p the Hexa Core made a world of difference in my case. So at 1440p\1600p my scores didn't reflect the GTX 670 reviews fps as well until I installed my Xeons-hexa core. Now all of my scores reflects others and actually does better than most now.

It looks like the X58 architecture was part of the issue. The newer platforms like Z77\Z87\X79 etc have better and more up to date architecture and this is the main reasoning I was thinking of upgrading. Being that the newer architectures has PCI-E directly connected to the CPU was a game changing. Still I thought the X58 moved plenty of data and could still be a contender. Thought about upgrading for many months. After installing my Xeon L5639 and Xeon 5660 my scores started reflecting the 1080p\1200p+2560x =1440\1600 scores for my GTX 670s. Being that my i7-960 @ 4Ghz - 4.2Ghz couldn't handle certain games at 1080p\1440p\1600p, I would say yes it would be a good investment if you are looking to game at higher resolutions [or games like RTS and MMO].


----------



## mechwarrior

well i just installed my x5660 es chip and cpuZ shows only 4 cores and 8 treads? checked with hwinfo same thing 4 cores 8 treads. think i just got conned


----------



## justinyou

I bought a x5650 to replace my i7-950 after reading this forum, and never regret. The biggest improvement is the lower temperature if compare to the old i7-950, the idle temperature difference is 15 degree Celsius, the same goes to the load temperature, just crazy. Now running perfectly 24/7 on 4.2Ghz.
Kana-maru's comments helps a lot, kudos to him.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mechwarrior*
> 
> well i just installed my x5660 es chip and cpuZ shows only 4 cores and 8 treads? checked with hwinfo same thing 4 cores 8 treads. think i just got conned


Well it's a X5660 ES. As I said you never know what you are getting with those. Sometimes all of the bugs are not worked out and somethings could go wrong. Other times you'll get a Quad. Did the seller advertise Hexa Core or Quad Core? You might be able to send it back for a refund and get a non ES-X5660. You can check the BIOS to ensure that it's only a 4 Cores and nothing needs to be enabled. Run a Cinebench R11.5 benchmark test at stock and tell me your score [just wondering]. X5660 should also have the x24 multipliers not x23. The multipliers normally boost instead of dropping, depending on the cores. A0 revision & 0 stepping as far as I know is only Quad Core. I'll look into sending it back if I were you, but only if the seller advertised 6 cores.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> I bought a x5650 to replace my i7-950 after reading this forum, and never regret. The biggest improvement is the lower temperature if compare to the old i7-950, the idle temperature difference is 15 degree Celsius, the same goes to the load temperature, just crazy. Now running perfectly 24/7 on 4.2Ghz.
> Kana-maru's comments helps a lot, kudos to him.


Thank you. You'll definitely enjoy this chip and it should ease the upgrading itch for a little while longer. 15c difference is pretty big, but that's another reason why these CPUs are nice. 4.2Ghz should be fine for any high end setup and welcome to OCN. Most people I've spoken with has unusually hit 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz which is more than enough speed.


----------



## Horsemama1956

I actually just got an x58 setup the other day and it's quite fun. Everything feels so damn snappy, games run great and it runs cool at 4.2Ghz in games. Generally in the 40s.

I plan on going multi GPU for the first time in the near future when I see a cheap MSI 270x locally.


----------



## Rangerscott

Screw the 5660, Im going E7-8870. LOL


----------



## aznplayer213

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mechwarrior*
> 
> 
> well i just installed my x5660 es chip and cpuZ shows only 4 cores and 8 treads? checked with hwinfo same thing 4 cores 8 treads. think i just got conned


I had the same problem on my non-es 5650. Since I had a 920 on my board before and I had messed around the boot option in msconfig, the pc was booting into the previous max number of cores (4 phyiscal with 8 thread). Go into your msconfig and try to set everything default under boot. Hopefully this fixes your issue.


----------



## Rangerscott

Also make sure all cores option is on in your bios.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horsemama1956*
> 
> I actually just got an x58 setup the other day and it's quite fun. Everything feels so damn snappy, games run great and it runs cool at 4.2Ghz in games. Generally in the 40s.
> 
> I plan on going multi GPU for the first time in the near future when I see a cheap MSI 270x locally.


That's good to hear. I was thinking about 290x CrossfireX myself. I might stick with the 670s longer and wait and see what AMD and Intel has coming.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Screw the 5660, Im going E7-8870. LOL


Lol, but they've been expensive for years. I would love to get one or a couple actually. The price is just to great.


----------



## Rangerscott

Jeez X59 stuff is still priced high. Ebay is full of it.


----------



## Bradford1040

I plan on doing the X5660 in my system, anyone tried it on the X58 asus p6t deluxe v2? I could not believe the prices on this chip on ebay! I always wanted to get the xeon but it was just so expensive.

I am thinking withe the higher Tcase temps and just the spec of the chip over the 920, that I should see a boost in performance in CPU based games like Arma3 and older games of that series, and a few other games I play that I notice that they like more on the CPU side than GPU

So if anyone has tried it on the board I mentioned please let me know if I am wasting 190.00 or not


----------



## sergec19

Hi mate!
I have an asus p6td deluxe with latest bios 608 installed and x5660 works perfect after install i have it running on 4,6ghz with corsair 100i







very good upgrade from my i7 950!


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aznplayer213*
> 
> I had the same problem on my non-es 5650. Since I had a 920 on my board before and I had messed around the boot option in msconfig, the pc was booting into the previous max number of cores (4 phyiscal with 8 thread). Go into your msconfig and try to set everything default under boot. Hopefully this fixes your issue.


Like i see on the pic you have an engineer sample (es)


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Hi mate!
> I have an asus p6td deluxe with latest bios 608 installed and x5660 works perfect after install i have it running on 4,6ghz with corsair 100i
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> very good upgrade from my i7 950!


Thanks and the 1202 is the latest Bios just FYI but that is really good news! I can only get my 920 to 4.3ghz and even then is seems like my buddy's system with a 1090T is getting to close in bench'es lol, Plus I love the higher Tcase temps of the X5660, and the 6 cores lol, if you have time post some screenies of your system running like cinebench 11.5 or R15 and maybe a 3dmark of some sort


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Thanks and the 1202 is the latest Bios just FYI but that is really good news! I can only get my 920 to 4.3ghz and even then is seems like my buddy's system with a 1090T is getting to close in bench'es lol, Plus I love the higher Tcase temps of the X5660, and the 6 cores lol, if you have time post some screenies of your system running like cinebench 11.5 or R15 and maybe a 3dmark of some sort


Ok ill make some screens later.. First need decent cooling for my r9 290







its on the way.. Arctic accelero iv ..
Ok i see you have the P6T deluxe i have the P6TD deluxe.. Newer version.. But will work for sure!


----------



## Rangerscott

Theyre cheap cause theyre old. The W3600 series are 2011 production and are in the $400-$500 used range now. Not sure whats the new cats meow xeons.

Guess Ill be going with a 5650 cause every 5660 I find is $200-$250.


----------



## bill1024

I have the Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with a xeon x5650 at 4ghz.. As said before, you have to have the latest bios.
I ordered a bios chip off e-bay for around 12$ I did not have an i7xxx chip to boot and flash with.
The x5650 cpus are going for 118$ now on e-bay.

I have a Corsair H90 water cooler, 4ghz x5660 running BOINC primegrid 12 threads at 58c Folding at home 12 threads, it is at 52c
CPU at 1.26v, 12gb ram 1.6v @ 1600 9-9-9-25 (3x4gb)
20 x 201 to get to 4ghz and ram @ 1600.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Thanks and the 1202 is the latest Bios just FYI but that is really good news! I can only get my 920 to 4.3ghz and even then is seems like my buddy's system with a 1090T is getting to close in bench'es lol, Plus I love the higher Tcase temps of the X5660, and the 6 cores lol, if you have time post some screenies of your system running like cinebench 11.5 or R15 and maybe a 3dmark of some sort
> 
> 
> 
> Ok ill make some screens later.. First need decent cooling for my r9 290
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its on the way.. Arctic accelero iv ..
> Ok i see you have the P6T deluxe i have the P6TD deluxe.. Newer version.. But will work for sure!
Click to expand...

I have the P6t Deluxe V2 which if I am not mistaken is the newer version right? I already have the 1202 bios updated and just bouncing in my chair waiting on a chip lol I think as far as our boards the V1-Boards were the ones that were frying the extra CPU plug out of them, that was why the V2 has a stupid temp sensor right at that plug where it never gets hot or even moves but a degree or 2 (had to find out everything about the board after I got it) plus the H100i Corsair link software has the topology thing which is kinda cool looking!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have the Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with a xeon x5650 at 4ghz.. As said before, you have to have the latest bios.
> I ordered a bios chip off e-bay for around 12$ I did not have an i7xxx chip to boot and flash with.
> The x5650 cpus are going for 118$ now on e-bay.
> 
> I have a Corsair H90 water cooler, 4ghz x5660 running BOINC primegrid 12 threads at 58c Folding at home 12 threads, it is at 52c
> CPU at 1.26v, 12gb ram 1.6v @ 1600 9-9-9-25 (3x4gb)
> 20 x 201 to get to 4ghz and ram @ 1600.


Thank you as well, makes me always feel better when more than one responds to a question. Strength in numbers right! I know you are running BOINC and have your chip set to 4ghz and running at 52~58c but have you pushed her to 4.6ghz or even seen some getting 4.8ghz, now I have a H100i with delta's in push-pull so have more than enough fan on it lol, and even have a custom loop I could put on it if I just bought new o-ring for the cpu block. but was hopping to trade blows with the newer sandy-bridge and ivy-bridge, and haswell. Not beet mind you just keep up, I am running a GTX680 Classified with a core speed of 1320 and memory clocked to 7100mhz and can play 99% of my games maxed, but THEN theres ARMA Series! Talk about a CPU hungry game, and with mods even more so. I would love to be able to know that 4.6 or 4.8 is the avg. on the high side of a OC, not 24/7 mind you just possible for the most part. I seen the higher Tcase temps and better bandwidth not to mention the extra cache and cores and went nuts after seeing the Ebay prices. God it would be nice to have a halfway decent rig again, not that it isn't now, I just got this used after running a Intel Q9550 @ 3.8ghz on a 790I ultra with twin 460's in sli for years (my back-up rig) I fried my main rig in a water leak!

EDIT>>>>>> Question also between the X5650 and the X5660 is there any OC'ing diff. I will spend the extra 100usd for a bit more if it really is worth it but saving a 100 is also cool if it makes no diff. I would love to get the X5680 but that price is still way up there!


----------



## Kana-Maru

I agree with the i7-980x being around the 400 dollar mark. I'd say anywhere from $350-$450. As for the Asus Rampage III Extreme I'd say around $250-$300 is a fair price for one.

Just to let you guys know I finally go around to dealing with the DDR3-2000Mhz RAM. I'm performing a lot of benchmarks. My motherboard only supports 1866Mhz so I'm comparing 1600Mhz -1900Mhz and 2000Mhz test. I'm focused more on the gaming side of using faster RAM vs slower RAM, but I will provide some CPU synthetic benches. I'm also comparing by using the same Graphic Drivers [new compared to new and old compared to old] . I'm using the latest physics drivers for all of the test, no matter which graphic driver. So far I'm completed about 10 benchmarks. Once I finish everything I'll type it up and show you guys my results.

For Real-Time Benchmarks™ I'm going to use 1600Mhz and 2000Mhz to see if we can get more performance overall.


----------



## alancsalt

You are not permitted to ask for appraisals outside the forum Marketplace. Cleaned.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Guess I'll retype what I posted.

I just wanted to let you guys know that I was running DDR3-2000Mhz RAM test for comparison. I'm going to compare 1600Mhz \ 1900Mhz and 2000Mhz. My motherboard is rated for 1866Mhz, but I don't care. I'm focusing more on the gaming side of these test, but I can include some CPU synthetic test as well. I've ran a ton of test with new drivers and old drivers.I've been benching all day long. I'll post it here once I get everything organized and ready. CPU speeds were 4Ghz & 4.6Ghz for some benchmarks and 4.8Ghz for a few other benches.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Guess I'll retype what I posted.
> 
> I just wanted to let you guys know that I was running DDR3-2000Mhz RAM test for comparison. I'm going to compare 1600Mhz \ 1900Mhz and 2000Mhz. My motherboard is rated for 1866Mhz, but I don't care. I'm focusing more on the gaming side of these test, but I can include some CPU synthetic test as well. I've ran a ton of test with new drivers and old drivers.I've been benching all day long. I'll post it here once I get everything organized and ready. CPU speeds were 4Ghz & 4.6Ghz for some benchmarks and 4.8Ghz for a few other benches.


Cool, I will for one be watching very closely, you really got me hooked on this now lol, and I have not had the PC bug in the past year and a half. There goes my wallet again lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Guess I'll retype what I posted.
> 
> I just wanted to let you guys know that I was running DDR3-2000Mhz RAM test for comparison. I'm going to compare 1600Mhz \ 1900Mhz and 2000Mhz. My motherboard is rated for 1866Mhz, but I don't care. I'm focusing more on the gaming side of these test, but I can include some CPU synthetic test as well. I've ran a ton of test with new drivers and old drivers.I've been benching all day long. I'll post it here once I get everything organized and ready. CPU speeds were 4Ghz & 4.6Ghz for some benchmarks and 4.8Ghz for a few other benches.


How do you get 2000mhz ram to run on a 1866mhz mobo? It wont on mine.


----------



## Rangerscott

Im thinking of getting an X5560 to compare to a 920. More apples to apples comparison.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Cool, I will for one be watching very closely, you really got me hooked on this now lol, and I have not had the PC bug in the past year and a half. There goes my wallet again lol










Trust me man I know the feeling. For some reason I just want to upgrade my GPUs now. There's always something that makes you want to spend a little more cash.....then there's something else. I've been running test for most of the day. I've completed pretty much all of the 1900Mhz + 2000Mhz test I'm going to run for now. All I have to do now is compare the 1600Mhz scores to the others with the latest drivers. I might post a Fire Strike benchmark shortly for 1600Mhz and 2000Mhz [4.8Ghz was over 2088Mhz]. I'll probably get around to posting them all tomorrow or something. I have run those 1600Mhz test with the new BETA drivers. I guess I'll compare the old drivers for now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> How do you get 2000mhz ram to run on a 1866mhz mobo? It wont on mine.


Different brands I suppose. I was able to get up to over 2200Mhz on my motherboard. It takes decent amount of voltage so I"m staying around 1900Mhz - 2100Mhz for testing purposes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Im thinking of getting an X5560 to compare to a 920. More apples to apples comparison.


Wouldn't that be apples to oranges? Also why not post your i7-920 results here. I've been looking for someone to post more results here for the Quads. We've already compared i7-920 graphic scores because there is a person here with a setup similar to my GPU setup. Others have posted their CinebenchR11.5 + R15 scores as well. I ran as many test as I could with my i7-960 in my Xeon L5639 review. After a SDD crash I couldn't remember all of the scores for some of them. I think more Quad data could be helpful since I added as much Quad data as I could.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Cool, I will for one be watching very closely, you really got me hooked on this now lol, and I have not had the PC bug in the past year and a half. There goes my wallet again lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trust me man I know the feeling. For some reason I just want to upgrade my GPUs now. There's always something that makes you want to spend a little more cash.....then there's something else. I've been running test for most of the day. I've completed pretty much all of the 1900Mhz + 2000Mhz test I'm going to run for now. All I have to do now is compare the 1600Mhz scores to the others with the latest drivers. I might post a Fire Strike benchmark shortly for 1600Mhz and 2000Mhz [4.8Ghz was over 2088Mhz]. I'll probably get around to posting them all tomorrow or something. I have run those 1600Mhz test with the new BETA drivers. I guess I'll compare the old drivers for now.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> How do you get 2000mhz ram to run on a 1866mhz mobo? It wont on mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Different brands I suppose. I was able to get up to over 2200Mhz on my motherboard. It takes decent amount of voltage so I"m staying around 1900Mhz - 2100Mhz for testing purposes.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Im thinking of getting an X5560 to compare to a 920. More apples to apples comparison.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wouldn't that be apples to oranges? Also why not post your i7-920 results here. I've been looking for someone to post more results here for the Quads. We've already compared i7-920 graphic scores because there is a person here with a setup similar to my GPU setup. Others have posted their CinebenchR11.5 + R15 scores as well. I ran as many test as I could with my i7-960 in my Xeon L5639 review. After a SDD crash I couldn't remember all of the scores for some of them. I think more Quad data could be helpful since I added as much Quad data as I could.
Click to expand...

yes there always is, I just got this used board and before I even got the os finish I saw this thread and next thing the ebay pages were open lol

Plus I have a 920 on this board so if you want me to post scores I will but I am nowhere near organized about it lol, I am all over the place and have no goal other than get more out of it lol.

Main reason I never posted a tutorial or stuff like what you are doing. I also have a few questions about oc'ing this 920 till I get the X5660 if you know a bit about the volt limits and stuff with the I7's 920~960


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Im thinking of getting an X5560 to compare to a 920. More apples to apples comparison.


Wouldn't comparing a w3520 to a 920 be apples to apples? Best I can tell the specs are the same. If anyone can use benchmarks from my w3520 @ 4ghz lmk what you'd like me to run and I'd be happy to.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yes there always is, I just got this used board and before I even got the os finish I saw this thread and next thing the ebay pages were open lol
> 
> Plus I have a 920 on this board so if you want me to post scores I will but I am nowhere near organized about it lol, I am all over the place and have no goal other than get more out of it lol.
> 
> Main reason I never posted a tutorial or stuff like what you are doing. I also have a few questions about oc'ing this 920 till I get the X5660 if you know a bit about the volt limits and stuff with the I7's 920~960


Well we can do one at a time to keep it neat. Yeah I know about the volt limits and overclocking on the X58 platform. Bloomfields are tough and they can take the heat. The problem is that they require to much heat when overclocked past 4Ghz. Overall it shouldn't be that hard if you are shooting for 4Ghz.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Wouldn't comparing a w3520 to a 920 be apples to apples? Best I can tell the specs are the same. If anyone can use benchmarks from my w3520 @ 4ghz lmk what you'd like me to run and I'd be happy to.


I think that would be a more appropriate apples to apples as well. Also feel free to post some Xeon w3520 @ 4Ghz. I can definitely use the data. I just need to get more data so I can get an average. Then I can add the data to my charts accordingly. I support you can just go down the list of my CPU Review. All of the software is free. I'll just need to know your core speed and your DRAM frequency.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Wouldn't comparing a w3520 to a 920 be apples to apples? Best I can tell the specs are the same. If anyone can use benchmarks from my w3520 @ 4ghz lmk what you'd like me to run and I'd be happy to.


Yea I guess. Was just sticking with the X models.

Well I guess to see if its an upgrade while staying with a 4 core cpu.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yes there always is, I just got this used board and before I even got the os finish I saw this thread and next thing the ebay pages were open lol
> 
> Plus I have a 920 on this board so if you want me to post scores I will but I am nowhere near organized about it lol, I am all over the place and have no goal other than get more out of it lol.
> 
> Main reason I never posted a tutorial or stuff like what you are doing. I also have a few questions about oc'ing this 920 till I get the X5660 if you know a bit about the volt limits and stuff with the I7's 920~960
> 
> 
> 
> Well we can do one at a time to keep it neat. Yeah I know about the volt limits and overclocking on the X58 platform. Bloomfields are tough and they can take the heat. The problem is that they require to much heat when overclocked past 4Ghz. Overall it shouldn't be that hard if you are shooting for 4Ghz.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Wouldn't comparing a w3520 to a 920 be apples to apples? Best I can tell the specs are the same. If anyone can use benchmarks from my w3520 @ 4ghz lmk what you'd like me to run and I'd be happy to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that would be a more appropriate apples to apples as well. Also feel free to post some Xeon w3520 @ 4Ghz. I can definitely use the data. I just need to get more data so I can get an average. Then I can add the data to my charts accordingly. I support you can just go down the list of my CPU Review. All of the software is free. I'll just need to know your core speed and your DRAM frequency.
Click to expand...

4ghz was easy as pie, I want 4.5ghz lol or even 4.3ghz seem to be stuck at 4.0~4.17 or something like that, and the QPI being set on auto volts is telling me in Aida64 that it is at 1.38v and I have heard not to go over 1.35 but also seen guys running 1.5v on the QPI. Now I don't need to go to 1.5v but would like to know if I take it off auto and push it just a little more to get my ram stable, like 1.4~145v MAX you think that would be alright? I know the old saying not my first time asking a question like this and in no way do I hold you responsible lol, I just want your opinion on the QPI volts and any other that I might need to know being that I am a noob on this x58 platform hence the not knowing anything lol

EDIT>>>> also remember I plan on getting a X5660 soon so not like I care about long times and happy memories with this chip lol


----------



## notyettoday

W3520, Rampage III Gene, 20x200 @ 1.200v, 3x2gb 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 1T

Cinebench 11.5: 6.87
AIDA64 Extreme: 45979

There's a start, I'm not aware of how to validate scores from these programs.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks for the Cinebench score. Also 1.2v isn't bad at all for core speed. I forgot that the W3520 overclock much better than the budget Blooms i7-920's and requires less voltage\heat.

I'll make a list to make it easier. Just pick a few and post away. Just a simple picture of the benchmarks are preferred for validation.

AIDA64 = CPU Queen, FPU SinJulia: CPU Queen.
Cinebench R11.5, R15 & R10 [optional]
Performance Test 7 & 8 [CPU Mark full bench]
7-zip v9.20
WinRar v4.20

So just run the benchmarks and post a picture. I'll add to my bench lists and update accordingly.

Also keep a look out for my X58-Xeon Club thread. I'm hoping the mods allow me to make it "official". I'm glad to see so many people still discussing the X58 platform.


----------



## alancsalt

Whether or not a thread is worthy of the [Official] tag is usually decided by an editor of that section. If there is no editor of section the Managing Moderator can be asked how you can proceed.

Usually requires well maintained and fairly definitive content and strong membership. Whether it is "best of type" too if there are multiple threads on the same topic.....

If you have a reputation for producing good content you might get consent sooner, but otherwise you'd probably have to wait till the op is done and a following has built up.


----------



## Rangerscott

The OP says the X5660 is unlocked. Every where I search states no or doesnt meantion it.


----------



## notyettoday

Here are the benchmarks I've run, I couldn't figure out how to share performance test 8 as the screen was taller than my monitor's resolution. If you have any suggestions I have the results still up.

Note: I'm running Windows Vista SP2, I'm not sure if that would effect my scores much, but I figured it'd be worth mentioning

Aida64 Cpu Queen


Aida64 Sinjulia


7Zip


Cinebench 11.5


Winrar:
6734


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Whether or not a thread is worthy of the [Official] tag is usually decided by an editor of that section. If there is no editor of section the Managing Moderator can be asked how you can proceed.
> 
> Usually requires well maintained and fairly definitive content and strong membership. Whether it is "best of type" too if there are multiple threads on the same topic.....
> 
> If you have a reputation for producing good content you might get consent sooner, but otherwise you'd probably have to wait till the op is done and a following has built up.


Yeah I've been holding off, but with so many users constantly buying Xeons and those who already have Xeons I thought why the hell not. X58 still has plenty of life in it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> The OP says the X5660 is unlocked. Every where I search states no or doesnt meantion it.


The X5660 is unlocked, as well as the Xeon L5639 from what I've tested. I've already helped users throughout this topic with different motherboards. They were able to change the CPU ratio at will. The only multiplier you can't access is 22x and 24x on the X5660. I suppose I should say that it depends on the motherboard manufacture brand and the BIOS as well. If you look through the topic you'll see users who have chosen their CPU multiplier. There's a lot of POST so I'm sure if you'll want to go through them all.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Here are the benchmarks I've run, I couldn't figure out how to share performance test 8 as the screen was taller than my monitor's resolution. If you have any suggestions I have the results still up.
> 
> Note: I'm running Windows Vista SP2, I'm not sure if that would effect my scores much, but I figured it'd be worth mentioning


Thanks for the results. Also on Vista [other than the Basic version] you can use the "snipping tool" to select area that you want to copy and paste. Actually windows will do the copy and paste for you. All you have to do is save the file+format after select the area on your screen. It's found under - Start Menu > Accessories >Snipping Tool -

Here's a quick of example of simply selecting a specific area:









It's great for those who want a smaller upload file or only want to show specific information. From there you fix anything you need to in Paint.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The X5660 is unlocked, as well as the Xeon L5639 from what I've tested. I've already helped users throughout this topic with different motherboards. They were able to change the CPU ratio at will. The only multiplier you can't access is 22x and 24x on the X5660. I suppose I should say that it depends on the motherboard manufacture brand and the BIOS as well. If you look through the topic you'll see users who have chosen their CPU multiplier. There's a lot of POST so I'm sure if you'll want to go through them all.


Sorry to tell you, that means it is NOT unlocked. Unlocked processors like the 980x can have the multiplier freely adjusted well up into the x30+ range. The X5660 maxes at x24.

Every X58 processor can adjust ratios at will.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Sorry to tell you, that means it is NOT unlocked. Unlocked processors like the 980x can have the multiplier freely adjusted well up into the x30+ range. The X5660 maxes at x24.
> 
> Every X58 processor can adjust ratios at will.


This is true in the sense you can not OC with the multiplier like you can with the AMD Black series.
You have to OC with the FSB.

My x5650 and P6T deluxe will not let me use the 21 multiplier for some reason.

Some one asked if I had it up to 4.6 or over. No I haven't, I had it at 3.8 for a while, now I am at 4.0, next after a while I may shoot for 4.4.
With this system running at 100% load 24/7 folding and crunching I don't want to kill it.
Plus this box is my HDTV PVR and it houses the TV tuner and the drives to store my recordings.
I need it to be 100% stable and last a long time.


----------



## Bradford1040

http://valid.canardpc.com/trl779

Just a little happy about this, But I am just screwing around I will get some screen shots of benchies from Aida and a few others, just getting used to this chip and abusing it till the X5660 gets here


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Sorry to tell you, that means it is NOT unlocked. Unlocked processors like the 980x can have the multiplier freely adjusted well up into the x30+ range. The X5660 maxes at x24.
> 
> Every X58 processor can adjust ratios at will.


That's what I thought.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I was speaking in regards to some users being unable to set the multiplier to what others are getting. For instance some L5639 users being limited to 16x and losing the remaining 4 multipliers. Or X5660 users being unable to access anything higher than 18x or 21x.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/trl779
> 
> Just a little happy about this, But I am just screwing around I will get some screen shots of benchies from Aida and a few others, just getting used to this chip and abusing it till the X5660 gets here


That's a good CPU speed for the i7-920. How much Vcore did it take?


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Sorry to tell you, that means it is NOT unlocked. Unlocked processors like the 980x can have the multiplier freely adjusted well up into the x30+ range. The X5660 maxes at x24.
> 
> Every X58 processor can adjust ratios at will.
> 
> 
> 
> This is true in the sense you can not OC with the multiplier like you can with the AMD Black series.
> You have to OC with the FSB.
> 
> My x5650 and P6T deluxe will not let me use the 21 multiplier for some reason.
> 
> Some one asked if I had it up to 4.6 or over. No I haven't, I had it at 3.8 for a while, now I am at 4.0, next after a while I may shoot for 4.4.
> With this system running at 100% load 24/7 folding and crunching I don't want to kill it.
> Plus this box is my HDTV PVR and it houses the TV tuner and the drives to store my recordings.
> I need it to be 100% stable and last a long time.
Click to expand...

Well I understand it having to be 100% stable if it runs you home media to, I have a rack server for that myself and those are super stable, I a few rack servers all used for different things, I was under the impression it was your gaming/oc'ing desktop, but thank you for answering me.

ALSO Kana-Maru! Why on the lga 1366 does it seem to game and bench so much better with HT and Turbo enabled. I have been playing as you seen, and am learning this chipset and CPU as I go and was wondering if it was just me that noticed this and I am doing something wrong! OR is it everyone and I am just following in the footsteps of others 4 years ahead of me on this chipset lol.

I was trying to set a score in Cinebench 11.5 that my friend can't touch with his AMD 1090t and he is nipping at my heels it seems, that was a big reason for the X5660 thought to as I know that 6 cores will do much better than this quad does.

I know you are busy and doing a great job testing this chipset and applaud you but if there are any hints to increasing my distance with this 920 from that 1090T let me know


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I was speaking in regards to some users being unable to set the multiplier to what others are getting. For instance some L5639 users being limited to 16x and losing the remaining 4 multipliers. Or X5660 users being unable to access anything higher than 18x or 21x.
> That's a good CPU speed for the i7-920. How much Vcore did it take?


That's an issue with a certain motherboard's compatibility, rather than a feature of the processor. Most likely a BIOS programming problem, but good luck getting it sorted out now with 5 yr old parts.

@Bradford: Agreed. Very nice speed. I'm assuming that's a D0 chip. What temps and cooling are you using for that? Or are you trying to kill it now that you have a new one on the way?


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's because HT and Turbo are beneficial. Turbo increases the core speed, voltage and other things on the system. HT allows more threads to run on one core. It's a win-win situation for nearly everything. Your 920 should be getting around 7.30 I suppose. I'll need more info.

I never got around to ever testing the HT vs HT off. I always leave my HT on no matter what I'm doing on the my PC.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Well I understand it having to be 100% stable if it runs you home media to, I have a rack server for that myself and those are super stable, I a few rack servers all used for different things, I was under the impression it was your gaming/oc'ing desktop, but thank you for answering me.
> 
> ALSO Kana-Maru! Why on the lga 1366 does it seem to game and bench so much better with HT and Turbo enabled. I have been playing as you seen, and am learning this chipset and CPU as I go and was wondering if it was just me that noticed this and I am doing something wrong! OR is it everyone and I am just following in the footsteps of others 4 years ahead of me on this chipset lol.
> 
> I was trying to set a score in Cinebench 11.5 that my friend can't touch with his AMD 1090t and he is nipping at my heels it seems, that was a big reason for the X5660 thought to as I know that 6 cores will do much better than this quad does.
> 
> I know you are busy and doing a great job testing this chipset and applaud you but if there are any hints to increasing my distance with this 920 from that 1090T let me know


I have two SuperMicro 4P servers, an Asus dual x5660 server, two AMD 1045T hexcores, and the one P6T-D-V2 x6550 and an Intel q6600.
I retired the q6600 and moved the PVR HDTV stuff in to the x5650 build.
Thing is it is getting warm here and my electric supplier just raised the electric rates to around 23 cents a KWH. It used to be around 13c or so.
We now have the 2nd highest rates in the US, only behind Hawaii. Plus on top of that, our local county just imposed a 3% tax on nat. gas, oil and electric.
So I shut most of my rigs down for the season and I will be using this x5650 @ 4ghz and an AMD 1045T @ 3.2ghz, both have 660Ti video cards, to game on.
In the cold weather at least the computers help heat the house, I refuse to cool this load this year at this electric rate.
I am looking to get the heck out of NY to a place less taxed, where the utilities are cheaper, and the gun and knife laws are not so crazy as they are here.

I will try to do some benching with my x5650 and my hex 1045T and see how they compare.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've dedicated a large portion of my weekend to these benches so please bear with me. I've done as much as I could. Also big thanks to kpforce1 for the help with these benchmarks







It's been proven that faster RAM [1600+] can lead to better scores in several programs. This is more likely on newer architectures [Post-X58]. It's possible on the X58 platform, but you'll nearly destroy the CPU, MB or the RAM attempting to emulate the scores you see on X79. Or you could potentially do some damage and cause some major degrading. I tried to be as conservative as I could with the voltages and focused around 1900Mhz - 2000Mhz. I probably could have and probable should have used more voltage; I'm not risking my build for faster RAM frequency. That's to big of a risk for me. My board is only rated at 1866Mhz.

However, I've always read different views on the benefits for gaming & CPU benchmarks. So I've taken many hours to compare RAM frequencies. We all know that the GPU and CPU matters, but how much does RAM matter on the X58 platform. The fastest frequency I could achieve was 2200Mhz. The problem is that it required a lot of voltage to POST and run. The other problem is that these voltages affect the CPU and the RAM the most. Therefore I'm running only 1600Mhz - 2000Mhz. I'm focusing mostly on the gaming side. Remember that my board is only rated for 1866Mhz so hopefully this barrier didn't influence my scores that much. I also attempted to show as many scores for drivers "331.82" & "337.50" with 1600Mhz, 1900Mhz and 2000Mhz in the chart. Below I'm going to compare the core speed+RAM frequency performance percentage.

Here is the list of the benchmarks that I've ran:
or click\go here----> http://cdn.overclock.net/9/9c/9c90f13c_28meal2.jpeg



Here are the breakdowns from my 1600Mhz, 1900Mhz and 2000Mhz scores [all graphic and physx drivers.] I will be taking the highest scores and comparing them from the results [increase or decrease%].

*3DMark 11 - Performance % Results:*
4Ghz-1900Mhz = +0.72%
4Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%'

4.6Ghz - 2000Mhz =+ 1.9%
4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = +0.93%
4.8Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%
--

*3DMark 11 - Extreme % Results:*
4Ghz-1900Mhz = +0.59%
4Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

4.8Ghz-1900Mhz = +0.29%
4.8Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%
--

*3D Mark Fire Strike - Performance:*
4Ghz-1900Mhz = +0.29%
4Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

4.6Ghz - 2000Mhz = +0.94%
4.6Ghz- 1900Mhz = +0.62%
4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = +0.18%
4.8Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%
--

*3D Mark Ice Storm - Performance:*
4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz = +1.07%
4.6Ghz - 2000Mhz = 0.0%

4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = +3.30%
4.8Ghz -1600Mhz = 0.0%
--

*Tomb Raider 100% Maxed 1080p - Avg. FPS*
4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = +1.88%
4.8Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

--

*Tomb Raider 100% Maxed 1600p - Avg. FPS*
4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = +0.88%
4.8Ghz - 1600Mhz = 0.0%

--

*Battlefield 4 100% Maxed 1600p - Avg. FPS*
4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz = +7.5%
4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = 0.0%
--

*Crysis 3*
4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz = +5.87%
4.8Ghz - 2000Mhz = 0.0%

Here are some high results I didn't think I'd ever get


*So are RAM modules higher than 1600Mhz worth it?*

The answer is yes and no depending on a few things. For the X58 platform 1600Mhz - 1866Mhz should be more than enough and has been for several years now. Now if you see 1600Mhz & 2000Mhz kit around the same price and your motherboard supports the frequency; then it might not be a bad decision to go with the higher frequency. If the 2000Mhz support a CAS of 7 or 8, I'd go with the 2000Mhz modules instead of the 1600Mhz personally. RAM timings are another thing to consider. Personally I would go with 1600Mhz RAM due to the fact that you can tighten the timings much better and usually get a lower CAS.

As far as overclocking goes 1600Mhz gives me a bit more flexibility when overclocking. My board [or probably the X58 platform] is limiting me what I can achieve with 2000Mhz RAM. I believe I could get more out of 2000Mhz RAM, but the potential consequences aren't worth it. This is my only build and I don't know what I'd do without my 1st Generation Beast. I actually broke the some of my old records so I'm glad I ran these test again with the latest drivers. The performance increases are pretty minor across the board when going from 1600Mhz to 2000Mhz. However some of the numbers look much better with 2000Mhz. I actually hit 16767 in 3D Mark 11, not quite 17K that I'd like to hit [but that's close enough for me:thumb:]. I also finally broke 200,000 in 3Dmark Ice Storm with 1600Mhz RAM, 2000Mhz just wasn't doing it. Real-Time Benchmarks™ shows that there isn't a big difference I'm able to tighten the times on 1600Mhz and it shows when compared to 1900Mhz - 2000Mhz RAM in some of the benchmarks. Thanks for reading. I'll update as I continue to benchmark.


----------



## Bradford1040

First off god that Sabertooth is SMEXY, the P6T Deluxe V2 I have is the first board I hated the looks of.

Getting ready to read this long review you posted, I am sure it will be great.

On My OC

I used 1.46v ( edit--but it has been set on this core volts for oc'ing stable reasons, I will lower it after I find my 24/7 speed) on the core and 1.40 on the QPI and 1.82 on the PPL I also used different ram than I run normally, I used a 6gb kit of OCZ ram pn# ocz3p1600lv4gk ram specs are [email protected] 1600mhz but loosen them up for the OC to 9-9-9-24-2 @ 1.62v I think might have been a little looser but volts were right on

The cooler I am using is a H100i I just got, with the Delta fans so the airflow is good enough to suck me off my chair if I get to close! lol. I am not trying to kill the chip but if it goes out not such a big deal

I hope I did not leave any questions unanswered, Thanks to all for asking and any advice to me as its always nice to have like minded people that you can turn to for answers as most of real lifers have no clue what a gaming PC is or even OC'ing them

EDIT>>>>> oh yeah it is a DO chip I had mentioned it before, I guess I need to put my system back in the sig section now that I have a rig I am talking about again, my older rig I knew it backwards and forwards, what it could and couldn't do, I still have her up and running as she is my old trid'n'true rig. A old core2quad Q9550 oc'ed to 3.8ghz on a XFX 790I ultra sli with twin Gtx 460's in sli and a 3rd 460 for Physx

Also Kana-Maru you make me wish I took the deal on Craigslist for twin 670's for 240usd for both not each! vs the 680 classy I have but I will be grabbing another 680 classy or 770 classy and sli them so sure at that point I will hit about the same scores as my 3dmark11 is about 10,000~11,000 now with the 920 and the 680. (just for anyone reading the 680 classified can be bios flashed to the 770 classified as they are the same card. sure some have different ram chips but I got lucky I guess as mine are the same as the 770's I have seen, I have my ram set in bios to 7ghz and get at least another 4~600 in Precision and my core set to 1320ghz but without adding more volts from the EVbot that is about maxed and seems to be my sweet spot anyway)

3dmark11 score

Ice Storm a few days ago on older driver

Ice Storm with Beta Drivers

Cloud Gate same old drivers

Cloud Gate with Beta Drivers

Fire Strike

And believe it or not Fire Strike will not run on the Beta Drivers

3dMark Vantage with the Beta Drivers

3DMark Vantage Extreme Setting
This was to bad I had Beta Driver if I am not mistaken I was the top score worldwide?


----------



## Bradford1040

I got a Question about the different chips, sorry for the double post just edited so many times on the other and this was a different subject in a way

I was looking at spec of the X5675 vs the X5660 and it seems that the 75 just had a different multi was all, is this true for all the X56** chips?

X5660 vs X5675

I also would like to know if you can get more out of the higher factory clocked chips? Because with the old Core2Quads the factory OC did nothing for the end result overclock, like the 9650 vs the 9550 had the same max overclock, or is this chip different because of the memory/QPI limits


----------



## notyettoday

So one of my customers gave me a free computer today, I didn't think it was anything special, but when I removed the cooler I found a W3680 underneath







Anyone have any experience with these?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> First off god that Sabertooth is SMEXY, the P6T Deluxe V2 I have is the first board I hated the looks of.
> 
> Getting ready to read this long review you posted, I am sure it will be great.


Well I hope you enjoyed the review. 2000Mhz RAM does show some pretty numbers. Thanks for the MB compliment. I was really digging the military look before I purchased it.

Quote:


> The cooler I am using is a H100i I just got, with the Delta fans so the airflow is good enough to suck me off my chair if I get to close! lol. I am not trying to kill the chip but if it goes out not such a big deal
> 
> I hope I did not leave any questions unanswered, Thanks to all for asking and any advice to me as its always nice to have like minded people that you can turn to for answers as most of real lifers have no clue what a gaming PC is or even OC'ing them


I have some of those Delta fans as well in my rig. I purchased a fan controller so it doesn't get to noisy. I could connect my fan controller to the board and let them run on their own, but I'd rather keep it like this for now. I have some of those 5,400rpm Gentle Typhoons as well. When I crank them up it can sound like a server room here. There are plenty of people here with good info. Some can be nicer than others. It's still good info nonetheless. Hey man we are real lifers too!









Quote:


> Also Kana-Maru you make me wish I took the deal on Craigslist for twin 670's for 240usd for both not each! vs the 680 classy I have but I will be grabbing another 680 classy or 770 classy and sli them so sure at that point I will hit about the same scores as my 3dmark11 is about 10,000~11,000 now with the 920 and the 680. (just for anyone reading the 680 classified can be bios flashed to the 770 classified as they are the same card. sure some have different ram chips but I got lucky I guess as mine are the same as the 770's I have seen, I have my ram set in bios to 7ghz and get at least another 4~600 in Precision and my core set to 1320ghz but without adding more volts from the EVbot that is about maxed and seems to be my sweet spot anyway)


That sounds good. $240 for two of them is a steal. I got both of my GTX 670s brand new for under $400.00 [purchased the second a little but later], so that was a steal near the release. I thought about a 680, but the fps and performance difference at the time wasn't worth the extra money to me. The 680 is still a great card.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> I got a Question about the different chips, sorry for the double post just edited so many times on the other and this was a different subject in a way
> 
> I was looking at spec of the X5675 vs the X5660 and it seems that the 75 just had a different multi was all, is this true for all the X56** chips?
> 
> X5660 vs X5675
> 
> I also would like to know if you can get more out of the higher factory clocked chips? Because with the old Core2Quads the factory OC did nothing for the end result overclock, like the 9650 vs the 9550 had the same max overclock, or is this chip different because of the memory/QPI limits


Well there are few more than those. Some of the X56xx has lower TDP than others and core speeds differ as well. I believe the only other difference is the turbo on the cores. Reminds me of the Core i7's. The only major differences of the Core i7's were the core\uncore speed, TDP, QPI and multipliers. Most people can OC the QPI fairly easy since it has to increase during the overclock. I guess another difference would be the single core speed, there's no way to know about that until you buy and benchmark the CPUs. I'm not sure if you will get more out of a higher factory clocked chip or not. Nice single card results btw. For some reason I'm just dying to upgrade my GPUs and sell these off. I'm gonna try and be patient.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> So one of my customers gave me a free computer today, I didn't think it was anything special, but when I removed the cooler I found a W3680 underneath
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone have any experience with these?


I sense something in the force. I believe its you mailing it to me.


----------



## notyettoday

ill give you an a for effort, but Im really liking the sound of a 12 core micro atx setup with my rampage iii gene


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> ill give you an a for effort, but Im really liking the sound of a 12 core micro atx setup with my rampage iii gene


Thats over kill for you.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Thats over kill for you.


Probably so, But I'm sure it won't hurt my folding points any


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Thats over kill for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably so, But I'm sure it won't hurt my folding points any
Click to expand...

Nice find for free? or did you have to pay for it? Plus I seen you said a 12 core rig, you know it is only 6 core and only has one Qpi possibilities so running two is not going to happen.

I would love to come across stuff like that but I always get old PC's and they got like LGA 478 in them lol, and the funny part is the person is like it is a gaming PC! I have to bite my tongue most of the time. It is scary going on my local Craigslist as most around here are 100% stupid when it comes to PC's. I was looking for a Rack Server (used of course) and this guy had a PC listed as a Biz Server so I opened up the link and low and behold

a Pentium 3 socket 1 running Windows XP pro and it had a 64mb AGP 8x card in it and this guy had the nerve to be asking 700usd for it, as when he bought it he paid 3,000 for it. so it is a steal for 700 lol, I could not hold it back the reply went out to tell him how out of line he was to be posting it as a Biz Server, Telling people it will run there Biz and game most new game at full settings and the kicker was the price!


----------



## notyettoday

It was in fact free, from a very generous customer at my shop! I was referring to the 12 logical cores.

There are people around here on CL Trying to sell nonsense for crazy prices. I saw a q6600 setup with a gtx 260 for $2000 the other day!


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> It was in fact free, from a very generous customer at my shop! I was referring to the 12 logical cores.
> 
> There are people around here on CL Trying to sell nonsense for crazy prices. I saw a q6600 setup with a gtx 260 for $2000 the other day!


YUP!!! Those! I hate them, they are a waste of a click, not to mention the poor people that buy the item thinking they got a gaming rig!


----------



## Rangerscott

Yo bro. I built this pc 8 years ago. Its runs BF4 on [email protected] resolution.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Yo bro. I built this pc 8 years ago. Its runs BF4 on [email protected] resolution.


GAMING PC! worth about 1,000usd then huh. you paid allot for it so it must be good! lol


----------



## notyettoday

Good news! My particular W3680 has an unlocked multiplier.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Good news! My particular W3680 has an unlocked multiplier.


I dont want to hear.

What did it come out of? Brand? Model?


----------



## Rangerscott

E - mainstream CPUs with standard TDP.
L - low-power CPUs.
W - workstation-class microprocessors.
X - high-performance models with 75 Watt and higher.

Xeon info.

http://www.cpu-world.com/info/Intel/server-processor-number.html


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I dont want to hear.
> 
> What did it come out of? Brand? Model?


It came out of an HP z400. Unfortunately the board is gone, I can't get it to power up. I won't tell you what my temps are then


----------



## dpoverlord

So interesting a guy on redditt is trying to prove X79 is far superior and better bang for the buck.

His thread is here:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/1zsykl/the_king_6400x2560_4_30_monitors_titan_build/

I dont deny x79 is compelling but its not worth it.
Quote:


> You are really pushing it with the pricetag of 1500 USD. Seriosuly, only checking a single hardware reseller, I got a pricetag of 485 USD on the CPU plus 580 USD for the Motherboard.
> That is a very effective, but expensive way of getting on the x79 playform. If you want to go there cheaper, I would suggest the 4820k for 325 USD plus the Gigabyte x79 ud3 motherboard for 230 USD
> That will bring the pricepoint for Ivy Bridge E (and all the perks discussed earlier on) down to a meager 555 USD, for a Ivy Bridge E quadcore, 715 USD for your Hexcore Ivy E CPU of choice pared with an "entry" level motherboard, and lastly 1060 USD for your chosen combo of motherboard and CPU. With gainlevels up to 30 percent, I would gladly pay even the 1000 doller price tag, but remember its completely achieveable with 555 USD.
> Not a whole lot of games support more than 4 cores anyways as of right now.


----------



## Bradford1040

RE-Ran 3dmark11 with non-beta drivers

basicly I went through my entire list of drivers and came up with the best for single card being Xtreme-G drivers 332.21 and on Fermi cards if anyone was running them 314.21 both Nvidia and Xtreme-G were about the same here, I got a bit better with Xtreme's but not much.

SO, not following the flow of the thread but figured I would put it out there. I was up all night Driver Sweeping and installing and Benching/BSOD'ing lol! I figured I would share my thoughts on them. I think the Xtreme-G are a little more forgiving for Overclocking, as we all know Nvidia loves jumping either way on this front! One driver OC's fine the next can't even get it off stock clocks it seems. Not to mention the hole Fermi fiasco with SLI, I swear they messed those up to make Kepler look better.

Like I said if I upset the OP for getting off track I am sorry just was bored and was working on getting the most out of this chip and getting the GPU dialed in helped with benches so.


----------



## Rangerscott

Looks like I'll be having a W5580 heading my way. Didnt mean to win it but I'll see what it can do.

But but but rangerscott. Thats a stinky peasant 4 core.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Looks like I'll be having a W5580 heading my way. Didnt mean to win it but I'll see what it can do.
> 
> But but but rangerscott. Thats a stinky peasant 4 core.


post scores when you get her, quad or not love to see if is better than its consumer counterpart, as we are all always on the look out for a better bang for the buck lol.

How much did it sell for? BTW


----------



## Rangerscott

More than what I wanted to spend. I was bidding with my phone and accidently added an extra 0 so I 1000% guaranteed myself the win. LOL

I guess people are doing what yall are doing or something. Theres some X5600's being bid on like theyre the last ones. Was watching an X5680, still 2 days left and jumped from $40ish to $200.


----------



## notyettoday

Ah well worse things have happened. That 24x multiplier should be good for your oc depending on the bclk your board is capable of.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Ah well worse things have happened. That 24x multiplier should be good for your oc depending on the bclk your board is capable of.


Is that the multiplier? Thats the only info I couldnt find.


----------



## notyettoday

I assume so, I just divided 3200 by 133


----------



## Rangerscott

Well I can boot into W7 @ 4ghz but running Heaven for a couple minutes freezes her up. Tried upping the voltage to the max safe and no go. Now I cant even go back to my 24/7 stable 3.6ghz setup.

OCing can be so frustrating.


----------



## Bradford1040

OK this has to ether be a scam or the best price ever seen on W3520


----------



## notyettoday

I paid $25 for my 2 w3520's shipped


----------



## Bradford1040

Well I just got my Shipping info for the X5660 so I am happy that it is on its way! I got it for $190.00 shipped which is a good price for used but from what I understand as long as the seller is not a lier its new! Now just keep finger crossed that it does not suck and is a golden chip. But as I don't have that kinda luck it most likely will be a DOA lol or won't OC for poo

EDIT>>>>> Plus notyettoday how does the w3520 compared to the 920? They seem to be the same specs so was wondering if the xeon out did the 920 in anyway or is it just a better bin and that is about it?


----------



## cala86

hi everybody, just installed an x5650 into my system, coming from a good i7 920 d0 which was doing 3,8ghz at 1,20625v, now i'm testing the xeon at 3,6ghz (180x20, multipliers are up to x22 but i do not see x21) , 1,15v, seems stable, this is absolutely fantastic!!i gained 4-5 fps in assassins creed black flag, power consumption? an average of 50w less under heavy load, cold temp (idle 28-30 degrees celsius, load max 55). for now, i think i'll keep at 3,6ghz, i do not need more power, but i will continue testing to find the minimum voltage possible to work with 3,6ghz-ht on.

IMPORTANT: i had some issues after the cpu-upgrade. Of course i reset the bios before installing the xeon, but that was not enough, because win 7 did load but incorrectly, i heared the login sound but the monitor was stuck on the windows logo. tried to boot on recovery mode, it works,so i tried to reinstall vga drivers, don't worked, tried to reinstall intel chipset drivers from the asus website, and windows finally loaded correctly, only a freeze, after that 3 times the reboot failed. then i swithed off the system to do another thing, after 5 minutes tried again and from two hours to now everithing works fine.

surely i will continue to test and post something i hope will be useful to the community, even if my english it is not so good but i'm working on it









thanks kana maru for all that you've done, thanks to you i have for 150 euros a beast in my system, if i sell my 920 the total costs will be 75-80 euros.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Well I just got my Shipping info for the X5660 so I am happy that it is on its way! I got it for $190.00 shipped which is a good price for used but from what I understand as long as the seller is not a lier its new! Now just keep finger crossed that it does not suck and is a golden chip. But as I don't have that kinda luck it most likely will be a DOA lol or won't OC for poo
> 
> EDIT>>>>> Plus notyettoday how does the w3520 compared to the 920? They seem to be the same specs so was wondering if the xeon out did the 920 in anyway or is it just a better bin and that is about it?


The w3520 seems to be a better binned i7 920, I ran mine 20x200 @1.2v for 3 months folding stable.


----------



## sergec19

the promised benchmarks..

Cpu @ 4.51Ghz,
was stable @ 4.6Ghz but got sound issues with my Asus Xonar DGX
HT is disabled! will try soon with HT On
R9 290 is overclocked but not max.. did not tried with more voltage..
has an Arctic Accelero IV cooler!

Max temps R9 [email protected] 1100/1400
Core 66° - VRM1 77° - VRM2 60°

Max temp X5660 4.51GHz HT off @1.40V
hottest core 64°

3Dmark11: P13377
Firestrike: 9809
Valley 1.0 Extreme HD: 2643
Heaven 4.0 Extreme : 1773


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Well I just got my Shipping info for the X5660 so I am happy that it is on its way! I got it for $190.00 shipped which is a good price for used but from what I understand as long as the seller is not a lier its new! Now just keep finger crossed that it does not suck and is a golden chip. But as I don't have that kinda luck it most likely will be a DOA lol or won't OC for poo
> 
> EDIT>>>>> Plus notyettoday how does the w3520 compared to the 920? They seem to be the same specs so was wondering if the xeon out did the 920 in anyway or is it just a better bin and that is about it?
> 
> 
> 
> The w3520 seems to be a better binned i7 920, I ran mine 20x200 @1.2v for 3 months folding stable.
Click to expand...

Funny thing about you screen name it made me fold again lol, I also was never 100% stable like I am with this intel board. I know I am going to make allot angry with this next statement, BUT, AMD boards and CPU's don't seem as stable as Intels, I have many AMD's mostly Phenom 2's left AM2,AM2+,and AM3 boards and my old Intel LGA 775 Q9550 was my board that always ran stable even when loaded down with 16gb ram and OC'ed to 4ghz which for that chip was pushed trust me. I had all my AMD boards and chips OC'ed as well and they had more BSOD's than my Intel rigs. I don't know if it is the ram or just the fact that you have to push them further to get about the same performance out of them or what, But was never able to Fold with any of them, not 100% anyway. I ran Crysis 1 and was running intel burn test on high with half the cores on this 920 and not one hiccup, then folded for I think 10 hours at 4.5ghz with max core temp at 82c with just a H100i on it. I cant wait to see this X5660 I got coming. I know its a old chipset but I am actually excited for the first time in years about a PC part!

Sorry all for rambling just wanted to share a bit is all

EDIT>>>>> sergec19 Thank you so much for taking the time to do that, I hope I am able to trade blows with them in a few days


----------



## Bradford1040

Well I am hoping my CPU will be in tomorrow, if not it will be monday! God I hate shipping I am the most impatient person when it comes to waiting for a item bought online! I normally (if I have the choice) I next day everything morning delivery, with my local post office it is almost needed as I have never seen such a bad office before. I have lived in many cities and states and by far Virginia Beach USPS is the worst!

Lost or late packages are very common, they even had a news article on it in the local paper, you have to physically go to the sorting station as they take the phone off the hook, I even dialed it in front of the receptionist and got a busy signal looked down at her phone seen every line light up and no one was on any phone, when I confronted her on this she just smiled and said we are very busy sir we will call you if we find your item! (mind you the place was so quiet you could hear a pin drop,and it is a warehouse with high ceilings) I asked to see the manager and that was the funniest part, he only comes in for a hour at 4pm sir if you would like I could have him call you as he does not see people directly! So that was my little rant for today and hopefully gets others to post


----------



## Rangerscott

My W5580 should be here Monday.


----------



## Bradford1040

well it looks like mine won't be here till then either, I know for a fact it was shipped on the 1st but they have it listed as, accepted on the 2nd, so it took them a full day to decide to scan it in I guess, so 2 day shipping puts that in monday, GOD I hate USPS, why can't they just do what they are paid to do? I would like it just one time a package arrives early or even on time from USPS, would be nice but , as my dad used to tell me wish in one hand and poop in the other and see which fills first!


----------



## Rangerscott

Always add a day for processing.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Always add a day for processing.


I did I am not adding that it was purchased on the 29th and dropped off from what the shipper said was the 1st first thing in the am I believe he said 9am was hard to hear him

The Post Office did not scan it in till (May 2, 2014 , 11:10 pm)


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> My W5580 should be here Monday.


Make sure you post scores, I would love to see how it does, I am thinking about building a few rigs with parts I have laying around and getting rid of them and X58 stuff is still great and getting cheaper by the day


----------



## bill1024

I have an Asus dual processor with two x5660, and I have the Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with the one x5650.
What I am thinking, buy another x5650 and put two x5650 in the dual processor since they can't be overclocked anyway, the turbo speed is not much faster stock. 2.9ghz vs 3.067
Put a x5660 in the P6t D V2 and sell one x5660 since it is a better chip with a higher multiplier. Not to mention get some $$$ back'

Or maybe try a x5660 with a x5650 in the 2P server and see if they run.
I do know someone who ran an e-5620 with an e5645 in a SR-2 for a 20 thread system, it may work on my MB.


----------



## justinyou

Guys, i am using the Asus Sabertooth mb and set my x5650 to multiplier 22 (can't go higher than 22), blck 191.
So running on 4.2Ghz, it requires me to put vcore 1.35, anything lower than that will cause pc games crashing, (Battlefield 4, Assassin Creed, COD Ghosts).
I think it might have something to do with my gtx690, maybe that card need more vcore to match with the x5650?
Anyway, I'm glad to have changed from i7-950 to x5650, the lowered temperature is BIG plus.
Fyi, I have another rig which is a i7 4770k with an itx mb inside a very small casing (Jonsbo v2), that is my media htpc (sff pc) sitting beside a 42inch TV.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Guys, i am using the Asus Sabertooth mb and set my x5650 to multiplier 22 (can't go higher than 22), blck 191.
> So running on 4.2Ghz, it requires me to put vcore 1.35, anything lower than that will cause pc games crashing, (Battlefield 4, Assassin Creed, COD Ghosts).
> I think it might have something to do with my gtx690, maybe that card need more vcore to match with the x5650?
> Anyway, I'm glad to have changed from i7-950 to x5650, the lowered temperature is BIG plus.
> Fyi, I have another i7 4770k with an itx mb inside and very small casing (Jonsbo v2), that is my media htpc sitting beside a 42inch TV.


What kind of power supply are you using? Glad to hear you're happy with the switch, what kind of temperatures are you seeing?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> the promised benchmarks..
> 
> Cpu @ 4.51Ghz,
> was stable @ 4.6Ghz but got sound issues with my Asus Xonar DGX
> HT is disabled! will try soon with HT On
> R9 290 is overclocked but not max.. did not tried with more voltage..
> has an Arctic Accelero IV cooler!
> 
> Max temps R9 [email protected] 1100/1400
> Core 66° - VRM1 77° - VRM2 60°
> 
> Max temp X5660 4.51GHz HT off @1.40V
> hottest core 64°
> 
> 3Dmark11: P13377
> Firestrike: 9809
> Valley 1.0 Extreme HD: 2643
> Heaven 4.0 Extreme : 1773


Nice scores and nice OC\Temp. I have been successfully preventing myself from going R9 290x crossfireX or getting the latest R9 295x2. Those 290 GPUs are beast.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Guys, i am using the Asus Sabertooth mb and set my x5650 to multiplier 22 (can't go higher than 22), blck 191.
> So running on 4.2Ghz, it requires me to put vcore 1.35, anything lower than that will cause pc games crashing, (Battlefield 4, Assassin Creed, COD Ghosts).
> I think it might have something to do with my gtx690, maybe that card need more vcore to match with the x5650?
> Anyway, I'm glad to have changed from i7-950 to x5650, the lowered temperature is BIG plus.
> Fyi, I have another rig which is a i7 4770k with an itx mb inside a very small casing (Jonsbo v2), that is my media htpc (sff pc) sitting beside a 42inch TV.


What BIOS revision are you running and the PSU info would be a bit more helpful. 1.35v is the recommended max. How high are you trying to go? Chances the CPU could require a lot of more voltage to reach higher OC. Post your specs and it's good to see that you are enjoying your X5650.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Guys, i am using the Asus Sabertooth mb and set my x5650 to multiplier 22 (can't go higher than 22), blck 191.
> So running on 4.2Ghz, it requires me to put vcore 1.35, anything lower than that will cause pc games crashing, (Battlefield 4, Assassin Creed, COD Ghosts).
> I think it might have something to do with my gtx690, maybe that card need more vcore to match with the x5650?
> Anyway, I'm glad to have changed from i7-950 to x5650, the lowered temperature is BIG plus.
> Fyi, I have another rig which is a i7 4770k with an itx mb inside a very small casing (Jonsbo v2), that is my media htpc (sff pc) sitting beside a 42inch TV.


Video card voltages have NOTHING to do with stability in a CPU overclock unless that card was unstable already before the OC. If that's the case you have other problems. Don't go cranking up voltages on other components. If you're crashing in games, you're not stable.

Did you adjust any voltages besides CPU vcore? What's your QPI/Vtt? What tests did you run besides games to check stability?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> What BIOS revision are you running and the PSU info would be a bit more helpful. 1.35v is the recommended max. How high are you trying to go? Chances the CPU could require a lot of more voltage to reach higher OC. Post your specs and it's good to see that you are enjoying your X5650.


1.4v max for QPI/Vtt. Max on Vcore is dictated by full load temperatures. As long as it stays below 80*C you're probably ok. Having said that, its better not to push too high. Also needing 1.35v for only 4.2 GHz sounds like a lot, maybe just not a good OCer.


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice scores and nice OC\Temp. I have been successfully preventing myself from going R9 290x crossfireX or getting the latest R9 295x2. Those 290 GPUs are beast.
> What BIOS revision are you running and the PSU info would be a bit more helpful. 1.35v is the recommended max. How high are you trying to go? Chances the CPU could require a lot of more voltage to reach higher OC. Post your specs and it's good to see that you are enjoying your X5650.


Thanks!! Yes idd those r9 290 are very good cards for the price!!!
Got it running now @ 1200/1450.. See benchmark screens in later post

EDIT:

PSU: Coolermaster Silent Pro M 850watt
MB: Asus P6TD V2 Deluxe bios 0608 (latest)

my vcore is set to 1.41V (cpu-z 1.40v)
stable now with HT ON @ 215x21= 4.51Ghz
got it perfect stable @ 218x21 = 4.6Ghz but i got sound issues with my Asus Xonar DGX...







so i think im at the limit of my mb..
you think 1.4v is a high voltage for 24/7? im using a Corsair H100i


----------



## sergec19

3DMARK11: 14447
FIRESTRIKE: 10757


----------



## sergec19




----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Thanks!! Yes idd those r9 290 are very good cards for the price!!!
> Got it running now @ 1200/1450.. See benchmark screens in later post
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> PSU: Coolermaster Silent Pro M 850watt
> MB: Asus P6TD V2 Deluxe bios 0608 (latest)
> 
> my vcore is set to 1.41V (cpu-z 1.40v)
> stable now with HT ON @ 215x21= 4.51Ghz
> got it perfect stable @ 218x21 = 4.6Ghz but i got sound issues with my Asus Xonar DGX...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so i think im at the limit of my mb..
> you think 1.4v is a high voltage for 24/7? im using a Corsair H100i


Saw the benchmarks. They look great. I personally wouldn't run 1.4v\1.41v 24/7. 1.35v or below for me when it comes to 24/7. Now if you have a offset vcore that might not be bad, but 27/7 1.4v pumping into the chip doesn't seem like it's worth it.


----------



## freeagentt

If you can keep it cool, you can give it 1.4v 24/7 no problem.


----------



## Rangerscott

Turn off HT and see if you can lower the voltage.


----------



## Bradford1040

sergec19 really nice scores dude, even if that is your limit its still a great system! I always try to keep in mind "There is always someone with the same hardware doing better than you, its like the lotto just keep trying and enjoy life as it is" With that in mind I still push lol. But I remember when on my LGA 775 Q9550 when I looked at scores like you got right there going dam if I only could get close to that! lol

Thank you so much for posting BTW as I am getting my X5660 in about 12hrs from this post and going to be put on my ASUS P6t Deluxe v2 with a H100i, I think you and I are about even on systems and would be nice to compare settings.

I am running a GTX 680 Classified OC'ed by me in Bios so you might have a bit on me in the video card (not sure as I have been out of the OC'ing and scores game) Just got back into it with buying this board and 920 I7.

Edit>>>> Rangerscott what does the HT help with on a gamer day? as that is about the most I do with this PC


----------



## Rangerscott

Turning off HT usually allows a higher OC.


----------



## peteroaknyc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> sergec19 really nice scores dude, even if that is your limit its still a great system! I always try to keep in mind "There is always someone with the same hardware doing better than you, its like the lotto just keep trying and enjoy life as it is" With that in mind I still push lol. But I remember when on my LGA 775 Q9550 when I looked at scores like you got right there going dam if I only could get close to that! lol
> 
> Thank you so much for posting BTW as I am getting my X5660 in about 12hrs from this post and going to be put on my ASUS P6t Deluxe v2 with a H100i, I think you and I are about even on systems and would be nice to compare settings.
> 
> I am running a GTX 680 Classified OC'ed by me in Bios so you might have a bit on me in the video card (not sure as I have been out of the OC'ing and scores game) Just got back into it with buying this board and 920 I7.
> 
> Edit>>>> Rangerscott what does the HT help with on a gamer day? as that is about the most I do with this PC


Please report for your experience with the asus board and the x5660.Right now i am wondering which mobo to choose, the asus p6t deluxe v2 or evga le sli,i will appreciate any advice.Beside this, thanks to all contributors in this fantastic thread, previously i've wanted to change my rusty e8400 with the quadcore server version of it , but right now i will pull the triger and gonna buy the x5650 and more ram.My goal is to reach 4ghz ,don't game much, but this is gonna be wonderful platform for esxi virtualization


----------



## Scannall

Just a quick question. I'm about to pull the trigger on a 5660, but was wondering if anyone had used the ASUS P6T SE?


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peteroaknyc*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> sergec19 really nice scores dude, even if that is your limit its still a great system! I always try to keep in mind "There is always someone with the same hardware doing better than you, its like the lotto just keep trying and enjoy life as it is" With that in mind I still push lol. But I remember when on my LGA 775 Q9550 when I looked at scores like you got right there going dam if I only could get close to that! lol
> 
> Thank you so much for posting BTW as I am getting my X5660 in about 12hrs from this post and going to be put on my ASUS P6t Deluxe v2 with a H100i, I think you and I are about even on systems and would be nice to compare settings.
> 
> I am running a GTX 680 Classified OC'ed by me in Bios so you might have a bit on me in the video card (not sure as I have been out of the OC'ing and scores game) Just got back into it with buying this board and 920 I7.
> 
> Edit>>>> Rangerscott what does the HT help with on a gamer day? as that is about the most I do with this PC
> 
> 
> 
> Please report for your experience with the asus board and the x5660.Right now i am wondering which mobo to choose, the asus p6t deluxe v2 or evga le sli,i will appreciate any advice.Beside this, thanks to all contributors in this fantastic thread, previously i've wanted to change my rusty e8400 with the quadcore server version of it , but right now i will pull the triger and gonna buy the x5650 and more ram.My goal is to reach 4ghz ,don't game much, but this is gonna be wonderful platform for esxi virtualization
Click to expand...

Oh yeah you really do want to upgrade, it really made a difference coming from the core 2 quads as I have said before I was using a Q9550 oc'ed to 3.8ghz 24/7 and it was a great chip but even the I7 920 was a huge jump in performance, and as far as Virtualization you really would want the X5650 or any of the hex cores, you could also look into buying old servers like I did. The Dell Poweredge 1950's and 2950's gen 3 are cheap and have two quads in them for the most part and take up to 64gb of memory (which is still pricey) but they are great all around rigs and are work horses! I have like 6 of them and run sites on a old 2850 and the database on a 1950 as well as PFsense on a 2850! I use the rest of the 1950's and 2950's I have for media server, and game servers (minecraft, source games, and a few others) and use the LGA 1366 platform as my gaming rig now which is so much better than the Q9550 with my GTX 680 classified it really stepped me up a bunch! I love my old LGA 775 and it is still in use with twin GTX 460's

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scannall*
> 
> Just a quick question. I'm about to pull the trigger on a 5660, but was wondering if anyone had used the ASUS P6T SE?


I think I saw someone using it on that board, via bios updates but I am pretty sure yours would run the chip, but I will search as well so you don't waste any money and time, that is something no one can afford this day and age


----------



## Rangerscott

Thought someone on here said they got a new bios chip off of ebay to run theirs?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Thought someone on here said they got a new bios chip off of ebay to run theirs?


I bought a bios chip for my P6T Deluxe v2. I knew I needed the latest bios for the Xeons and I didn't have an i7 to use to flash.

This is the one I bought for my board. The seller seems to be good and they shipped quickly.
Search his store for the bios you need. Or just send them a msg and ask if they can help you out.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260675863472?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649


----------



## Timeofdoom

So.. I'm back to this thread. APparently the CPU really was DOA. I brought up a 2nd one - and it Works!








It's sitting here, running stock ATM, because I have to figure out how to have both of my 2 slot GPU's in this motherboard. I tried putting em in the X1_1 and the X1_3 PCIE, but no avail. I'm gonna have to look into a PCI-E 2.0 x16 riser/extender for this.
Or I might just have to sell off one of the two, which wouldn't be very nice.

When that is fixed, I might come back to bug you @Kana, because running this CPU at stock is unacceptible and I have zero experience with the x58 CPU's/motherboards.


----------



## Rangerscott

Right. Stock speeds are like driving a geo metro. Turn it into a "insert favorite vehicle."


----------



## Bradford1040

Validation CPU-Z 100% stock and have run most of the base lines finishing up running them tonight and will post after I get everything together. I have to say the temps are very very low compared to the I7 920, I took this validation right after running ARMA2 benchies and that game really puts it down on the cpu so 34c after running a bench is very low in my book but cores are sitting at 22c as I type! I love this chip so far just a hint on how much better it does my 920 scored 7.51 @ 4.4ghz and ram @ 1646mhz on cinebench 11.5 and this chip scored 7.50 @ 2.8ghz and ram @1066mhz so I am very impressed!!

Thank you all for talking me into getting this chip, I am very happy and will be happy for the next year or so it seems!


----------



## bill1024

Does anyone know of a way to overclock these CPUs with software?
I would love to get some extra mhz out of my dual x5660 server. I know bios oc is the best.
But if there is no way to oc in the bios, software would be the next best thing.

I am in the middle of the "The BOINC Pentathlon competition". When this is over in a few days I will do some benchmarks with my systems.
The 6 core AMDs 1045T @ 3.2 - 3.7 and the oc x5650, and my dual x5660 for the fun of it.
I will be using 660Ti at 1200mhz that I have in my 2 main all around systems. I can pop one of them in the server for testing.
I doubt the dual CPU system will do any better than the single system.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Does anyone know of a way to overclock these CPUs with software?
> I would love to get some extra mhz out of my dual x5660 server. I know bios oc is the best.
> But if there is no way to oc in the bios, software would be the next best thing.
> 
> I am in the middle of the "The BOINC Pentathlon competition". When this is over in a few days I will do some benchmarks with my systems.
> The 6 core AMDs 1045T @ 3.2 - 3.7 and the oc x5650, and my dual x5660 for the fun of it.
> I will be using 660Ti at 1200mhz that I have in my 2 main all around systems. I can pop one of them in the server for testing.
> I doubt the dual CPU system will do any better than the single system.


I take it the twin X5660 is like a Dell PE R710 or something? you really need to put the hardware you are using down when you ask a question like that, but mostly if you are running a server the answer would be no unless someone has made a custom bios for your board, now if you are running the SR2 then hell yes, the software OC'ing software works with the boards Bios (as far as I know) so if the bios is non-oc'able most likely you wont be able to OC it


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Does anyone know of a way to overclock these CPUs with software?
> I would love to get some extra mhz out of my dual x5660 server. I know bios oc is the best.
> But if there is no way to oc in the bios, software would be the next best thing.
> 
> I am in the middle of the "The BOINC Pentathlon competition". When this is over in a few days I will do some benchmarks with my systems.
> The 6 core AMDs 1045T @ 3.2 - 3.7 and the oc x5650, and my dual x5660 for the fun of it.
> I will be using 660Ti at 1200mhz that I have in my 2 main all around systems. I can pop one of them in the server for testing.
> I doubt the dual CPU system will do any better than the single system.


Most of the motherboard manufacturers offer OC software for free download. Find out what board you have and go to the manufacturer's website for that board and download the software.


----------



## bill1024

I built it, it is an Asus Z8NA-D6 dual socket 1366, I had 2 E5620 quad cores, and now I have 2 x5660.
I have 12 gb Kingston value ram EEC non reg, Asus sound card, Antec 650W gold PSU, EVGA 9800GT VC.
Asus does not have any oc software for it and there is no way to oc it in the bios.

I was hopping there was some software out there that may work.
Kind of like MSI and EVGA both have software to oc video cards and it works on all makes.
There is a ton of video card oc software out there, and I remember years ago some software for cpus that came with a MB I bought.
But I never used it, always use bios settings, and can't even remember what MB it was.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I built it, it is an Asus Z8NA-D6 dual socket 1366, I had 2 E5620 quad cores, and now I have 2 x5660.
> I have 12 gb Kingston value ram EEC non reg, Asus sound card, Antec 650W gold PSU, EVGA 9800GT VC.
> Asus does not have any oc software for it and there is no way to oc it in the bios.
> 
> I was hopping there was some software out there that may work.
> Kind of like MSI and EVGA both have software to oc video cards and it works on all makes.
> There is a ton of video card oc software out there, and I remember years ago some software for cpus that came with a MB I bought.
> But I never used it, always use bios settings, and can't even remember what MB it was.


There was talk about that board being able to Overclock but ASUS flat out said NO! We will not be updating it to overclock, I remember that board very well
it was expected to be a SR2 competitor and many bought it thinking ASUS would update the Bios and software to include overclocking, sadly they never did

Nice board though, you might find with some internet digging someone that made a modded bios for it though I have not looked into that in years so someone could have done it by now

You could look into Intel's extreme tuning software


----------



## Rangerscott

Foxconn had a OC software called AEGIS panel.

http://www.helpdrivers.com/english/download/

Click the download button in the middle blue area.


----------



## Rangerscott

Got my W5580 in. Seller played a cruel joke. Sent it in an Intel X5680 box. LoL.


----------



## Bradford1040

Kana-Maru, what was your highest OC with turbo and all the power stuff on, well all but C1E I always turn that off, but seen that some leave it on with these newer chips, I am still stuck old school I guess lol. I am having a harder time OC'ing the ram on this X5660 chip, on the 920 I was able to leave auto on for most things and was running like 1650mhz ram on it. The X5660 I have it at 1360mhz and so far I still have most things on auto running 3.58ghz with turbo of 3.9ghz on 1.224v on the core and I am 100% stable, I know I am going to push it further but very impressed with my games at this speed. I got a Cinebench 11.5 score of 9.41 on first oc out of stock

OH I have 12gb of ram 6x2gb kit, someone told me I should pull some out on OC'ing the CPU, I also have a few different kits I will try but what is your opinion on the 12gb thing as well?


----------



## thomasz

I just got my dual X5650 build ignited. Looks cool in both aesthetics and performance. hehe


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> I just got my dual X5650 build ignited. Looks cool in both aesthetics and performance. hehe
> 
> ]


not something you see everyday lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Kana-Maru, what was your highest OC with turbo and all the power stuff on, well all but C1E I always turn that off, but seen that some leave it on with these newer chips, I am still stuck old school I guess lol. I am having a harder time OC'ing the ram on this X5660 chip, on the 920 I was able to leave auto on for most things and was running like 1650mhz ram on it. The X5660 I have it at 1360mhz and so far I still have most things on auto running 3.58ghz with turbo of 3.9ghz on 1.224v on the core and I am 100% stable, I know I am going to push it further but very impressed with my games at this speed. I got a Cinebench 11.5 score of 9.41 on first oc out of stock
> 
> OH I have 12gb of ram 6x2gb kit, someone told me I should pull some out on OC'ing the CPU, I also have a few different kits I will try but what is your opinion on the 12gb thing as well?


My highest OC with my X5660 was 5.4Ghz with everything on [HT, EIST, c-states etc]. Takes a crap load of voltage+heat. I don't suggest hitting that unless you have a very nice ambient temp. Loaded into windows and everything. My CPU was pumping so much voltage that I simply restarted the PC. I thought about doing it again just to snap a CPU-Z screenshot, but I don't think it's worth it. I can just feel degrading occurring with those volts. I always leave HT on when I overclock. So far I've had minor issues with HT ---> Highest Overclocks - i7-960 @ 4.4Ghz, Xeon L5639 @ 4.1Ghz, Xeon X5660 5.4Ghz. 5.2Ghz was a lot, but I wanted more. The i7-960 required way to much voltage to keep stable at 4.4Ghz so I settled for 4.2 and 4.1Ghz.

I've always used 12GB (6 x 2GB) Triple Channel Kits with every CPU so far. I've never experienced any major issues with them in all of my X58 years of Overclocking. Going from 6 to 12 caused no stability issues with my i7-960. So in my opinion I say get what you want. Others say that you get a small gain and better overclocks with only 3 modules instead of 6. I beg to differ, but then again I have no data I can provide other than my upgrade from 3 to 6. I've nearly always used 6 modules personally. I can only speak from my experiences.

1.22v is great for 3.9Ghz w/Turbo. Hopefully you won't have any issues hitting 4.2Ghz - 4.4Ghz. For lower overclocks the X5660 has been my favorite thus far. I literally changed one thing in the BIOS and ran my PC @ 4Ghz w/ turbo with only 1.20v. I scored 9.64pts in Cinebench with everything set to auto except the BCLK. I think I mentioned this in my CPU review. I knew I made a great decision when I purchased it after I saw that. I'm glad you are enjoying your CPU as well. With these CPUs it's hard to stay at any OC below 4.2Ghz. Everyone goes straight for 4.4Gzh or 4.6Ghz+. For the sake of the CPU and everyday usage I'm sure 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz is more than enough. I've ran 4Ghz and had no issues, even while streaming. With that being said it never hurts to see your max safe OC. Just don't kill or do some major degrading in the process.


----------



## Bradford1040

New [email protected]

http://valid.canardpc.com/h68jpw

I don't 100% get why it shows the turbo speed in CPU-Z or maybe I just am stupid and don't realize it is clocked to 4.1ghz lol

EDIT>>>>> Volts are all set on auto so I am not sure if they will go lower yet, trying to find out my FSB limit by slowly creeping up, to 4.5~5.0ghz I hope

Edit >>> played a bit more


----------



## Timeofdoom

Ended up fooling around with my settings again.

Straight out of the box:
Rounded up at 
This was after 20 IBT standard runs BTW, so fully stable @3.75ghz, 1.216V~1.225V, C-states enabled, HT+Turbo Core enabled. I'm thinking, if I actually gave it some effort I could probably end waay over 4.2ghz.









But I'm clocking the chip for sustainability, not power. (I don't really need that much power at my disposal anyways - 3.75ghz will do me just fine and I was already surpassing my [email protected] with the STOCK CLOCKS of the x5650 in Cinebench 11.5, so I'm good







.)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry I missed one of your older post Timeofdoom. I haven't had a lot of time on my hands to check everything, but I don't mind helping if you need some help. Judging from your previous post you are doing pretty good. I'm glad that you were able to figure out that issue. Low Vcore and a decent speed, what more could you ask for. I think you'll be able to hit 4.2Ghz without too much trouble. 4.4Ghz will definitely take a nice amount to run. I'm focusing solely on the temperature and heat. 3.75Ghz+1.21v should give you the benefit of both words at the end of the day.


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Turning off HT usually allows a higher OC.


no, turning off HT is the same for me. im at the max FSB of 215x21 for my motherboard..
215x23 is not stable. and 216x21 or higher makes my soundcard go crazy


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Saw the benchmarks. They look great. I personally wouldn't run 1.4v\1.41v 24/7. 1.35v or below for me when it comes to 24/7. Now if you have a offset vcore that might not be bad, but 27/7 1.4v pumping into the chip doesn't seem like it's worth it.


thanks for the info..
my i7 950 has running 3 years 4.4Ghz 1.43Vcore and still running when i sold it..
i thaugt 1.4v was a great vcore!








set is to 1.38v now and stable for now.. try to lowering more..


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> sergec19 really nice scores dude, even if that is your limit its still a great system! I always try to keep in mind "There is always someone with the same hardware doing better than you, its like the lotto just keep trying and enjoy life as it is" With that in mind I still push lol. But I remember when on my LGA 775 Q9550 when I looked at scores like you got right there going dam if I only could get close to that! lol
> 
> Thank you so much for posting BTW as I am getting my X5660 in about 12hrs from this post and going to be put on my ASUS P6t Deluxe v2 with a H100i, I think you and I are about even on systems and would be nice to compare settings.
> 
> I am running a GTX 680 Classified OC'ed by me in Bios so you might have a bit on me in the video card (not sure as I have been out of the OC'ing and scores game) Just got back into it with buying this board and 920 I7.
> 
> Edit>>>> Rangerscott what does the HT help with on a gamer day? as that is about the most I do with this PC


mmmm








no problem mate !
we have idd almost the same hardware, only my motherboard is a bit newer.. but dont know if its overclocking better? ...
but maybe you got a better chip then me!








let me know what youre result are and post them here on the forum!
cinebench results !


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sergec19*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> sergec19 really nice scores dude, even if that is your limit its still a great system! I always try to keep in mind "There is always someone with the same hardware doing better than you, its like the lotto just keep trying and enjoy life as it is" With that in mind I still push lol. But I remember when on my LGA 775 Q9550 when I looked at scores like you got right there going dam if I only could get close to that! lol
> 
> Thank you so much for posting BTW as I am getting my X5660 in about 12hrs from this post and going to be put on my ASUS P6t Deluxe v2 with a H100i, I think you and I are about even on systems and would be nice to compare settings.
> 
> I am running a GTX 680 Classified OC'ed by me in Bios so you might have a bit on me in the video card (not sure as I have been out of the OC'ing and scores game) Just got back into it with buying this board and 920 I7.
> 
> Edit>>>> Rangerscott what does the HT help with on a gamer day? as that is about the most I do with this PC
> 
> 
> 
> mmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no problem mate !
> we have idd almost the same hardware, only my motherboard is a bit newer.. but dont know if its overclocking better? ...
> but maybe you got a better chip then me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> let me know what youre result are and post them here on the forum!
> cinebench results !
Click to expand...

I see you were clocked at 4.5ghz in those tests, what was your settings? like did you turn off HT, and Turbo, C1E and stuff? Or did you leave it all on?

I had my chip running at 5.0ghz but I did not want to degrade the chip first night out lol so I backed her down. I found 3.99ghz/4.35ghz turbo With HT/[email protected] is about the sweet spot for 24/7 for me temps wise it never sees over 58c at full load after hours of either Prime or Folding

EDIT>>>> This """Turbo Boost mode is 266 MHz for 6, 5, 4 or 3 cores, and 400 MHz for 1 or 2 cores""" stuff is screwing with me lol, I don't get which way is the best performance I have no patience to keep rebooting, in a way I wish windows 8 and this board had a way to enable TurboV Asus software! Does anyone know how to get that working on Win8? it would just make getting to the end result so much easier and faster than rebooting, I guess I could pull my raid cards and stuff to make the boot faster but I don't want to do that if I don't have too



Seen someone else had posted there steam list for other to pick games for benching so figured I would do the same


----------



## Rangerscott

Well I was watching an X5670 listing but it just dissapeared. I know I "watched" it but its not in the ended or active sections.

Maybe ebay pulled it?


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Well I was watching an X5670 listing but it just dissapeared. I know I "watched" it but its not in the ended or active sections.
> 
> Maybe ebay pulled it?


Or the seller pulled it! was it auction or buy now? or Best offer? sometimes the seller will see that others are selling for more than he listed so pull and repost it! or he sold it off ebay that can happen too


----------



## ]\/[EGADET]-[

x58 still running strong


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Or the seller pulled it! was it auction or buy now? or Best offer? sometimes the seller will see that others are selling for more than he listed so pull and repost it! or he sold it off ebay that can happen too


I guess. Seller had 0 rating so who knows. Wish I had wrote his info down.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Looks like I'll be having a W5580 heading my way. Didnt mean to win it but I'll see what it can do.
> 
> But but but rangerscott. Thats a stinky peasant 4 core.


Did you get a chance to play with your 5580 yet?


----------



## Bradford1040

OK well I have a question, I just noticed after a folding sesion that core 5&6 are 10c lower than all the others? I looked around and its looks kinda normal but just want to make sure. So anyone chime in and let me know I don't have to Lap or take off the IHS like I see others doing on the ivy bridge chips!

EDIT>>> I should add that it is 10c at idle and 6~7c under load


----------



## Kana-Maru

My L5639 Core 1,3, and 5 were below the other cores [sometimes 12c lower than the hottest core]. My X5660 it's usually Core 3 and 5 being lower than the others. Even under loads the cores will stay far below the hottest cores. So I would think this is normal activity.


----------



## bill1024

My x5650 does the same thing when folding or crunching.
I also noticed with realtempGT when sitting idle the temp reading was a few deg c off from the idle temp reading in bios.
Bios read 29 and windows realtempGT read 26. (Numbers may not be exact) I knew it had to be off, it was colder than room temp.
So in settings I calibrated the reading.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notyettoday*
> 
> Did you get a chance to play with your 5580 yet?


Not yet. Maybe this weekend.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My L5639 Core 1,3, and 5 were below the other cores [sometimes 12c lower than the hottest core]. My X5660 it's usually Core 3 and 5 being lower than the others. Even under loads the cores will stay far below the hottest cores. So I would think this is normal activity.


Thank you,

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My x5650 does the same thing when folding or crunching.
> I also noticed with realtempGT when sitting idle the temp reading was a few deg c off from the idle temp reading in bios.
> Bios read 29 and windows realtempGT read 26. (Numbers may not be exact) I knew it had to be off, it was colder than room temp.
> So in settings I calibrated the reading.


Thank you,



I just thought maybe I needed to reseat the CPU cooler as you can see core 5,6 are low and 7,8 are high. I know this is not the best temp monitor but it is normally spot on I have noticed so use it for just keeping a eye on things without another program running


----------



## Rangerscott

I may be getting an X5670 or I may have just been hosed. LOL


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I may be getting an X5670 or I may have just been hosed. LOL


EBAY? or on here? or just a person talking poo? lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Ebay. Just gotta wait and see.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

I wouldn't be looking for an X58 system anymore... Not really much point in taking it over X99 unless you can find a real bargain.

I'd rather get a system that will last me a while after I build it, than something that still runs ok now, but will be outdated more quickly. Sure, X58 is hardly bad, it has lasted a LONG time, but that's not to say that X99 will not either.


----------



## Rangerscott

Did anyone say to go by an x58 system just for these cpus?


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

It could be implied...

Noone said not to imply that...


----------



## Rangerscott

So how many of ya'll........


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I may be getting an X5670 or I may have just been hosed. LOL


If it was the one for 120$ I bet you got hosed. He had 0 ratings both buying and selling, and he use the same exact picture an other seller had posted that had 3000 reviews.
They were on pink padding if I remember right.


----------



## bill1024

Lately I have seen the MB prices falling and boards selling around 125$, add a 100$ for a hexcore x5650 CPU you have quite a nice little system.
Play any game you want, and get some nice points per day BOINC/[email protected]

Trouble is new Intel CPUs cost an arm and a leg. With the exception of a few new primegrid work units these do just as well as the new Intel chips.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> If it was the one for 120$ I bet you got hosed. He had 0 ratings both buying and selling, and he use the same exact picture an other seller had posted that had 3000 reviews.
> They were on pink padding if I remember right.


17 post count. Knew which one. Hmmmm......


----------



## Bradford1040

Ebay is really good about returning money that is stolen and if what it sounds like happened that is about the best way to put it lol, and trust me I doubt ebay is in the habit of not getting there money back after they fronted it to a screwed over buyer so he will get his if that is what he did


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> 17 post count. Knew which one. Hmmmm......


LOL

I have no life, every day I search for x5650, x5660, x5670 and 80.
Also AMD 6172, 6174, 6176, 6180. 6272, 6274.
x58 1366 motherboards and pc3 1333 eec ram.
Swing guard knife, stag trapperlock, and drop point Russlock and lever lock knife.

Because I have no life and what life I do have is too short to carry a cheap pocket knife!!!!!


----------



## bill1024

By the way was I right?


----------



## Rangerscott

Eh I took a chance. Ill wait awhile and see. Ive gotten so many things at very small fraction price and from 0 feedback sellers before so.......

Resolution says Im covered but Ive never had to file with the "newer" rules. Ebay hosed me bad back in the day before they started to hold sellers responsible.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> By the way was I right?


Yea.


----------



## bill1024

If I see a 0 seller I look to see if he has any feed back buying. If not I'll pass.
I was going to pull the trigger on one of those, if he had some feed back.
But I do have an offer on a x5650 anyway. If I win that I am going to swap my dual x5660 with 50'd and put the 60 in my single board and sell one x5660.
Then I will be a seller with 0 selling feed back. But I have a couple hundred as a buyer.
I have 2 E-5620 to sell and about one hundred pocket knives. Going to sell of a good chunk of my collection.
If I get a couple thousand together I may build a 4P e5 4650 server.


----------



## Rangerscott

Pm me what you want for the x5660 when u decide to sell. Im not in a hurry to get a x5600 series, just when I find a deal.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Lately I have seen the MB prices falling and boards selling around 125$, add a 100$ for a hexcore x5650 CPU you have quite a nice little system.
> Play any game you want, and get some nice points per day BOINC/[email protected]
> 
> Trouble is new Intel CPUs cost an arm and a leg. With the exception of a few new primegrid work units these do just as well as the new Intel chips.


Where are you finding x58 boards for $125?


----------



## bill1024

They are used board on ebay.Here should be a search of x58 1366 boards that have sold lately.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=x58+1366+motherboard&_in_kw=1&_ex_kw=&_sacat=0&LH_Sold=1&_udlo=&_udhi=&_samilow=&_samihi=&_sadis=10&_fpos=&_fsct=&LH_SALE_CURRENCY=0&_sop=12&_dmd=1&_ipg=50&LH_Complete=1

I have seen Asrock boards listed for 120$ in the last few days.


----------



## bill1024

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASRock-X58-Extreme-Intel-Socket-LGA-1366-ATX-Motherboard-FireWire-Giga-LAN-IDE-/351065913132?pt=Motherboards&hash=item51bd28b72c

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p3984.m570.l1313.TR5.TRC1.A0.H0.Xasrock+x58&_nkw=asrock+x58&_sacat=0&_from=R40


----------



## Bradford1040

I am not a big asrock fan but you can find a sabertooth x58 for a good price let me know right away as I will buy that sucker, lol I have a extra chip now and any NORMAL person would sell it or keep it for a spare but not ME lol I want to have a spot to put it lol so I guess by my thinking that means I need another board lol, I swear I have spent more money on older tech than newer tech, I think I had the latest and the greatest back in 2008 and that was the last time, since then it has been the HASBEEN's lol

EDIT>>>>>>> OK well I am really blown away! I just said screw it raised the volts on the X5660 and OC'ed it too 4.6ghz and ran some tests and wow! I was really blown away my scores jumped up past 990x'es on HW-Bot and were comparing too 3960x and 4930x cpu's with one gtx 680 and best part is speedsteping is working as well as all the C1E stuff and it stays below 65c under load? I don't know how but using AIDA64 with precision I was able too see my temps in benches and wow I was really impressed with the low temps not to also say my scores afterwards


----------



## bill1024

Here is one with in range. 8 hours left from now.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/261469738342?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Nothing wrong with giving used hardware a good home.
I bought used G34 12 core MangyCores CPUs for 10 cents on the dollar and they work as well as the new chips coming out.


----------



## Schmuckley

Idk..but I think either Kana-Maru has golden chip or extremely low ambients.
I've had a few x5660s now and they're not liking to go past 4.7Ghz.
4.2-4 for daily @ max-ish temps.
Any higher is going to require freezing it.









On another note;IMO it seems x58 is more stable than AM3 or SB/IB/Haswell.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> Idk..but I think either Kana-Maru has golden chip or extremely low ambients.
> I've had a few x5660s now and they're not liking to go past 4.7Ghz.
> 4.2-4 for daily @ max-ish temps.
> Any higher is going to require freezing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On another note;IMO it seems x58 is more stable than AM3 or SB/IB/Haswell.


Yeah I been seeing your scores on HW Bot and DAM! lol you got a few high clocks there

OH and on your opinion on stability I 100% agree that X58 is much better than AMD

BTW I am running at 4.6ghz stable and cool at 1.4v just got done gaming at that clock and also ran ever bench I had at it, plus ran memtest86 before I even booted into windows! I think I can hit 4.8 24/7 with the H100i (mind you I said think) lol but as the max temps I seen after all the benches and gaming was 66c I know I can run her at 74~6c and not really be hurting it. I was reading to much into trying to adjust everything earlier and it was killing me trying to get past 4.3 but after many BSOD's I started from scratch and just fattened up the timings and lowered the RAM mhz to bottom level and just kept pushing the base till I hit 4.6ghz and then tightened things up!


----------



## mtbiker033

is there a big difference between the 5660 & my i7-970?

Btw I have been running it at 4.2ghz (21x200) at 1.32Vcore fixed for years now and it runs perfect (it's my second rig in my sig).


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtbiker033*
> 
> is there a big difference between the 5660 & my i7-970?
> 
> Btw I have been running it at 4.2ghz (21x200) at 1.32Vcore fixed for years now and it runs perfect (it's my second rig in my sig).


From my 920 to the X5660 there was of coarse the performance jump, but as far as temps and oc'abliity big difference as the X5660 runs so much cooler than the normal chips from my experience and from what I have seen, Plus the chip seems to have a much better headroom as I have just posted, the fact is I am running at 4.6ghz and only see max core temps of 66c (Prime,Folding,IBT, or Intel Extreme Tweaking Utility stress testing) oh Plus gaming also and I was running very CPU intensive games


----------



## mtbiker033

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> From my 920 to the X5660 there was of coarse the performance jump, but as far as temps and oc'abliity big difference as the X5660 runs so much cooler than the normal chips from my experience and from what I have seen, Plus the chip seems to have a much better headroom as I have just posted, the fact is I am running at 4.6ghz and only see max core temps of 66c (Prime,Folding,IBT, or Intel Extreme Tweaking Utility stress testing) oh Plus gaming also and I was running very CPU intensive games


what vcore at 4.6? what is the multi & bclk? That's about the same temps I get on my 970 with h100 (which is in my basement where it is generally cool ambient about 15-17C)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtbiker033*
> 
> is there a big difference between the 5660 & my i7-970?
> 
> Btw I have been running it at 4.2ghz (21x200) at 1.32Vcore fixed for years now and it runs perfect (it's my second rig in my sig).


There are some differences, but I don't think the differences are enough to switch from the i7-970 to the X5660. A few differences are dual QPI links, the QPI rated speed, lower TDP which benefits the X5660. Definitely run much cooler in the warmest rooms under a 1--% load. The 970 has a higher clock speed at stock. Just very minor differences for you at this point.

4.2Ghz is still the sweet spot for Hexa Core users. I'm running 4Ghz with 1.20v most of the time unless I need more speed. Stock speeds works very well for me actually. So it all depends on what I'm doing with my PC.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> Idk..but I think either Kana-Maru has golden chip or extremely low ambients.
> I've had a few x5660s now and they're not liking to go past 4.7Ghz.
> 4.2-4 for daily @ max-ish temps.
> Any higher is going to require freezing it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On another note;IMO it seems x58 is more stable than AM3 or SB/IB/Haswell.


When you pass 4.2Ghz things definitely start to warm up. My ambient temps depends solely on the time of the day and the weather outside. If I'm going to be benchmarking with high overclocks I'll turn on the A/C. My ambient temp is fairly normal and can get as high as 23c to 25c. These chips can be easily damaged from what I've seen and heard. Going higher than 4.6Ghz will be a task and going high then 4.8Ghz can be pretty dangerous. It requires a ton of volts and good cooling. Idle temps can easily sore to 45c - 55c+. I don't even want to think about the load temps.


----------



## Trace

Great thread Kana! Took me a while, but I finally finished reading it. I'm hoping to join the X56** club soon. I have an X58 Foxconn Bloodrage MB and a stock i7 920 w/ 6G ddr3 @ 1333mhz. Was thinking about doing an upgrade to an i5 4650k but this thread saved me. A few questions though:

Is my MB fine for the Xeon CPU?

Which should I buy - a refurbished or used x5660 off of amazon? They're both around $200.

Should I upgrade my ram to 12G of 1600?

Lastly, I've never OC'ed before but read up on it a ways back. I also have a tech savvy friend who says he can help me OC. Is this a good chip being my first attempt?

Oh, I get back to the states in about two weeks so that's when I'll be able to get my hands on my PC again.

Thanks for any help


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trace*
> 
> Great thread Kana! Took me a while, but I finally finished reading it. I'm hoping to join the X56** club soon. I have an X58 Foxconn Bloodrage MB and a stock i7 920 w/ 6G ddr3 @ 1333mhz. Was thinking about doing an upgrade to an i5 4650k but this thread saved me. A few questions though:
> 
> Is my MB fine for the Xeon CPU?
> 
> Which should I buy - a refurbished or used x5660 off of amazon? They're both around $200.
> 
> Should I upgrade my ram to 12G of 1600?
> 
> Lastly, I've never OC'ed before but read up on it a ways back. I also have a tech savvy friend who says he can help me OC. Is this a good chip being my first attempt?
> 
> Oh, I get back to the states in about two weeks so that's when I'll be able to get my hands on my PC again.
> 
> Thanks for any help


I got tye same setup. What bios are you runnibg cause you'll need beta G44 or official P11 to be able to use 12gb of ram. Im running G44. I had 6gb of ballistix tracers and just put in 12gb dominators 2000mhz.

If youve never OC'd your 920 then you may wanna do that first and see if youre happy. Kinda of a waste to not know the capabilitues of what you have now.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trace*
> 
> Great thread Kana! Took me a while, but I finally finished reading it. I'm hoping to join the X56** club soon. I have an X58 Foxconn Bloodrage MB and a stock i7 920 w/ 6G ddr3 @ 1333mhz. Was thinking about doing an upgrade to an i5 4650k but this thread saved me. A few questions though:
> 
> Is my MB fine for the Xeon CPU?
> 
> Which should I buy - a refurbished or used x5660 off of amazon? They're both around $200.
> 
> Should I upgrade my ram to 12G of 1600?
> 
> Lastly, I've never OC'ed before but read up on it a ways back. I also have a tech savvy friend who says he can help me OC. Is this a good chip being my first attempt?
> 
> Oh, I get back to the states in about two weeks so that's when I'll be able to get my hands on my PC again.
> 
> Thanks for any help


Thanks man. I'm still updating as much data as I can. I think I'll make the club a Xeon club specifically for X58 since some users are getting or already owns Quad Xeon. I think that would allow more X58 users to unite instead of having 56xx [only] users at this point. This topic is pretty lengthy now.

1. Your Bloodrage does support these chips with BIOS revision "8A1F1P10" or higher. So you seem to be set. Make sure to update your BIOS before you install the Xeon 56xx.









2. You can try Amazon or Ebay. I doubt if you find any of them new. Check out ebay for the model you want. You'll get more choices on Ebay as well.

3. Depends on the price of the additional 6GBs you are going to purchase and how you use your PC on a daily basis. Also are you even using anywhere close to 6GBs of RAM and do you multitask a lot? 8GB has been the new standard lately, but you can't go wrong with 12GBs. 12GB of RAM is fine and will be for awhile. Unless you using heavy apps that requires a ton of memory I believe 12GB will be more than enough for the years to come. I've been using 12GB for more than 2 years already. The only reason I needed more than 6GB was due to specific programs I use that can easily eat up more than 10GB of memory. If it wasn't for memory hogging programs and the cheap memory at the time I would have probably stayed with 6GBs up until now. For everyday usage and multitasking with a crap load of Firefox tabs open, watching vids, running several programs.....most days I never go past 3GBs usage. For gaming I'll be lucky if I hit 4GBs with Firefox and other programs open. So it all depends on how you are using your PC.

4. You try overclocking your i7- 920 to get a basic understanding of overclocking. There are TONS of 1366 overclocking guides out there. Just Google for them or search here on OCN. I think the Xeon X56xx are great for overclocking. It was much easier overclocking my Westmere-EP's because they didn't take a lot of voltage and I didn't have to change a ton of settings to reach 4Ghz. Actually I only had to change two settings to actually hit 4Ghz. So yeah these Xeons 56xx can be a piece of cake if you get a good or decent CPU.

I guess you have two weeks to shop for a CPU in the meantime right







. Most people here are going after the X5650 since they are a very good bang for the buck. It's very similar to X5660 [X5650 - x23 ---- X5660 = x24].


----------



## justinyou

Guys need to ask if anyone encountered this, where the Windows Experience Index showing wrong cpu speed.
I have overclocked the cpu to 4.2Ghz but the WEI is showing 3.93Ghz but the CPU-Z is showing 4.2Ghz, totally weird.
Even the Cinebench shows it as 3.93Ghz. Is this normal?

I have screen captured so that everyone can see at the below.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Kana-Maru

That is normal. Cinebench will normally read from WIndows System Info. Sometimes Cinebench is correct other times it is wrong. I would pay more attention to CPU-Z or other programs than Windows\Cinebench for core speed. Windows usually only reads what the BIOS reports, which isn't always the correct frequency. It has happened a lot to me and I looked more into this situation with my L5639 last year.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That is normal. Cinebench will normally read from WIndows System Info. Sometimes Cinebench is correct other times it is wrong. I would pay more attention to CPU-Z or other programs than Windows\Cinebench for core speed. Windows usually only reads what the BIOS reports, which isn't always the correct frequency. It has happened a lot to me and I looked more into this situation with my L5639 last year.


Thanks for the explanation, it sure clams me down








Initially i thought maybe my Windows 7 is going crazy and thinking to format it and do a fresh installation, and luckily i didn't waste my time doing that.


----------



## Rangerscott

It's very similar to X5660 [X5650 - x23 ---- X5660 = x24].[/quote]

Cpu world is saying x5650 = 20x multi and x5660 is 21x.


----------



## Kana-Maru

CPU World does indeed state that, but CPU World does miss a few things from time to time. Overall a good site. In my very first post you'll see my X5660 running 24x. - Just realized I only posted my OC'd settings in my first post. My X5660 is running 24x right now as we speak and I've seen X5650 hit x23. To hit X5660-24x or X5650-23x you'll need C-states enabled for the boost. They are enabled by default so everyone will be able to see them. Most motherboards can go above 20x and 21x as far as I know.

Edit:


----------



## Trace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I got tye same setup. What bios are you runnibg cause you'll need beta G44 or official P11 to be able to use 12gb of ram. Im running G44. I had 6gb of ballistix tracers and just put in 12gb dominators 2000mhz.
> 
> If youve never OC'd your 920 then you may wanna do that first and see if youre happy. Kinda of a waste to not know the capabilitues of what you have now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks man. I'm still updating as much data as I can. I think I'll make the club a Xeon club specifically for X58 since some users are getting or already owns Quad Xeon. I think that would allow more X58 users to unite instead of having 56xx [only] users at this point. This topic is pretty lengthy now.
> 
> 1. You Bloodrage does support these chips with BIOS revision "8A1F1P10" or higher. So you seem to be set. Make sure to update your BIOS before you install the Xeon 56xx.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. You can try Amazon or Ebay. I doubt if you find any of them new. Check out ebay for the model you want. You'll get more choices on Ebay as well.
> 
> 3. Depends on the price of the additional 6GBs you are going to purchase and how you use your PC on a daily basis. Also are you even using anywhere close to 6GBs of RAM and do you multitask a lot? 8GB has been the new standard lately, but you can't go wrong with 12GBs. 12GB of RAM is fine and will be for awhile. Unless you using heavy apps that requires a ton of memory I believe 12GB will be more than enough for the years to come. I've been using 12GB for more than 2 years already. The only reason I needed more than 6GB was due to specific programs I use that can easily eat up more than 10GB of memory. If it wasn't for memory hogging programs and the cheap memory at the time I would have probably stayed with 6GBs up until now. For everyday usage and multitasking with a crap load of Firefox tabs open, watching vids, running several programs.....most days I never go past 3GBs usage. For gaming I'll be lucky if I hit 4GBs with Firefox and other programs open. So it all depends on how you are using your PC.
> 
> 4. You try overclocking your i7- 920 to get a basic understanding of overclocking. There are TONS of 1366 overclocking guides out there. Just Google for them or search here on OCN. I think the Xeon X56xx are great for overclocking. It was much easier overclocking my Westmere-EP's because they didn't take a lot of voltage and I didn't have to change a ton of settings to reach 4Ghz. Actually I only had to change two settings to actually hit 4Ghz. So yeah these Xeons 56xx can be a piece of cake if you get a good or decent CPU.
> 
> I guess you have two weeks to shop for a CPU in the meantime right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Most people here are going after the X5650 since they are a very good bang for the buck. It's very similar to X5660 [X5650 - x23 ---- X5660 = x24].


Really appreciate the replies! I'm still running the original bios from when I built it in 09' so I'll definitely need to update it.

Main reason I am thinking about upgrading my ram is I might get better performance with 1600 ram. Plus, I didn't know if I was cutting it close with only 6 gigs. I pretty much run similar programs and tabs going on in Firefox and game at the same time. Still, 12gigs might keep me safe for a while. I think with a x56** OC'ed, my rig should last me another couple years







.

Question about the chip though...which would be a safer buy, the used chip, or the remanufactured chip? Used could be all beat up, but the remanufactured could have issues while being new :/.

I'll probably mess around with my 920 just to get a feel for OC'ing while I wait for the Xeon to ship. Couldn't hurt.

Btw, I know this isn't the right thread but I need to move my OS to an SSD too and get either win7 or 8.1 (I'm still rocking vista lol.) Can anyone point me to some good info on the best way to do that? A thread or read on the net somewhere?

Again, thanks for the help...especially on what bios to get for my MB. You guys rock!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry I didn't address the RAM Frequency. Most 1333Mhz RAM can hit 1600Mhz. Have you tried running 1600Mhz frequency with your current RAM? If not you should give it a try. To honestly answer your question, I was running 1200Mhz earlier with decent RAM timings and Cinebench R11.5 only showed a 1.19% [1.2%] difference from my BEST 2000Mhz Cinebench score. I was running my CPU @ 4.6Ghz as well. 1600Mhz only improved my score by 1% over the 1200Mhz. So give or take 1333Mhz is fine, but 1600Mhz is the sweet spot for just about anything. You should check and see if you can run 1600Mhz RAM before spending over a hundred dollars for a 12GB kit. That way you may only need to add to what you already have.

I'm still rocking Windows 7 and having no problems with the OS. I have used Windows 8 and 8.1 and I don't like it that much at all. I have Windows 8.1 on my Laptop and me and my gf agreed that it's definitely switching back to Windows 7. On the other hand some people enjoy Windows 8 and like it a lot. I guess I'll be waiting for Windows 9.

You check here for upgrading from Windows Vista [or XP] to Windows 8.1:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/upgrade-from-windows-vista-xp-tutorial

It's should help you out.You could probably upgrade first then clone your OS on your HDD to the SSD if there is enough space. Otherwise you could create an image and only make it as big as the OS. That will all depend since SSDs has a smaller capacity compared to HDDs. There are so many different ways you can tackle switching an OS on a HDD to another HDD or SDD. The biggest issue will be the capacity so you'll need a sophisticated program that will only copy what it needs.

You could always start with a fresh install with a SSD+Windows 7\8.1 and reinstall your drivers and software. That's what I would do.


----------



## Trace

@kana

Ok thanks. I'll leave my ram alone for now. Thanks for quick link and tips on windows too.

Ok, so I just checked amazon and found a "new" x5650 for $160 shipped. http://www.amazon.com/2-66GHz-Intel-Six-Core-3200MHz-SLBV3/dp/B004EET19Y/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1399660061&sr=8-3&keywords=x5650

Is this a good deal. I know the only difference between the 5650 and 5660 is it's missing a multiplier or something. If this chip is as easy to get to 4ghz then that's all I need. I don't really care about benchmarks, I just want better fps while gaming. I feel better buying a new chip rather than a used one too fwiw.

Edit* there's this one too for $170 shipped. I don't know if they are different batch numbers. Honestly, I don't mind paying $170 for the kind of performance increase that's been reported. http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-Processor/dp/B003COF556/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399660799&sr=8-1&keywords=x5650


----------



## Rangerscott

Isnt all ram over 1333mhz overclocked? Its just a gurantee that the ram will run at the designated speed?

My 920 @ 3.6ghz runs the ram at 1444mhz.

If youre wanting to save money just see what your system can OC to before buying more stuff.

We need to know what bios youre running because there are a few that dont OC well.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trace*
> 
> @kana
> 
> Ok thanks. I'll leave my ram alone for now. Thanks for quick link and tips on windows too.
> 
> Ok, so I just checked amazon and found a "new" x5650 for $160 shipped. http://www.amazon.com/2-66GHz-Intel-Six-Core-3200MHz-SLBV3/dp/B004EET19Y/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1399660061&sr=8-3&keywords=x5650
> 
> Is this a good deal. I know the only difference between the 5650 and 5660 is it's missing a multiplier or something. If this chip is as easy to get to 4ghz then that's all I need. I don't really care about benchmarks, I just want better fps while gaming. I feel better buying a new chip rather than a used one too fwiw.


I doubt any of them are new. Ive searched new retail and saw from $600-$1200.


----------



## bill1024

Do you think maybe having a list of what boards support the Xeons added to the first post is a good idea?
Many, some don't, some that don't can be modded to.
Just a thought.

I ran out of memory running BOINC Rosetta 12 threads and only 6gb of ram.


----------



## Trace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> If youre wanting to save money just see what your system can OC to before buying more stuff.
> 
> We need to know what bios youre running because there are a few that dont OC well.


I've read the comparison of the [email protected] and the x5660. @4ghz and to me that's worth the cash.

I'm pretty sure my bios is the stock one on the Bloodrage since I never updated it. I won't be able to know for sure until I get back to the states though :/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I doubt any of them are new. Ive searched new retail and saw from $600-$1200.


Hmm, all I know is it said new. Used ones are $125. New but refurbished X5650s are starting @ $105 on eBay.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Do you think maybe having a list of what boards support the Xeons added to the first post is a good idea?
> Many, some don't, some that don't can be modded to.
> Just a thought.
> 
> I ran out of memory running BOINC Rosetta 12 threads and only 6gb of ram.


I think someone suggested something similar to this, but I don't think it would be a bad idea at all. I was making a average list of core speeds that users were able to hit in this topic with X5650's and X5660's so I could add to it. It shouldn't be a problem to add a list of motherboards that support the Gulftown - Westmere-EP CPUs.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trace*
> 
> @kana
> 
> Ok thanks. I'll leave my ram alone for now. Thanks for quick link and tips on windows too.
> 
> Ok, so I just checked amazon and found a "new" x5650 for $160 shipped. http://www.amazon.com/2-66GHz-Intel-Six-Core-3200MHz-SLBV3/dp/B004EET19Y/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1399660061&sr=8-3&keywords=x5650
> 
> Is this a good deal. I know the only difference between the 5650 and 5660 is it's missing a multiplier or something. If this chip is as easy to get to 4ghz then that's all I need. I don't really care about benchmarks, I just want better fps while gaming. I feel better buying a new chip rather than a used one too fwiw.
> 
> Edit* there's this one too for $170 shipped. I don't know if they are different batch numbers. Honestly, I don't mind paying $170 for the kind of performance increase that's been reported. http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-Processor/dp/B003COF556/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399660799&sr=8-1&keywords=x5650


Yeah I agree I doubt its new, and that chip sells for about 100 on ebay used, mind you look at the seller and the area it comes from, used is not so bad for the most part, 95% I say are server pulls which have not been used and abused by overclockers so even a used chip has a bunch of life left in her, hell my Q9550 was bought used on amazon and it is still humping away at 3.8ghz with good temps on a H50 that is most likely clogged with dust lol.

All the advice you are getting is great advice, both RangerScott and Kana-Maru seem to be very knowledgeable and willing to help. I just upgraded from a 920 myself but I just wanted more (gluttony, lol) I am just like that though, I did not need more I wanted more, the 920 at 4.3ghz is 100% a good chip for gaming and all around PC work, I mean 4 cores and 8 threads at 4.3ghz should be enough for anyone with a good GPU so before you drop the extra cash ask yourself have I outgrown this chip? If you have, the guys here will help you on getting the right chip and memory if needed.

BTW>>> Did anyone every LAP there 1366 chips? or is that a thing of the past? I was wondering if it was still done? or not!

DAM>>>>>Kana-Maru can you steam me lol I forgot your steam name and my friends list is kinda full of names I don't remember lol, dam getting old sucks lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Lapping is the past. People are popping off the heat spreader. Some pop off easy, some are really glued on so you gotta research which cpu's are easy to do it to.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I still see some people attempt lapping processors. I think they only lap the processors with the soldered IHS since it's to damn hard to remove. If you remove it you will damage the CPU as well from what I understand. Lapping appears to work fine, but I've never tried it.

The Sandy and Ivy crowd has started delidding a few years ago. They basically replace the TIM underneath the IHS after popping the IHS off. Putting back on is another story though. Intel is so wrong for using that cheap ass TIM on a lot of those processors. The Hexa core Ivy-E+Sandy-E doesn't seem to have those problems that requires delidding.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> DAM>>>>>Kana-Maru can you steam me lol I forgot your steam name and my friends list is kinda full of names I don't remember lol, dam getting old sucks lol


Ok I'll log in and message you.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Lapping is the past. People are popping off the heat spreader. Some pop off easy, some are really glued on so you gotta research which cpu's are easy to do it to.


yeah I know Sandy and Ivy guys are doing the deliding thing, but 1366 I think did not come off or some just lapped it from what I am seeing, mostly because of the same issue I am having temp differences on a few cores by 10c lol, turned out it was very common with the 980x 990x and xeon's 5600's but only seen a few results as far as lapping them and not enough about the pro's vs con's of it for me to feel safe doing it. I have lapped many CPU's so I know its not a big deal but if there is no benefit from it then why do it right? lol. I will keep googling and let all know if I find anything on it and post if I do decide to do it before and after spec's


----------



## justinyou

Basically you cannot de-lid any 1366 socket cpu because the heatspreader is soldered together with the chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yeah I know Sandy and Ivy guys are doing the deliding thing, but 1366 I think did not come off or some just lapped it from what I am seeing, mostly because of the same issue I am having temp differences on a few cores by 10c lol, turned out it was very common with the 980x 990x and xeon's 5600's but only seen a few results as far as lapping them and not enough about the pro's vs con's of it for me to feel safe doing it. I have lapped many CPU's so I know its not a big deal but if there is no benefit from it then why do it right? lol. I will keep googling and let all know if I find anything on it and post if I do decide to do it before and after spec's


I've read a few reviews on the 1366 CPUs that were lapped and it appeared that it did indeed improve the temps overall. I thought about lapping as well, but so far the 32nm run pretty cool for me as they are. After finally apply my thermal paste and CPU cooler perfectly I don't think I'll be removing my CPU anytime soon. Definitely let us know if you plan to lap your processor. I messaged you btw.


----------



## Schmuckley

FYIo NOT try to delid any Sandy Bridge chips.The IHS is soldered on.

Boards I know support Westmere-EP:Sabertoofus,Giga X58A series,Most Asus boards.(p6t variations)
There will be problems with EVGA boards,as well as ex58 giga boards.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yeah I know Sandy and Ivy guys are doing the deliding thing, but 1366 I think did not come off or some just lapped it from what I am seeing, mostly because of the same issue I am having temp differences on a few cores by 10c lol, turned out it was very common with the 980x 990x and xeon's 5600's but only seen a few results as far as lapping them and not enough about the pro's vs con's of it for me to feel safe doing it. I have lapped many CPU's so I know its not a big deal but if there is no benefit from it then why do it right? lol. I will keep googling and let all know if I find anything on it and post if I do decide to do it before and after spec's
> 
> 
> 
> I've read a few reviews on the 1366 CPUs that were lapped and it appeared that it did indeed improve the temps overall. I thought about lapping as well, but so far the 32nm run pretty cool for me as they are. After finally apply my thermal paste and CPU cooler perfectly I don't think I'll be removing my CPU anytime soon. Definitely let us know if you plan to lap your processor. I messaged you btw.
Click to expand...

I have not found those sites yet I guess, only the main one I see about how nice of a job he did, as I said I have lapped many CPU's and everyone of them have been mirror finish. I don't understand why everyone acts like that is not like what there looks like after a lapping lol


----------



## Rangerscott

The flatter the meeting surfaces are, the better.

It just depends on how well of a job you do.


----------



## Bradford1040

OK WAY WAY OFF TOPIC, I am getting a bit upset with Steam! Have you ever noticed how many files are lost from steam games? I mean I have never once had to verify games that are not in my steam folder (I.E. Not on Steam) and they play every time, with even fresh OS installs they just need the first run to set the registry files I guess and off and playing! But steam games I own (which is a bunch) are always needing verified files and it is missing a few all the time it seems? Do you think Steam has a clock on files that expire? That way you need to conect to them all the time?


----------



## Rangerscott

How often do you defrag?


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> How often do you defrag?


my steam drive kinda never lol, I defragged after every install at the beginning and now I just let the games be, I have them on a 2 x 1TB samsung 840 SSD in raid0 so, and backed up on a 2 x 2TB WD Black enterprise drive in raid1 which is what I find funny I don't have any other files come up missing or corrupt just steam files lol. (joke) I kinda should be writing to samsung and WD about this problem huh lol, bet they would like to check into why 1,400usd worth of drives lose info (joke end)

I even have my backup server (a Dell PE2950 gen 3 & a MD1000) backing up my back-ups as they are loaded with drives and have really no use for them at the moment, so I was like lets make a really big back rig lol


----------



## alancsalt

How does a cpu get "refurbished"?


----------



## BuxPC

The prices of X5650 is dropping now is us$80 X5660 is us$130 X5670 is us$250
and not all X58 motherboard support those CPU


----------



## iDShaDoW

Could anyone tell me if there'd be any compatibility/oc issue with a GA-EX58-EXTREME motherboard and Xeon X5650?


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> How does a cpu get "refurbished"?


Well it is a highly guarded secret by people at ebay and amazon but I imagine it has to do with the price some how as refurbished raises the amount of it so it must be better! right? lol


----------



## Trace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> How does a cpu get "refurbished"?


I was wondering the same thing.


----------



## Rangerscott

Im guessing they were sent back to Intel to be tested. Who knows.


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> OK WAY WAY OFF TOPIC, I am getting a bit upset with Steam! Have you ever noticed how many files are lost from steam games? I mean I have never once had to verify games that are not in my steam folder (I.E. Not on Steam) and they play every time, with even fresh OS installs they just need the first run to set the registry files I guess and off and playing! But steam games I own (which is a bunch) are always needing verified files and it is missing a few all the time it seems? Do you think Steam has a clock on files that expire? That way you need to conect to them all the time?


Only time Ive had that happen was after many steam updates without playing the game/s for some time.

Now get back on topic or else........


----------



## Kana-Maru

I have updated my review with newer CPU benchmarks and BF4 1440p Benchmark. I'll list them here just in case you guys don't wan to go through the review again. I'll also be updating other CPU benchmarks and performing new\different benchmarks.

*Cinebench R10*



*New - 38162*
Old - 37685

*WinRar v4.20*


*New - 16,458*
Old - 13,604

*7-zip v9.20*




Decompress
*New - 448218*
Old - 445683

This score actually beat out the i7-4960X @ 4.7Ghz in the decompress bench.

*Battlefield 4 100% Maxed [Ultra] - 2560x1440p*





*Stock* GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 915Mhz [337.50 BETA Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
*CPU Average: 44c*
CPU Max: 57c
*Ambient Temp: 22c*
Gameplay Duration: 34 minutes 46 seconds
Captured 141,055 frames
*FPS Avg: 69fps*
FPS Max: 147fps
FPS Min: 32fps
*Frame time Avg: 14.5ms*

I'll get around to posting new CPU benchmarks when I get a chance. I have a few lined up. I'm trying to keep all of my data in some type of order. Things get confusing quickly when updating. I thought these CPU increases were worthy of an update. Especially the WinZip benchmark.


----------



## Str8Klownin

Hey guys. First, I just want to say how awesome this thread is. I have a 2011 rig and im looking to build a nice budget system for the little lady. Would it be possible to find a combo for 200 or less? I see the 5650s for 100 on ebay but the motherboards im finding are putting me out of that range. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Bradford1040

well been running at the 200x23 multi now for days and it seems nothing is wrong not one bsod on anything, I tried lowering the volts from 1.418 to 1.373 and just browsing the net I crashed go figure lol, made no sense to me ran all benches and not one hiccup but browsing and boom lol

I am very happy with this chip all my AIDA64 scores are above anything I have ever got and it games like no tomorrow, I for one am very very happy with the upgrade from the 920 to the X5660 and it still runs so much cooler than the 920 ever did max temps are still about 67c on 10 out of the 12 and still those two cores are reporting 10c lower but as I said it seems to be a common problem so not even going to sweat it

OH the AIDA shot is CPU Queen and FPU SinJulia sorry forgot to add that


----------



## The Tacit Duke

Hi! I was looking at your 7-ZIP Benchmark and I was curios to see how a DELL T5600 perform








so...
here the results


----------



## freeagentt

Kanu, are you using speedstep and eist? Or do you have your clock set at 1 speed?


----------



## Kana-Maru

My clock is set to 1 speed with offset. Although I can use Speedstep\EIST, I don't use them when I'm benchmarking.

Other than benchmarking I use all of the settings for everyday use.


----------



## Timeofdoom

So I decided to push this little baddie a bit more: 4.0 Ghz.
The result: 

From [email protected] to [email protected]: stable at 20 IBT runs, maxing out at 70 degrees - while my H100 is still running the slowest RPM preset. Awesome.








Best thing is: This CPU is very COOL - as in cold. My room temperatuyre after using my pc for 3hrs is at 22 degrees celsius in a 19-20 m2 room.








Utilizing my FX-8350 ([email protected]) for the same amount of time would've left me with a room temperature of 25 degrees.

I would recommend anyone who's sitting out there, reading this thread to go for it - sure, I had some bad luck with the sellers at first - but not because of the motherboards, mind you - I just received a dead CPU from a dishonest seller (thank god for eBay buyer protection).
All in all: even with the amount of time and money that I put into getting this CPU running has definitely been worth it in the end.


----------



## bill1024

Try using real temp GT, the realtempgt.exe file is in the real temp folder directory.


----------



## xenxo80

Hi all,
After reading most of this thread. I just encourage buying:

Motherboard: Evga X58 Sli
Processor: Xeon X5650

I want to try this microprocessor 6 cores for gaming.
I have to complement this team:
6gb Ram (3x2GB Mushkin)
gtx 780
Wd 500 Gb black
Atx Tower Coolermaster Advanced II

I just be wanting to buy a power supply for this team to recommend me?

I hope this pc last a couple of years playing with a 1080p tv 32 "

regards


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenxo80*
> 
> Hi all,
> After reading most of this thread. I just encourage buying:
> 
> Motherboard: Evga X58 Sli
> Processor: Xeon X5650
> 
> I want to try this microprocessor 6 cores for gaming.
> I have to complement this team:
> 6gb Ram (3x2GB Mushkin)
> gtx 780
> Wd 500 Gb black
> Atx Tower Coolermaster Advanced II
> 
> I just be wanting to buy a power supply for this team to recommend me?
> 
> I hope this pc last a couple of years playing with a 1080p tv 32 "
> 
> regards


If for gaming purposes, instead of using a LCD/LED TV, try buying a proper monitor, because almost certainly the TV will have input lag.
Input lag is bad for gaming.


----------



## xenxo80

Even I have mounted the pc. Today and bought the motherboard and processor Evga b stock on ebay.
I will use a monitor for Acer Gd245 120hz for Dvi and Samsung 32 "B651 for hdmi.
What power supply do you recommend for a 750w this team?

regards


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenxo80*
> 
> Even I have mounted the pc. Today and bought the motherboard and processor Evga b stock on ebay.
> I will use a monitor for Acer Gd245 120hz for Dvi and Samsung 32 "B651 for hdmi.
> What power supply do you recommend for a 750w this team?
> 
> regards


For power supply you can't go wrong with Corsair, for cheaper option you may try the RM series , if you have more budget then you can try the AX series.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenxo80*
> 
> Even I have mounted the pc. Today and bought the motherboard and processor Evga b stock on ebay.
> I will use a monitor for Acer Gd245 120hz for Dvi and Samsung 32 "B651 for hdmi.
> What power supply do you recommend for a 750w this team?
> 
> regards


I know almost everyone will disagree with me but the raidmax RX1000-AE I am using has been a good psu for years now, I used it back when I was running 3 way sli with the gtx 260' and 280's then the 3 gtx 460's and now with my sig rig and not once has it let me down! I might have just gotten a good one but my buddy has the same one and his runs just as well


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> If for gaming purposes, instead of using a LCD/LED TV, try buying a proper monitor, because almost certainly the TV will have input lag.
> Input lag is bad for gaming.


Ive used 2 TV's with gaming. Unless youre buying an ultra cheap one, you'll be fine.

Got all the benching done for my 920 @3.6ghz. Now to put in the W5580.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenxo80*
> 
> Even I have mounted the pc. Today and bought the motherboard and processor Evga b stock on ebay.
> I will use a monitor for Acer Gd245 120hz for Dvi and Samsung 32 "B651 for hdmi.
> What power supply do you recommend for a 750w this team?
> 
> regards


budget?link to an online store where I could check the availability and prices?


----------



## Rangerscott

Got another scammer on ebay.

jame.shele

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-INTEL-XEON-X5670-2-93GHz-Hex-6-Core-12MB-LGA1366-SLBV7-/141286744288?pt=CPUs&hash=item20e558a0e0

Its a buy it now listing so once he gets all sold then the listing will disappear so if the link dies, that's why.


----------



## PachAz

Bench the xeon x5660 at 4.8ghz with a 7970 and a i5 /2500/3570/4670k at 4.8ghz with a 7970 in world of tanks all settings max and share the results. On bf4 all ultra multiplayer. We need some more real life gaming comparisions, not multithreaded hypotetical benchmarks that dont tell us a squat of real life performance. I mean unless you are building a workstation or gaming, why would you need all these hardware anyways? In fact how many of you even use these intel 6 cores in games that benefit from them?

And no, you cant compare a 120-144hz gaming monitor with a "TV", not only will the TV not show anything past 60hz it will have imput lag bigger than the cheapest pc monitor.


----------



## Trace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Got another scammer on ebay.
> 
> jame.shele
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-INTEL-XEON-X5670-2-93GHz-Hex-6-Core-12MB-LGA1366-SLBV7-/141286744288?pt=CPUs&hash=item20e558a0e0
> 
> Its a buy it now listing so once he gets all sold then the listing will disappear so if the link dies, that's why.


yeah, the listing is already closed. How could you tell it was a scam?


----------



## Bradford1040

this one looks ok

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-INTEL-XEON-X5670-2-93GHz-Hex-6-Core-12MB-LGA1366-SLBV7/161292249953?_trksid=p2045573.c100034.m2102&_trkparms=aid%3D555012%26algo%3DPW.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131003150253%26meid%3D6889454385642177633%26pid%3D100034%26prg%3D20131003150253%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D181399566429


----------



## xenxo80

Hi, is to buy it on amazon of Spain. I'm looking at several power supplies with maximum budget of 220 €

Super Flower Leadex 80 Plus Platinum 1000W

Enermax EPM850AWT Platimax

This source is for this team, but in the future I want to another computer with sli gtx titan and I7 3930K with OC (4.4GHz)

regards


----------



## xenxo80

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> this one looks ok
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-INTEL-XEON-X5670-2-93GHz-Hex-6-Core-12MB-LGA1366-SLBV7/161292249953?_trksid=p2045573.c100034.m2102&_trkparms=aid%3D555012%26algo%3DPW.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131003150253%26meid%3D6889454385642177633%26pid%3D100034%26prg%3D20131003150253%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D181399566429


Yesterday I bought this processor
This seller has more processors for $ 122
I need to buy a power supply for mounting all equipment.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Intel-Westmere-Xeon-X5650-2-66Ghz-TB-6-Core-HT-12MB-L3-B1-LGA1366-95W-32nm-/400706106827?ssPageName=ADME:L:OC:ES:3160

Regards


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> Bench the xeon x5660 at 4.8ghz with a 7970 and a i5 /2500/3570/4670k at 4.8ghz with a 7970 in world of tanks all settings max and share the results. On bf4 all ultra multiplayer. We need some more real life gaming comparisions, not multithreaded hypotetical benchmarks that dont tell us a squat of real life performance.


Ah man I was getting ready to post my 100% maxed BF4 and Tomb Raider 3500x1800 [2,204,000 MORE pixels than 1600p] just for the hell out it.

Are you asking me to benchmark with a 7970? I don't have one. Most competitive gamers I know don't even run 1080p while playing BF3\BF4 online. I'm simply posting my results using my graphic cards so I can't speak for everyone. I did compare my GPU scores @ 4Ghz to another user with a i7-920 @ 4Ghz with two GTX 670s. Similar setups. I'll probably be adding that to my first post for everyone to see, but that would be taking away from the main reason I posted this topic. I'm sorry if you don't like the CPU benchmarks or Real Time Benchmarks, but there's nothing I can do about that. I'm already planning on posted more benchmarks from different programs.

Quote:


> "PachAz"
> I mean unless you are building a workstation or gaming, why would you need all these hardware anyways? In fact how many of you even use these intel 6 cores in games that benefit from them?


Well I need a workstation and I'm gaming on it as well so this Xeon fits my needs. This topic is for those who are still running the X58 platform and wants to upgrade to hexa-core or know very little about them. Not only that, but for the "insert number here" time.....this topic was strictly meant to *compare X58 Hexa Core to X79 Hexa core*. Quad Cores were never meant to be the main focus. If you enjoy your Quad by all means keep using it. There is ton of Quad data out there and has been for over 6 years [from Tylersburg and up].

I personally posted my gains from the i7-960 and it has helped other i7-960 users. I also added Quads results to give readers a better comparison just in case they were on the fence of upgrading to Sandy\Ivy Quad [as some people were planning to do]. *The main focus is my L5639 and X5660 compared to i7-3930K, 4930K, 4960X, 3970X.* So I'm the guy saying that there's no major reason to upgrade now. X99 is coming and we will see if the X99 upgrade+price will be worth it. If it's not worth then the X58 is still a great board to use with decently priced Hexa cores that are decently priced.

I'm all about high end workstations. I doubt if I ever use a single card again for gaming, if someone was to send a graphic card to me I would test the hell out of it and send it back. Other than that I'm using CrossfireX or SLI for gaming and benchmarks. I actually almost pulled the trigger on two R9 290X's \ CrossfireX. Those benchmark results were going here in my topic. I'm still on the fence about it.


----------



## Trace

@PachAz - I understand your critique but a little tact goes a long way. Kana has done some very impressive work and brought new light to the, still numerable, X58 audience. If you have a 7970 and "insert cpu here", then maybe you can send it to him for some more testing. Yes, it would be nice to have more comparisons of every GPU or CPU combination but that isn't very realistic.

@Kana - keep on, keepin' on...you're doing fine bro!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks. I will try my best. Sometimes it's hard to get a few people to realize that I'm simply posting my benchmarks for comparison to X79 Hexa Cores. Those were my main focus. I can honestly say that I'm impressed with the X58 Xeon performance. I'm going to be staring at the X99 reviews really hard. X99 seems to be a 2011 revision that will bring DDR4, BCLK+ratio OC back and 8 cores. At this point the deciding factor for me will be the price. I could just wait for a new architecture altogether.


----------



## bill1024

The one thing the new Intel chips have that the 56xx do not is AVX instructions. That helps speed up BOINC Primegrid work units.
I don't know what other programs take advantage of AVX, but at this point it's not worth me spending the money to upgrade.
I am more than happy with my setup. I upgraded a Q6600 quad to the x5650, paired it with a 660Ti it crunches BOINC real well and play the games I play with out a problem. But then so does my AMD hexcore 1045T @ 3.5ghz with the 660Ti.
I guess it depends on what you intend to do with your system and how much you can afford to spend. I have always been a step behind the newest and greatest so I can save some money.
As far as needing all this hardware, my systems all totaled I have 124 cores and I can keep all of them 100% loaded 24/7/365.


----------



## Rangerscott

Hahaha. I took out my 920 to put in my W5580. Fired it up and the bios was still showing 920 so ai loaded deafaults and went into windows. System was showing 920. ***. Looked at the cpu next to me. Yea. W5580. LOL


----------



## Rangerscott

I don't know guys. I couldn't ever hit 4Ghz with my 920 and cant do the same with the w5580. I miss the OC'ing 775 days. I hate this.


----------



## dasparx

It's probably your board man.


----------



## notyettoday

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> It's probably your board man.


This. Have you tried tweaking voltages besides the vcore?? I had to bump my qpi/dram core a couple steps to get 4ghz stable on my w3680


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> It's probably your board man.


Don't you say that. You take it back. YOU TAKE IT BACK!!!!!!!

23x core multi seems to be the trick. Dang even numbers.


----------



## dasparx

So i've ordered a Sabertooth + L5639 for 180 euro , only to come to the conclusion that my R9 290s wont fit due to having Accelero Hybrids on them. So you know what i got as well?









An X5670 and a Rampage III Extreme for 240









All will be here in about 1-2 weeks.

So i'll be having fun with two seperate setups


----------



## D3V1N

Thanks so much for posting this!! I just got my x5650 from Ebay to replace the i7-920 that I bought when it first came out.
I had the 920 overclocked at 21x175 at 1.2v without HT. Installed the x5650 and forgot to reset the bios. It booted to windows at 22x175(3,850)!
Awesome chip... Can't wait to push it! I just hope this motherboard can hold out for another 5 years! lol

EX58-UD3R Rev 1.2
16gb KHX1600C9D3/4GX


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Hahaha. I took out my 920 to put in my W5580. Fired it up and the bios was still showing 920 so ai loaded deafaults and went into windows. System was showing 920. ***. Looked at the cpu next to me. Yea. W5580. LOL


WOW!!! LOL!!!! Just WOW lol I don't think I would have had that second beer or drink huh lol


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I don't know guys. I couldn't ever hit 4Ghz with my 920 and cant do the same with the w5580. I miss the OC'ing 775 days. I hate this.


sorry for double post! But you can hit 4ghz on that chip I have faith in you and I and others I am sure will help, and REALLY? you could not get 4ghz on the 920? god I thought that was the standard OC for that chip, I have a 920 that hits 4.3 easy but the 5580 should be a beast, and should be able to get to 4.4 pretty easy from what I see on the web unless the scores I see are just false. What are you doing to get to 4ghz I mean it all volts, uncore, FSB/North Bridge, QPI, Ram everything you got set, I am going to edit here in a bit and add AIDA64 shots of my settings from the bios, plus I figured out how to get TurboV working and installed on windows8.1 which was a hard to find but laughable and easy fix once I figured it out! So if you have a ASUS board that might help to tweak a bit in the OS to find the stable OC to put into the bios


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> sorry for double post! But you can hit 4ghz on that chip I have faith in you and I and others I am sure will help, and REALLY? you could not get 4ghz on the 920? god I thought that was the standard OC for that chip, I have a 920 that hits 4.3 easy but the 5580 should be a beast, and should be able to get to 4.4 pretty easy from what I see on the web unless the scores I see are just false. What are you doing to get to 4ghz I mean it all volts, uncore, FSB/North Bridge, QPI, Ram everything you got set, I am going to edit here in a bit and add AIDA64 shots of my settings from the bios, plus I figured out how to get TurboV working and installed on windows8.1 which was a hard to find but laughable and easy fix once I figured it out! So if you have a ASUS board that might help to tweak a bit in the OS to find the stable OC to put into the bios


I got it. I dropped from 24x to 23x core multi to hit 4ghz. Gonna shoot for 4.5ghz but this is a 130w cpu so Im gonna bet It gets too hot or too much voltage to hit that.

I just got an H60 on the cpu and am not impressed. Need to get a block for my asus 78 so I can hook up my full WC system. Dang thing is non reference and EK is the only one that makes a block for it.

Ek status shows "end of life." Thats great they dont make it any more.


----------



## Bradford1040

Those voltz I am using are gaming stable, I can drop the vcore a bit in fact allot but during Crysis 1 and BF4 it BSOD's with 0x1E or 0x124 so up the voltz went lol, glad to see you got it, and your chip is the quad version right? I will have to look up the specs but I think it is the 960 or something like that right? and it is 45nm not 32nm?

I am having a issue getting my NB past the 3200mhz its at I had it running 3600mhz and the Ram was really much faster getting info and writing it but not sure what it needs to stay stable and I am chicken to turn the voltz on the NB or IOH into the yellow or red area lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Its a W5580 quad core 45nm.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20W5580%20-%20AT80602000756AD%20(BX80602W5580).html


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Its a W5580 quad core 45nm.
> 
> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20W5580%20-%20AT80602000756AD%20(BX80602W5580).html


yeah I looked it up earlier, you still got a good chip! I just redid my 3dmark11 score

3DMark11 Score 11500

With your 780 you should walk all over me!


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I got it. I dropped from 24x to 23x core multi to hit 4ghz. Gonna shoot for 4.5ghz but this is a 130w cpu so Im gonna bet It gets too hot or too much voltage to hit that.
> 
> I just got an H60 on the cpu and am not impressed. Need to get a block for my asus 78 so I can hook up my full WC system. Dang thing is non reference and EK is the only one that makes a block for it.
> 
> Ek status shows "end of life." Thats great they dont make it any more.


Get a universal WB. They don't look as good, but you actually get cooler GPU core temps with them. Just make sure you put heatsinks on your VRMs.


----------



## ssnyder28

Thank you for doing this review. I am thinking of doing something similar but I am going to try expand and do a little more comparative analysis of x58 vs x79 and maybe do some of the same benches for a 2500k since a lot of people are on those too, if I can find the time :/. I also have 7970 crossfire so we can see how crossfire works in comparison to your sli benches. I have a 1440p monitor too so I'll be able to give benches at that specific resolution.

Basically, I am thinking of comparing the following x58 cpus (because I currently have them):

i7 930 stock & OC
L5640 stock & OC
X5670 stock & OC

And comparing results to the following x79 cpus (because I currently have them):

i7 3820 stock & OC

Also 2500k maybe?

I might change some of the cpus based on what I can get in the coming weeks. I have a bunch of x58, X79, and 1155 boards I've been trying to fix but some of them I just can't figure out. Once I get that project out of the way I'll probably start my own thread here for the project.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sounds good and Thanks for reading. You could just post your results here since there's already plenty of data from different users and their results.

Hey guys if you have a Xeon+X58 check out my Xeon Club here.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/x58-xeon-club







*>- X58 Xeon Club -<*









All you have to do is post your CPU-Z validation link with your OCN username to be approved. X58 users unite! I'm glad that I was able to bring you guys this review. Thanks a lot for all the rep as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D3V1N*
> 
> Thanks so much for posting this!! I just got my x5650 from Ebay to replace the i7-920 that I bought when it first came out.
> I had the 920 overclocked at 21x175 at 1.2v without HT. Installed the x5650 and forgot to reset the bios. It booted to windows at 22x175(3,850)!
> Awesome chip... Can't wait to push it! I just hope this motherboard can hold out for another 5 years! lol
> 
> EX58-UD3R Rev 1.2
> 16gb KHX1600C9D3/4GX


You're welcome. Another 5 years would be amazing and I think the X58 could still be good then. What's your GPU setup?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yeah I looked it up earlier, you still got a good chip! I just redid my 3dmark11 score
> 
> 3DMark11 Score 11500
> 
> With your 780 you should walk all over me!


That's a nice score for the 680. The 780 Ti's look good, but price wise the 290x's looks just as good with $200 - $300 off.

Have you guys seen the GTX Titan Z review? It seems to be pretty bad and SLI 780 Ti's out do it. $3000.00 GPU is way to much anyways.


----------



## Kana-Maru

The GTX Titan Z isn't looking that good. Not only was the $3000.00 very expensive, but the card seems to under perform [a lot]. Titan Z was delayed, but reviews still went live.



*Watts and Temps:*


*Performance:*


*Max Clock:*


Goodness. Baseclock is only 706Mhz and the boost is 876mhz. The max is only 1058Mhz from the tests the Chinese magazine conducted. Could the tides change or AMD. The 295x2 is looking much better than expected.

Thoughts?


----------



## ssnyder28

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The GTX Titan Z isn't looking that good. Not only was the $3000.00 very expensive, but the card seems to under perform [a lot]. Titan Z was delayed, but reviews still went live.
> 
> 
> 
> *Watts and Temps:*
> 
> 
> *Performance:*
> 
> 
> *Max Clock:*
> 
> 
> Goodness. Baseclock is only 706Mhz and the boost is 876mhz. The max is only 1058Mhz from the tests the Chinese magazine conducted. Could the tides change or AMD. The 295x2 is looking much better than expected.
> 
> Thoughts?


I think both are a pretty big waste of money TBH...

I've seen used R9 290 as low as $215 shipped each on ebay as recent as a couple days ago. Obviously those are stock reference coolers and high end dual and tri fire setups would need non-reference cooling of some type. The big time enthusiasts will go for a full loop and I assume they can build a full loop while spending under $900 for 3 290s and stay under the msrp for the 295x2


----------



## Rangerscott

Still seeing what the w5580 can do before posting. Once I find its top iff, Id like to get sone with as lose to my clock and system to see the differences. I really dont feel like installing my 920 back.


----------



## Bradford1040

I try lol, I know I could get a higher score in all the 3dmarks if any of the questions I asked on the threads were answered, (not this thread) I have been trying to find out any info on the Kepler Bios Tweaker so I know what each thing really does and which are the best and worst to raise or lower in the voltage and power profiles and such, I know how to get the thermo downclocking disabled that was easy, I also was able to raise the power target voltage so there is no need for that anymore either, I would like some of them guys that really do know how to get into the guts of the bios and tweak it, but I guess they are holding on to their knowledge like a trade secret! Anytime I ask a question in any of those threads it just goes unanswered like I did not even post! No smart remarks nothing lol, I resulted to fumbling around my bios till I got 1320mhz core and 7200mhz memory 100% stable at 1.31 voltz on air, I have the classified card so the cooler on it is really good for stock air cooling!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssnyder28*
> 
> I think both are a pretty big waste of money TBH...
> 
> I've seen used R9 290 as low as $215 shipped each on ebay as recent as a couple days ago. Obviously those are stock reference coolers and high end dual and tri fire setups would need non-reference cooling of some type. The big time enthusiasts will go for a full loop and I assume they can build a full loop while spending under $900 for 3 290s and stay under the msrp for the 295x2


I agree the R9 295x2 did turn me off when I saw the price. I figured that it would be even cheaper to just get two 290x's or two 780 Ti's. You are right about the Triple 290 price. I"m just going to stay patient and wait and see what comes next. I just have the GPU upgrade itch now. It's the only the left that I need want to upgrade.


----------



## Rangerscott

Ok. Back on topic.

Here is a quick side by side comparison of my i7 920 @3.6 Ghz and W5580 @ 3.6 Ghz.

*AIDA64 v 1.85.1600*
*
I7 920 @ 3.6Ghz w/ HT*....................*W5580 @ 3.6Ghz w/ HT*

Queen - 41348.................................Queen - 41332
Photo - 54546..................................Photo - 52549
Zlib - 231.6 MB/s...............................Zlib - 231.7 MB/s
AES - 44047.....................................AES - 44079
Hash - 2089 MB/s.............................Hash - 2091 MB/s
VP8 - 3045.......................................VP8 - 3051
Julia - 12003....................................Julia - 11998
Mandel - 5817..................................Mandel - 5816
SinJulia - 4948................................SinJulia - 4953

*
Cinebench R15*

*I7 920 @ 3.6Ghz w/ HT.....................W5580 @ 3.6Ghz w/ HT*

564 cb.............................................567 cb

They appear to be equally matched, BUT keep in mind that this is a workstation cpu and not an "X" type like the other guys on here. I am currently at 4.26Ghz on the W5580 but I think the H60 is about to reach it's limits. I'm hitting 71c on core 1. I'm going to have to install my WC system. Was hoping to get a block for my 780 direct cu but dang thing is nonreference and I'd like to find a deal and not pay full retail.

I'm going to try my best to hit 4.5Ghz but I'm already at 1.344v on cpu-Z. The scores @ 4.26ghz are up a good amount but we'll see if I can go higher.

Game benching seemed to be the same. Also while playing, average fps where the same. I did notice in Crysis 3 and Metro LL that they held a bit steadier while completely maxed out. Instead of going up and down a bit from say 21 - 28 fps, with the "W" they would stay 23 - 28 fps but would stay in the middle more often if you get what I'm saying.


----------



## kckyle

oh man i have left my 920 on stock since day one and haven't found any needs to overclock it. i can see myself using the x58 for at least couple more years.


----------



## Rangerscott

Dear Santa,


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> oh man i have left my 920 on stock since day one and haven't found any needs to overclock it. i can see myself using the x58 for at least couple more years.


If you game, you'd get a really nice boost if you hit 3.4-3.6ghz.

Well 4.5Ghz is fighting me hard. I can get into windows and run a few AIDA64 benches but eventually she shuts down. I feel as if I'm going to cook her but man does she fly on those benchmarks at 4.5.


----------



## Rangerscott

Ok. Every AIDA64 bench I do, it shows the X5560 ahead of me most of the time. So, I'm thinking of getting an X5560/X5570 just to do another comparo.


----------



## mocboy123

Nothing better than a Xeon that is a badass overclocker. It makes me happy to see something like that.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Dear Santa,


Damn that's nice. Way to much money for home usage, but still very nice. I thought about running 2 X5660's. At this point I think it would be better to put the money towards GPUs instead of another CPU, CPU cooler, MB and case etc.

Thanks for posing your benchmarks as well. Very neat.


----------



## ssnyder28

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Damn that's nice. Way to much money for home usage, but still very nice. I thought about running 2 X5660's. At this point I think it would be better to put the money towards GPUs instead of another CPU, CPU cooler, MB and case etc.
> 
> Thanks for posing your benchmarks as well. Very neat.


Yea dual x5660s would only offer extra benefits if you can oc them and the only board you can oc them in is the evga sr-2 and good luck finding one for under $500 lol


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Ok. Every AIDA64 bench I do, it shows the X5560 ahead of me most of the time. So, I'm thinking of getting an X5560/X5570 just to do another comparo.


ok you do realise the reason the x5560 is ahead of you right! Most if not all of those are with 2 thats TWO of them lol as most x5560's are in or on server boards and they have two cpu sockets so if you are right behind the x5560 x 8 core results you are doing dam good son lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> ok you do realise the reason the x5560 is ahead of you right! Most if not all of those are with 2 thats TWO of them lol as most x5560's are in or on server boards and they have two cpu sockets so if you are right behind the x5560 x 8 core results you are doing dam good son lol


Hmmm ok. So those are probably two stock speed cpu's? Still would like to see what the 95w versions can do.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> ok you do realise the reason the x5560 is ahead of you right! Most if not all of those are with 2 thats TWO of them lol as most x5560's are in or on server boards and they have two cpu sockets so if you are right behind the x5560 x 8 core results you are doing dam good son lol
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm ok. So those are probably two stock speed cpu's? Still would like to see what the 95w versions can do.
Click to expand...

yeah! dam that would stink, all this time you are trying to beat a score that was what you thought one chip, bet you were like man what clock was this guy running! lol


----------



## bill1024

Dual x5660 24 threads on a folding SMP work unit will do around 80,000 points per day (PPD), a q6600 6 or 7,000 PPD a AMD 1045T @ 3.5 ghz 10,000 PPD
My 48 core AMD 4 processors 12 core each 175,000PPD and my AMD 4 x 6 24 core does around the same as my dual x5660 80,000 PPD or so.
All those are standard work units. There sre special work units for 24 core or more that will net 170,000 on 24 and 350,000PPD or much more with 4 processor depending on CPUs.
Unless you are doing folding at home or BOINC it will not be much use to you.
At this point in time for multi socket bang for the buck AMD 4 processor is the way to gverclocking is possible with the modded bios that is out there. (Supermicro boards)
But if you do have deep pockets Intel quad socket e5-4560 makes a nice work horse and the chips are showing up on ebay used.but 3500$ is not in my budget
There are people overclocking them too not sure how they are doing it. But with the special WUs one million PPD are possible.

Once this BOINC contest is over in a few days, I will do some benching.


----------



## Bradford1040




----------



## thomasz

Any of you guys heard of MSI MS-96C8 dual 1366 server motherboard? It's cheeeeep and it can OVERCLOCK with a few hardware modding

Here's the original inventor's post: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2291907036

Here's a graphic tutorial: http://tieba.baidu.com/photo/p?kw=%CD%BC%C0%AD%B6%A1&flux=1&tid=2292442988&pic_id=caef76094b36acaf4fdbb7ab7dd98d1001e99ca9&pn=1&fp=2&see_lz=1#!/pid8da9d53f8794a4c21c18c67c0ff41bd5ad6e394a/pn1

In brief, remove the resistor at R680 and weld a 1k resistor at R698. Then use setfsb to pull FSB straight to 166 MHz.


----------



## ssnyder28

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Any of you guys heard of MSI MS-96C8 dual 1366 server motherboard? It's cheeeeep and it can OVERCLOCK with a few hardware modding
> 
> Here's the original inventor's post: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2291907036
> 
> Here's a graphic tutorial: http://tieba.baidu.com/photo/p?kw=%CD%BC%C0%AD%B6%A1&flux=1&tid=2292442988&pic_id=caef76094b36acaf4fdbb7ab7dd98d1001e99ca9&pn=1&fp=2&see_lz=1#!/pid8da9d53f8794a4c21c18c67c0ff41bd5ad6e394a/pn1
> 
> In brief, remove the resistor at R680 and weld a 1k resistor at R698. Then use setfsb to pull FSB straight to 166 MHz.


Sounds good but I don't see this board for sale anywhere. Where exactly are you finding it cheap?


----------



## thomasz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssnyder28*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Any of you guys heard of MSI MS-96C8 dual 1366 server motherboard? It's cheeeeep and it can OVERCLOCK with a few hardware modding
> 
> Here's the original inventor's post: http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2291907036
> 
> Here's a graphic tutorial: http://tieba.baidu.com/photo/p?kw=%CD%BC%C0%AD%B6%A1&flux=1&tid=2292442988&pic_id=caef76094b36acaf4fdbb7ab7dd98d1001e99ca9&pn=1&fp=2&see_lz=1#!/pid8da9d53f8794a4c21c18c67c0ff41bd5ad6e394a/pn1
> 
> In brief, remove the resistor at R680 and weld a 1k resistor at R698. Then use setfsb to pull FSB straight to 166 MHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds good but I don't see this board for sale anywhere. Where exactly are you finding it cheap?
Click to expand...

I didnt see it on sale in North America either. I guess it is cheap because it is made by MSI. It is on sale in China though, with low price tags, including modded boards (by fans).


----------



## Kana-Maru

UPDATE *Brand new CPU benchmarks and comparisons with HWBOT scores:*

I've finally got around to creating an account and uploaded some HWBOT scores. Since it's going to be a challenge to find high end X79-i7's running DDR3-1600Mhz - 1670Mhz, I'll compare clock speeds and a few other things. Most of my benchmarks are running 4.8Ghz /w DDR-1670Mhz and one test is running using 4.6Ghz is running DDR-1600Mhz. I'm going to compare the current #1 CPU [Hexa-Core only] against my CPUs in terms of performance percentage. After the comparison I'll elaborate on the difference and if it is worth the upgrade.

Then I'll go for a lower ranked X79-high-end-CPU running 4.8Ghz + [looped or traditional] water cooling + similar vCore. I'll start from my score and work my way upwards until I find what I'm looking for. I feel that it wouldn't be fair to compare my build against other builds using extreme measures to cool their entire MB\CPU [DICE, LN2, Phase Change etc]. However, when I compare the #1 CPUs will ignore the type of cooling. My complete specs are above. I'm using the Antec Kuhler 620.

*Click Here for the X5660 vs High-End SB-E & IVB-E HWBOT Benchmarks Comparisons*


Spoiler: X5660 vs HWBOT Benchmarks



*As of May 19th 2014:*

*Cinebench R11.5 - Core for Core*
-i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *14.13 pts [-13.9%]*
-i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *13.82 pts [-11%]*
-i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.41v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "Looped H20" = *13.71 pts [-10%]*
-Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]*

*Cinebench R11.5 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
i7-4930K @ *6.3Ghz v1.70v* w/ DDR3-2703Mhz - Cooling: "unknown"[possibly LN2?] = *19.26 pts [-55%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]
*

The first thing that jumps out at me during this benchmark is the amount of vCore and extreme cooling it takes to get those high percentages [30%+ - 50%+]. I thought that a i7-4930K @ 6.3Ghz would gain more than 55%. That's an insane amount of voltage to gain the benefits. Of course this is only for benchmarking and getting the best time, but my main focus is the core for core comparisons. I'm so glad I didn't upgrade to X79 at this point. Moving On.

*Cinebench R15 - Core for Core*
i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2404Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1265 cb [-13%]*
i7-3970X @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-1333Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1215 cb [-8.7%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz - *1117 cb [0.0%]*

*Cinebench R15 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
i7-4930K @ 6.4Ghz *v1.79v* w/ DDR3-2541Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *1704 [-52.5%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz = *1117 cb [0.0%]*

*WinRar Core for Core* - [ I couldn't find any 4.6Ghz SB-E\IV-E so I stuck with 4.8Ghz ]
i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.49v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *18,343 pts [-11%]*
i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore"w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *17,559 pts [-6.6%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 cb [0.0%]*

*WinRar - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
i7-3970X @ 5.2Ghz 1.55v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *19,868 KB/s [-20.7%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 KB/s [0.0%]*

*UCBENCH 2011 - Core for Core*
i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.52v w/ DDR3-1889Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1747.3 MPT-score [-1.6%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*

*UCBENCH 2011 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
[/B]i7-4930K @ 5.5Ghz v1.57v w/ DDR3-2423Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *2125.0 MPT-score [-23.6%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*

*FryBench - Core for Core*
i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *2m 55secs [-1.1%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*

*FryBench - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.65v* w/ DDR3-1941Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *2m 21secs [-25.5%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*

*Black Hole Benchmark - Core for Core*
i7-4930K @ 4.9Ghz v1.38v w/ DDR3-2613Mhz - Cooling: H20 = *24428 marks [-9%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*
i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *20800 marks [+7.7%]*

*Black Hole Benchmark World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.69v* w/ DDR3-2760Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *26452 [-18%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*

*RealBench V2 - Core for Core*
i7-3970X @ 4.94Ghz v1.58v w/ DDR3-2422Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = *102953 [-12.7%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*

*RealBench V2 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660 x2 GTX 670 2GB Ref. Stock Cooling*
i7-4930K @ 4.92Ghz *v1.73v* w/ DDR3-2256Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = 1*11514 [-22%]*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 2GB Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*



Alright so there you have it. This definitely took awhile to setup and compare, but I think it was worth it in the end, I'm so glad I didn't spend $2000.00 on a X79 build that I was thinking about upgrading to late last year. I'm still thinking about getting two R9 290x's in CrossfireX. I haven't made a decision yet, but if I do decide to get them I will compare GPU\CPU scores for you guys. I still think my build will be fine until Skylake-E releases. That's what I'm trying to hold out for. It appears that some of the scores decrease one you go above 6 cores\12Threads in a lot of the test from what I've seen. I'm sure this will change in a few years.

This has also been added to my first post as well. I focused solely on Hexa cores since that is the main part of the topic. I'm still debating added my Xeon X5660 @ 4Ghz GPU benchmark with a i7-920 @ 4Ghz Benchmark to my first post. There was a user here that had a similar setup to my build. However, there seems to be a few people that thinks that this topic is solely about Hexa core vs Quad core when it is not.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> yeah I looked it up earlier, you still got a good chip! I just redid my 3dmark11 score
> 
> 3DMark11 Score 11500
> 
> With your 780 you should walk all over me!


Hmmm you physics score seems kind of low. Here is my run with a 780 and an x5650 @ 4.4 Ghz. Note my clocks on the 780 are pretty much stock on that run lol. That 680 is still beast though. I looked at my 670 single card benches and your 680 is fast.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Damn that's nice. Way to much money for home usage, but still very nice. I thought about running 2 X5660's. At this point I think it would be better to put the money towards GPUs instead of another CPU, CPU cooler, MB and case etc.
> 
> Thanks for posing your benchmarks as well. Very neat.


Funny you should say that... i have an SR-2 rig with two x5679's in it.... have been run for a total of like 15 hours lol. if only I could finish my Force1 rig... one day.... one day. You can pick up SR-2 for pretty cheap if you look around now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> UPDATE *Brand new CPU benchmarks and comparisons with HWBOT scores:*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I've finally got around to creating an account and uploaded some HWBOT scores. Since it's going to be a challenge to find high end X79-i7's running DDR3-1600Mhz - 1670Mhz, I'll compare clock speeds and a few other things. Most of my benchmarks are running 4.8Ghz /w DDR-1670Mhz and one test is running using 4.6Ghz is running DDR-1600Mhz. I'm going to compare the current #1 CPU [Hexa-Core only] against my CPUs in terms of performance percentage. After the comparison I'll elaborate on the difference and if it is worth the upgrade.
> 
> Then I'll go for a lower ranked X79-high-end-CPU running 4.8Ghz + [looped or traditional] water cooling + similar vCore. I'll start from my score and work my way upwards until I find what I'm looking for. I feel that it wouldn't be fair to compare my build against other builds using extreme measures to cool their entire MB\CPU [DICE, LN2, Phase Change etc]. However, when I compare the #1 CPUs will ignore the type of cooling. My complete specs are above. I'm using the Antec Kuhler 620.
> 
> *Click Here for the X5660 vs High-End SB-E & IVB-E HWBOT Benchmarks Comparisons*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: X5660 vs HWBOT Benchmarks
> 
> 
> 
> *As of May 19th 2014:*
> 
> *Cinebench R11.5 - Core for Core*
> -i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *14.13 pts [-13.9%]*
> -i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *13.82 pts [-11%]*
> -i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.41v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "Looped H20" = *13.71 pts [-10%]*
> -Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]*
> 
> *Cinebench R11.5 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4930K @ *6.3Ghz v1.70v* w/ DDR3-2703Mhz - Cooling: "unknown"[possibly LN2?] = *19.26 pts [-55%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]
> *
> 
> The first thing that jumps out at me during this benchmark is the amount of vCore and extreme cooling it takes to get those high percentages [30%+ - 50%+]. I thought that a i7-4930K @ 6.3Ghz would gain more than 55%. That's an insane amount of voltage to gain the benefits. Of course this is only for benchmarking and getting the best time, but my main focus is the core for core comparisons. I'm so glad I didn't upgrade to X79 at this point. Moving On.
> 
> *Cinebench R15 - Core for Core*
> i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2404Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1265 cb [-13%]*
> i7-3970X @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-1333Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1215 cb [-8.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz - *1117 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *Cinebench R15 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4930K @ 6.4Ghz *v1.79v* w/ DDR3-2541Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *1704 [-52.5%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz = *1117 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *WinRar Core for Core* - [ I couldn't find any 4.6Ghz SB-E\IV-E so I stuck with 4.8Ghz ]
> i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.49v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *18,343 pts [-11%]*
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore"w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *17,559 pts [-6.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *WinRar - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-3970X @ 5.2Ghz 1.55v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *19,868 KB/s [-20.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 KB/s [0.0%]*
> 
> *UCBENCH 2011 - Core for Core*
> i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.52v w/ DDR3-1889Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1747.3 MPT-score [-1.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*
> 
> *UCBENCH 2011 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> [/B]i7-4930K @ 5.5Ghz v1.57v w/ DDR3-2423Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *2125.0 MPT-score [-23.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*
> 
> *FryBench - Core for Core*
> i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *2m 55secs [-1.1%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*
> 
> *FryBench - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.65v* w/ DDR3-1941Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *2m 21secs [-25.5%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*
> 
> *Black Hole Benchmark - Core for Core*
> i7-4930K @ 4.9Ghz v1.38v w/ DDR3-2613Mhz - Cooling: H20 = *24428 marks [-9%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *20800 marks [+7.7%]*
> 
> *Black Hole Benchmark World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.69v* w/ DDR3-2760Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *26452 [-18%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*
> 
> *RealBench V2 - Core for Core*
> i7-3970X @ 4.94Ghz v1.58v w/ DDR3-2422Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = *102953 [-12.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*
> 
> *RealBench V2 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660 x2 GTX 670 2GB Ref. Stock Cooling*
> i7-4930K @ 4.92Ghz *v1.73v* w/ DDR3-2256Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = 1*11514 [-22%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 2GB Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*
> 
> 
> 
> Alright so there you have it. This definitely took awhile to setup and compare, but I think it was worth it in the end, I'm so glad I didn't spend $2000.00 on a X79 build that I was thinking about upgrading to late last year. I'm still thinking about getting two R9 290x's in CrossfireX. I haven't made a decision yet, but if I do decide to get them I will compare GPU\CPU scores for you guys. I still think my build will be fine until Skylake-E releases. That's what I'm trying to hold out for. It appears that some of the scores decrease one you go above 6 cores\12Threads in a lot of the test from what I've seen. I'm sure this will change in a few years.
> 
> This has also been added to my first post as well. I focused solely on Hexa cores since that is the main part of the topic. I'm still debating added my Xeon X5660 @ 4Ghz GPU benchmark with a i7-920 @ 4Ghz Benchmark to my first post. There was a user here that had a similar setup to my build. However, there seems to be a few people that thinks that this topic is solely about Hexa core vs Quad core when it is not.


Thanks for even more info...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Thanks for even more info...


No problem man.

Quote:


> Funny you should say that... i have an SR-2 rig with two x5679's in it.... have been run for a total of like 15 hours lol. if only I could finish my Force1 rig... one day.... one day. You can pick up SR-2 for pretty cheap if you look around now.


Yeah I've thought about the SR-2. I feel that I'd rather benefit by just putting the money towards graphic cards at this point. I thinking about picking up a SR-2 back in December and passed it up. I'd have to buy another CPU + CPU cooler and another case. I think I'll rather stay patient and see what Nvidia and AMD will release later this year or wait for the next architectures from Nvidia and AMD.

I hope you get around to finishing that build.


----------



## bill1024

Where are the cheap SR-2 at? What do you consider cheap? I will spring for one right now if the price is right.
I know one coming up for sale soon but it is more than I want to spend.
I kick myself in the butt for not grabbing one from newegg when they had refurbs for 250$


----------



## Rangerscott

I only saw one on ebay for $400+.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> I only saw one on ebay for $400+.


The one I know of will be 350, it had a couple bent pins he said he fixed and it works.
Still more than I want to pay.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah I thought long and hard about the SR-2. Just seems so late to be upgrading to that when I think about the prices and requirements. I haven't seen any cheap SR-2''s online and haven't for awhile. The cheapest were refurbished boards and I never purchased refurbished-anything when it comes to my PC.


----------



## Rangerscott

Got a refund for the scam x5670 sale.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Got a refund for the scam x5670 sale.


wait what happened? i just bought a x5650 myself lol


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> wait what happened? i just bought a x5650 myself lol


Ebay.


----------



## kckyle

did the item never arrrived? or was it doa?


----------



## Quantium40

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Got a refund for the scam x5670 sale.


I saw those. Thought about pulling the trigger then realized the dude had no rep, so I figured it wasn't real.


----------



## ruhtraeel

Hello,
Just out of curiousity, would an i5 2500k @ 4.0ghz be better or a Xeon X5650 @ 3.6ghz for rendering/productivity? How about gaming?

My dad does some heavy video editing/rendering, and he's been complaining that his dual Opteron 2354's haven't been cutting it due to the low clock speed. I've been reading this thread as a result.

If I were to get one, I wouldn't know if I would keep my i5 2500k, or if I would use the X5650.


----------



## ssnyder28

Ty for the excellent analysis. Go for crossfire 290s over 290xs the 5% performance difference isn't worth the $200 price difference

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> UPDATE *Brand new CPU benchmarks and comparisons with HWBOT scores:*
> 
> I've finally got around to creating an account and uploaded some HWBOT scores. Since it's going to be a challenge to find high end X79-i7's running DDR3-1600Mhz - 1670Mhz, I'll compare clock speeds and a few other things. Most of my benchmarks are running 4.8Ghz /w DDR-1670Mhz and one test is running using 4.6Ghz is running DDR-1600Mhz. I'm going to compare the current #1 CPU [Hexa-Core only] against my CPUs in terms of performance percentage. After the comparison I'll elaborate on the difference and if it is worth the upgrade.
> 
> Then I'll go for a lower ranked X79-high-end-CPU running 4.8Ghz + [looped or traditional] water cooling + similar vCore. I'll start from my score and work my way upwards until I find what I'm looking for. I feel that it wouldn't be fair to compare my build against other builds using extreme measures to cool their entire MB\CPU [DICE, LN2, Phase Change etc]. However, when I compare the #1 CPUs will ignore the type of cooling. My complete specs are above. I'm using the Antec Kuhler 620.
> 
> *Click Here for the X5660 vs High-End SB-E & IVB-E HWBOT Benchmarks Comparisons*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: X5660 vs HWBOT Benchmarks
> 
> 
> 
> *As of May 19th 2014:*
> 
> *Cinebench R11.5 - Core for Core*
> -i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *14.13 pts [-13.9%]*
> -i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2133Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *13.82 pts [-11%]*
> -i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.41v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "Looped H20" = *13.71 pts [-10%]*
> -Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]*
> 
> *Cinebench R11.5 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4930K @ *6.3Ghz v1.70v* w/ DDR3-2703Mhz - Cooling: "unknown"[possibly LN2?] = *19.26 pts [-55%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - *12.40 [0.0%]
> *
> 
> The first thing that jumps out at me during this benchmark is the amount of vCore and extreme cooling it takes to get those high percentages [30%+ - 50%+]. I thought that a i7-4930K @ 6.3Ghz would gain more than 55%. That's an insane amount of voltage to gain the benefits. Of course this is only for benchmarking and getting the best time, but my main focus is the core for core comparisons. I'm so glad I didn't upgrade to X79 at this point. Moving On.
> 
> *Cinebench R15 - Core for Core*
> i7-4930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-2404Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1265 cb [-13%]*
> i7-3970X @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore" w/ DDR3-1333Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1215 cb [-8.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz - *1117 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *Cinebench R15 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4930K @ 6.4Ghz *v1.79v* w/ DDR3-2541Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *1704 [-52.5%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-2088Mhz = *1117 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *WinRar Core for Core* - [ I couldn't find any 4.6Ghz SB-E\IV-E so I stuck with 4.8Ghz ]
> i7-3960X @ 4.8Ghz 1.49v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *18,343 pts [-11%]*
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz "unknown max vCore"w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *17,559 pts [-6.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 cb [0.0%]*
> 
> *WinRar - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-3970X @ 5.2Ghz 1.55v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *19,868 KB/s [-20.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.6Ghz w/ DDR-1600Mhz = *16,458 KB/s [0.0%]*
> 
> *UCBENCH 2011 - Core for Core*
> i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.52v w/ DDR3-1889Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *1747.3 MPT-score [-1.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*
> 
> *UCBENCH 2011 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> [/B]i7-4930K @ 5.5Ghz v1.57v w/ DDR3-2423Mhz - Cooling: LN2 = *2125.0 MPT-score [-23.6%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *1718.6 MPT-score [0.0%]*
> 
> *FryBench - Core for Core*
> i7-3930K @ 4.85Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *2m 55secs [-1.1%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*
> 
> *FryBench - World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.65v* w/ DDR3-1941Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *2m 21secs [-25.5%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *2 min 57secs [0.0%]*
> 
> *Black Hole Benchmark - Core for Core*
> i7-4930K @ 4.9Ghz v1.38v w/ DDR3-2613Mhz - Cooling: H20 = *24428 marks [-9%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz 1.45v w/ DDR3-2400Mhz - Cooling: "H20" = *20800 marks [+7.7%]*
> 
> *Black Hole Benchmark World's #1 vs Kana X5660*
> i7-4960X @ 5.3Ghz *v1.69v* w/ DDR3-2760Mhz - Cooling: DICE = *26452 [-18%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz = *22408 marks [0.0%]*
> 
> *RealBench V2 - Core for Core*
> i7-3970X @ 4.94Ghz v1.58v w/ DDR3-2422Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = *102953 [-12.7%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*
> 
> *RealBench V2 - World's #1 vs Kana X5660 x2 GTX 670 2GB Ref. Stock Cooling*
> i7-4930K @ 4.92Ghz *v1.73v* w/ DDR3-2256Mhz - Cooling: H20 - 2x GeForce GTX 780 Ti = 1*11514 [-22%]*
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz w/ DDR-1670Mhz - 2x GeForce GTX 670 2GB Ref. = *91312 points [0.0%]*
> 
> 
> 
> Alright so there you have it. This definitely took awhile to setup and compare, but I think it was worth it in the end, I'm so glad I didn't spend $2000.00 on a X79 build that I was thinking about upgrading to late last year. I'm still thinking about getting two R9 290x's in CrossfireX. I haven't made a decision yet, but if I do decide to get them I will compare GPU\CPU scores for you guys. I still think my build will be fine until Skylake-E releases. That's what I'm trying to hold out for. It appears that some of the scores decrease one you go above 6 cores\12Threads in a lot of the test from what I've seen. I'm sure this will change in a few years.
> 
> This has also been added to my first post as well. I focused solely on Hexa cores since that is the main part of the topic. I'm still debating added my Xeon X5660 @ 4Ghz GPU benchmark with a i7-920 @ 4Ghz Benchmark to my first post. There was a user here that had a similar setup to my build. However, there seems to be a few people that thinks that this topic is solely about Hexa core vs Quad core when it is not.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruhtraeel*
> 
> Hello,
> Just out of curiousity, would an i5 2500k @ 4.0ghz be better or a Xeon X5650 @ 3.6ghz for rendering/productivity? How about gaming?
> 
> My dad does some heavy video editing/rendering, and he's been complaining that his dual Opteron 2354's haven't been cutting it due to the low clock speed. I've been reading this thread as a result.
> 
> If I were to get one, I wouldn't know if I would keep my i5 2500k, or if I would use the X5650.


um they are not even the same platform, but yeah a x5650 definitely out performs the 2500k, unless you are only comparing single core operations.


----------



## peteroaknyc

Hey guys, after long time lurking managed to score a x58 sabertooth board with 1.5 year rest warranty for 80 euro.Really happy, so now its time to buy the cpu, any good source to buy from europe.I've found plenty on taobao china for 83 usd, but the shipping chargers and the waiting time is so long , so i prefer to buy it from europe or usa .Really can't wait to get hands on this cpu.

Greets Peter


----------



## Rangerscott

Got an X5560 heading my way.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssnyder28*
> 
> Ty for the excellent analysis. Go for crossfire 290s over 290xs the 5% performance difference isn't worth the $200 price difference


Thanks and I'm going to post more results soon. So far I'm #1 in every X5660 category. I'm going to upload some more scores eventually. I'm not seeing a huge difference clock for clock so I'm holding out for Skylake-E [hopefully]. I changed my mind on the entire 290\290x\780Ti upgrade. I think I'm just going to wait until later this year. I'm still putting up great numbers with 1080p\1440p\1600p for now. If I purchased them now it would be strictly for benchmarking and bringing results to your guys. Those cards are pretty expensive so I thought about re-selling them on Ebay or something once I finished using them. In the end I just think it would be better to wait until later this year when we get more info on newer architectures.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Got an X5560 heading my way.


Sounds good. What happened with that scam that you went through?


----------



## Nelson2011

Is it worth the extra 50-60 bucks to get the X5660 than the x5650?


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> .
> Sounds good. What happened with that scam that you went through?


See above.


----------



## bill1024

Does anyone know for sure if the ASRock X58 Extreme motherboard will support the x56xx cpu?


----------



## Vardamir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nelson2011*
> 
> Is it worth the extra 50-60 bucks to get the X5660 than the x5650?


From what I understand, the X5660's can overclock higher than the X5650. You can get the X5660 to 4.4-4.6ghz on air pretty easily, while the X5650 tends to top out at around 4.2-4.3ghz. The highest 24/7 stable overclock I can get on my X5650 is 4.2ghz, but then again I have a middle-class MB (Asus P6X58D-E) instead of a Sabertooth or Maximus formula etc... Personally, if I could go back in time I would have spent the extra cash on the X5660, but wasn't sure if it would even work on my motherboard so I went for the cheapest option. I'm still really happy with my X5650 though, it's more than enough for my needs.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nelson2011*
> 
> Is it worth the extra 50-60 bucks to get the X5660 than the x5650?


No get a X5650. It's the same as the X5660 minus one multiplier. You'll still get decent clocks with the X5650. If you can reach 200BLCK you'll get 4.6Ghz with the X5650. You'll have to reach around 208-211BCLK with the 22x multiplier. What really matters will be your cooling solution and vCore needed to reach a stable overclock. Every build and CPU is different so it will vary from user to user. From all of my testing 3.8Ghz - 4.2Ghz is all you really need for gaming, streaming, video editing, high quality music programs etc. Unless I need to overclock for specific reason I'm running stock with no issues for everyday use. When I need the speed then I'm OC'ing to about 4.2Ghz for most tasks. I'd put than extra $50-$60 towards something else honestly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Does anyone know for sure if the ASRock X58 Extreme motherboard will support the x56xx cpu?


Yes it will work, but to be on the safe side always update to the latest BIOS. That should take care of any stability issues.


----------



## mocboy123

Anyone know if these Xeons will work in the ASUS P6T SE? The reason I'm asking is that I've seen a few people across the web with Xeons in their P6T deluxe's but never in the SE version. It does support the 6 core Extreme editions though...


----------



## sergec19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mocboy123*
> 
> Anyone know if these Xeons will work in the ASUS P6T SE? The reason I'm asking is that I've seen a few people across the web with Xeons in their P6T deluxe's but never in the SE version. It does support the 6 core Extreme editions though...


It will work 100% ! Al P6T(D) support xeon!
Have an P6TD deluxe and working.
And seen on Other forum with a normal P6T..
Plug and play friend just make sure it has the latest bios update.


----------



## RX7-2nr

It works fine in my P6T using the 1408 bios.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xenxo80*
> 
> Hi, is to buy it on amazon of Spain. I'm looking at several power supplies with maximum budget of 220 €
> 
> *Super Flower Leadex 80 Plus Platinum 1000W*
> 
> Enermax EPM850AWT Platimax
> 
> This source is for this team, but in the future I want to another computer with sli gtx titan and I7 3930K with OC (4.4GHz)
> 
> regards












You may have to update BIOS on that EVGA board to get westmere-ep to work.


----------



## Vardamir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No get a X5650. It's the same as the X5660 minus one multiplier. You'll still get decent clocks with the X5650. If you can reach 200BLCK you'll get 4.6Ghz with the X5650. You'll have to reach around 208-211BCLK with the 22x multiplier. What really matters will be your cooling solution and vCore needed to reach a stable overclock. Every build and CPU is different so it will vary from user to user. From all of my testing 3.8Ghz - 4.2Ghz is all you really need for gaming, streaming, video editing, high quality music programs etc. Unless I need to overclock for specific reason I'm running stock with no issues for everyday use. When I need the speed then I'm OC'ing to about 4.2Ghz for most tasks. I'd put than extra $50-$60 towards something else honestly.
> Yes it will work, but to be on the safe side always update to the latest BIOS. That should take care of any stability issues.


Thanks, that's good to know. I think my P6X58D-E board is probably the main limiting factor in not being able to get my X5650 stable over 4.2ghz. Anything over 1.36 vCore is unstable in Prime95, no matter how low the temps or frequency. I wonder if it's my particular MB or the model itself, as I remember having similar vCore issues with my i7 950 OC on this board. That being said, I also noticed that the 3rd core (in particular the 6th thread) would almost always fail first in Prime95, so perhaps I also didn't have the best luck of the draw with my CPU. Either way, 4.2ghz is more than enough for me. Right now I'm running my X5650 at a stable 3.8ghz and 1.25 vCore, but anything above 3.8ghz or so needs a vCore boost to 1.30+.


----------



## mocboy123

Awesome. Thanks a lot guys!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vardamir*
> 
> Thanks, that's good to know. I think my P6X58D-E board is probably the main limiting factor in not being able to get my X5650 stable over 4.2ghz. Anything over 1.36 vCore is unstable in Prime95, no matter how low the temps or frequency. I wonder if it's my particular MB or the model itself, as I remember having similar vCore issues with my i7 950 OC on this board. That being said, I also noticed that the 3rd core (in particular the 6th thread) would almost always fail first in Prime95, so perhaps I also didn't have the best luck of the draw with my CPU. Either way, 4.2ghz is more than enough for me. Right now I'm running my X5650 at a stable 3.8ghz and 1.25 vCore, but anything above 3.8ghz or so needs a vCore boost to 1.30+.


No prob, 1.36 is the recommended voltage so that's a good thing. I usually only run 1.16v for 3.8Ghz [stable] otherwise it's stock clocks when I don't need the power. You 3.8Ghz @ 1.25v is pretty good as well. Every CPU is different, but 3.8Ghz is fine for a lot of high end programming and gaming. It could be the MB and other things. Who knows. At least you got to 4.2Ghz

I'm still working on a list to add to the first page of my review. I'm going to add a section stating the MB that supports the Gulftown\Westmere-EP Hexa cores and what BIOS is needed. Or at least what BIOS most users currently have installed. I've already started the list, but I haven't gotten around to finishing it. I still have a of benchmarks I need to upload to HWBOT as well. I'll get around to updating everything eventually.

Also remember to join the X58 Xeon Club. I can't say it's "official" unless the topic get's a lot of support. X58 users Unite!







Sandy, Ivy and Haswell haven't left us in the dust just yet. I'm waiting to see what Haswell-E is next.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No prob, 1.36 is the recommended voltage so that's a good thing.


Wait, so I still have 0.08V of headroom? NOICE.


----------



## xenxo80

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You may have to update BIOS on that EVGA board to get westmere-ep to work.


Thank you very much, to see if it works this processor x5650

The motherboard is an EVGA X58 3X SLI rev 1.0 bought in evga b-stock.
Probably have to do a mod on the resistors 538 and 539 to be compatible
I'm hoping the processor purchased on ebay in Hong Kong
The author was a source Enemax Platimax 1000w computer for X79 motherboard and sli gtx titan

regards


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vardamir*
> 
> From what I understand, the X5660's can overclock higher than the X5650. You can get the X5660 to 4.4-4.6ghz on air pretty easily, while the X5650 tends to top out at around 4.2-4.3ghz. The highest 24/7 stable overclock I can get on my X5650 is 4.2ghz, but then again I have a middle-class MB (Asus P6X58D-E) instead of a Sabertooth or Maximus formula etc... Personally, if I could go back in time I would have spent the extra cash on the X5660, but wasn't sure if it would even work on my motherboard so I went for the cheapest option. I'm still really happy with my X5650 though, it's more than enough for my needs.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vardamir*
> 
> Thanks, that's good to know. I think my P6X58D-E board is probably the main limiting factor in not being able to get my X5650 stable over 4.2ghz. Anything over 1.36 vCore is unstable in Prime95, no matter how low the temps or frequency. I wonder if it's my particular MB or the model itself, as I remember having similar vCore issues with my i7 950 OC on this board. That being said, I also noticed that the 3rd core (in particular the 6th thread) would almost always fail first in Prime95, so perhaps I also didn't have the best luck of the draw with my CPU. Either way, 4.2ghz is more than enough for me. Right now I'm running my X5650 at a stable 3.8ghz and 1.25 vCore, but anything above 3.8ghz or so needs a vCore boost to 1.30+.


I would say it is your board... I was able to get my x58 classy (760 version) and both of my x5650's to 4.6Ghz+ pretty easy but I am under water so I didn't have to tweak my voltages as much. 4.4Ghz would be pretty easy to get with air on my board. IF you found a good deal on a few different x58 boards it could get you a few more hundred Mhz but really I don't think it would be worth it with what you already have







.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Wait, so I still have 0.08V of headroom? NOICE.


I'm sorry. I meant to say *1.35v* is the recommend max from Intel.. I don't think 1.36v will hurt to bad at all actually.


----------



## Vardamir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I would say it is your board... I was able to get my x58 classy (760 version) and both of my x5650's to 4.6Ghz+ pretty easy but I am under water so I didn't have to tweak my voltages as much. 4.4Ghz would be pretty easy to get with air on my board. IF you found a good deal on a few different x58 boards it could get you a few more hundred Mhz but really I don't think it would be worth it with what you already have
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Yeah, I'm almost 100% convinced now that it's my board. Thank you for sharing that, I appreciate it. I have to admit that I'm feeling a little bit conflicted lol... I kinda do want those extra few hundred Mhz, but like you said, getting a new board just to get to 4.4-4.6 isn't really worth it with what I have right now. Who knows, maybe if I get a crazy deal on an SR-2 or something I'll bite. Otherwise I'm pretty much good until X99 and Broadwell-E. Cheers


----------



## Rangerscott

After doing OC test on my W5580, .2-.4ghz doesnt make a difference on gaming. Now .5 - 1ghz can.

On synthetic benching, yes every mhz can make a difference,but if youre gaming then 4ghz will be fine.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Just ordered the X5650 for my R3E. Can't wait to play around but I will need to be a little less enthusiastic with my overclock. Looking for 200x20 (I think 20 is the max multi) for a daily driver. My 930 held 4ghz for the last 3 years or so, but not sure if I can easily do the same with this xeon. Since so many of you are obviously running higher than 4ghz I have some hope. Still reading everything I can find though.

To anyone who has read every page of this thread, is it worth going through all 83 pages to search for tips and hints on a Rampage III? I also want to keep HT on and will be using RAID0 with 4 SSD's. My board is using the last 1601 bios so it should be able to run a xeon? I am water cooled with a descent single loop, not the best since I'm also cooling the vga but my 930 at 4ghz seems to stay in the upper 30's low to mid 40's depending on ambient, this is of course normal every day temps with normal applications. Its been a while since I had it under load, so not sure what the numbers are for load atm (again its been three years since last testing was done).

Can someone recommend some windows apps for monitoring voltages please? I already use CPU-Z, but not sure what is used these days for the other important monitoring in 2014. Is CoreTemp still OK for CPU temps? (that's what I have installed now anyway) Or is there something better? Thanks guys. Can't wait to play with this xeon... It will be my first one... lol









EDIT: If anyone still wants one of these 5650's for that amazing $88 tag, better hurry as the seller esisoinc just put up a note that he is running low on stock.


----------



## Firehawk

You won't find anything specific for the R3E. Just approach the OC the same as your 930.

Your loop should be more than enough to get you above 4GHz. These chips run cooler than the Bloomfield generation, so your only limits will be the chip's hard ceiling and what you feel comfortable with.

Try HWInfo for voltages and temps. I still use CoreTemp, it works fine. Some people prefer RealTemp.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> You won't find anything specific for the R3E. Just approach the OC the same as your 930.
> 
> Your loop should be more than enough to get you above 4GHz. These chips run cooler than the Bloomfield generation, so your only limits will be the chip's hard ceiling and what you feel comfortable with.
> 
> Try HWInfo for voltages and temps. I still use CoreTemp, it works fine. Some people prefer RealTemp.


Wow, thank you that is nicer than HWMonitor which is what I normally use.

I don't feel comfortable taking my board over 200 bclk, every time I do and I think I have a stable OC, something happens down the road that tips me off that its not so stable, even though it passed Prime for 24 hours or so. Personally, I think it does not like anything above 205 or 210 max. But it ran trouble free at 200 for the past 3 years. If I was a professional overclocker with that kind of time I bet it could go over that, but for a system I actually use for my business I will stick to what has worked in the past. Albeit IF the Xeon will let me... haha

Man I have a XEON w00t! Wow, man that feels good saying. I have a Xeon... My little brother Josh is jealous already


----------



## Kana-Maru

Updated my HWBOT results with a chart instead of text. This should be easier on the eyes. I'll upload all of the charts as I update more of my scores to HWBOT over the week. This will help those who are still probably on the fence [hopefully]

*Click Here for the the HWBOT result Chart*


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









http://hwbot.org/user/kana_maru/


----------



## Rangerscott

X5560 will be here tomorrow.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> X5560 will be here tomorrow.


Did you mean x5650?


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Did you mean x5650?


Am I typing greek here?


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Am I typing greek here?


No, he's wondering if you really meant 5560 or 5650. Those two number being swapped make a pretty big difference.







Seeing that you are coming from an i7 920, the 5560 is going to be a negligible upgrade..especially considering that you've already bought a W5580.


----------



## UNOE

These X5650 look like some nice CPU's. always wanted a 6 core 1366 chip.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *UNOE*
> 
> These X5650 look like some nice CPU's. always wanted a 6 core 1366 chip.


Join the dark side....


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *UNOE*
> 
> These X5650 look like some nice CPU's. always wanted a 6 core 1366 chip.
> 
> 
> 
> Join the dark side....
Click to expand...

CAN YOU FEEL THAT!!! Bad Baby Bad Baby! (smack smack) ALLLL Right


----------



## Bradford1040

UM I know I am beating a dead horse here but what do you think would be the bennifet to upgrading from the X5660 to the X5675?
I know that the multi is higher, which is good as getting 100% stable past the 200 blck is hard and the 23 multi on the X5675 vs the 21 multi of the X5660
would help get a higher OC stable but see that the X5675 was only released in 2011 vs all the other chips were 2010?

Just any help would be nice, maybe stop me from spending another load of money on something that I don't need but want lol


----------



## Haserath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> UM I know I am beating a dead horse here but what do you think would be the bennifet to upgrading from the X5660 to the X5675?
> I know that the multi is higher, which is good as getting 100% stable past the 200 blck is hard and the 23 multi on the X5675 vs the 21 multi of the X5660
> would help get a higher OC stable but see that the X5675 was only released in 2011 vs all the other chips were 2010?
> 
> Just any help would be nice, maybe stop me from spending another load of money on something that I don't need but want lol



They say pictures speak a thousand words.

4.6 is a respectable overclock for one of these chips.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Haserath*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> UM I know I am beating a dead horse here but what do you think would be the bennifet to upgrading from the X5660 to the X5675?
> I know that the multi is higher, which is good as getting 100% stable past the 200 blck is hard and the 23 multi on the X5675 vs the 21 multi of the X5660
> would help get a higher OC stable but see that the X5675 was only released in 2011 vs all the other chips were 2010?
> 
> Just any help would be nice, maybe stop me from spending another load of money on something that I don't need but want lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They say pictures speak a thousand words.
> 
> 4.6 is a respectable overclock for one of these chips.
Click to expand...

so you wanted me too light you cigarette? lol

I know 4.6 is good, been watching others very closely and am happy with my chip, just wanted to know as I can always slide the chips I don't like over to one of the CPU'less servers I have sitting here if I don't like it. But at the same time if I like the X5675 in the X58 board that would mean I have to buy another X5660 for the server cause I can't have a empty socket that would just not do! lol


----------



## UNOE

How does x5650 overclock compared to x5660


----------



## iDShaDoW

Can't say for sure but from what I've read it seems like the X5660 would overclock similarly, just that you get 1 more clock multiplier (24 instead of 23?).


----------



## bill1024

Maybe some of you guys remember, seems to me there was a problem with the x58 motherboards, they were killing sata 3 hard drives or SSD drives.. I can not remember what the deal was and if it was fixed. Was sata 3 bad but the sata 2 worked fine?
Or am I totally mistaken?


----------



## iDShaDoW

My old board didn't have SATA 3 but I upgrade to the Asus Saberooth x58 which does have it.

All my drives are still working fine. I did have some weird issues with the 2TB and 4TB drives but swapping them between the Marvell and Intel ICH10R ports for formatting seems to work. For example, I had the 2TB on the ICH10R and was able to encrypt/format the drive but Western Digital Lifeguard Tools kept failing the tests. Once I swapped it to Marvell the tests worked without issue.

Once my friend put it in his computer he said it worked right off the bat. Could be completely unrelated but weird nonetheless.

The same happened with the 4TB Red. Was able to set it to GPT and format and test it on Marvell; trying it on ICH10R did not work. Once it was all set up and swapped to the ICH10R it worked.

Could be completely unrelated to the x58 platform but just some weirdness that I encountered. No drives have died on me from x58 SATAIII though.


----------



## kckyle

just don't put your ssd on the sata 3 on x58 mobo, since the marvel controllers don't offer trim support. just keep it simple with the sata3 sockets, one drive for one socket and you'll be fine. no raids.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Maybe some of you guys remember, seems to me there was a problem with the x58 motherboards, they were killing sata 3 hard drives or SSD drives.. I can not remember what the deal was and if it was fixed. Was sata 3 bad but the sata 2 worked fine?
> Or am I totally mistaken?


You're thinking of the first generation P67 chipset. That had problems with the Sata controller. X58 is fine.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> You're thinking of the first generation P67 chipset. That had problems with the Sata controller. X58 is fine.


Yeah I do believe you're right, thanks.
And thanks for the head up about marvel issue too.


----------



## iDShaDoW

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> just don't put your ssd on the sata 3 on x58 mobo, since the marvel controllers don't offer trim support. just keep it simple with the sata3 sockets, one drive for one socket and you'll be fine. no raids.


Can anyone else confirm this?

I thought TRIM worked on everything regardless and that it was just Intel's newest controllers that offer TRIM for RAID?


----------



## RX7-2nr

I've just always heard to avoid Marvell sata ports entirely.


----------



## UNOE

I can confirm the Marvell SATA ports on x58 even though they where SATA 3 where not as fast as intel sata 2. Dont know about TRIM though. The sequential wasn't that bad but access times suffered and therefor it wasn't worth it to have a SSD OS on marvell


----------



## iDShaDoW

Damn, that's good to know. I had been using ICH10R on my old Gigabyte board thinking it was bottlenecking my SSD this whole time and was happy to swap it to the Marvell 9128 SATAIII port thinking it'd be faster.

Hadn't run anything like CrystalMark, etc. to test after I put everything together but thanks for bringing that to my attention.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *UNOE*
> 
> How does x5650 overclock compared to x5660


..about 1 multiplierX less


----------



## UNOE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> ..about 1 multiplierX less


So with 200 Bclk would it be 4.4ghz or 4.6ghz?


----------



## RX7-2nr

The extra 1x multiplier still does not guarantee that you will get a great overclock. It just means you need slightly less baseclock to do so. I don't really see the 5660 being worth the extra money. Not when 5650s are going for $80.


----------



## kckyle

sequential write and read speed will be faster on marvel sata3, intel controller has better random access timing. and when you're using your boot drive random access timing is all that matters 90 percent of the time.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iDShaDoW*
> 
> Can anyone else confirm this?
> 
> I thought TRIM worked on everything regardless and that it was just Intel's newest controllers that offer TRIM for RAID?


No, not exactly. TRIM has never worked in RAID until Intel started modifying their drivers to do so for x79 and up. However, if you know how to mod the OROM you can add TRIM to all Intel chipsets all the way back to P35, ICH7R and x58 and up. I have TRIM on my x58 for 9 months now all from a simple mod, but intel does not support it because they want that feature on their newer chipsets only (selling point I guess), even though all the older ones support it... TRIM natively works in AHCI mode without any modification.

http://www.win-raid.com/t202f28-TRIM-in-RAID-seems-possible-for-all-Intel-chipsets-from-P-up.html

It has always been possible but Intel never made it a priority until x79 I believe, and the fact that they finally realized the benefits for their own SSD's on their own motherboards... But it has been possible for a very long time from what I was told, and you can do it on just about any motherboard with almost every OROM and driver release, with a few exceptions.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> sequential write and read speed will be *slightly* faster on marvel sata3, intel controller has *MUCH* better random access timing. and when you're using your boot drive random access timing is all that matters 90 percent of the time.


Haha, you missed a few important words in your sentences. Let me fill them in for you









There that looks better, lol.... But seriously, it's true on my board, the marvell can't even be considered until I run out of Intel ports


----------



## iDShaDoW

I know this is sort of getting off-topic since it's a Xeon thread but here's a screenshot of results for my Samsung 840 EVO 250GB on the x58 Marvell 9128/ICH10R controllers.

I'm not too read up on the different scores but would you all still go with the ICH10R based off of these?

Marvell on left / ICH10R on right


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I still would, even with those numbers. I would use the Marvell for large spinning disks though, if I had some on this system. But for the OS, 4K random writes and higher IOPs is more important. However, looking at your scores that is the best Marvell results for single drive I have seen in a while. Try a 4KB Random IO read and write stress test using IOMeter and see how the Marvel fares to ICH. Maybe latest marvell drivers have gotten better since I last tried it, lol... I have not used it since this board was released


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iDShaDoW*
> 
> My old board didn't have SATA 3 but I upgrade to the Asus Saberooth x58 which does have it.
> 
> All my drives are still working fine. I did have some weird issues with the 2TB and 4TB drives but swapping them between the Marvell and Intel ICH10R ports for formatting seems to work. For example, I had the 2TB on the ICH10R and was able to encrypt/format the drive but Western Digital Lifeguard Tools kept failing the tests. Once I swapped it to Marvell the tests worked without issue.
> 
> Once my friend put it in his computer he said it worked right off the bat. Could be completely unrelated but weird nonetheless.
> 
> The same happened with the 4TB Red. Was able to set it to GPT and format and test it on Marvell; trying it on ICH10R did not work. Once it was all set up and swapped to the ICH10R it worked.
> 
> Could be completely unrelated to the x58 platform but just some weirdness that I encountered. No drives have died on me from x58 SATAIII though.


I had to update firmware on my board and get the "correct" drivers to use for my 4Tb drive to be 100% visible.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iDShaDoW*
> 
> I know this is sort of getting off-topic since it's a Xeon thread but here's a screenshot of results for my Samsung 840 EVO 250GB on the x58 Marvell 9128/ICH10R controllers.
> 
> I'm not too read up on the different scores but would you all still go with the ICH10R based off of these?
> 
> Marvell on left / ICH10R on right


Looks good. I'm dying to test RAID 0 on my Marvell SATA-III and Intel SATA-II ports. I had a bad experience with a SSD. I"m only using HDDs as of right now. I'm thinking about setting up RAID-0, but with HDDs and a backup.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> However, looking at your scores that is the best Marvell results for single drive I have seen in a while.


Not me. The numbers do look good, but I've seen single drives [SSD] on the X58-Marvell Sata III get upwards towards 450MB/s - 480MB/s and higher Seq. More than 250MB/S 4K QD32.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Looks good. I'm dying to test RAID 0 on my Marvell SATA-III and Intel SATA-II ports. I had a bad experience with a SSD. I"m only using HDDs as of right now. I'm thinking about setting up RAID-0, but with HDDs and a backup.
> Not me. The numbers do look good, but I've seen single drives [SSD] on the X58-Marvell Sata III get upwards towards 450MB/s - 480MB/s and higher Seq. More than 250MB/S 4K QD32.


I apologize, I should have been more clear, I was not talking about max transfer speeds. I only look at 4K (or any other spec that directly translates to great OS performance) when I compare on-board storage controllers. Which is why I said I wouldn't mind using it for a large spinning drive since that would mean I am only interested in max transfer speeds. I have used Intel RAID 0 (as long as I can remember it existing) ever since the day OCZ released their original Vertex drives (I pre-ordered 4 of them for RAID 0), and when I did my tests back then 2x Vertex drives on the Marvell was blown away by the same 2x Vertex drives on the Intel in almost ever aspect. However, before I built my first Home Server I had the large 1TB and 2TB drives on the Marvell which just made sense. But I retired the Marvell and shut down the controller the moment I went to a dedicated storage machine (whs2011) lol. Yes I have seen better max transfer speed for single drives on the Marvell, but the Intel ICH10R for RAID 0, is just a MUCH better solution. However, if I had the money I would get a LSI 9266-4i and 4 HGST UltraStar SAS drives and make both the Marvell and Intel cry... But I need to win the lottery for that to happen









With my 4 old Vertex on the ICH10R I got nearly 700 MB/s, and 670 MB/s using my C300's. However, nothing transfer-wise changed with my 2 Samsung 840 Pro's, it still seems to max out the ICH. I think I need a few more of them, hell maybe I should populate all 6 ports with the 840 pro's and see if at least 4K random gets any better... Can't wait for prices to come down


----------



## iDShaDoW

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Try a 4KB Random IO read and write stress test using IOMeter and see how the Marvel fares to ICH.


Got a quick run-through on how to configureand run IOMeter for this?

I downloaded it and it seems like the software hasn't been updated recently so it's not like super user-friendly; saying the GUI is a bit archaic might be a bit of stretch but it's not straightforward either.

I'll poke around and see if I can figure it out the meantime. Working from home today so got some spare time; hopefully the phones die down.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iDShaDoW*
> 
> Got a quick run-through on how to configureand run IOMeter for this?
> 
> I downloaded it and it seems like the software hasn't been updated recently so it's not like super user-friendly; saying the GUI is a bit archaic might be a bit of stretch but it's not straightforward either.
> 
> I'll poke around and see if I can figure it out the meantime. Working from home today so got some spare time; hopefully the phones die down.


Yeah I saw a guide on how to set it up for a SSD once. But now it seems to escape me as well. Quick searching found these but the other day I found one specifically for your EVO, but now I can't find it..
Here's a review of a Samsung SSD using IOmeter
http://www.myce.com/review/samsung-840-pro-ssd-revisited-70633/iometer-test-results-4/

Here's something that might help
http://greg.porter.name/wiki/HowTo:iometer


----------



## iDShaDoW

Ah, was hoping you'd be familiar with it.

So I went and ran it already, not sure if I picked the correct tests and such, but had all 12 workers going (6 cores / 2 workers a core). Gave them each a sector size of 3,500,000 and 32 outstanding I/Os (I believe this means a 32 depth - read somewhere that 64 doesn't apply as much for home users - read one benchmark article where they recommended CrystalDiskMark over ATTO for this reason).

1 pass for each test and run for 1 minute.

Again, I could be configuring IOMeter in a sub-optimal manner so if anyone has suggestions I can re-run the tests.

*Marvell (4K Read)*









*Marvell (4K Random)*









*ICH10R (4K Read)*









*ICH10R (4K Random)*


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah I am familiar with it from 2010, lmao... I used it to test between the marvell and intel controllers when I had 4 brand new Vertex drives to play with. I even had one of the most expensive paper weights from Adaptec that couldn't keep up with the Intel and refused to run more than 2 Vertex drives at once. The Intel beat out both the Marvel and Adaptec 5405, so I sold the 5405 and kept the 4 Vertex's on my ICH in raid 0, until they were retired by the Crucial C300's, which were then retired by my Samsung 840 Pro's. Although, I do keep two C300's in raid as a local storage place for downloads. I think I want to get another 12gb of memory, and several more SSD's and then learn to be happy until Skylake.


----------



## iDShaDoW

I had thought about running RAID 0 on 2x Samsung 830 128GB and giving the 840 EVO 250GB to my brother but since I found out that the Marvell 9128 doesn't perform as well as current SATAIII controllers I'm going to scrap that idea and stick with the 250GB. Can't exactly ask him to pull the 830 out of his computer to use for testing RAID 0 performance.

I'm fine on storage with like 10TB of HDD space and getting more SSDs for storage purposes is pretty cost prohibitive at this time. Same goes for going from 16GB to 32 or 48GB of RAM especially when they're going to start pushing new platforms towards DDR4 with no backwards compatibility from here on out. I'd just end up having extra DDR3 that will go down in value that I can't do anything with since I only run my primary rig and don't have alternate HTPCs or the like.

I'm waiting on news of Devil's Canyon performance at Computex.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iDShaDoW*
> 
> I had thought about running RAID 0 on 2x Samsung 830 128GB and giving the 840 EVO 250GB to my brother but since I found out that the Marvell 9128 doesn't perform as well as current SATAIII controllers I'm going to scrap that idea and stick with the 250GB. Can't exactly ask him to pull the 830 out of his computer to use for testing RAID 0 performance.
> 
> I'm fine on storage with like 10TB of HDD space and getting more SSDs for storage purposes is pretty cost prohibitive at this time. Same goes for going from 16GB to 32 or 48GB of RAM especially when they're going to start pushing new platforms towards DDR4 with no backwards compatibility from here on out. I'd just end up having extra DDR3 that will go down in value that I can't do anything with since I only run my primary rig and don't have alternate HTPCs or the like.
> 
> I'm waiting on news of Devil's Canyon performance at Computex.


The Core i7-4790K, if it is released for 1155 is the one I would have my father upgrade his i7-2600K to, but I doubt 1155 will ever see any processor refreshes. Oh well, his 2600K on water should do pretty good at 4.5 ghz but he hasn't even bothered to try since it was already fast enough for him.


----------



## PachAz

The i7 4790k will be for the 1150. There havent been any new cpus for the 1155 for the last 2 years. Both overclocked the differance in games will be little between the i7 2600k and the i7 4790k, we are talking about some few fps.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah I'm well aware but was thinking hopefully. My father does not game at the age of 77, he just wants his processor to crunch wu's the best it can. Lol


----------



## jboudwin

I'm about half way through the entire thread. My EVGA X58 4-Way Classified died (for no particular reason) when I changed to a X5660. EVGA sent me an X79 Dark to replace it. However this thread really wetted my appetite to try a Hexcore especially for Folding so I requisitioned one of my employee's X58 SLI3's and moved him to another workstation. Initially I thought you guys were all delusional about how easy OC'ing the X5660 would be. I couldn't get it past a 152 Baseclock without it BSOD'ing while Folding.

I think I found the problem. In both or the images below I cranked up the CPU Vcore to 1.5v. If you notice at 100% load CPU-Z shows a reduction in core voltage and it is nowhere near the 1.5v I set in the BIOS.





Does this seem correct?

And Kana ( and everyone else) thanks so much for such an interesting thread.


----------



## PachAz

Of course, vcore during 100% load do drop. On my system it drops from 1.4 to 1.368 during prime95 100% load, and that is with all llc and vdrop compensation to max/100%.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> Initially I thought you guys were all delusional about how easy OC'ing the X5660 would be. I couldn't get it past a 152 Baseclock without it BSOD'ing while Folding.
> 
> I think I found the problem. In both or the images below I cranked up the CPU Vcore to 1.5v. If you notice at 100% load CPU-Z shows a reduction in core voltage and it is nowhere near the 1.5v I set in the BIOS.
> 
> Does this seem correct?
> 
> And Kana ( and everyone else) thanks so much for such an interesting thread.


Thanks for reading. There has been a lot of help and discussion throughout this topic. X58 is still alive and cooking.

152 BCLK is pretty low. I think you need to check some other settings or something. Most people can get to around 180-195bclk with minimum issues. Also why are you pumping 1.5v into the CPU with a 3.35Ghz overclock. That's only roughly a 159Mhz overclock from stock speeds.

You can pump all of the voltage you want in the chip and kill it, but as long as LLC is enabled it's going to knock down the voltage to protect the CPU from damage. To make it easy to understand.......the CPU knows that it doesn't require 1.5v, so LLC is doing it's job and protecting the CPU in so many words. That's why you are seeing 1.17v or whatever it is under 100% load from 1.5v. If you want to get all of that voltage pumping through your cores just turn off LLC and\or Vdroop and see the sparks fly. Well not literally sparks, but your CPU will spike in voltage constantly. You'll see what you want to see in the "voltage" field during benchmarks [1.5v] or BSOD+freezing. I don't recommend this and I don't recommend pumping voltage through the CPU past 1.35v for extremely low OC's.

You need to set everything to default settings in the BIOS and find your highest stable BCLK first. Lower your multiplier as well. You say that 152 BCLK is your highest, but you may be able to go higher without adding a ton of vCore. Check your QPI\VTT, RAM timings, RAM voltage, DRAM Frequency and make sure the Uncore is double the DRAM frequency. [Example: DRAM Freq. = 1600Mhz - Uncore = 3200Mhz] Test from there.


----------



## jboudwin

Thanks for the advice guys. I'll crank down the voltage and start anew. Soldier On.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> I'm about half way through the entire thread. My EVGA X58 4-Way Classified died (for no particular reason) when I changed to a X5660. EVGA sent me an X79 Dark to replace it.


Wow, that's awesome.


----------



## PachAz

Evga little behind? Why send you a x79, what will do do with that one, you need a x58 mobo.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> Evga little behind? Why send you a x79, what will do do with that one, you need a x58 mobo.


If they don't have the identical product on hand anymore they will give you the new tech equivalent


----------



## Firehawk

They don't have X58 parts anymore, so they honored their warranty by giving him a replacement board for the equivalent modern system. Not much you can do about it. Better than a kick in the pants.

He can either upgrade, or sell the board.


----------



## PachAz

They should have given him the money back, since they have lifetime warranty.


----------



## jboudwin

X79 was given because they are out of X58's and to honor the lifetime warranty they upgraded me. Unfortunately I'm not yet ready to upgrade to X79. Seems like a nice upgrade but I have been enjoying my X58 so much I figured let me do it some more. This thread really convinced me. I'm still a relative noob to OC'ing but was able to get my I7 960 to 4.1 without too much trouble. This X5660 is proving more difficult.
I have some questions as per Kana's reply:
1. When you mention QPI/VTT are you referring to voltages? On my EVGA mobo there is no such ratio.
2. What is the advantage of lowering the multiplier? Then you have to use a higher BCLK to achieve the desired OC.
3. My RAM is Corsair Dominator GT 2000GHz. I have been downclocking to 1300-1600. Do I still need to loosen timings? At that GHz do I really need to max their voltage at the rated 1.65v (default in BIOS is 1.5v)?
4. Also the default CPU Vcore in BIOS is 1.325v. Does that seem high?

Thanks for the help guys.


----------



## jboudwin

BTW I'm in and out of the forum between BIOS changes.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

That would be terrible to get a x79 board as a replacement for a x58 board. That still tells the user to go spend more of their own money to fix the problem. Some of us have to pre-plan our upgrades...


----------



## RX7-2nr

I would not complain about a company replacing my 4 year old obsolete motherboard with a brand new current generation one. Sure, it doesn't get your X58 system going again, but you can still either sell it and come out way ahead or upgrade.


----------



## PachAz

I agree, getting a x79 pretty much force the person to buy a new system or to sell it and take a huge loss (since the x58 probably cost more than a new x79 does now, new or used). Why didnt they refund you the price you paid for the x58. What if my z77 mobo broke, should I accept a z87 or z97 motherboard just because of that? I dont even have a haswell cpu and I dont want one either even if I got it for free. I understand the nice act of them, but a refund would be much better in this case so you could buy a used x58 yourself.

If you think about it, its kinda idiotic and absurd to be honest since you will have 0 use for the x79 mobo.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> I would not complain about a company replacing my 4 year old obsolete motherboard with a brand new current generation one. Sure, it doesn't get your X58 system going again, but you can still either sell it and come out way ahead or upgrade.


In order to purchase another Rampage III Extreme from ebay I would need a minimum of $400. If they send me a x79 worth at least that, then maybe it is doable but I doubt it. I would be stuck for months trying to save up for a CPU for the x79.


----------



## RX7-2nr

There are tons of R3Es on ebay for 299 buyouts right now. If you watched for long enough you could surely get one for $200 on a bid. I see what you're saying, but they are not going to make a special one off motherboard to replace a broken 4 year old board that they do not have anymore of. I think given the age of the component, the warranty was handled great.


----------



## UNOE

Plus the replacement still has lifetime warranty. But you sell it then you loose warranty, and buy another board that is probably out of warranty. Most people's boards from x58 like ASUS or Gigabyte are out of warranty already. So how is this negative ? If he didn't by EVGA he would have nothing but a dead board to hang on the wall now most likely.

I would keep that x79 board and use it for few years and keep it since they don't have lifetime any more. You will never get a board like that under lifetime again.


----------



## PachAz

Why didnt they give money back, if they cant repair or give a similar product. The x79 is not similar, its a whole other thing, they could might as well send him a basket of fruit.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> I agree, getting a x79 pretty much force the person to buy a new system or to sell it and take a huge loss (since the x58 probably cost more than a new x79 does now, new or used). Why didnt they refund you the price you paid for the x58.


X58 cost no more new than X79 does now. I bought a 920 and a UD5 brand new for 365 and 360, respectively.

Equivalent X79 system assuming that mobo would be 400-450 for the board and a 4820K for 350. With inflation, that's practically identical.

They can't give you money, because the warranty allows them to sub a product of equal value. The real reason is that they have no way of knowing how much you paid for the product originally, and additionally the value of the product has decreased over the years of ownership. Not even taking into account store discounts, MIRs, sales, and whatever else might change the price of the item at retail. This is every company's policy. The only time you get a refund is within a short period after initial purchase, and usually only from the retailer who then gets credit from the manufacturer.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> There are tons of R3Es on ebay for 299 buyouts right now. If you watched for long enough you could surely get one for $200 on a bid. I see what you're saying, but they are not going to make a special one off motherboard to replace a broken 4 year old board that they do not have anymore of. I think given the age of the component, the warranty was handled great.


Yeah I'm on my second R3E, the first one that just up and died was replaced no questions asked. This one has been very strong but has been running warmer than the first one. The cheapest one I find is $370 on ebay, but I would try and buy the $400 one with a full cover waterblock. There are a few even cheaper but only if your purchase from a Chinese seller and I'm not doing that, especially with a used Motherboard.

There is no x79 i7 that is an upgrade from my Xeon Hexa, maybe a side grade at best... I'm saving up, but only for Skylake, that should be the first true upgrade imo.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

About 4 years ago I had to fight with Asus for a fair replacement on my 4870x2. I paid something like $600 for a brand new super expensive video card and when it died they tried to send me a 5450 in its place. I was shocked at the offer and can't believe people would actually go for this. The only card at the time that could come close to matching it was the new 5870. They said they would have to get permission to do a replacement of that magnitude as if I was asking far too much of them. Asking far too much, yet I had purchased their #1 most expensive card made, and they were acting like I was the one ripping them off, lol. And the 5870 was not nearly as expensive as what I paid for the 4870x2. Anyway, I told them they were sending a 5870 or else. Not sure what I would have done if they had not though, haha. I got a brand new unopened retail 5870 in the mail a Month later though. I still lost money because the full cover nickel plated water block on the 4870x2 cost me $175 and it never sold. And the replacement water block EK-FC5870 wasn't cheap either. So all in all I probably paid close to $1000 for this video card I have now, that I can no longer afford to replace, lol... Thanks to mining at least cards these days can be had pretty cheap in comparison.


----------



## jboudwin

I'm very happy/very unhappy with X79 Dark replacement board. I planned on upgrading next year and was very excited at playing more with my X58. I'll probably sell the X79 but haven't yet decided. In the meantime OC'ing the x5660 will be my challenge.


----------



## kckyle

sell the x79 and get a used ud5 or p6t or p6x58d for around 200.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> I agree, getting a x79 pretty much force the person to buy a new system or to sell it and take a huge loss (since the x58 probably cost more than a new x79 does now, new or used). Why didnt they refund you the price you paid for the x58. What if my z77 mobo broke, should I accept a z87 or z97 motherboard just because of that? I dont even have a haswell cpu and I dont want one either even if I got it for free. I understand the nice act of them, but a refund would be much better in this case so you could buy a used x58 yourself.
> 
> If you think about it, its kinda idiotic and absurd to be honest since you will have 0 use for the x79 mobo.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> Why didnt they give money back, if they cant repair or give a similar product. The x79 is not similar, its a whole other thing, they could might as well send him a basket of fruit.


You apparently need to read the EVGA warranty policy... that isn't how the lifetime warranty works... when something is EOL and it dies they replace it with a "current" equivalent piece of hardware. You are not going to get $ back. If you could, name a company in the same market that offers a lifetime warranty that will give you money back if the board dies after years of use? I sure can't think of any.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> sell the x79 and get a used ud5 or p6t or p6x58d for around 200.


He will loose the lifetime warranty of he does that. I'd just keep the x79 board unless you want to work out a trade for my x58 classified 760 (has enzotech board blocks on it though).


----------



## kckyle

ok does the x79 even have a lifetime warranty? cause i know you can't even get LT warranty even if you buy x79 new. so unless EVGA's policy is that lax and allow him to carry his lifetime warranty from board to board, i think as soon as he got the x79 it switches to the standard 3 years warranty evga carries now.

and just a side note. after x58 shamino left EVGA, in some opnions he made the classified platform great. the x79 had no input from him whatsoever.


----------



## jboudwin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> sell the x79 and get a used ud5 or p6t or p6x58d for around 200.


If I sell it I will put the money toward another 780 Ti Classified.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> You apparently need to read the EVGA warranty policy... that isn't how the lifetime warranty works... when something is EOL and it dies they replace it with a "current" equivalent piece of hardware. You are not going to get $ back. If you could, name a company in the same market that offers a lifetime warranty that will give you money back if the board dies after years of use? I sure can't think of any.
> He will loose the lifetime warranty of he does that. I'd just keep the x79 board unless you want to work out a trade for my x58 classified 760 (has enzotech board blocks on it though).


That's correct. Warranty is only 3 years but I purchased the extended 5 year warranty for myself or whoever I sell it to. And if I get another 762 I'll put my EK fullboard WB on it but I really expect to sell the waterblock since I don't need to replace the 762 (stole my employee's SLI 3 form his workstation).


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Is there a hexa core chip with at least three memory channels for the x79? If so which one?

Also I would swap a brand new x79 board I can't use for a classified x58 with water block any day of the week. Lol


----------



## UNOE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> I'm very happy/very unhappy with X79 Dark replacement board. I planned on upgrading next year and was very excited at playing more with my X58. I'll probably sell the X79 but haven't yet decided. In the meantime OC'ing the x5660 will be my challenge.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> sell the x79 and get a used ud5 or p6t or p6x58d for around 200.


Did you guys even read my post before ?

He has a x79 board with lifetime warranty you won't find a board like that ever again. Those lifetime warranties are hard to get and the lifetime follows that board. So you recommend he sells it and buys a x58 that probably has no warranty?


----------



## UNOE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> ok does the x79 even have a lifetime warranty? cause i know you can't even get LT warranty even if you buy x79 new. so unless EVGA's policy is that lax and allow him to carry his lifetime warranty from board to board, i think as soon as he got the x79 it switches to the standard 3 years warranty evga carries now.
> 
> and just a side note. after x58 shamino left EVGA, in some opnions he made the classified platform great. the x79 had no input from him whatsoever.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> If I sell it I will put the money toward another 780 Ti Classified.
> That's correct. Warranty is only 3 years but I purchased the extended 5 year warranty for myself or whoever I sell it to. And if I get another 762 I'll put my EK fullboard WB on it but I really expect to sell the waterblock since I don't need to replace the 762 (stole my employee's SLI 3 form his workstation).


It doesn't change to 3 years if you had lifetime you always have life time until you no longer have the product. It doesn't change to 3 years. Email EVGA they will tell you the same thing.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Is there a hexa core chip with at least three memory channels for the x79? If so which one?
> 
> Also I would swap a brand new x79 board I can't use for a classified x58 with water block any day of the week. Lol


As far as I know all 2011 CPUs support quad channel memory. 8 DIMMs max.


----------



## PachAz

I understand that its a good opportunity for OP to get a 4930k or a 3930k new or used and get a nice system for less. But when we are talking about this high end stuff, it will in the end get much more expensive because he will still have to get a new cpu and ram. I agree that the company "cant" give money back after so long time, but neverless the situations is funny if you think about it. He will still have 0 use for the x79.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> as LLC is enabled it's going to knock down the voltage to protect the CPU from damage. To make it easy to understand.......the CPU knows that it doesn't require 1.5v, so LLC is doing it's job and protecting the CPU in so many words.


The default load-line/Vdroop exists to protect against transient surges that occur when leaving a high load (high current draw) scenario. The idea is to make sure the CPU is never given more than the VID that has been set, and this is achieved by reducing the voltage given under load, so that when a load is abruptly removed the peak of the spike that follows does not go above that set point. It's based purely on current draw and is not getting any sort of active feedback in order to protect the CPU. At the same amperage you will see similar _relative_ vdroop, regardless of the VID. For example, if I don't touch the LLC settings, and run my part at 1v VID I may see the same ~15% droop at full load as I would if I ran 1.5v, all other things being equal.

But yes, that droop definitely exists for a reason, and settings that completely remove it are often counter productive.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> They should have given him the money back, since they have lifetime warranty.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> Why didnt they give money back, if they cant repair or give a similar product. The x79 is not similar, its a whole other thing, they could might as well send him a basket of fruit.


They didn't give the money back because that's not anywhere in the warranty terms. Even if it was, it would probably be based on their estimation of current "fair market value", which would almost certainly not be enough to obtain an equivalent replacement.

This is how most warranties work.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Is there a hexa core chip with at least three memory channels for the x79?


All LGA-2011 CPUs have quad-channel memory controllers.

Among consumer parts, the 3930k, 3960X, 3970X, 4930k, and 4960X are hex core. There are many more six to twelve core LGA-2011 Xeon options, but they cannot be overclocked to any significant degree.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> The default load-line/Vdroop exists to protect against transient surges that occur when leaving a high load (high current draw) scenario. The idea is to make sure the CPU is never given more than the VID that has been set, and this is achieved by reducing the voltage given under load, so that when a load is abruptly removed the peak of the spike that follows does not go above that set point. It's based purely on current draw and is not getting any sort of active feedback in order to protect the CPU. At the same amperage you will see similar _relative_ vdroop, regardless of the VID. For example, if I don't touch the LLC settings, and run my part at 1v VID I may see the same ~15% droop at full load as I would if I ran 1.5v, all other things being equal.
> 
> But yes, that droop definitely exists for a reason, and settings that completely remove it are often counter productive.


Yeah I didn't want to get into all of that in detail. I just wanted to keep it simple. It's best to have LLC enabled or set to AUTO. I'll never run my system with it off. In the past some overclockers preferred it off when they were trying to do certain things with their build. You never know when that deadly or degrading spike is coming.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> X79 was given because they are out of X58's and to honor the lifetime warranty they upgraded me. Unfortunately I'm not yet ready to upgrade to X79. Seems like a nice upgrade but I have been enjoying my X58 so much I figured let me do it some more. This thread really convinced me. I'm still a relative noob to OC'ing but was able to get my I7 960 to 4.1 without too much trouble. This X5660 is proving more difficult.
> I have some questions as per Kana's reply:
> 1. When you mention QPI/VTT are you referring to voltages? On my EVGA mobo there is no such ratio.
> 2. What is the advantage of lowering the multiplier? Then you have to use a higher BCLK to achieve the desired OC.
> 3. My RAM is Corsair Dominator GT 2000GHz. I have been downclocking to 1300-1600. Do I still need to loosen timings? At that GHz do I really need to max their voltage at the rated 1.65v (default in BIOS is 1.5v)?
> 4. Also the default CPU Vcore in BIOS is 1.325v. Does that seem high?
> 
> Thanks for the help guys.


1. QPI\VTT name varies from board to board. Every manufactures has their way of describing certain features+options. Vtt is pretty much the voltage that is fed to multiple components within the CPU+QPI, but most importantly is the IMC. Maybe it said IMC voltage or something on your board. Setting this to low can affect a overclock and make i unstable. I have seen issues were setting it to high effected overclocks as well.

2. Lowering the multiplier will eliminate the Core Speed+Vcore from being a limited factor while overclocking. As you increase the BCLK you'll also inadvertently increase the Core Speed, QPI, RAM frequency and Uncore frequency. This is the reason I said you'll want everything else set to AUTO [except the multiplier ratio]. Depending on the MB you might have to turn other functions off such as TurbEIST and C-states. So when you increase the BCLK the CPU [and other settings] won't require more voltage. This is a older and slower approach, but never failed for me. Once you hit your BCLK limit then you wouild start changing settings in the BIOS to attempt to get over the BCLK limit. This is just one way that you can overclock when you face low BCLK.

3. Intel doesn't recommend running the DRAM voltage over 1.65v. Some people do it to overclock the RAM for benchmarking purposes. If you try to run @ 1600Mhz you try the bare minimum 9-9-9-24 for stability issues. You can run AUTO qpi\vtt, but sometimes a little voltage is required to run 1600Mhz.

4. Yeah something must had been wrong with the MB before it died. The default vCore should be nowhere close ot 1.3-anything.

Yeah sorry to hear about your board dying. I know that sucks and it's good that EVGA honored their lifetime warranty\support. Unfortunately you are stuck with a X79 and to get a Hex you'll be spending around $550+ for a new SB-E or IV-E. X58's are more popular than ever now. Everything was cool until these Hex cores hit the market.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Is there a hexa core chip with at least three memory channels for the x79? If so which one?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> As far as I know all 2011 CPUs support quad channel memory. 8 DIMMs max.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> All LGA-2011 CPUs have quad-channel memory controllers..


Having Quad channel memory channels is irrelevant. You can easily use 3 DIMMs or any setup up to quad channel. So SkOrPn you can use any X79 motherboard with your triple channel memory. If you want to run Quad you'll have to add one more module [same speed of course]


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *UNOE*
> 
> Did you guys even read my post before ?
> 
> He has a x79 board with lifetime warranty you won't find a board like that ever again. Those lifetime warranties are hard to get and the lifetime follows that board. So you recommend he sells it and buys a x58 that probably has no warranty?


That is great and all, but that puts you on the manufacturers clock of building a PC and not by your own update plans. If the board lasts really long and you want to upgrade to the platform you been waiting on, say Skylake, you will lose the warranty anyway because you just got rid of the board with a lifetime warranty for a new platform without a lifetime warranty. Lifetime warranty does not mean squat unless you plan on using it the rest of your life, and not one enthusiast on Planet Earth will use a x79 for the rest of their life. lol

If I can get a new/used cpu with a equal or greater performance of a Xeon 6 Core CPU without spending any additional money, at least not a crazy amount that will leave us without groceries or bills paid, then yes it is a good idea to keep the x79 and try to find the means to buy a CPU for it, depending on what board it is of course and the layout. Otherwise the lifetime does not mean squat if the board is sitting in its retail box unused month after month. I know if they sent me a x79 in place of my x58 I would be screwed as it would take me 6 months to save up for a hexa core lga 2011 cpu and I would be losing all the money I needed for Skylake.


----------



## PachAz

I totally agree. Lifetime warranty is just useless really, because no enthusiast use components that long anyways. I think they should have refunded him the cost considering the circumstances, so he can buy a better used motherboard him self, or they should try to find a used EVGA x58 to him for free. Or even send him a free 3930k or 4930k along with the x79 as compensation. Right now, the x79 board is as usefull as a plastic yoyo in this context. Since the life time warranty is BS anyways, I see no reason to pay premium for evga. I live in sweden, and here we are used to the option to return a faulty item after 3 years to the retailer and get money back or the item fixed. It seem warranty in US is kinda pointless really since many of these manufacturer exploit the laws to make it more and more expensive for the customer to even freaking own a item. No wonder the economy is doing so "well" in that part of the world...asus is down the drain, evga next.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Having Quad channel memory channels is irrelevant. You can easily use 3 DIMMs or any setup up to quad channel. So SkOrPn you can use any X79 motherboard with your triple channel memory. If you want to run Quad you'll have to add one more module [same speed of course]


That's not what he asked. He asked-
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> *Is there a hexa core chip with at least three memory channels for the x79?* If so which one?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> All LGA-2011 CPUs have quad-channel memory controllers.
> 
> Among consumer parts, the 3930k, 3960X, 3970X, 4930k, and 4960X are hex core. There are many more six to twelve core LGA-2011 Xeon options, but they cannot be overclocked to any significant degree.


Ok thanks, I was just looking at the 2011 chips and there is two hexa's I wouldn't mind owning, both are just under $600 at newegg and the most I will ever spend on a chip, in fact that is more than I would ever spend, so not sure if they can be had even cheaper at ebay or not. Would be nice though, but it is just too close for Skylake to think about spending my upgrade money on a x79 chip. Lifetime warranty or not. I am hoping a Skylake with 8, 10 or 12 cores is released running at least 4ghz stock for under $500.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> That's not what he asked. He asked-


Yeah I looked at them today and they are nice but way too far out of my reach. Owning a $88, 6C12T Xeon is a god send for me considering I am now retired and my R3E is nearly as fast. However, I might just sell the x79 and add that to the Skylake funds and suffer on my laptop until Skylake is available, LOL. At least the laptop has vga out so I can still use my monitor at very least.


----------



## PachAz

Keep dreaming about 6-12 cores for under 500 dollars. As we have seen, even the x99 is hardly a upgrade compared to the x79 plattform using the 6 core cpus. Sure you get a 8 core, but it will cost 1000+ dollars, just like the 4960x which is totally unneeded. Even the 4690k and the 4790k will have slighty higher prices than the current i5 and i7s. Intel will make sure the only upgrade from the mainsteam quads (i5, i7) will be the ultra expensive enthusiast plattforms, and I think it will be like that for a very long time looking at history and current changes. Intel will never give more for less, they even nerfed the pcie lanes on the 5820k compared to the 4820k.

Also 4ghz stock will be less likely considering the 8 core have like 3ghz stock and with the dye shrink, the cpus will OC less and less due to beeing more sensitive to higher vcore, yet demanding higher vcore to achieve higher clocks, its a paradox the haswells are really good at showing.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PachAz*
> 
> Keep dreaming about 6-12 cores for under 500 dollars. As we have seen, even the x99 is hardly a upgrade compared to the x79 plattform using the 6 core cpus. Sure you get a 8 core, but it will cost 1000+ dollars, just like the 4960x which is totally unneeded. Even the 4690k and the 4790k will have slighty higher prices than the current i5 and i7s. Intel will make sure the only upgrade from the mainsteam quads (i5, i7) will be the ultra expensive enthusiast plattforms, and I think it will be like that for a very long time looking at history and current changes. Intel will never give more for less, they even nerfed the pcie lanes on the 5820k compared to the 4820k.
> 
> Also 4ghz stock will be less likely considering the 8 core have like 3ghz stock and with the dye shrink, the cpus will OC less and less due to beeing more sensitive to higher vcore, yet demanding higher vcore to achieve higher clocks, its a paradox the haswells are really good at showing.


It's nice to see you have all this information about a product that hasn't even been released yet.

How do you know X99 won't be an upgrade over X79? Pricing structure is ASSUMED at this point, seeing as it won't be out for another 6 months. Just like product specs are from leaks that may or may not be accurate. If the 5820K has fewer PCIe lanes, its in comparison to the 5930K instead of the 4820K, and all because (if the leaks are accurate) those are both 6-core chips, so they have to give people a reason for paying more for the better part.


----------



## PachAz

I dont know I just speculate using data that alreaddy exists. At this time, all people are doing is speculating and guessing, some in the favour of them selves hoping to build the super duper machine for less money and some for justifying their current over priced build. I dont think you will get more for less though. Studdying intels latest generation it doesnt seem like consumers are getting more, other than a 6% increase in performance and chips that OC less, needs more vcore to OC, become hotter, and also is more prone to degrading. Intels focus are not us desktop users, we basicly get the lower binned/damaged/nerfed chips since dektops are getting less and less popular. And since they will sell less desktop ships, they need to compensate by high prices. You said it your self _"so they have to give people a reason for paying more for the better part"._


----------



## jboudwin

Thanks for the info Kana. Very strange...is this chip power hungry or what? At default Vcore of 1.16875v it won't even POST (removed CMOS battery and unplugged power supply). Not until I raise Vcore to 1.2125v will it even run Prime 95 or LinX for 10 minutes (didn't test longer).


----------



## Kana-Maru

Your welcome man. I'm not sure what's going on with your CPU. I haven't seen many people have major issues with their X5660, X5650 or L5639. There are other Xeon's as well that didn't have those problems. Every CPU is different.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> Thanks for the info Kana. Very strange...is this chip power hungry or what? At default Vcore of 1.16875v it won't even POST (removed CMOS battery and unplugged power supply). Not until I raise Vcore to 1.2125v will it even run Prime 95 or LinX for 10 minutes (didn't test longer).


1.2125 is on the high side but looking at the spec's on Intel's site that is spot on for it as far as normal volts, some have abnormally low volts like my X5660 idles at 1.05 I believe I know it was low, but as I sit at 4.6ghz on all 6 cores that voltage is long gone lol and all that remains is the 1.44 that sits here lol

But I would not worry to much about volts unless you are going for a lower power bill, just watch the heat is all, I have seen up to 1.7 volts going into one of these now (not by me) and on water it runs fine for 2 years I was told


----------



## bill1024

Oh babay, that x5660 sitting there telling me to get another board won out.
Going to go pick up an EVGA X58 FTW3 for 60$ woot, I have 4, 4gb sticks. I will run both my boards in dual channel mode for a while.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> 1.2125 is on the high side but looking at the spec's on Intel's site that is spot on for it as far as normal volts, some have abnormally low volts like my X5660 idles at 1.05 I believe I know it was low, but as I sit at 4.6ghz on all 6 cores that voltage is long gone lol and all that remains is the 1.44 that sits here lol
> 
> But I would not worry to much about volts unless you are going for a lower power bill, just watch the heat is all, I have seen up to 1.7 volts going into one of these now (not by me) and on water it runs fine for 2 years I was told


Talking about voltage, what is the X5650 max v per Intel? And also the max temps? I should be taking my system apart tomorrow to install this X5650. I polished it up pretty good today and though I really wanted to get busy I procrastinated instead and watched TV. It wont happen on Thursday... That baby is going in there whether my 930 likes it or not, so first thing in the morning going to the store to get some NOS or RedBull. Procrastination won't be happening on day two of xeon ownership... lol


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> 1.2125 is on the high side but looking at the spec's on Intel's site that is spot on for it as far as normal volts, some have abnormally low volts like my X5660 idles at 1.05 I believe I know it was low, but as I sit at 4.6ghz on all 6 cores that voltage is long gone lol and all that remains is the 1.44 that sits here lol
> 
> But I would not worry to much about volts unless you are going for a lower power bill, just watch the heat is all, I have seen up to 1.7 volts going into one of these now (not by me) and on water it runs fine for 2 years I was told
> 
> 
> 
> Talking about voltage, what is the X5650 max v per Intel? And also the max temps? I should be taking my system apart tomorrow to install this X5650. I polished it up pretty good today and though I really wanted to get busy I procrastinated instead and watched TV. It wont happen on Thursday... That baby is going in there whether my 930 likes it or not, so first thing in the morning going to the store to get some NOS or RedBull. Procrastination won't be happening on day two of xeon ownership... lol
Click to expand...

Intel spec's page

But in case your are lazy again today lol, the max recomended volts are 1.350V and TCASE of 81.3°C but basiclly the 96°C max is the easiest to go by in real world temp programs as no one I know anyway can rattle off the formula for TCASE conversion to Core temps lol


----------



## Timeofdoom

Here ya go, gotta get that signature








http://valid.canardpc.com/147txs


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Intel spec's page
> 
> But in case your are lazy again today lol, the max recomended volts are 1.350V and TCASE of 81.3°C but basiclly the 96°C max is the easiest to go by in real world temp programs as no one I know anyway can rattle off the formula for TCASE conversion to Core temps lol


Thanks buddy that info is a big help. Looks like I have two customers today that want me to work for them so I may not be installing the xeon today after all


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Here ya go, gotta get that signature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/147txs


Wrong topic









Here ya go:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/x58-xeon-club


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Wrong topic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here ya go:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/x58-xeon-club


Herp-a-derp.
TY Kana!


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Intel spec's page
> 
> But in case your are lazy again today lol, the max recomended volts are 1.350V and TCASE of 81.3°C but basiclly the 96°C max is the easiest to go by in real world temp programs as no one I know anyway can rattle off the formula for TCASE conversion to Core temps lol
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks buddy that info is a big help. Looks like I have two customers today that want me to work for them so I may not be installing the xeon today after all
Click to expand...

that sucks! I got parts coming in tomorrow for my rig (new CPU water block Koolance 380I and related parts totaling 350 usd worth) I also am going to put my LGA 775 back in service as a gamer with either 3 way sli 280's or 260's 216 core or 2 way sli 460's with a 3rd 460 for Physx as the H100i will keep that Q9550 pretty cool and should be able to get it to 4ghz 24/7

I also have a few of those tape strips coming in to convert LGA 771 chips to LGA 775 so my Xeon's on my dell servers will be getting a shot on my 790I board as well!

I am just reviving all the old platforms this week lmao, I even have converted my R710 with twin W5580's to run windows 7 64bit rather than Sabayon server that it was running and thing of dropping in a GPU card into it and see how she does for a gaming rig rather than a gaming server.

I also thought of doing the same to my PE 1950 gen III with twin x5492's dam with all the horse power I got in my place I should figure out a way to make a super computer lol, (kinda done that already) but this one would be for benching scores lol


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Talking about voltage, what is the X5650 max v per Intel? And also the max temps? I should be taking my system apart tomorrow to install this X5650. I polished it up pretty good today and though I really wanted to get busy I procrastinated instead and watched TV. It wont happen on Thursday... That baby is going in there whether my 930 likes it or not, so first thing in the morning going to the store to get some NOS or RedBull. Procrastination won't be happening on day two of xeon ownership... lol


Max QPI/VTT volts is 1.4 v. You shouldn't need that, but if you get high enough with bclock you're going to have to start pumping it up.

As was stated, Intel's max vcore is 1.35 v. Most OCers will tell you that as long as it stays cool enough under stress tests, you can keep pushing.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Max QPI/VTT volts is 1.4 v. You shouldn't need that, but if you get high enough with bclock you're going to have to start pumping it up.
> 
> As was stated, Intel's max vcore is 1.35 v. Most OCers will tell you that as long as it stays cool enough under stress tests, you can keep pushing.


Thanks for that info. My current QPI is 1.224 and cpu is 1.29, so it looks like very minor adjustments from my 930 will be made, possibly in the right direction too, down, lol.


----------



## jboudwin

Finally got it!! I could barely OC my X5660. At times it even wouldn't boot. Turned off VDroop and voila'. CPU Vcore set at 1.35v in the BIOS and GPU-Z shows 1.376v without VDroop and 1.19v with VDroop. I noticed voltages were not predictable with VDroop on. Now have a 3.95 OC with temps in the low 60's. Now I can continue to tweak to go higher.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> Finally got it!! I could barely OC my X5660. At times it even wouldn't boot. *Turned off VDroop and voila'*. CPU Vcore set at 1.35v in the BIOS and GPU-Z shows 1.376v without VDroop and 1.19v with VDroop. I noticed voltages were not predictable with VDroop on. Now have a 3.95 OC with temps in the low 60's. Now I can continue to tweak to go higher.


What?

Now I know I am rusty at this overclocking because I could have sworn VDroop was a symptom, not a on/off setting.


----------



## alancsalt

LLC I assume...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> LLC I assume...


Load Line Calibration? Ah OK, then that makes sense. I didn't know until now exactly what LLC did. Thanks


----------



## jboudwin

Now that's great. First my EVGA 4-Way Classified dies in changing to X5660 and I presumably have no use for the X79 Dark they sent as RMA replacement. So I relocate an employee to another work station and abscond with the SLI 3 mobo in his computer. Finally figure out why I can't get a decent OC of 3.95 (had to turn Vdroop off) and now the SLI 3 dies 6 months out of warranty. I think God is sending me a message..."Give up X58 platform". I have other computers in my office from which I could steal an X58 mobo but then work wouldn't get done. I guess it's time to abandon my X5660 and get a hexcore for my X79 Dark. I suppose that means I get kicked out of the X58 Xeon Club to which I just applied.

But thanks for the very interesting thread Kana.


----------



## Kana-Maru

So you turned off Vdroop and it died. Looks like your CPU is killing boards left and right. Those voltages just didn't seem right. Otherwise it could've been the motherboards time to go. I hate that you had a tough time. I haven't heard many stories and issues like yours across the web with these X58-Xeons.

You won't be kicked out of the X58 - Xeon club. As long as you submit a valid CPU-Z link you are in for life.

Moving to a X79 is not bad at all and it's more update. It's actually a aging platform, but it's the latest and greatest high end from Intel. I'm hoping that you'll be able to find a decently priced i7-hexa core on the X79 platform. Most of them I've seen have been running in the high $400s-$500+ [3930K + 4930K etc]. From my testing their isn't that much difference in benchmarks clock for clock between the platforms. The X58 would still be the cheapest high end platform at this point, but you could never go wrong with a X79+Hexa core. Looks like it's time for you to put that X79 Dark to work.


----------



## alancsalt

AFAIK you cannot "turn off" v droop or v-drop. You can turn on LLC, which is a countermeasure to voltage drooping under load. Recent LLC implementations can provide a range of settings, and the higher ones can be extreme enough on some boards to deliver more volts than are entered in bios....


----------



## RX7-2nr

Some motherboards have a setting in the BIOS called Vdroop Control, I imagine it is the same as LLC.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> I guess it's time to abandon my X5660 and get a hexcore for my X79 Dark. I suppose that means I get kicked out of the X58 Xeon Club to which I just applied.


Well why don't you start a x79 Xeon Club? I mean you have no idea how long socket 2011 is going to last, it may be years, and 1366 was special enough, so maybe 2011 is special enough?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Knowing Intel and their 5% increments I'm sure LGA2011-X79 will be fine for a very long time. I wish AMD could step it up in the enthusiast area. I'm sure Intel's Haswell refresh will be a joke when reviews are posted. I'm not even going to think about a different platform until Intel releases a new platform altogether. It's going to be hard to make a lot of i7-EE X79 users upgrade I bet. I'm not expecting much out of Broadwell, but I'm waiting to see what Broadwell-E will bring to the table for those switching form X79 to X99.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> AFAIK you cannot "turn off" v droop or v-drop. You can turn on LLC, which is a countermeasure to voltage drooping under load. Recent LLC implementations can provide a range of settings, and the higher ones can be extreme enough on some boards to deliver more volts than are entered in bios....


Yeah the new boards, post-X58, have a lot of more control over LLC. I'm not sure about all X58 boards, but I have 3 options which are pretty straight forward. I usually leave my LLC set to AUTO, but it all depends on my overclock settings. There has been lots of debates about LLC. Some people fear those extreme LLC settings.


----------



## jboudwin

VDroop can be disabled on EVGA X58 mobo's. It looks like it's EVGA's equivalent of LLC. And funny you mentioned it, I have been looking at Xeons for the X79. In the meantime I have been talking to a guy on EVGA forums who has an X58 4-Way Classified who may take my watercooling parts since I no longer have use for them on the X79 Dark. Now I have to sell off the X5660. I feel like I'm losing an old friend.


----------



## Kana-Maru

At least it seems to be working out the best for you. I think your CPU is a MB killer. Hopefully you can fine a Hexa-core for cheap. They seem to cost a nice amount.
---

Uploaded more X5660 vs X79 i7-Extreme Edition Hexa Core results to my chart. The overall performance between the platforms using HWBOT scores has been updated as well. Posting it here for those who might not notice it in my first post.

http://postimg.org/image/8zza822kl/



http://hwbot.org/user/kana_maru/


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> Now I have to sell off the X5660. I feel like I'm losing an old friend.


Why didnt you do this two weeks ago on the 28th of May, my Bday? I would have loved a 5660 if you were willing to take $90 bucks for it. This 5650 was a bday gift from my Parents, lol...

EDIT: Up to bclk of 180 so far and IBT high stress at only 70C. Once I find max bclk I will work on the cpu multi and pray it makes it to at least 20. Anyone know why the Asus board has CPU PLL at 1.8 by default? Shouldn't it be around 1.65 for a default? Also when I set my memory to 1.65 I got a big red warning that said Intel says this can permanently damage a CPU. So I put it back on 1.60v.

Does everything voltage wise look safe for this CPU so far? My next test is going to be bclk of 185, and another ten stress tests using IBT. I'm not going to start OC the cpu until I know the max bclk.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jboudwin*
> 
> VDroop can be disabled on EVGA X58 mobo's. It looks like it's EVGA's equivalent of LLC. And funny you mentioned it, I have been looking at Xeons for the X79. In the meantime I have been talking to a guy on EVGA forums who has an X58 4-Way Classified who may take my watercooling parts since I no longer have use for them on the X79 Dark. Now I have to sell off the X5660. I feel like I'm losing an old friend.


Yeah you can disable it on EVGA motherboards, never found out whats the difference with it on or off, anyone can help me with overclocking my X5650 a little more? I have an EVGA X58 SLI3 with a X5650 and a Corsair H100 with 4 scythe fans in push / pull config... thanks in advance


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Yeah you can disable it on EVGA motherboards, never found out whats the difference with it on or off, anyone can help me with overclocking my X5650 a little more? I have an EVGA X58 SLI3 with a X5650 and a Corsair H100 with 4 scythe fans in push / pull config... thanks in advance


What bclk did you manage? I'm up to 190 so far.


----------



## EvilMonk

Im at 195.5 (Set to 196 in the bios). Still I think after burning the chips with prime 95 for a couple of days the thermal grease will settle better and the cooling will get more efficient! Am I right about that?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Im at 195.5 (Set to 196 in the bios). Still I think after burning the chips with prime 95 for a couple of days the thermal grease will settle better and the cooling will get more efficient! Am I right about that?


That depends on the type of TIM you used. Some need to cure, and others do not. I'm using HeGrease for now, but not sure if it needs to cure like our old Ceramique needs to do.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> That depends on the type of TIM you used. Some need to cure, and others do not. I'm using HeGrease for now, but not sure if it needs to cure like our old Ceramique needs to do.


Im on MX-4, its carbon based but I never saw information that said its different than Arctic Silver 5, I find it more effective for cooling though but I always drive my chips on prime after I change thermal grease.
You have any idea if it needs to heat up through stress test to be more effective?
Thanks!

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835186038&cm_re=arctic_mx-4-_-35-186-038-_-Product


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Im on MX-4, its carbon based but I never saw information that said its different than Artic Silver
> 
> http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835186038&cm_re=arctic_mx-4-_-35-186-038-_-Product


MX-4 is fantastic stuff, so you should be good to go with minimal, if any, cure time.


----------



## EvilMonk

Good to
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> MX-4 is fantastic stuff, so you should be good to go with minimal, if any, cure time.


Good to know!! I can get 207 Gflops through loop / stress test in AIDA64 @ 4.5Ghz, still its under the 224 Gflops that my Retina MacBook Pro i7 Ivy Bridge 3740QM 2.7 Ghz 6m L3 (Turbo 3.7 Ghz) gives me and that is just pissing me off, the cpu is also ahead in most FPU tests and the 16 Gb dual Channel LPDDR3 1600 Mhz is also a lot faster (Except in RAM copy operations) than my 24 Gb DDR3 1600 CL8 in triple channel








When I finish to watch last night episode of 24 I'll get back to tweak my overclocking... I hope I can push it higher.


----------



## EvilMonk

I'm starting to look into getting an 8-10 cores ES Xeon E5 + an X79 motherboard on the side...
I found this one on eBay (Xeon E5 2650 8 Cores / 16 Threads 2 Ghz) for 300$ with the ASUS P9X79 LE because it has 8 memory slots ASUS P9X79 LE LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA and its 249$. Anyone think it would make a good build? You guys think I'm better of to stick with the X5650 / X58 SLI3 setup until something better is released by Intel?
Thanks a lot guys!


----------



## bill1024

I went and picked up the EVGA X58 FTW and I dropped the x5660 in and it took right off.
I have it at 3.8 running BOINC WCG, 6 cores HT off and temp is 50c 100% load. Running Linux Ubuntu.
Running with just one 4gb stick.
The BIOS is a bit different from the Assus BIOS that call things a bit differently,
I will load win7 and tweak it, and do some testing.

I am pleased, for 60$ not bad.
An EVGA x58 FTW just sold on ebay for 56$, no one bid on it at 50$ starting price, so I bid 55$ and down to the last 2 min I was praying some one please bid and win this thing, I already have too many computers.
Some one did bid and won it for 55.xx plus15 shipping. 70$ or so.
There are good deals out there you just have to look around.

Xeons work native in the sli3, classified3 and the x58 FTW3 boards.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I went and picked up the EVGA X58 FTW and I dropped the x5660 in and it took right off.
> I have it at 3.8 running BOINC WCG, 6 cores HT off and temp is 50c 100% load. Running Linux Ubuntu.
> Running with just one 4gb stick.
> The BIOS is a bit different from the Assus BIOS that call things a bit differently,
> I will load win7 and tweak it, and do some testing.
> 
> I am pleased, for 60$ not bad.
> An EVGA x58 FTW just sold on ebay for 56$, no one bid on it at 50$ starting price, so I bid 55$ and down to the last 2 min I was praying some one please bid and win this thing, I already have too many computers.
> Some one did bid and won it for 55.xx plus15 shipping. 70$ or so.
> There are good deals out there you just have to look around.
> 
> Xeons work native in the sli3, classified3 and the x58 FTW3 boards.


lol, I think that was my buddy that won it! He was telling me he got a evga board but it was not the classified like he wanted.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm starting to look into getting an 8-10 cores ES Xeon E5 + an X79 motherboard on the side...
> I found this one on eBay (Xeon E5 2650 8 Cores / 16 Threads 2 Ghz) for 300$ with the ASUS P9X79 LE because it has 8 memory slots ASUS P9X79 LE LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA and its 249$. Anyone think it would make a good build? You guys think I'm better of to stick with the X5650 / X58 SLI3 setup until something better is released by Intel?
> Thanks a lot guys!


um it is a good cpu for multi rendering, but I am pretty sure that the 2011 xeon's did not overclock at all really, locked multi of coarse but the blck clock is topped out at 110 or something, so from what I have seen you won't get any extra performance out of it. What you have is what you will have, so to speak.

Sorry for double post all


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Ok, quick question. If I am not interested in high overclocks, what would be best to run? 190x21 or 200x20? It just completed 12 hours of Prime at 190 BCLK, so I am ready to take it up 5 notches to see if 195 works, but I am wondering what you guys would do? Would you start testing the multis to see what clocks it will go to? Right now its at 17 and my memory as low as it would allow. My board ran the 930 at 200 bclk for 3.5 years at least so should I just do the same here?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Ok, quick question. If I am not interested in high overclocks, what would be best to run? 190x21 or 200x20? It just completed 12 hours of Prime at 190 BCLK, so I am ready to take it up 5 notches to see if 195 works, but I am wondering what you guys would do? Would you start testing the multis to see what clocks it will go to? Right now its at 17 and my memory as low as it would allow. My board ran the 930 at 200 bclk for 3.5 years at least so should I just do the same here?


195 might work bud... for me the L5640 at max multi wouldn't clock higher than 192... the X5660 at max multi clock at 196... you won't know until you try...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Well as you know it did hit 200x20 yesterday and has been running prime flawlessly all night so far. Now all I want to think about is uncore and voltages.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## EvilMonk

Niceeeeee bud!!! Congrats on getting the CPU stable with 200 BCLK


----------



## Kana-Maru

Here are my 3500x1800p benchmark results. I ran these quickly, but everything was smooth. I couldn't run Tressfx at this resolutions, but I can handle Tressfx with 2560x1600p.


http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2053644/



*Tomb Raider [Ultra] - 3500x1800p*
*Stock* GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [337.50 BETA Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
CPU Average: 35c
CPU Max: 45c
*Ambient Temp: 25.5c*
CPU Usage Avg: 4.9%
CPU Usage Max: 28.4%
Gameplay Duration: 15 minutes 21 seconds
Captured 49,318 frames
*FPS Avg: 54fps* [53.51]
FPS Max: 70fps
FPS Min: 20fps
*Frame time Avg: 18.7ms*


http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2053646/



*Battlefield 4 100% Maxed [Ultra] - 3500x1800p*
*Stock* GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [337.50 BETA Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
CPU Average: 48c
CPU Max: 59c
*Ambient Temp: 24c*
CPU Usage Avg: 17%
CPU Usage Max: 49%
Gameplay Duration: 10 minutes 36 seconds
Captured 17,241 frames
*FPS Avg: 43fps* [42.97]
FPS Max: 116fps
FPS Min: 7fps
*Frame time Avg: 22ms*

The GTX 670 still puts up great numbers at higher resolutions. 18.7ms and 22ms frame time is just awesome.


----------



## saaanx

The moment I came across this thread I got plethoric. I can now afford nowadays' computing performance with my X58 for dead cheap, and still have a surprisingly decent rig for some good years.

Thank you Kana for such information and help on the matter, seriously
+Rep +Vote


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *saaanx*
> 
> The moment I came across this thread I got plethoric. I can now afford nowadays' computing performance with my X58 for dead cheap, and still have a surprisingly decent rig for some good years.
> 
> Thank you Kana for such information and help on the matter, seriously
> +Rep +Vote


Thanks for the rep and the vote man.









It's good to see a lot or X58 users coming back. I'm glad out platform is still relevant 6 years after releasing. I refused to play Intel marketing games and I'm glad I didn't upgrade. I'm also glad so many others are upgrading their PCs for little to nothing. Not only, but they are getting Hexa cores. I'm still continuing to update this topic so check back once in awhile.


----------



## WoKeN

Has anyone tried using 24 gigs of ram in their x58 mobo with 3x8 sticks so that not all banks are used? Have they been able to OC with ram similar to this using their x5600 cpus?

I'm planning to get http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226329 these unless someone has a better recommendation?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> Has anyone tried using 24 gigs of ram in their x58 mobo with 3x8 sticks so that not all banks are used? Have they been able to OC with ram similar to this using their x5600 cpus?
> 
> I'm planning to get http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226329 these unless someone has a better recommendation?


Tried with 2 8 Gb sticks a couple of months back, G.Skill DDR3-1600 - 2x8Gb (16 Gb kit dual channel) worked ok for the 8Gb sticks when I used 2.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> Has anyone tried using 24 gigs of ram in their x58 mobo with 3x8 sticks so that not all banks are used? Have they been able to OC with ram similar to this using their x5600 cpus?
> 
> I'm planning to get http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226329 these unless someone has a better recommendation?


I do not know where I read it, but I saw someone running 48GB in their X58 with a Xeon, but now that I try I can't find the post. Sorry. So do not take my word for it. lol

EDIT: and I think it was 6x8GB sticks


----------



## WoKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I do not know where I read it, but I saw someone running 48GB in their X58 with a Xeon, but now that I try I can't find the post. Sorry. So do not take my word for it. lol
> 
> EDIT: and I think it was 6x8GB sticks


K thank you SkOrPn


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> K thank you SkOrPn


I just replied to you at the other website, lol... These Xeons are good up to 288GB according to Intel. Now these boards only have 6 slots per socket, and ram is only worth buying up to 8gb per stick. So theoretically speaking a good X58 board, and definitely any server or workstation board should be able to handle up to 48GB, I would think...


----------



## WoKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I just replied to you at the other website, lol... These Xeons are good up to 288GB according to Intel. Now these boards only have 6 slots per socket, and ram is only worth buying up to 8gb per stick. So theoretically speaking a good X58 board, and definitely any server or workstation board should be able to handle up to 48GB, I would think...


Yeah I saw lol, I heard though at least from my board's community (evga) that the x58 or at least the model i had (e758) mobo supported up to officially 48 gb, and was only advertised to 24 gigs cause upon it's release the 4 gb modules were as high as they came for desktops


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> Yeah I saw lol, I heard though at least from my board's community (evga) that the x58 or at least the model i had (e758) mobo supported up to officially 48 gb, and was only advertised to 24 gigs cause upon it's release the 4 gb modules were as high as they came for desktops


Yes exactly, that is why I said theoretically will support up to 48GB... Some companies edited their boards info pages to reflect that 48Gb will work.


----------



## WoKeN

If I'm hoping to OC a x5650 from 2.6 ghz to about 3.8 or 4ghz would you recommend I'd rather buy 1866 rated ram and clock it down to 1600 or do you think I should be able to oc the cpu with the help of 1600 rated ram just fine:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231567


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> If I'm hoping to OC a x5650 from 2.6 ghz to about 3.8 or 4ghz would you recommend I'd rather buy 1866 rated ram and clock it down to 1600 or do you think I should be able to oc the cpu with the help of 1600 rated ram just fine:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231567


1600 will do just fine, you still need to set the FSB to 200mhz or so and the memory to DDR3-1333 and you will have the ram clocked at 1600
I have the same RAM as the one you posted.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> If I'm hoping to OC a x5650 from 2.6 ghz to about 3.8 or 4ghz would you recommend I'd rather buy 1866 rated ram and clock it down to 1600 or do you think I should be able to oc the cpu with the help of 1600 rated ram just fine:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231567


Like Evil M said, if your board does 200 BCLK, than you will have no problem hitting 4ghz and do it at really good temps. I was surprised how easy my X5650 overclocked.

First set your volts to their maximums. I set my CPU to 1.35, my QPI to 1.35, my ram to 1.6. Then I set the CPU to one of its lowest multipliers, using a odd number like 15 or 17. Then I set my RAM to its lowest mhz setting of 1200 i think it was and Uncore to 1.5x or lowest speed of 2400 mhz. This let me keep pushing and testing BCLK from 160 to 200 in 5 or 10 tick intervals. Once I was at 200 bclk, I then set my RAM to 1600, and my Uncore to 3200 (2x) leaving all the RAM timings stock (can be worked on later anyway). It was then that I started moving the CPU multi up per tick and testing 10 runs of IBT each time, until I reached a multi of 20. This gave me 4ghz and never once did it rise in temps over 57C. After that mark was achieved I started lowering volts and testing until I reached 1.18v on the CPU and 1.17v on the QPI. NOT ONCE did it ever fail a test, so who knows it may even go lower on volts or MUCH higher on overclocks, lol... I just ran out of time to find out...

The point is this X5650 was hella easy to overclock to 4ghz for me.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> If I'm hoping to OC a x5650 from 2.6 ghz to about 3.8 or 4ghz would you recommend I'd rather buy 1866 rated ram and clock it down to 1600 or do you think I should be able to oc the cpu with the help of 1600 rated ram just fine:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231567
> 
> 
> 
> Like Evil M said, if your board does 200 BCLK, than you will have no problem hitting 4ghz and do it at really good temps. I was surprised how easy my X5650 overclocked.
> 
> First set your volts to their maximums. I set my CPU to 1.35, my QPI to 1.35, my ram to 1.6. Then I set the CPU to one of its lowest multipliers, using a odd number like 15 or 17. Then I set my RAM to its lowest mhz setting of 1200 i think it was and Uncore to 1.5x or lowest speed of 2400 mhz. This let me keep pushing and testing BCLK from 160 to 200 in 5 or 10 tick intervals. Once I was at 200 bclk, I then set my RAM to 1600, and my Uncore to 3200 (2x) leaving all the RAM timings stock (can be worked on later anyway). It was then that I started moving the CPU multi up per tick and testing 10 runs of IBT each time, until I reached a multi of 20. This gave me 4ghz and never once did it rise in temps over 57C. After that mark was achieved I started lowering volts and testing until I reached 1.81 on the CPU and 1.71 on the QPI. NOT ONCE did it ever fail a test, so who knows it may even go lower on volts or MUCH higher on overclocks, lol... I just ran out of time to find out...
> 
> The point is this X5650 was hella easy to overclock to 4ghz for me.
Click to expand...

please tell me that 1.71 on the QPI, and 1.81 on the core are typos


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Like Evil M said, if your board does 200 BCLK, than you will have no problem hitting 4ghz and do it at really good temps. I was surprised how easy my X5650 overclocked.
> 
> First set your volts to their maximums. I set my CPU to 1.35, my QPI to 1.35, my ram to 1.6. Then I set the CPU to one of its lowest multipliers, using a odd number like 15 or 17. Then I set my RAM to its lowest mhz setting of 1200 i think it was and Uncore to 1.5x or lowest speed of 2400 mhz. This let me keep pushing and testing BCLK from 160 to 200 in 5 or 10 tick intervals. Once I was at 200 bclk, I then set my RAM to 1600, and my Uncore to 3200 (2x) leaving all the RAM timings stock (can be worked on later anyway). It was then that I started moving the CPU multi up per tick and testing 10 runs of IBT each time, until I reached a multi of 20. This gave me 4ghz and never once did it rise in temps over 57C. After that mark was achieved I started lowering volts and testing until I reached 1.81 on the CPU and 1.71 on the QPI. NOT ONCE did it ever fail a test, so who knows it may even go lower on volts or MUCH higher on overclocks, lol... I just ran out of time to find out...
> 
> The point is this X5650 was hella easy to overclock to 4ghz for me.


I tend to prefer starting at stock volts and raising as necessary, instead of starting high and lowering. I guess in the end you end up in the same place, though.

Basically if you buy 1600 ram you set the multipliers to suit, and same for 1866. Either will serve your purposes.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> please tell me that 1.71 on the QPI, and 1.81 on the core are typos


Lol, that is what I was thinking too, but it is confirmed in the bios and two separate software programs. And not once a missed test. Kinda makes you wish you owned it yourself huh? That is what another user told me, he said its a shame I am not willing to push it to its limits which he believes will be very high. haha...

OH WAIT DOH! Those are typo's, my bad, its actually 1.17v QPI and 1.18 CPU (Damn I guess my brain was not comprehending 1.1v)... even lower lmao, and 24 hours of Prime95 and 10 runs of IBT at high stress, twice...







This CPU needs to be told what the laws of physics are, lol...



EDIT: Yeah OK, I see now 1.71 and 1.84 would be way too high, but in my head that seems more realistic then 1.17v


----------



## Bradford1040

lol!!!! I was reading and was NOOOOO I don't want that chip lol


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> lol!!!! I was reading and was NOOOOO I don't want that chip lol


LOL, haha I agree. I just could not believe I was at 1.1 though, I guess it is normal for these 32nm chips. I think I needed a minimum voltage of 1.26 for my 930 to maintain 4ghz.


----------



## kael13

Just seen this thread. That is nuts. My x58 has been such a solid performer that grabbing an X5660 seems like a good decision. However, my aged mobo doesn't support SATA 3 or USB 3, so I will probably still get Haswell-E as planned.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kael13*
> 
> Just seen this thread. That is nuts. My x58 has been such a solid performer that grabbing an X5660 seems like a good decision. However, my aged mobo doesn't support SATA 3 or USB 3, so I will probably still get Haswell-E as planned.


SATA 3 is worthless, and USB 3.0 can be added via a PCIe addon card. Haswell-E will be very nice no doubt but not as nice as Skylake which may come on its heels. Unless you have tons of money you will want to upgrade from Haswell-E to Skylake no doubt about it. So, with the MASSIVE performance increase with these Xeons, its just money thrown away. If you have to have SATA 3 speeds, just put 2 good SSD's into RAID 0 on your mobo and you instantly have more than what SATA 3 brings you. I get like 560 MB/s on my raid which is above the theoretical max of 500.

With that all aside, yeah Haswell-E is VERY nice looking...


----------



## kckyle

spend that 80 bucks and get a x5650 and ur set for the next 2 years at the very least.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kael13*
> 
> Just seen this thread. That is nuts. My x58 has been such a solid performer that grabbing an X5660 seems like a good decision. However, my aged mobo doesn't support SATA 3 or USB 3, so I will probably still get Haswell-E as planned.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> spend that 80 bucks and get a x5650 and ur set for the next 2 years at the very least.
Click to expand...

I would definitely go with the X5650 while they are still cheap. The X5660's are more expensive than they were 3 - 6 months ago. The X5650 has been the best bang for the buck for awhile now. You'll hit 4Ghz with ease. Most users can go 4Ghz-4.4Ghz with decent voltage and get really good CPU temps with air coolers. I'm running a looped water cooler and loving my temps.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*New* Firestrike and 3Dmark 11 results. The best results so far. I broke both of my old records.

GTX 670 2GB ref. [blower cards] 2-Way SLI with the latest drivers 337.88. Also my NB, CPU, MB and GPUs are much cooler with my new fan layout.



3DMark FireStrike - 4.8Ghz - 1670Mhz RAM - 11462

3DMark11 - 4.8Ghz - 1670Mhz RAM - P16832


----------



## kael13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I would definitely go with the X5650 while they are still cheap. The X5660's are more expensive than they were 3 - 6 months ago. The X5650 has been the best bang for the buck for awhile now. You'll hit 4Ghz with ease. Most users can go 4Ghz-4.4Ghz with decent voltage and get really good CPU temps with air coolers. I'm running a looped water cooler and loving my temps.


I might just go for it to tide me over until Haswell-E. Very cheap and you end up with a solid spare processor that might have good resell value. £90ish on Ebay. Tempting. Any issues with motherboard compatibility?


----------



## Scannall

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kael13*
> 
> Just seen this thread. That is nuts. My x58 has been such a solid performer that grabbing an X5660 seems like a good decision. However, my aged mobo doesn't support SATA 3 or USB 3, so I will probably still get Haswell-E as planned.


With DDR4 about a year away, I'm going to hold on to my X58 until that's been available for a bit, and the prices come down on it. I don't want to spend much now, since a lot of it can't be carried forward.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kael13*
> 
> I might just go for it to tide me over until Haswell-E. Very cheap and you end up with a solid spare processor that might have good resell value. £90ish on Ebay. Tempting. Any issues with motherboard compatibility?


None from what I've seen so far with the correct or latest BIOS. This topic is really large so it would take a long time to see all of the BIOS requirements. In my X58-Xeon Club topic I have composed a list of members, Xeon models, MB brand + model and BIOS.

Go here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club

Then check under the "Xeon Memberlist" category. There you will fine the motherboards and BIOS.

Oh and I'd also agree with the RAID SATA II. I've seen some ridiculous numbers well past 500 MB/s with SATA II. SATA III PCI-E cards are dirt cheap if you want SATA III. There's absolutely nothing wrong with SATA II.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scannall*
> 
> With DDR4 about a year away, I'm going to hold on to my X58 until that's been available for a bit, and the prices come down on it. I don't want to spend much now, since a lot of it can't be carried forward.


So you want DDR4. The X5650 x23 multiplier Hex core is only around $80-$90 bucks. The good motherboards have been going up a bit, but it's still cheaper to build a high end X58 build within 10% of Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge-E. Haswell-E is close, but I decided not to upgrade since it's still on the same old 3 year platform with revisions [2011-3 with some new add-ons]. If you feel that I prices are to high I understand.


----------



## Scannall

Quote:


> So you want DDR4. The X5650 x23 multiplier Hex core is only around $80-$90 bucks. The good motherboards have been going up a bit, but it's still cheaper to build a high end X58 build within 10% of Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge-E. Haswell-E is close, but I decided not to upgrade since it's still on the same old 3 year platform with revisions [2011-3 with some new add-ons]. If you feel that I prices are to high I understand.


I'm sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I'm hanging on to my X58 until well after the DDR4 boards and chips are available. I don't want to run into the first wave regrets and prices when they are first introduced. I have a 5660 sitting here waiting on me to get enough free time to install it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry I just misread that. Heavy multitasking at the moment. I see what you are saying. DDR4 will be expensive. DRAM-DDR3 has already climbed in prices. The kits are insane. I guess the $50-$60 2x8GBs kit days are over or something. I'm hoping by the time I decide to upgrade RAM[DDR4] won't be so expensive.


----------



## kckyle

they predict ddr3 price might jump down a little bit when ddr4 comes in full swing.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm still seeing DDR3-1333 kits over $100. Probably resellers, but DDR3-1600Mhz kits are still near $70 and well over $90 into $100+. They don't appear to be doing anything just yet. I don't think they will drop that much. Maybe some of the $100+ RAM will drop into the $85-$95 pricing area. That won't help anything. There's still strong demand for 1600Mhz.
.


----------



## kckyle

yeah i got my 8gb stick for 80 bucks off newegg, rated at 1600mhz cl8. if they come down by maybe 10-20 bucks i'll snatch up 2 more for triple channel


----------



## Bradford1040

Ram prices went up They Said! Because of that tsunami or something I remember. But prices are still up just like DDR2 stayed up at its end of life, better to sell one set for double or triple the price, than a bunch of sets at a cheap price, they are not producing as much as they were and that helps keep demand down. I really wished I grabed everything I could have back during the cheap days. I would be a ram selling fool now lol


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> Ram prices went up They Said! Because of that tsunami or something I remember. But prices are still up just like DDR2 stayed up at its end of life, better to sell one set for double or triple the price, than a bunch of sets at a cheap price, they are not producing as much as they were and that helps keep demand down. I really wished I grabed everything I could have back during the cheap days. I would be a ram selling fool now lol


I'm glad I did pile up these dozens and dozens of DDR3 1333 Registered ECC 4&8Gb ram sticks and 1333 4Gb normal ram sticks


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm glad I did pile up these dozens and dozens of DDR3 1333 Registered ECC 4&8Gb ram sticks and 1333 4Gb normal ram sticks


Same here. I'm glad I went ahead and upgraded my RAM when I did sometime ago. I only paid $80 total for my 12GB Triple Channel Kit.

*UPDATE:* *Watch Dogs [Ultra Settings + Graphic Mods] - 1920x1080p & 2560x1440p*



*Watch Dogs [Ultra Settings + Graphic Mods] - 1920x1080p
MSAA x2*



GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [337.88 BETA Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 14 minutes 5 seconds
Captured 90,355 frames
*FPS Avg: 68fps*
FPS Max: 131fps
FPS Min: 21fps
*Frame time Avg: 9.30ms*



*Watch Dogs [Ultra Settings + kadzait24_4.0 Graphic Mods] - 2560x1440p
MSAA x2*



GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [337.88 BETA Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 22 minutes 59 seconds
Captured 55,939 frames
*FPS Avg: 41fps*
FPS Max: 55fps
FPS Min: 9fps
*Frame time Avg: 24.7ms*

I'll also like to note that Watch Dogs with the unlocked settings\mod used approximately 5.5GBs of RAM. I'll double check that again when I get a chance.


----------



## TheReciever

stahp!

Your making it hard for me not to splurge on a similar configuration as yours lol


----------



## OCmember

Love my X5660!!!


----------



## anubis1127

I like both of my X5660s.


----------



## TheReciever

What kind of points do they get?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> What kind of points do they get?


My X5660s? Around 155k PPD at stock clocks.


----------



## TheReciever

Very nice, I think I may pick up a few in a month or so and fold them. I lost my folding rank since I have been inactive









Shooting for a million points a day would make for a good come back


----------



## anubis1127

That it would, haha. If I could find a reasonable SR 2 board I could probably OC them a bit and get higher PPD. Right now they are in a HP server so I'm stuck at stock clocks.


----------



## TheReciever

Yeah I would probably be in a similar situation if I were to get 2 c1100's

Was thinking I can just put them in the garage until some x58 boards come along Craigslist. Not to go off topic but is itx 2600k still the route to go for p/$?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> Yeah I would probably be in a similar situation if I were to get 2 c1100's
> 
> Was thinking I can just put them in the garage until some x58 boards come along Craigslist. Not to go off topic but is itx 2600k still the route to go for p/$?


Actually right now GPU folding is where its at. My 780 gets 175-210k PPD depending on the work unit. Even my little r9 270 gets up to 75k PPD with a single 6pin connector.

In comparison a 2600k OCd to heck only gets around 20-35k PPD.


----------



## TheReciever

Ouch! Thats pretty terrible.

GPU's are so darn expensive. Might go with a farm of 750Ti's or something. In short, scored a high paying IT contract and still living with the parent. One time opportunity before I start moving into other avenues of life


----------



## bill1024

My 4 processor socket G34 48 core AMD 6166H does 350,000PPD folding bigadv. That is stock speed, no overclock.
The bigadv program will be ending at the end of Jan 1015
It gets around half that folding regular SMP WUs. Stanford is supposed to tweak the PPD for SMP but we will see.
With ocores and the new crome folding coming out servers still should do ok

Question for you guys on here.
Many motherboards today come with two gigabyte network ports built in.
Why? Why do I need two, connect them both to the modem and get better speed?
One for the internet one for a local lan or some thing?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My 4 processor socket G34 48 core AMD 6166H does 350,000PPD folding bigadv. That is stock speed, no overclock.
> The bigadv program will be ending at the end of Jan 1015
> It gets around half that folding regular SMP WUs. Stanford is supposed to tweak the PPD for SMP but we will see.
> With ocores and the new crome folding coming out servers still should do ok
> 
> Question for you guys on here.
> Many motherboards today come with two gigabyte network ports built in.
> Why? Why do I need two, connect them both to the modem and get better speed?
> One for the internet one for a local lan or some thing?


I'm not really sure on the appeal for multiple NICs on consumer boards. Servers use them for NIC teaming, which can provide increased bandwidth, and fault tolerance. Microsoft has even made NIC teaming support native in Server 2012.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheReciever*
> 
> stahp!
> 
> Your making it hard for me not to splurge on a similar configuration as yours lol


lol. The X5660 is great to me. It's definitely a work horse and plays games really good at stock settings. Getting them up to 3.8Ghz is pretty easy. 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz is were most users take their X58 Xeons. The GTX 670s are nice as well so if you can find some cheap I'd get a 4GB version they are good. Otherwise, it would be wise to get 700 series card [re-badged 600 series]. The 670 SLI setup handles Watch Dogs + E3 2012 graphic mods\unlocks. I'm really maxing the 2GB limitation though so I'm waiting for the next generation to release. It going to be a tight match between AMD and Nvidia I bet. You can't go wrong with the price of a X58 + Hexa core Xeon vs a X79 price if you include the performance.

Here is my PC build as well. Cleaned everything out and re-arranged a few things like lights etc.

































Let me know what you guys think about my minor additions.


----------



## anubis1127

Looking good @Kana-Maru. I had dual dual Galaxy 670s at one point. Mine were the GC2 ones though, they used the 680 PCB.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> lol. The X5660 is great to me. It's definitely a work horse and plays games really good at stock settings. Getting them up to 3.8Ghz is pretty easy. 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz is were most users take their X58 Xeons. The GTX 670s are nice as well so if you can find some cheap I'd get a 4GB version they are good. Otherwise, it would be wise to get 700 series card [re-badged 600 series]. The 670 SLI setup handles Watch Dogs + E3 2012 graphic mods\unlocks. I'm really maxing the 2GB limitation though so I'm waiting for the next generation to release. It going to be a tight match between AMD and Nvidia I bet. You can't go wrong with the price of a X58 + Hexa core Xeon vs a X79 price if you include the performance.
> 
> Here is my PC build as well. Cleaned everything out and re-arranged a few things like lights etc.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know what you guys think about my minor additions.


I really like your monster power supply. Thinking to change my Corsair TX-750 to a 850watt gold or platinum psu in the future.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> I really like your monster power supply. Thinking to change my Corsair TX-750 to a 850watt gold or platinum psu in the future.


Unless you are using dual or up to quad graphics, more power is not necessarily better, not at this stage of the game anyway. Currently both Intel and AMD are working hard at bringing down the power requirements. I spent $500 on my now antiquated 1kW PSU, and when I first got it It was for two 4870x2's in CF mode. Now I only have a single graphics chip, and all my spinning drives (cheatahs and raptors, power hungry hdd's) have been swapped out for SSD's. Not only that, the processors keep lowering their energy consumption as time goes by. I was using something like 750-900 watts but now I am below the 400 watt range thanks to this Xeon and single graphics card.

I'm just saying are you really sure you need more power? Or are you looking for higher quality, because higher quality is always worth it, lol... My old Ultra X3 1kW psu will probably last me forever, or until they change the connector on us again.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My 4 processor socket G34 48 core AMD 6166H does 350,000PPD folding bigadv. That is stock speed, no overclock.
> The bigadv program will be ending at the end of Jan 1015
> It gets around half that folding regular SMP WUs. Stanford is supposed to tweak the PPD for SMP but we will see.
> With ocores and the new crome folding coming out servers still should do ok
> 
> Question for you guys on here.
> Many motherboards today come with two gigabyte network ports built in.
> Why? Why do I need two, connect them both to the modem and get better speed?
> One for the internet one for a local lan or some thing?


Damn that must pump off some serious wattage at full load, you got your own little nuclear power plant?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Question for you guys on here.
> Many motherboards today come with two gigabyte network ports built in.
> Why?


I always thought it was for when your router died, and you had already upgraded your computer you could quickly pull it out of the closet (lol) and put this machine back together and install PFSense (Powerful router software). Now connect one port to the Modem and the other to a network giga Switch (and one of the switch ports to a 1w AP while your at it) and you now have the most powerful dual core overclocked bad-a$$ router and coolest geeky home network you can imagine. lol

That's what I thought it was for...


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Damn that must pump off some serious wattage at full load, you got your own little nuclear power plant?


This is my folding and BOINC crunching farm. With everything going 100% load my meter spins like a top!!!!

Supermicro H8QME-2 quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 8425 6-core cpus,(24 cores) 16gb pc2-800mhz EEC memory EVGA 650w gold PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
Supermicro H8QGi+-F quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 6166HE 12-core cpus (48 cores) 32gb pc3-1333 EEC memory EVGA 850 gold2 PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 with AMD phenom II 1045T 6-core OC to 3.5ghz 8gb Hyper-X-red memory, NZXT 700w gold PSU, 1 EVGA 660Ti gpu. 256gb SSD w7proCreative Recon3d fatality pro sound card, game computer. W7 pro
Asus dual socket, 2 Intel xeon x5650 hexcores 12cores/24threads, 128gb SSD Evga GTX9800 6gb pc3-1333 EEC Kingston ram
Gigabyte 970ud3 AMD PhenomII [email protected] 8gb hyperx red BFG 465GTX few 1tb hd w7pr
Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Xeon X5660 hexcore @4ghz 12gb HYperX EVGA 660Ti, Ceton TV tuner card w7pro Antec 650 gold. 180gb Intel SSD and 1TB WD Black
EVGA X58FTW3 with a x5660 hexcore 8gb 1600 dual channel ram 128gb SSD and a 1tb drive for storage evga 8800GTX UBUNTU 12x OS
Gigabyte P35 ud3 with a Q6600 quad core 128 ssd EVGA 8800gtx
And one large electric bill.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> This is my folding and BOINC crunching farm. With everything going 100% load my meter spins like a top!!!!
> 
> Supermicro H8QME-2 quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 8425 6-core cpus,(24 cores) 16gb pc2-800mhz EEC memory EVGA 650w gold PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
> Supermicro H8QGi+-F quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 6166HE 12-core cpus (48 cores) 32gb pc3-1333 EEC memory EVGA 850 gold2 PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
> Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 with AMD phenom II 1045T 6-core OC to 3.5ghz 8gb Hyper-X-red memory, NZXT 700w gold PSU, 1 EVGA 660Ti gpu. 256gb SSD w7proCreative Recon3d fatality pro sound card, game computer. W7 pro
> Asus dual socket, 2 Intel xeon x5650 hexcores 12cores/24threads, 128gb SSD Evga GTX9800 6gb pc3-1333 EEC Kingston ram
> Gigabyte 970ud3 AMD PhenomII [email protected] 8gb hyperx red BFG 465GTX few 1tb hd w7pr
> Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Xeon X5660 hexcore @4ghz 12gb HYperX EVGA 660Ti, Ceton TV tuner card w7pro Antec 650 gold. 180gb Intel SSD and 1TB WD Black
> EVGA X58FTW3 with a x5660 hexcore 8gb 1600 dual channel ram 128gb SSD and a 1tb drive for storage evga 8800GTX UBUNTU 12x OS
> Gigabyte P35 ud3 with a Q6600 quad core 128 ssd EVGA 8800gtx
> *And one large electric bill.*


You aren't kidding there, lol. Very nice collection.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> This is my folding and BOINC crunching farm. With everything going 100% load my meter spins like a top!!!!
> 
> Supermicro H8QME-2 quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 8425 6-core cpus,(24 cores) 16gb pc2-800mhz EEC memory EVGA 650w gold PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
> Supermicro H8QGi+-F quad socket server with 4 AMD Opterons 6166HE 12-core cpus (48 cores) 32gb pc3-1333 EEC memory EVGA 850 gold2 PSU, on board VC, Ubuntu 12 OS
> Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 with AMD phenom II 1045T 6-core OC to 3.5ghz 8gb Hyper-X-red memory, NZXT 700w gold PSU, 1 EVGA 660Ti gpu. 256gb SSD w7proCreative Recon3d fatality pro sound card, game computer. W7 pro
> Asus dual socket, 2 Intel xeon x5650 hexcores 12cores/24threads, 128gb SSD Evga GTX9800 6gb pc3-1333 EEC Kingston ram
> Gigabyte 970ud3 AMD PhenomII [email protected] 8gb hyperx red BFG 465GTX few 1tb hd w7pr
> Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Xeon X5660 hexcore @4ghz 12gb HYperX EVGA 660Ti, Ceton TV tuner card w7pro Antec 650 gold. 180gb Intel SSD and 1TB WD Black
> EVGA X58FTW3 with a x5660 hexcore 8gb 1600 dual channel ram 128gb SSD and a 1tb drive for storage evga 8800GTX UBUNTU 12x OS
> Gigabyte P35 ud3 with a Q6600 quad core 128 ssd EVGA 8800gtx
> *And one large electric bill.*


ROFL, I bet you can save on heating during winter








Used to turn off the heater in the basement last winter when I folded with my Mac Pro and my 2 dual Xeon HexaCores HP Proliant DL160 G6 & DL160SE G6, I bet the electric bill fit the killer rigs you have







These seem like nice configs to fold on... bet you can get massive 250-300k+ on that 48 cores Opteron monster of yours







that must have been a blast to put together!!!


----------



## bill1024

Thanks guys, I do heat my house in the winter with it all running. I cut way back in the summer time.
I will do a team contest or primegrid challenge for a couple days but that's it. 136 cores crunching away throws off some heat !!

The G34 4P 48c does 350,000 PPD not overclocked. One day I will do the "special bios" and OC it.
The 4P 24c socket F does 175,000 PPD
The Asus dual x5650 does 170,000 PPD too
My 660Ti each do 70,000, roughly, with core 17 Wus.
The others do 10-20,000 PPD.
But I like to use the hex cores for BOINC I find the AMD and Intel do real well crunching.
All out balls to the walls I can do 1,000,000 PPD

Just the new Intel cpu have an extra instruction I wish these xeons had. VTX I think it is off hand. Makes a big difference in prime grid.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Thanks guys, I do heat my house in the winter with it all running. I cut way back in the summer time.
> I will do a team contest or primegrid challenge for a couple days but that's it. 136 cores crunching away throws off some heat !!
> 
> The G34 4P 48c does 350,000 PPD not overclocked. One day I will do the "special bios" and OC it.
> The 4P 24c socket F does 175,000 PPD
> The Asus dual x5650 does 170,000 PPD too
> My 660Ti each do 70,000, roughly, with core 17 Wus.
> The others do 10-20,000 PPD.
> But I like to use the hex cores for BOINC I find the AMD and Intel do real well crunching.
> All out balls to the walls I can do 1,000,000 PPD
> 
> Just the new Intel cpu have an extra instruction I wish these xeons had. VTX I think it is off hand. Makes a big difference in prime grid.


Thats with boinc right? Or maybe you are running some kind of optimized linux client or tweaks you'll have to teach me about


----------



## bill1024

I am not sure what you mean "That's in BOINC"
If you mean folding, that's with all my hardware listed plus two video cards not listed, they are sitting on the bench I only install in the winter. I removed a couple 660Ti, no need for them using power in the summer. I use my computers to get TV in 3 rooms so they are not needed at this time. The cost of cooling the added heat in the summer is too much, the wife has a fit!!!!!
I have a Ceton 4 tuner TV card that uses a cable M card. Watch, record 4 channels at once and it networks TV to the other computers in the bedroom and my kids room. Computers in every room.
Plus I have a gteway 4 core i5 2.5 lap top and a Lenovo Thinkpad dual core laptop. I don't like to use them for folding or prime grid.
WCG is not so bad but still, not worth the ' effort. '

I am running a tweaked Ubuntu from [H] hardforum. The "folding appliance."
It sets a automatic backup and it sets up it's own ram drive to fold on, and it can run on a 8gb thumb drive.
They tweaked the BOINC end of the appliance too
I use hard drives, I found thumb drives lag when using them to do anything but fold. If you set the folding up and never touch it, it's ok.

You can put together a 4P 24 core with 4 8431cpu 16gb ram for 150$ at this point in time.
The board wit the ram is around 100$ and the CPUs are 10$ each !!!!
They come with 4 dual core cpus that you need to flash the bios to the newest bios.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Looking good @Kana-Maru
> . I had dual dual Galaxy 670s at one point. Mine were the GC2 ones though, they used the 680 PCB.


Your pic looks good as well. What are you running now? I couldn't find your rig.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> I really like your monster power supply. Thinking to change my Corsair TX-750 to a 850watt gold or platinum psu in the future.


Thanks. I decided to just buy it and get it out of the way. I was planning on running 7990 Quad [2x7990] at one point. Bitcoin took off and all of the prices were to high. The r9 290x prices spiked as well as high end Nvidia cards. Nvidia cards are always high anyways. Those miners were flooding the market and running the cards dry. I decided that I'll just wait now for the next series. These graphics cards can ask for some silly specs now. They can throw all of the amps they want at me now because I'm ready. My old PSU is still a good one. It was 700w OCz ModExtreme Pro I believe. I still have it somewhere and it was pretty good as well.


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> lol. The X5660 is great to me. It's definitely a work horse and plays games really good at stock settings. Getting them up to 3.8Ghz is pretty easy. 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz is were most users take their X58 Xeons. The GTX 670s are nice as well so if you can find some cheap I'd get a 4GB version they are good. Otherwise, it would be wise to get 700 series card [re-badged 600 series]. The 670 SLI setup handles Watch Dogs + E3 2012 graphic mods\unlocks. I'm really maxing the 2GB limitation though so I'm waiting for the next generation to release. It going to be a tight match between AMD and Nvidia I bet. You can't go wrong with the price of a X58 + Hexa core Xeon vs a X79 price if you include the performance.
> 
> Here is my PC build as well. Cleaned everything out and re-arranged a few things like lights etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know what you guys think about my minor additions.


What do you clean your PC with?


----------



## Kana-Maru

I didn't have to really "clean" anything with liquid other than the window to remove finger prints. The inside of the case was fine and the canned air handled the rest. A lot of the fine dust was underneath the plastic. The fine dust was wiped with some towels and or paper towels. Cleaned the fans as well. I hope it doesn't appear to be dirty







. Some of the pics are low quality.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Your pic looks good as well. What are you running now? I couldn't find your rig.


In my X58 rig (with Xeon E5640) I have a GTX 780 FTW. In my X79 rig I have two R9 270s in CFX.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Very nice. Those should last you for a nice while in the gaming department.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Very nice. Those should last you for a nice while in the gaming department.


Hopefully until big Maxwell comes out, GM210, or whatever it will be. The R9 270s are for gaming/folding, the 780 is strictly for folding right now.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I am not sure what you mean "That's in BOINC"
> If you mean folding, that's with all my hardware listed plus two video cards not listed, they are sitting on the bench I only install in the winter. I removed a couple 660Ti, no need for them using power in the summer. I use my computers to get TV in 3 rooms so they are not needed at this time. The cost of cooling the added heat in the summer is too much, the wife has a fit!!!!!
> I have a Ceton 4 tuner TV card that uses a cable M card. Watch, record 4 channels at once and it networks TV to the other computers in the bedroom and my kids room. Computers in every room.
> Plus I have a gteway 4 core i5 2.5 lap top and a Lenovo Thinkpad dual core laptop. I don't like to use them for folding or prime grid.
> WCG is not so bad but still, not worth the ' effort. '
> 
> I am running a tweaked Ubuntu from [H] hardforum. The "folding appliance."
> It sets a automatic backup and it sets up it's own ram drive to fold on, and it can run on a 8gb thumb drive.
> They tweaked the BOINC end of the appliance too
> I use hard drives, I found thumb drives lag when using them to do anything but fold. If you set the folding up and never touch it, it's ok.
> 
> You can put together a 4P 24 core with 4 8431cpu 16gb ram for 150$ at this point in time.
> The board wit the ram is around 100$ and the CPUs are 10$ each !!!!
> They come with 4 dual core cpus that you need to flash the bios to the newest bios.


Please tell me more about that 150$ investment, I would really like to know where I can find that hardware at that price to build myself my own system. Would you help me please?


----------



## buttface420

i was looking into upgrading to a x5650 because on ebay they are 88 bucks used and they are more powerful than an fx 6350, the only problem is its not economical to do this because a x58 motherboard is just too expensive. im better off getting an fx 8320 and a motherboard.

sucks cause i just got a r9 280x and my cpu e5450 is bottlenecking it hard.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *buttface420*
> 
> i was looking into upgrading to a x5650 because on ebay they are 88 bucks used and they are more powerful than an fx 6350, the only problem is its not economical to do this because a x58 motherboard is just too expensive. im better off getting an fx 8320 and a motherboard.
> 
> sucks cause i just got a r9 280x and my cpu e5450 is bottlenecking it hard.


Just got an MSI X58 board 8+2 phases for 108$ yesterday on eBay, you can find very sweet deals if you take time, ordered a Corsair H110i for 63$ and a Xeon X5650 I made an offer of 75$ for.
Total investment around 240$ + shipping! not expensive at all for a system that will likely clock around 4.4Ghz on 6 cores... its a real good deal


----------



## buttface420

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Just got an MSI X58 board 8+2 phase for 108$ yesterday on eBay, you can find very sweet deals if you take time, ordered a Corsair H110i for 63$ and a Xeon X5650 I made an offer of 75$ for.
> Total investment around 240$ + shipping! not expensive at all for a system that will likely clock around 4.4Ghz on 6 cores... its a real good deal


thats awesome, a x5650 at 4.4 gz is beast, the fact that its 6 core hyper threaded makes it sound even better. even at stock speeds its not much lower than a fx8320 on passmark scores,so im sure at 4ghz or better it scores much higher than a stock 8320.i may have a look around for a x58 lol


----------



## chux

Hi Guys

Need some help

I recently got an x5670 to replace my 920 D0 and I am having trouble overclocking this thing.

Motherboard is ud4p with 4x3 gig ram - latest bios F14q

On my 920 i have been running at bclk 181 for last .. 4-5 years with no issues.

I am able to get this x5670 to bclkc 150 with all stock voltages with
- mem multiplier on x8 and
- uncore at x16
- qpi at x36
- cpu multiplier x22

I cannot seem to get it to run with any bclck higher than 150 at all . Even raising bclkc 1mhz to 151 results in not being able to post.

I have tried everything from increasing voltages on cpu/ram/qpi/vtt/ioh etc - lowering memory mutiplier to x6 and uncore x12 as well as manually setting lose timings on ram.

Anyone have ay ideas?

Incidentally - it seems to have trouble posting on a warm reboot (either control alt delete or windows restart) even at stock clocks. But cold boots are fine


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chux*
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> Need some help
> 
> I recently got an x5670 to replace my 920 D0 and I am having trouble overclocking this thing.
> 
> Motherboard is ud4p with 4x3 gig ram - latest bios F14q
> 
> On my 920 i have been running at bclk 181 for last .. 4-5 years with no issues.
> 
> I am able to get this x5670 to bclkc 150 with all stock voltages with
> - mem multiplier on x8 and
> - uncore at x16
> - qpi at x36
> - cpu multiplier x22
> 
> I cannot seem to get it to run with any bclck higher than 150 at all . Even raising bclkc 1mhz to 151 results in not being able to post.
> 
> I have tried everything from increasing voltages on cpu/ram/qpi/vtt/ioh etc - lowering memory mutiplier to x6 and uncore x12 as well as manually setting lose timings on ram.
> 
> Anyone have ay ideas?
> 
> Incidentally - it seems to have trouble posting on a warm reboot (either control alt delete or windows restart) even at stock clocks. But cold boots are fine


Lower QPI between 30 and 32, at around +0.1 to .15v to QPI voltage... let me know if it help...


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chux*
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> Need some help
> 
> I recently got an x5670 to replace my 920 D0 and I am having trouble overclocking this thing.
> 
> Motherboard is ud4p with 4x3 gig ram - latest bios F14q
> 
> On my 920 i have been running at bclk 181 for last .. 4-5 years with no issues.
> 
> I am able to get this x5670 to bclkc 150 with all stock voltages with
> - mem multiplier on x8 and
> - uncore at x16
> - qpi at x36
> - cpu multiplier x22
> 
> I cannot seem to get it to run with any bclck higher than 150 at all . Even raising bclkc 1mhz to 151 results in not being able to post.
> 
> I have tried everything from increasing voltages on cpu/ram/qpi/vtt/ioh etc - lowering memory mutiplier to x6 and uncore x12 as well as manually setting lose timings on ram.
> 
> Anyone have ay ideas?
> 
> Incidentally - it seems to have trouble posting on a warm reboot (either control alt delete or windows restart) even at stock clocks. But cold boots are fine


Maybe you can show us all the voltages here, so that we can see and comment.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Please tell me more about that 150$ investment, I would really like to know where I can find that hardware at that price to build myself my own system. Would you help me please?


OK here are some links for you.
Hex core cpu 8$ each, need 4
http://www.ebay.com/itm/171339361262?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

Motherboard , ram, 4 dual core cpus you need to flash the bios. and heat sinks.
I use 80mm fans on the heatsinks that come with it.
NOTE: Looks like these are not with heat sinks, you will need 4 socket F sinks and fans.
He says make offer, I would offer 75 or 80 and see if he takes it. Or do a search and see if any other pop up that my have them.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Supermicro-H8QME-2-4-Quad-Socket-Motherboard-4xOpteron-8216-16GB-Memory-4x-PCI-X-/151330814562?pt=COMP_EN_Servers&hash=item233c04fa62

Here is a guide I put together on another forum, it will tell you exactly what you need and where to get it.
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1908970

I would use at least 650 watt min PSU with anything over a 8425HE chips, those are 8431 so 650 to 750 W


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> OK here are some links for you.
> Hex core cpu 8$ each, need 4
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/171339361262?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT
> 
> Motherboard , ram, 4 dual core cpus you need to flash the bios. and heat sinks.
> I use 80mm fans on the heatsinks that come with it.
> NOTE: Looks like these are not with heat sinks, you will need 4 socket F sinks and fans.
> He says make offer, I would offer 75 or 80 and see if he takes it. Or do a search and see if any other pop up that my have them.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Supermicro-H8QME-2-4-Quad-Socket-Motherboard-4xOpteron-8216-16GB-Memory-4x-PCI-X-/151330814562?pt=COMP_EN_Servers&hash=item233c04fa62
> 
> Here is a guide I put together on another forum, it will tell you exactly what you need and where to get it.
> http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1908970
> 
> I would use at least 650 watt min PSU with anything over a 8425HE chips, those are 8431 so 650 to 750 W


Thanks a lot. I can't see the first link as I am in Canada and it just redirect me to the ebay main page.
Could you tell me what it is?
Thanks!!!


----------



## bill1024

Search for AMD 8431 cpu, there are some for 8$ each. That is the best price I have ever seen.
The other link is for H8QME-2 motherboard with 4 dual core cpus and 16gb 8x2 pc2-677 memory.

In that guide there are instructions to flash the bios.
It is tricky SM forgot to add a small detail in their instructions and theirs will not flash and give an error.


----------



## brootalperry

How well does this CPU overclock on air? Specifically with the Hyper 212 EVO?
Would 4.5Ghz be doable with hyperthreading?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Hopefully until big Maxwell comes out, GM210, or whatever it will be. The R9 270s are for gaming/folding, the 780 is strictly for folding right now.


I see you have a lot of folding going now. I'm looking forward to Maxwell and AMD has been stepping their game up consistently. Hopefully cards will get more affordable since AMD is under cutting Nvidia and the benchmark web sites are recommending AMD more and more due to the price per performance.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> How well does this CPU overclock on air? Specifically with the Hyper 212 EVO?
> Would 4.5Ghz be doable with hyperthreading?


Anything is possible with low ambient temps. I wouldn't be able to tell you since I haven't used my Hyper 212 [no EVO] since I've installed my Antec Kuler 620 many years ago. I can tell you that I successfully overclocked my i7-960 to 4.2Ghz with really good temps under 100% load. I also had a decent ambient temp as well. I'm sure the hyper can handle a 32nm easily and those extra cores will definitely add some heat. It's been awhile since I've used the Hyper 212. Shooting for anything higher than 4.2Ghz will probably require water cooling to maintain the overclock and reasonable temps. That's is my opinion.


----------



## brootalperry

Thanks for the input. Every little bit helps. I'll have to shop around for a good water cooler and a motherboard for this chip.
The latter is a little difficult seeing as most of them on ebay are pretty expensive. Hopefully I'll have a little luck on my side.

Anyway you've completely convinced to go for this CPU. I was going to get an i5 3570K, but this seems to be the better choice for a good lasting upgrade.

Also would a single GTX 760 Superclocked be a bit of a bottleneck for this CPU at 4.5 Ghz?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Hey man just pick up a X5650 for like $80. It's exactly the same as the X5660, but with a missing multiplier. [X5660 = 24x - X5650 23x]. Other than that the two are exactly the same. X5660 cost much more and I'm hoping my review has nothing to do with it.

The X5660 - X5650 will manhandle that GTX 760 Super OC'd at STOCK SPEEDS w/ DDR3-1600. My X5650 man handled the two GTX 670s 2-Way SLI and Battlefield 3 running @ 2560 x 1600p + Ultra Settings \ 100% maxed. I still got 73fps easy. If you need a little more you can should hit 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz fairly easy.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Question for you guys on here.
> Many motherboards today come with two gigabyte network ports built in.
> Why? Why do I need two, connect them both to the modem and get better speed?
> One for the internet one for a local lan or some thing?


For non server OS's the two ports can be used for bridging (i.e. the OS sees both NICs as one doubling your theoretical bandwidth). I always do this along with bridging my WiFi adapter as well for whatever system is serving as my server







It is a ver "basic" version of Teaming without the throttling/stability functions like you get in server OS's.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

I subbed to this thread a while back, and was was drooling over the prospect of getting a hex core! So I just bought a giga ex58-ud3r for $75 shipped, a p6t deluxe combo with 6gb of ram, a 920, and about to pick up an L5639 for $80 shipped!

I'm stoked! I am making the plunge into x58! And I plan on rocking this setup for a long time.

Hoping to get some help to extract the most out of these chips! I've only ever had one go at BCLK overclclocking.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I subbed to this thread a while back, and was was drooling over the prospect of getting a hex core! So I just bought a giga ex58-ud3r for $75 shipped, a p6t deluxe combo with 6gb of ram, a 920, and about to pick up an L5639 for $80 shipped!
> 
> I'm stoked! I am making the plunge into x58! And I plan on rocking this setup for a long time.
> 
> Hoping to get some help to extract the most out of these chips! I've only ever had one go at BCLK overclclocking.


Very nice price on the Gigabyte board. I loved the L5639 and it great, but it's limited due to it's extremely low TDP and power usage. Unless you NEED a really low power CPU get the *X5650*! They are only $80 - $100. Usually around $85-$90. You'll thank me later. They also have a higher multiplier - x23. Most users can hit 4.2Ghz easily with the X5650. Hitting 4.1Ghz with the L5639 is a challenge due to it's low multiplier. I also wrote a review on the L5639 and it's great CPU and you can't go wrong with it. The X5650 has now flooded the market and they are the best bang for you buck on X58 platform.


----------



## anubis1127

Nice price on that board. I picked one up a few months back and paid $105 or something for it.

Its been solid for me, although I haven't done extremely high OCs, been running a solid 4.0ghz on my e5640 Xeon though.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Very nice price on the Gigabyte board. I loved the L5639 and it great, but it's limited due to it's extremely low TDP and power usage. Unless you NEED a really low power CPU get the *X5650*! They are only $80 - $100. Usually around $85-$90. You'll thank me later. They also have a higher multiplier - x23. Most users can hit 4.2Ghz easily with the X5650. Hitting 4.1Ghz with the L5639 is a challenge due to it's low multiplier. I also wrote a review on the L5639 and it's great CPU and you can't go wrong with it. The X5650 has now flooded the market and they are the best bang for you buck on X58 platform.


I know









I just can't find an eBay seller to ship one to an APO address!!

Also I have a hard limit on my budget of $80, so if you can find me an x5650 or 60 for $80 shipped and willing to go to APO then I'll be all over that!

I haven't bought the L5639 yet so if you could find one soon let me know!!!!


----------



## bill1024

I was told that the Gigabyte boards have to be ver.2 to be able to use a Xeon.
Is that true, does anyone here have a Xeon in a ver.1.xx board?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I was told that the Gigabyte boards have to be ver.2 to be able to use a Xeon.
> Is that true, does anyone here have a Xeon in a ver.1.xx board?


Mine is the 2nd rev, not sure.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I was told that the Gigabyte boards have to be ver.2 to be able to use a Xeon.
> Is that true, does anyone here have a Xeon in a ver.1.xx board?


Im pretty sure that I've seen people on other forums with rev 1 boards with them in..

It makes sense since the website specifically says it supports 32nm CPUs and has the 990x on the compatible CPU list!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

By the way, can of you guys find me an eBay seller who will sell me one for $80-85 shipped AND ships to APO?

I messaged those guys and they never responded! (I hate the stupid fleabay)


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Im pretty sure that I've seen people on other forums with rev 1 boards with them in..
> 
> It makes sense since the website specifically says it supports 32nm CPUs and has the 990x on the compatible CPU list!


I think it has to do with the 2nd QPI link that xeons have.
Like the EVGA x58 board only the X58 FTW3, SLI3 and claasified3 support Xeon natively with out a hard mod.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Hey man just pick up a X5650 for like $80. It's exactly the same as the X5660, but with a missing multiplier. [X5660 = 24x - X5650 23x]. Other than that the two are exactly the same. X5660 cost much more and I'm hoping my review has nothing to do with it.
> 
> The X5660 - X5650 will manhandle that GTX 760 Super OC'd at STOCK SPEEDS w/ DDR3-1600. My X5650 man handled the two GTX 670s 2-Way SLI and Battlefield 3 running @ 2560 x 1600p + Ultra Settings \ 100% maxed. I still got 73fps easy. If you need a little more you can should hit 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz fairly easy.


Yes the X5650 is what I'll be going for. I'll also (hopefully if no one buys it first) get an ASRock x58 Extreme motherboard for it as well as an H60 water cooler.
I'm hoping I'll be able to hit 4.5GHz at least just so I can feel accomplished


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I think it has to do with the 2nd QPI link that xeons have.
> Like the EVGA x58 board only the X58 FTW3, SLI3 and claasified3 support Xeon natively with out a hard mod.


This is where I saw it!
Some rev 1 giga boards listed (hopefully mine works I just bought a rev1 board) , idk if the newer BIOS fixed these issues? Hopefully someone can clarify this!
http://hardforum.com/archive/index.php/t-1547036.html


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> This is where I saw it!
> Some rev 1 giga boards listed (hopefully mine works I just bought a rev1 board) , idk if the newer BIOS fixed these issues? Hopefully someone can clarify this!
> http://hardforum.com/archive/index.php/t-1547036.html


They were using a L5640 cpu and I looked that up and it is a multi processor hexcore CPU
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20L5640%20-%20AT80614005133AB%20%28BX80614L5640%29.html

Those guys over at H are pretty sharp so I have to think it is a go.
Maybe someone will chime in who has a x5650 in one of those rev.1 boards to be sure


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> They were using a L5640 cpu and I looked that up and it is a multi processor hexcore CPU
> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20L5640%20-%20AT80614005133AB%20%28BX80614L5640%29.html
> 
> Those guys over at H are pretty sharp so I have to think it is a go.
> Maybe someone will chime in who has a x5650 in one of those rev.1 boards to be sure


That's what I was thinking too..

Generally how far can you take them on air? What's the max temps?
(I'm a complete and total noob when it comes to overclocking on x58)


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Also what's the best stepping for the x5650? I'm about to order one!


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Also what's the best stepping for the x5650? I'm about to order one!


B1.


----------



## brootalperry

I have a question that hopefully someone can answer...

Which board would be best to overclock the x5650/5660?
Asus Rampage III Extreme?
ASRock x58 Extreme?
EVGA X58 FTW3?
MSI X58A-GD65?
or I guess last and hard to find Asus Sabertooth x58?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I have a question that hopefully someone can answer...
> 
> Which board would be best to overclock the x5650/5660?
> Asus Rampage III Extreme?
> ASRock x58 Extreme?
> EVGA X58 FTW3?
> MSI X58A-GD65?
> or I guess last and hard to find Asus Sabertooth x58?


Rampage III Extreme.

Second best would be the Saberkitty.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Rampage III Extreme.
> Second best would be the Saberkitty.


Thanks for the speedy reply. I should be able to get one from Ebay, but just in case I can't find either of those top 2, which do you think would be a third best option?


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Thanks for the speedy reply. I should be able to get one from Ebay, but just in case I can't find either of those top 2, which do you think would be a third best option?


Probably the EVGA board, x58 was the last time EVGA made good boards. Just make sure it can support Xeons, I forget which ones don't, but I think a couple of the earlier EVGA x58 boards did not.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Rampage III Extreme.
> Second best would be the Saberkitty.


Second best? HA! You take back that kitty elsewhere







.....








That Sabertooth can take a beating







and still boot with no problems.


----------



## brootalperry

Thanks for answering my questions









I just have 1 more I think...and that is do you guys think a 650 watt PSU be good enough for this chip at 4.0-4.5 Ghz?


----------



## Kana-Maru

500watts is the minimum for the GPU you want to get. I think 650 will be fine.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Second best? HA! You take back that kitty elsewhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That Sabertooth can take a beating
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and still boot with no problems.


Heh, how bout a close second? RIIIE is still better.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Heh, how bout a close second? RIIIE is still better.


Nope. Face to face the Sabertooth TUF [X58] is better. To be perfectly honest the Sabertooth is only a little better. They usually go neck and neck from most test and benchmarks I've seen. Don't let that RoG stuff go to the brain. Is your board military-standard certified? No because RIIIE can't cut it.


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nope. Face to face the Sabertooth TUF series is better. To be perfectly honest the Sabertooth is only a little better. They usually go neck and neck from most test and benchmarks I've seen. Don't let that RoG stuff go to the brain. Is your board military-standard certified? No because RIIIE can't cut it.


Oh I don't have either board, don't let that armor marketing jargon to go your brain.  (I hope you can sense the kidding around nature of my post)

I have a lowly x58a-ud3r board.


----------



## EvilMonk

I got an MSI X58 board, although I can't seem to find the X5650 in the list of validated CPUs for that board :s


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nah I'm only joking. I was hoping you could pickup on my humor. Text have no tone. Don't even get me started on Gigabyte! Nah it's doesn't matter since Intel purposely limited the X58 platform. Instead of coming out with a revision they went full 2011 on us. Which as you can see from my first post is roughly 10% faster from a Hexa core perspective







Otherwise we would be neck and neck with X79 users.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I got an MSI X58 board, although I can't seem to find the X5650 in the list of validated CPUs for that board :s


...and you probably won't since the Xeon were mainly for servers. Not only that, but I believe your board released before the X5650 was launched. So it won't be there on a lot of manufactures CPU list for that reason. Well unless they've updated their CPU list which most companies didn't. The marketing was the big bad 970 -980[x] - 990[x] for the consumer market. I think it's safe to say that if your board supports a Hexa core i7-970 and above you'll be fine. Asus doesn't even label the Hexa core by name. It just basically says the BIOS will allow 6 core processors or something along those lines.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Don't even get me started on Gigabyte!


What do you mean by that? I happen to like my board. Over 6 years old and still a tank. Speaking of which, it runs a X5670 perfectly on the latest BIOS. That's a first gen board, so I see no reason for the later ones not to.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nah I'm only joking. I was hoping you could pickup on my humor. Text have no tone. Don't even get me started on Gigabyte! Nah it's doesn't matter since Intel purposely limited the X58 platform. Instead of coming out with a revision they went full 2011 on us. Which as you can see from my first post is roughly 10% faster from a Hexa core perspective
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise we would be neck and neck with X79 users.
> ...and you probably won't since the Xeon were mainly for servers. Not only that, but I believe your board released before the X5650 was launched. So it won't be there on a lot of manufactures CPU list for that reason. Well unless they've updated their CPU list which most companies didn't. The marketing was the big bad 970 -980[x] - 990[x] for the consumer market. I think it's safe to say that if your board supports a Hexa core i7-970 and above you'll be fine. Asus doesn't even label the Hexa core by name. It just basically says the BIOS will allow 6 core processors or something along those lines.


I can find it on eVGA's X58 SLI3 processor compatibility chart, I think most of the manufacturers didn't update their list with time...


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Heh, how bout a close second? RIIIE is still better.


You guys have it all wrong... The x58 classy 1st gen 760 is the best







. I don't think many people have abused a board like I have lol. Still a beast.







I did have to do the hard mod for the hex core though


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> You guys have it all wrong... The x58 classy 1st gen is the best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I don't think many people have abused a board like I have lol. Still a beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did have to do the hard mod for the hex core though


That wasn't a choice.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I can find it on eVGA's X58 SLI3 processor compatibility chart, I think most of the manufacturers didn't update their list with time...


This is from the EVGA cpu list for the x58 chipset

* Westmere

Xeon X5690 - 3.46 GHz
Xeon X5680 - 3.33 GHz
Xeon X5677 - 3.46 GHz
Xeon X5670 - 2.93 GHz
Xeon X5667 - 3.06 GHz
Xeon X5660 - 2.80 GHz
Xeon X5650 - 2.66 GHz
Xeon L5640 - 2.27 GHz
Xeon L5630 - 2.13 GHz
Xeon E5649 - 2.53 GHz
Xeon E5645 - 2.40 GHz
Xeon E5640 - 2.67 GHz
Xeon E5630 - 2.53 GHz
Xeon E5620 - 2.40 GHz
Xeon E5607 - 2.27 GHz
Xeon E5606 - 2.13 GHz
Xeon E5603 - 1.60 GHz

* Westmere processors are only supported natively on the X58 SLI3, FTW3, and Classified3 Models. A product modification may be needed for older models.
** Latest BIOS update is necessary to run


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> What do you mean by that? I happen to like my board. Over 6 years old and still a tank. Speaking of which, it runs a X5670 perfectly on the latest BIOS. That's a first gen board, so I see no reason for the later ones not to.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> You guys have it all wrong... The x58 classy 1st gen is the best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I don't think many people have abused a board like I have lol. Still a beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did have to do the hard mod for the hex core though


Those sound like fighting words guys
















@ kpforce....I have abused my board like you have. It was making all kinds of noise. Thought I had killed my PC at one point, but nope. Booted back up some pretty high voltages all around. Even if my MB can't run the tight timings it still boots up no matter what. I just throw everything at it to see what will happen. I do love the 5 year warranty though. Asus only needs the S/N. No questions asked if you are a computer tech. Ship and repair or a replacement if you choose to go that route. Unless something major happen to my board I don't want to get rid of it for anything. I can pretty much deal with or fix anything minor.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> That wasn't a choice.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Those sound like fighting words guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ kpforce....I have abused my board like you have. It was making all kinds of noise. Thought I had killed my PC at one point, but nope. Booted back up some pretty high voltages all around. Even if my MB can't run the tight timings it still boots up no matter what. I just throw everything at it to see what will happen. I do love the 5 year warranty though. Asus only needs the S/N. No questions asked if you are a computer tech. Ship and repair or a replacement if you choose to go that route. Unless something major happen to my board I don't want to get rid of it for anything. I can pretty much deal with or fix anything minor.


I fixed my post.... i don't know why I said first gen x58 Classy lol... I should have put x58 Classy 760. I put water blocks on my board because I just couldn't justify getting rid of it lol. A 5 year warranty would be nice.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

BAM! Just ordered one for $85 shipped by computer-sales, he was the only one who would ship to APO!

Can't wait to overclock this bad boy! So can I assume its fairly easy to get to 4+ on air?

I'll be using either an ex58-ud3r or a p6t deluxe v1


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> BAM! Just ordered one for $85 shipped by computer-sales, he was the only one who would ship to APO!
> 
> Can't wait to overclock this bad boy! So can I assume its fairly easy to get to 4+ on air?
> 
> I'll be using either an ex58-ud3r or a p6t deluxe v1


On air I can't say but on water they overclock quite well.
If your Air cooling is performant enough you can probably get some sweet performances out of it!!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> On air I can't say but on water they overclock quite well.
> If your Air cooling is performant enough you can probably get some sweet performances out of it!!


When My water cooling junk that I got right before I moved, so once I get settled this is gonna go under water!

What's the temps you guys normally keep them at?

I honestly don't mind running it with a small OC (sheesh I'm only currently using bulldozer at 4ghz) haha...

BTW is there an owners club for hex core Xeons? I know there's a Xeon owner club...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> When My water cooling junk that I got right before I moved, so once I get settled this is gonna go under water!
> 
> What's the temps you guys normally keep them at?
> 
> I honestly don't mind running it with a small OC (sheesh I'm only currently using bulldozer at 4ghz) haha...
> 
> BTW is there an owners club for hex core Xeons? I know there's a Xeon owner club...


I'm at 28-30 at idle and I max out at 48 under load with a Corsair H100 with 4 fans connected to its fan regulator module in a Antec P280 XL-ATX case with my fans in a 2 push / 2 pull config. I'll get a new Corsair H110i next week or so for my new build with an MSI X58 and another X5650 that will be inside a Antec 300 hundred mid tower, probably will get more warm than my current setup even if it will have a more powerful cooling... Time will tell... You got yourself a sweet setup as well, let us know how it goes once you put it together!!

Theres the X58 Xeon club, you can find the link in my signature... we're a bunch of fun guys... come join us!


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> When My water cooling junk that I got right before I moved, so once I get settled this is gonna go under water!
> 
> What's the temps you guys normally keep them at?
> 
> I honestly don't mind running it with a small OC (sheesh I'm only currently using bulldozer at 4ghz) haha...
> 
> BTW is there an owners club for hex core Xeons? I know there's a Xeon owner club...


TJMax is 96*C, but I wouldn't want to push that high normally. I like to keep it under 80* full load.

You should be able to get to 4 GHz on air if you have a decent cooler.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> When My water cooling junk that I got right before I moved, so once I get settled this is gonna go under water!
> 
> What's the temps you guys normally keep them at?
> 
> I honestly don't mind running it with a small OC (sheesh I'm only currently using bulldozer at 4ghz) haha...
> 
> BTW is there an owners club for hex core Xeons? I know there's a Xeon owner club...


My x5650 was running on 4.2, but the temperature worried me, so now I am running it at 4.0.
I am using air cooler though, Thermalright venomous-x in push-pull, fans are Gentle Typhoon gt1850, case is Fractal Design R4.
Idle around 37C-45C, and room temperature is 30C. When running full load on all 6 cores with HT on (prime95) it can goes as high as 70C-76C. It never go beyond 80C, i would consider this a good OC, and the venomous-x serve me well.


----------



## brootalperry

[redacted]

I asked a question but immediately got an answer afterwards xD sorry


----------



## Kana-Maru

Posting my Rig pics here and updated the first page as well:

http://postimg.org/image/mquf7xn6t/full/

http://postimg.org/image/wuejqcejp/full/

http://postimg.org/image/sdqs5epph/full/

http://postimg.org/image/ix0yys5ut/full/

http://postimg.org/image/kfwd3rcf9/full/

http://postimg.org/image/929tsk1wl/full/

http://postimg.org/image/jl9thq4kl/full/

http://postimg.org/image/q1is7td45/full/

http://postimg.org/image/d3mbkh4th/full/

http://postimg.org/image/3o6g79msl/full/

http://postimg.org/image/aoug01okl/full/

http://postimg.org/image/t5ouqv4it/full/

http://postimg.org/image/427s6v6w5/full/

http://postimg.org/image/yxoyy0ecl/full/

http://postimg.org/image/4k2xmpwh1/full/

http://postimg.org/image/5l7rpl2ud/full/


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Posting my Rig pics here and updated the first page as well:
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2071141/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Posting my Rig pics here and updated the first page as well:
> 
> http://postimg.org/image/t5ouqv4it/full/
> 
> [/url]


Is that the legendary crazy high rpm Delta fan?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Is that the legendary crazy high rpm Delta fan?


It must be something along those lines, look at the exaggerated angle on them blades, whoa man that must push some extreme amounts of air, and noise. A fan like that would drive me to insanity though, lol...


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> It must be something along those lines, look at the exaggerated angle on them blades, whoa man that must push some extreme amounts of air, and noise. A fan like that would drive me to insanity though, lol...


I have two 180 CFM fans in my x58 rig..... @ 3500 RPM they are ******ed.... I can't imagine what 250+ CFM @ 5000 RPM would sound like lol. Probably louder than all 80 of the physical servers in my data center being powered on simultaneously haha


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I have two 180 CFM fans in my x58 rig..... @ 3500 RPM they are ******ed.... I can't imagine what 250+ CFM @ 5000 RPM would sound like lol. Probably louder than all 80 of the physical servers in my data center being powered on simultaneously haha


Yes, I bet right along with you too. I used to have fans like that in my comps but that was right around the turn of the Century though. I dove into water cooling back when Koolance introduced their first fully cooled computer case system back in 2000 or so. I had two of their systems back when they were not cool (pun not intended) and all the DIY'ers looked down on them for trying to mainstream something that could be done even better by a DIY'er. All the fans whining literally started making my brain always hear fan whine everywhere I went. I finally broke down and started building my own water cooled systems and searching for the quietest fans possible. lol, sanity returned....


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Is that the legendary crazy high rpm Delta fan?


Delta FFB1212EHE 120x38mm is 190 cfm
Delta FFB1212VHE 120x38mm is 151.9 cfm
Delta FFB1212EH-F00 120 x 25mm is 150.3 cfm

the only other Delta FFB is a 40mm case fan..?


----------



## kpforce1

Here is the one I was thinking of


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Is that the legendary crazy high rpm Delta fan?


Yes sir they are. I have the 4,000RPM \ 150.33 CFM Delta. It's much quieter than my Scythe Gentle Typhoon 5400rpm fans at low speeds. I'm actually thinking about selling off the Gentle Typhoons [misleading name] and getting a few 253 CFM Delta's. Just a thought right now since my temps are pretty good. I had them on a push\pull setup for my rad. Since my rad was so small I figured one would be fine. I also had to tackle the northbridge "heat" issue and my top graphic card heat issue.

Their isn't a lot of space between my GPUs. My NB was usually around 61c - 65c. It wasn't the "worst", but I knew it could be much better. I put the delta fan inside of my case and my temps dropped to 49c-52c with low RPMs. Even on a warm day in the room around 27c ambient temp. I can deal with that. My top GPU can now run cooler than the bottom GPU O_O. I never thought I'd see that happen lol. Mission Accomplished.

My fan controller has a PWM connection. I have yet to use it with my motherboard. I think I'm going to test it out on a few fans to see how well the fan controller reacts under a load and Idle.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Here is the one I was thinking of


Damn bud that look serious as hell for a 120mm fan







what is that? d-day of the cooling?!?








You're looking for a leaf blower or what?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes sir they are. I have the 4,000RPM \ 150.33 CFM Delta. It's much quieter than my Scythe Gentle Typhoon 5400rpm fans at low speeds. I'm actually thinking about selling off the Gentle Typhoons [misleading name] and getting a few 253 CFM Delta's. Just a thought right now since my temps are pretty good. I had them on a push\pull setup for my rad. Since my rad was so small I figured one would be fine. I also had to tackle the northbridge "heat" issue and my top graphic card heat issue.
> 
> Their isn't a lot of space between my GPUs. My NB was usually around 61c - 65c. It wasn't the "worst", but I knew it could be much better. I put the delta fan inside of my case and my temps dropped to 49c-52c with low RPMs. Even on a warm day in the room around 27c ambient temp. I can deal with that. My top GPU can now run cooler than the bottom GPU O_O. I never thought I'd see that happen lol. Mission Accomplished.
> 
> My fan controller has a PWM connection. I have yet to use it with my motherboard. I think I'm going to test it out on a few fans to see how well the fan controller reacts under a load and Idle.


As I saw in last weekend episode of halt and catch fire








1. Just buy a fish tank
2. Fill it with thermal absorbant oil
3.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> My x5650 was running on 4.2, but the temperature worried me, so now I am running it at 4.0.
> I am using air cooler though, Thermalright venomous-x in push-pull, fans are Gentle Typhoon gt1850, case is Fractal Design R4.
> Idle around 37C-45C, and room temperature is 30C. When running full load on all 6 cores with HT on (prime95) it can goes as high as 70C-76C. It never go beyond 80C, i would consider this a good OC, and the venomous-x serve me well.


Sweet! I'm probably going to be very conservative, I also am gonna use a raijintek them is that I picked up for cheap, its a bit better than a 212 evo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> TJMax is 96*C, but I wouldn't want to push that high normally. I like to keep it under 80* full load.
> 
> You should be able to get to 4 GHz on air if you have a decent cooler.


I'll be aiming for around 4.2 or 1.25v or whatever comes first.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm at 28-30 at idle and I max out at 48 under load with a Corsair H100 with 4 fans connected to its fan regulator module in a Antec P280 XL-ATX case with my fans in a 2 push / 2 pull config. I'll get a new Corsair H110i next week or so for my new build with an MSI X58 and another X5650 that will be inside a Antec 300 hundred mid tower, probably will get more warm than my current setup even if it will have a more powerful cooling... Time will tell... You got yourself a sweet setup as well, let us know how it goes once you put it together!!
> 
> Theres the X58 Xeon club, you can find the link in my signature... we're a bunch of fun guys... come join us!


Yeah! Once I get internet in my new house, and have all my house all settled!

Im really stoked to over clock this chip! Hopefully I don't get scammed with the x5650 I just ordered!
I'll be turning it into a dual boot ----intosh.

I'll be sticking it in my trusty C70, I'm thinking I should put a fan on the side panel to keep the chipset cool, anyone have thoughts on this?

I do want to find a use for my bulldozer though, people give it a lot of crap, but I got mine one the cheap with a free AIO (OEM asetek equivalent to the h50). I wanted to tale it further than the 4ghz I have now but just don't have the cooling.

Dang. I need to find a job here.
Off topic: I wanna try to get a job in IT but have no cets or anything, I do have experience in laying low voltage and cat5 for a security co. What kind of stuff would get me in the door?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Also! If the 990x and the other i7 hex cores are on the CPU compatibility list is it safe to assume the Xeon hex would also be compatible?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Sweet! I'm probably going to be very conservative, I also am gonna use a raijintek them is that I picked up for cheap, its a bit better than a 212 evo
> I'll be aiming for around 4.2 or 1.25v or whatever comes first.
> Yeah! Once I get internet in my new house, and have all my house all settled!
> 
> Im really stoked to over clock this chip! Hopefully I don't get scammed with the x5650 I just ordered!
> I'll be turning it into a dual boot ----intosh.
> 
> I'll be sticking it in my trusty C70, I'm thinking I should put a fan on the side panel to keep the chipset cool, anyone have thoughts on this?
> 
> I do want to find a use for my bulldozer though, people give it a lot of crap, but I got mine one the cheap with a free AIO (OEM asetek equivalent to the h50). I wanted to tale it further than the 4ghz I have now but just don't have the cooling.
> 
> Dang. I need to find a job here.
> Off topic: I wanna try to get a job in IT but have no cets or anything, I do have experience in laying low voltage and cat5 for a security co. What kind of stuff would get me in the door?


Well you could probably find something in Telecomms, like start with more basic cabling / switches install and gateway configs plus IP phones cabling... that would get you in and you could gather experience left and right on the different contracts you get!!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Well you could probably find something in Telecomms, like start with more basic cabling / switches install and gateway configs plus IP phones cabling... that would get you in and you could gather experience left and right on the different contracts you get!!


I do want to change my major into something more business and computer oriented.

The only it jobs I can get are on base here in Germany being a dependent. I think they'll have jobs in IT but besides the high paying GS level or contracted stuff, Im pretty sure its stuff like fixing POS machines and stuff...

Do certs help with getting hired in entry level stuff?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I do want to change my major into something more business and computer oriented.
> 
> The only it jobs I can get are on base here in Germany being a dependent. I think they'll have jobs in IT but besides the high paying GS level or contracted stuff, Im pretty sure its stuff like fixing POS machines and stuff...
> 
> Do certs help with getting hired in entry level stuff?


Well you never know what assignments you'll get. Take me for exemple... After I finished school I was working for a year in a half as an IBM accounts employee in software & dev here in Montreal for 2 banking account (National Bank of Canada and National Bank Financial) then one day they needed a Q&A supervisor (I was trained for that in school, my first degree was in IT Programming and Coordinated efforts) so I applied and got switched on the account of the Department of National Defense (DND)... Then I got to play on lots of Tivoli and deployment platforms for Windows... Microsoft SMS and GPOs... Then slowly I got positions related to IT administration AKA Sys Admin... My second degree. Now I'm slowly going toward Management of staff and Accounts relations... hey its the third degree I'm currently as a license in IT management... Life is really well made and as long as you show the interest you have toward the different parts of your job the higher management will spot your skills and interests (They are trained for that) and you will only rise all the way to higher positions in the fields you feel the best affinities with!!!

And yes certs help a lot.
Got CCNA CCNP MCSE Windows Server and Exchange + Active Directory. Then I got classes on VMware ESXi / vSphere and I'm studying to take the MCITP versions of Windows Server 2012 R2 + Active Directory and Exchange 2013.
They help a lot to start bud!!!


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Sweet! I'm probably going to be very conservative, I also am gonna use a raijintek them is that I picked up for cheap, its a bit better than a 212 evo
> I'll be aiming for around 4.2 or 1.25v or whatever comes first.
> Yeah! Once I get internet in my new house, and have all my house all settled!
> 
> Im really stoked to over clock this chip! Hopefully I don't get scammed with the x5650 I just ordered!
> I'll be turning it into a dual boot ----intosh.
> 
> I'll be sticking it in my trusty C70, I'm thinking I should put a fan on the side panel to keep the chipset cool, anyone have thoughts on this?
> 
> I do want to find a use for my bulldozer though, people give it a lot of crap, but I got mine one the cheap with a free AIO (OEM asetek equivalent to the h50). I wanted to tale it further than the 4ghz I have now but just don't have the cooling.
> 
> Dang. I need to find a job here.
> Off topic: I wanna try to get a job in IT but have no cets or anything, I do have experience in laying low voltage and cat5 for a security co. What kind of stuff would get me in the door?


Let me know if you need help with the X-intosh part.
I've been a power user of Macs since I was a kid and had every generation of powermacs and mac pros since 2003. Plus did my fare share of X-intosh and kext tweaking to achieve best performance / compatibility on different laptop and desktops. I might be able to give you some good help!


----------



## bill1024

Monk, did you take a look at those 4P server boards?
I just picked up 4 AMD 6174 for a real good price. I thought I had 6166HE,, but they are 6164HE at 1.7ghz
The 6174 are 2.2ghz, that's 500mhz more. Not a lot on its own but multiply that by 48 cores and it add up.
I'll sell off the 12 core 6164He
My folding should show a good jump up from the 350,000PPD it can do now.

PS: Thanks for the rep.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Monk, did you take a look at those 4P server boards?
> I just picked up 4 AMD 6174 for a real good price. I thought I had 6166HE,, but they are 6164HE at 1.7ghz
> The 6174 are 2.2ghz, that's 500mhz more. Not a lot on its own but multiply that by 48 cores and it add up.
> I'll sell off the 12 core 6164He
> My folding should show a good jump up from the 350,000PPD it can do now.
> 
> PS: Thanks for the rep.


Yeah I took a look and have been searching for a server case that will fit that proprietary size server board without luck.
Any idea where I could find that?
Just ordered a HP Proliant DL385 G5p with 2 6 cores Opterons 2435 2.6Ghz & 32Gb of DDR2 800 Registered and a SmartArray P410 1Gb BBWC raid card with 8x146Gb 10k SAS2 for like 400$ but I would really want to get my hands on that Supermicro board and those 4 hexacores CPU. You know where I can find a case for that?

My pleasure for the rep buddy, it was well deserved!!!
Thanks!


----------



## bill1024

I just have mine on 1 in blocks on a wood board, no case for either SM MB board. But I did find this thread and the case came out nice.
http://forums.evga.com/Afterburners-Double-DipDip-4P-Adventure-m1903601.aspx


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I just have mine on 1 in blocks on a wood board, no case for either SM MB board. But I did find this thread and the case came out nice.
> http://forums.evga.com/Afterburners-Double-DipDip-4P-Adventure-m1903601.aspx


I'll start looking into it right away!!! Thanks a lot bud!!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Let me know if you need help with the X-intosh part.
> I've been a power user of Macs since I was a kid and had every generation of powermacs and mac pros since 2003. Plus did my fare share of X-intosh and kext tweaking to achieve best performance / compatibility on different laptop and desktops. I might be able to give you some good help!


I really appreciate your help!
I might take you up on that cause I failed the last time I tried.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Also are there any truth to this statement?

"There is no advantage to Gulftown/Westmere over Piledriver. Not in single threaded or multi-threaded workloads. The FX-6300 can match or beat any quad core westmere in 90% of workloads, and the FX-8350 is about an even draw with a hex core westmere (varies by workload, but they are more similar than different)."


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Also are there any truth to this statement?
> 
> "There is no advantage to Gulftown/Westmere over Piledriver. Not in single threaded or multi-threaded workloads. The FX-6300 can match or beat any quad core westmere in 90% of workloads, and the FX-8350 is about an even draw with a hex core westmere (varies by workload, but they are more similar than different)."


As far as I know thats completely false.
I owned an 8350 on a gigabyte 990fx ud3 and it wasn't faster than my Westmere-EP system even in productivity tasks. I had a chance to get rid of it because I have a friend who wanted a FX 8 cores no matter what... I just traded it to him for an nVidia shield and cash.
I have seen benchmarks with single and multiple thread comparisons between the 8150 (which is a little slower than 8350) & 8350 compared to i7-2600k and i7-980 and it wasn't ahead in the single threaded benchmarks you can also just see that in any aida64 benchmarks, a Westmere-EP is almost always ahead of the 8150-8350 results...
I think AMD is dead with the FX serie CPUs, just look at the FX-9590... It needs a dedicated AC to cool off, were talking about a 220w CPU!!! 220W??? *** I didn't even think that beside IBM Power7+ CPUs it was possible to reach such high TDPs... and it is still way behind intel recent CPUs in benchmarks... at 5Ghz!!!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> As far as I know thats completely false.
> I owned an 8350 on a gigabyte 990fx ud3 and it wasnt faster than my westmere-ep system even in productivity tasks.
> I have seen benchmarks with single thread comparisons between the 8150 (which is a little slower than 8350) and compoared to i7-2600k and i7-980 and it wasnt ahead in the single threaded benchmarks you can also just see that in any aida64 benchmarks, a westmere-ep is almost always ahead of the 8150-8350 results...


That's what i thought too, some guy was saying that when I suggested doing an x58 upgrade over a 6300..

Anyone have benchmarks?
Clock for clock with with single and multi threaded?
Anyone with an 8350 and a x5650 both at 4.2 and willing to run benches?

I'd like to link them. Thank you!

And no I don't want to go all fanboy, I like amd too, competition breeds excellence and is beneficial to everyone.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> That's what i thought too, some guy was saying that when I suggested doing an x58 upgrade over a 6300..
> 
> Anyone have benchmarks?
> Clock for clock with with single and multi threaded?
> Anyone with an 8350 and a x5650 both at 4.2 and willing to run benches?
> 
> I'd like to link them. Thank you!
> 
> And no I don't want to go all fanboy, I like amd too, competition breeds excellence and is beneficial to everyone.


I updated my post just take a read about the part I added on the FX-9590.

I'll try to find you benchmarks bud... Too bad I don't have mine anymore would have been a pleasure to compare both for you!
I just couldnt continue running that rig when my old X58 that is like 2-3 years older was still always ahead in any games or tasks I threw at it...


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I updated my post just take a read about the part I added on the FX-9590.
> 
> I'll try to find you benchmarks bud... Too bad I don't have mine anymore would have been a pleasure to compare both for you!
> I just couldnt continue running that rig when my old X58 that is like 2-3 years older was still always ahead in any games or tasks I threw at it...


Haha nice score on the shield, it looks perfect just to run emulators









Yeah I feel kinda ripped off by buying a new 990fx board, to pair with my 8120... I might end up gifting it to a friend back home.

One thing they have going for them is that its pretty fun to overclock them (even though I suck at over clocking)


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Haha nice score on the shield, it looks perfect just to run emulators
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I feel kinda ripped off by buying a new 990fx board, to pair with my 8120... I might end up gifting it to a friend back home.
> 
> One thing they have going for them is that its pretty fun to overclock them (even though I suck at over clocking)


Well don't see it like that...
We all started overclocking at some point... at the beginning most of us sucked as well.
Its just a matter of time and trying things to get better overclock. with experience you'll get better.
I'd like to know about the overclocking of the new FX-9590. Just don't think my watercooling would be enough to run it stock lol


----------



## bill1024

I have an AMD 1045T hexcore oc from 2.7 to 3.5ghz with a 660Ti 8gb 1600 ram.
I have the x58 x5660 at 4ghz and a 660TI and 8gb 1600 ram.

I'll try to do some tests in the next couple days. I will set them both to 3.4ghz and no HT on the Intel.
I believe the 1045T hex core should be close to the 8 core CPU.
At least in folding the Phenom ll hex produce as well as the 8 core FX, something to do with cores and FPU something or other. The 6 core clock to clock do as well as the 8 cores do, in folding at home anyway.

I can say a dual Intel x6560 24 threads at stock turbo speed 3.06ghz gets the same PPD as a 24 core AMD 8425HE at 2.1ghz
The time it takes to do each time frame is very close.

My youngest daughter just graduated HS and with the party and all the stuff going on right now. Family in from out of state.
I'M TIRED


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Congrats on your daughter!

Well is there any truth to this?
He uses pass mark scores to back up his claim of FX being superior to the Xeon hex cores.

"http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

i7-970: ~1370
FX-8350: ~1510

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

i7-970: ~8500
FX-8350: ~9000

Old news IMO! Bulldozer was targeted to compete with nahalem. It was just very late. Not surprising that PD competes nicely with Gulftown/westmere.

The results off passmark are quite accurate when held up against other 3rd party testing of real world workloads from places like openbenchmarking. The performance falls right in line with that we should expect based on the traits of these architectures, which we can learn a great deal about from the following manual: http://www.agner.org/optimize/microarchitecture.pdf

The FX-8350 has less execution resources per core but achieves high saturation of the usable execution resources at high clock speeds in 1-thread-per-module workloads (~2.5 IPC maximum theoretical), thus, trades blows with westmere (~3 IPC maximum theoretical) in lightly threaded work. The saturation of the execution resources drops off as the decoder bottlenecks in more parallel workloads, so the 8 cores (~16 IPC maximum theoretical) wind up performing very similarly to rising saturation of the more resource heavy 6 cores of the westmere in highly threaded work (~18 IPC maximum theoretical).


----------



## brootalperry

Although it's a bit late to be asking this...but I managed to snag an Asus Rampage III Formula on Ebay and an X5650.
I looked at the CPU support list for this board, but no mention of Xeons. Just i7 and i7 Extreme CPUs. I'm wondering I might need to update the BIOS when I get it?

Also I'm hoping this was worth it. I pretty much let an X5660 slip by as suggested by Kana. I see most of you guys with these chips stop at 4.6Ghz. I've got an H80i just for overclocking this chip


----------



## SmOgER

Talking about bulldozer someone mentioned earlier, I'am pretty sure FX-8150 equals to Harpertown (LGA771/LGA775) 12MB chips @ 4.5Ghz (X5470/QX9770), and it's not very efficient neither. So I don't quite think any bulldozer less powerful or equal to FX-8150 is worth the money.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Although it's a bit late to be asking this...but I managed to snag an Asus Rampage III Formula on Ebay and an X5650.
> I looked at the CPU support list for this board, but no mention of Xeons. Just i7 and i7 Extreme CPUs. I'm wondering I might need to update the BIOS when I get it?
> 
> Also I'm hoping this was worth it. I pretty much let an X5660 slip by as suggested by Kana. I see most of you guys with these chips stop at 4.6Ghz. I've got an H80i just for overclocking this chip


there was a guy at my p6x58d thread running an really old bios on his p6x58d board, and he boot up with his x5650 just fine. since the rampage 3 formula i believe was introduced after the p6x58d, you should have no problem


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Why even worry if its running an old bios or not? If it is, then update it to the latest one. All ROG series boards support Xeons but they do not advertise that as a selling point...


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> there was a guy at my p6x58d thread running an really old bios on his p6x58d board, and he boot up with his x5650 just fine. since the rampage 3 formula i believe was introduced after the p6x58d, you should have no problem


Thank you for letting me know =)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Why even worry if its running an old bios or not? If it is, then update it to the latest one. All ROG series boards support Xeons but they do not advertise that as a selling point...


I didn't know that they all supported the Xeons. I was worried that if the BIOS is old then it won't detect the CPU. But I also see that if that was the case then I wouldn't have to worry since I can update it without a CPU installed anyway. I just wanted to make sure regardless.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Thank you for letting me know =)
> I didn't know that they all supported the Xeons. I was worried that if the BIOS is old then it won't detect the CPU. But I also see that if that was the case then I wouldn't have to worry since I can update it without a CPU installed anyway. I just wanted to make sure regardless.


Yeah I am not sure exactly when they started supporting them, but I do know I have read from several publications and reviews over the years that Asus has directly stated to the reviewers that they do their best to make sure all their ROG series boards function with all chips in the same socket family including server/data center intended processors. What they wont do is advertise that fact (probably) because Intel wants to sell enthusiast class chips to that enthusiast class motherboard market, instead of consumers coming in later and buying up retired server chips at a bargain (which is what is happening with the xeons apparently). Chips like the 990x were directly targeted at overclockers and enthusiasts, but equally performing chips were targeted at corporations and data centers. I think what Asus originally had in mind was that if they were going to ask a premium for a board that had absolute premium parts built into it, and sold as their flag ship series, then it stands to reason the bios should be equally premium and recognize any processor that was pin for pin in the same socket family regardless of intended market.

I could be wrong because its been years since I last read anything to that nature, although I am quite certain that is what I read, whether it be true or not is another thing entirely. What I do know for fact is that my Rampage III runs FANTASTIC with my X5650 Xeon using modified ZioMod BIOS 1601_S15. Wouldn't have it any other way


----------



## brootalperry

The motherboard arrived today! All that's left is the X5650 to arrive before I can slap it altogether and join the club


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> The motherboard arrived today! All that's left is the X5650 to arrive before I can slap it altogether and join the club


Thats good!







Hurry now


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> The motherboard arrived today! All that's left is the X5650 to arrive before I can slap it altogether and join the club


Hell yeah! Put together and post some pics.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> The motherboard arrived today! All that's left is the X5650 to arrive before I can slap it altogether and join the club


You talk about a funny situation...








Got my X5650 for my 2nd workstation today... just need that damn x58 motherboard to arrive now, fedex says tomorrow so I cross my fingers


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Hell yeah! Put together and post some pics.


I defintely will. I might also need help overclocking and all that









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> You talk about a funny situation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got my X5650 for my 2nd workstation today... just need that damn x58 motherboard to arrive now, fedex says tomorrow so I cross my fingers


The CPU should arrive tomorrow. Depending on how fast USPS is, I should be able to slap everything together tomorrow and enjoy better performance.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Yay! I got the email fro. USPS!

All my stuff was scanned by as being "arrived at military post office APO,AE" whoooo! I should be getting my mobo CPU and cooler within a few days. I'm guessing Monday I'll have all my stuff.








))))))))


----------



## brootalperry

It's official!!!!!!!!! I'm now an X58 user now!








I've got everything running stock. Everything does seem faster. I'd like to jump straight into overclocking though


----------



## brootalperry

.
I've clocked her up to 4.0 Ghz on a x22 multiplier. Temps at idle are really good! It doesn't seem to get any higher than 33-34 C on idle, with the lowest being 23 C on Core #5.
Right now I'm trying to find the right voltage to make her stable. I'm at 1.23 at the moment, will run Intel Burn Test and see if she BSOD.

I've disabled EIST but left the C-States enabled. CPU-Z shows the multiplier going back and forth between x23 and x22 on idle. So it jumps between 4.1 and 4.0Ghz. On load the multiplier drops down to x22.

So just to clarify I've got an X5650, Rampage III Formula, and H80i. Everything else in my sig is the same except for those 3 things.
Can anyone with a Rampage III or Sabertooth board help me out with the overclocking? I have some idea on what I'm doing, but I could use a little more help.

If I can get her stable at 4.0, I'd like to push for 4.4. If you require screenshots I'll be more than happy to accommodate








BIOS screens might be a different story...but I've got a phone with a pretty good camera, so it should be okay


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> .
> I've clocked her up to 4.0 Ghz on a x22 multiplier. Temps at idle are really good! It doesn't seem to get any higher than 33-34 C on idle, with the lowest being 23 C on Core #5.
> Right now I'm trying to find the right voltage to make her stable. I'm at 1.23 at the moment, will run Intel Burn Test and see if she BSOD.
> 
> I've disabled EIST but left the C-States enabled. CPU-Z shows the multiplier going back and forth between x23 and x22 on idle. So it jumps between 4.1 and 4.0Ghz. On load the multiplier drops down to x22.
> 
> So just to clarify I've got an X5650, Rampage III Formula, and H80i. Everything else in my sig is the same except for those 3 things.
> Can anyone with a Rampage III or Sabertooth board help me out with the overclocking? I have some idea on what I'm doing, but I could use a little more help.
> 
> If I can get her stable at 4.0, I'd like to push for 4.4. If you require screenshots I'll be more than happy to accommodate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS screens might be a different story...but I've got a phone with a pretty good camera, so it should be okay


Since I am a lame overclocker (lol) and do not like to push into high overclock territory I'm afraid I can't help much. Kana however, should be able to help though, and if you can find the user Zoson (I will not help you locate him as he is on several different overclocking forums) he is an expert Rampage overclocker who "might" help you get it way past 4.4. I on the other hand think 4ghz (50%) is plenty so I still have not tried it. I had my 5650 all the way down to 1.18v and passing ibt after ibt and prime95, but it started crashing during simple browsing the net. So I raised it to my previous 1.26v until I could find time to test again. Its been rock solid at 1.26v. Remember do NOT go above 1.35v on the QPI voltage or you risk killing your IMC, especially if you plan on running high uncore speed of 2x or so. Uncore can be run as low as 1.5x that of RAM. I managed to get my QPI volts as low as 1.17 and uncore at 3200 mhz (2x) which was amazing imo. However once I lost stability in Windows I also raised it up not knowing if it was cpu or qpi that was complaining. I just have not found the time to do any testing and 1.26v is safe no matter how you look at it. So now QPI is at 1.26v and so is my CPU. All other voltages are pretty much stock.

If I can find time tomorrow I will tell you what you are supposed to do to break 4ghz on these chips, but again I have not tried it on mine yet. Sorry


----------



## brootalperry

Any info is good info, and you gave me quite a bit of info









I ran Intel Burn Test but it told me that it's not stable after 3 passes. I did some basic web browsing and stuff before running the test and didn't have any issues. The temps don't seem to hit 60C on full load either.
I'll go about seeing what I can do about that QPI voltage and other stuff.

I'm really impressed with the H80i. If this was my EVO 212 I would be seeing 70-80C right now!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Any info is good info, and you gave me quite a bit of info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ran Intel Burn Test but it told me that it's not stable after 3 passes. I did some basic web browsing and stuff before running the test and didn't have any issues. The temps don't seem to hit 60C on full load either.
> I'll go about seeing what I can do about that QPI voltage and other stuff.
> 
> I'm really impressed with the H80i. If this was my EVO 212 I would be seeing 70-80C right now!


I doubt that, not 80 anyway. The x5600 series is a cool running cpu even in the 5ghz realm. I have not failed an IBT test yet with this chip, so it is probably the most amazing cpu I think I have ever had. I have completely forgotten about wanting to upgrade to x79. Even x99 might be passed up on now lol (That would be the first time since the early 90's that I passed up that many refreshes and platform changes), but I think x58 was an "a-head-of-its-time" platform... The only thing that will get me to upgrade at this point is extreme native peripheral advancements such as USB 3.1, Thunderbolt, PCIe 4.0, Sata Express etc, etc... But for sheer CPU power I am quite happy now.


----------



## brootalperry

What would be your personal vcore limit?

Say you wanted 4.5 or 4.4 but it wasn't stable until at least maybe 1.39-1.4
Would you back off to a lower clock or keep it at those volts?
Reason I'm asking is because at 4.080 mine also seems stable at 1.26 in Intel Burn Test (just passed 10 levels on very high). Anything lower and it either fails ITB or BSOD. However I think 1.26 is a little high for 4.0...


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Dang I can't wait to get mine. I got my CPU cooler! Still waiting for the mail room to sort through my other two packages. Probably by Monday I'll have mine up and running.

I'll probably do one last hurrah on my FX and see if I can get it to clock as high as I can get it to go!

I was supposed to have internet hooked up in my new place too, but apparently Kabel Deutschland needed written permission from the owner of the home.

Oh well! Looks like I'm gonna keep using my dirt slow mobile data.


----------



## EvilMonk

Gotta order some 1866 DDR3 before I get my P6T... so I can clock the crap out of that damn X5650... the corsair h110i is beefy for a closed loop cooler... I have the feeling its going to work well


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Gotta order some 1866 DDR3 before I get my P6T... so I can clock the crap out of that damn X5650... the corsair h110i is beefy for a closed loop cooler... I have the feeling its going to work well


How much of a difference does ram speed make?

I have a 1866 dual channel kit, do I lose any preformance from not running triple channel?


----------



## kckyle

after 1600mhz at cl8, you don't really notice much real time difference,

one way to measure it is by 8 divided by 1600 = .0050 seconds

so if you have 2000mhz at cl7, 7 divided by 2000 = .0035 seconds.

so by spending that 100-200 bucks on a dominator platinum or some other over the top, you save .0015 thousands of a second. which will make marginal difference at best, for 100 bucks more, that much money can be better spend on a new cpu cooler, fans or more ram.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> What would be your personal vcore limit?
> 
> Say you wanted 4.5 or 4.4 but it wasn't stable until at least maybe 1.39-1.4
> Would you back off to a lower clock or keep it at those volts?
> Reason I'm asking is because at 4.080 mine also seems stable at 1.26 in Intel Burn Test (just passed 10 levels on very high). Anything lower and it either fails ITB or BSOD. However I think 1.26 is a little high for 4.0...


Lol, well I retired in 2012 so my personal limit is now what Intel says it is, HAHA. I can no longer take chances, so everything in the BIOS can and will stay out of the yellow and red limits (I had 5ghz for a few moments on my 930 but at almost 100C, NO THANKS, and 4.5 in the 70C range). 1.35 is my highest now even with my custom water loop and massive radiator, I'm not willing to risk hurting something for another couple performance points. The difference between 4.0 and 4.4 is unrecognizable to me. I might try the higher turbo multis just for the fun of it though, but only if the cpu does not need more than 1.35v. lol


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Lol, well I retired in 2012 so my personal limit is now what Intel says it is, HAHA. I can no longer take chances, so everything in the BIOS can and will stay out of the yellow and red limits (I had 5ghz for a few moments on my 930 but at almost 100C, NO THANKS, and 4.5 in the 70C range). 1.35 is my highest now even with my custom water loop and massive radiator, I'm not willing to risk hurting something for another couple performance points. The difference between 4.0 and 4.4 is unrecognizable to me. I might try the higher turbo multis just for the fun of it though, but only if the cpu does not need more than 1.35v. lol


That's fine. I figured it'd be 1.35. That's why I thought 1.26 for 4.0 is a little high.
Anyway when raising the base clock and subsequently the vcore, do I also have to raise the QPI voltage?

I have the vcore set at 1.26 and the QPI voltage at 1.25. So I guess I should try to keep it at least 1-2 steps lower than the vcore then?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> after 1600mhz at cl8, you don't really notice much real time difference,
> 
> one way to measure it is by 8 divided by 1600 = .0050 seconds
> 
> so if you have 2000mhz at cl7, 7 divided by 2000 = .0035 seconds.
> 
> so by spending that 100-200 bucks on a dominator platinum or some other over the top, you save .0015 thousands of a second. which will make marginal difference at best, for 100 bucks more, that much money can be better spend on a new cpu cooler, fans or more ram.


THIS IS EXACTLY right. RAM has never shown to do much, it is almost always CPU that makes the bigger differences. Better cooling means higher clocks possibly. I would run it at 1600 and uncore around 3200 (2x), and push the CPU as high as you can safely. If it runs at 1600 maybe you can lower its vcore as well and re-direct some of that energy savings to the cpu, lol... Where it is needed most.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> That's fine. I figured it'd be 1.35. That's why I thought 1.26 for 4.0 is a little high.
> Anyway when raising the base clock and subsequently the vcore, do I also have to raise the QPI voltage?
> 
> I have the vcore set at 1.26 and the QPI voltage at 1.25. So I guess I should try to keep it at least 1-2 steps lower than the vcore then?


1.26v is what I needed on my 930 for 4.0 and is what I used for several years. 1.26v is just the number I chose when I lost stability while at 1.18v. I did not have any time to test any other settings, and yes I could have just done 1.20 but that is not the number that was in my head, lol, so I just picked a safe number out of my head that I knew would work. It is NOT going to be my final vcore voltage, its just what I happen to be using atm. I will more than likely be around 1.20 or so I think. I hope...

On the QPI thing, I do not think so. I know QPI/VTT must stay within .05v of ram? So, if you have ram at 1.60, you should NOT go below 1.1 on the QPI. I never tested QPI below 1.17 and it still completed 10 passes of IBT high stress mode TWICE, and then 24 hours of Prime. What I did (which may be backwards for some people) was I put all my voltages to maximum per Intel safe levels, then I took down my ram to the lowest mhz my board allowed (1200 I think). Then I lowered the CPU multi to 17 and started raising my bclk until I reached my goal of 200 (you should actually keep going until you know what the highest your board/chip will go at safe voltages, but that's me. My R3E makes it to like 215 or so (on my 930 anyway), but I run 200 because I hate this x58 going over 60C temps). Anyway, I wanted to first know if this chip could and would do 200 bclk, then once I knew that, I then started testing my multis until I reached 20 (4ghz), then I took my RAM to its advertised spec of 1.5v and 1600 mhz, and then I brought up my uncore to 2x (this is flirting with danger by the way per Intel). Once I was at all my goal on all the clocks, I then started lowering voltages starting with the QPI, then CPU, to or below the defaults until I hit my goals of 1.2v or less. For what ever reason (maybe time) I stopped at 1.18 on the cpu and 1.17 on the QPI. A week or two later while in Windows and browsing the net I had a BSOD, a day later another and then another. After a couple days I could not find the time to test what was happening so I just simply took my vcore on both qpi and cpu to 1.26 (that instantly stopped the BSOD's) until I can mess around and figure out what was complaining. Its almost as if the cpu was breaking itself in on the new clocks for the first several weeks and then decided 1.18 was not enough lol. I also took my RAM up to 1.6v for the heck of it, just because it does not hurt anything and I needed the stability at that moment. Will work on voltages some day soon enough.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> 1.26v is what I needed on my 930 for 4.0 and is what I used for several years. 1.26v is just the number I chose when I lost stability while at 1.18v. I did not have any time to test any other settings, and yes I could have just done 1.20 but that is not the number that was in my head, lol, so I just picked a safe number out of my head that I knew would work. It is NOT going to be my final vcore voltage, its just what I happen to be using atm. I will more than likely be around 1.20 or so I think. I hope...
> 
> On the QPI thing, I do not think so. I know QPI/VTT must stay within .05v of ram? So, if you have ram at 1.60, you should NOT go below 1.1 on the QPI. I never tested QPI below 1.17 and it still completed 10 passes of IBT high stress mode TWICE, and then 24 hours of Prime. What I did (which may be backwards for some people) was I put all my voltages to maximum per Intel safe levels, then I took down my ram to the lowest mhz my board allowed (1200 I think). Then I lowered the CPU multi to 17 and started raising my bclk until I reached my goal of 200 (you should actually keep going until you know what the highest your board/chip will go at safe voltages, but that's me. My R3E makes it to like 215 or so (on my 930 anyway), but I run 200 because I hate this x58 going over 60C temps). Anyway, I wanted to first know if this chip could and would do 200 bclk, then once I knew that, I then started testing my multis until I reached 20 (4ghz), then I took my RAM to its advertised spec of 1.5v and 1600 mhz, and then I brought up my uncore to 2x (this is flirting with danger by the way per Intel). Once I was at all my goal on all the clocks, I then started lowering voltages starting with the QPI, then CPU, to or below the defaults until I hit my goals of 1.2v or less. For what ever reason (maybe time) I stopped at 1.18 on the cpu and 1.17 on the QPI. A week or two later while in Windows and browsing the net I had a BSOD, a day later another and then another. After a couple days I could not find the time to test what was happening so I just simply took my vcore on both qpi and cpu to 1.26 (that instantly stopped the BSOD's) until I can mess around and figure out what was complaining. Its almost as if the cpu was breaking itself in on the new clocks for the first several weeks and then decided 1.18 was not enough lol. I also took my RAM up to 1.6v for the heck of it, just because it does not hurt anything and I needed the stability at that moment. Will work on voltages some day soon enough.


At 4.0Ghz I started at 1.20 and worked my way up until it was stable in Intel Burn Test after 10 passes on Very High like I said.
Either Intel Burn Test said it was unstable or it BSOD. It wasn't until I got to 1.26 did it pass ITB and haven't BSOD. I'm not sure if this is normal or if I'm forgetting something or doing something wrong.

Anyway as for the QPI voltages I'll keep that in mind. I've got pretty much every voltage on auto apart from vcore. I think my RAM's stock voltage is 1.5 @ 1333 Mhz with CL 9. With the voltage set on Auto it's at 1.6 I think at 14xx something Mhz. I've got the Uncore voltage 2x the RAM speed. I'll go back in and mess around with it some more


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Everyone seems to do it that way, I'm not sure why. I did lower voltages on qpi and cpu in tandem with each other. I would test say 1.25v on CPU, it passed IBT, the then did the same with QPI, and so on until I got it below 1.2v. I then just stopped stress testing mainly because I ran out of time. You should NEVER run auto voltages if you plan on overclocking, except for IOH and ICH which are fine imo, but I still do not run auto. These machines are not intelligent enough to know what is and isn't safe, or is and isn't necessary to properly run. I put all my voltages at pre-determined levels, then once I was stable at my preferred clocks I dropped them down slowly to the defaults, but I did not use auto. I however did leave the RAM timings at stock because that was the last item I wanted to work on, and still have not gotten to it, lol...

I do not like pointing people to other sites, but I found this Gulftown overclocking guide to be the easiest to understand and adopt to my x5650. I 100% agree that isolating bclk first and foremost with highest safe voltages is absolutely the way to go, and is MUCH faster. Because you find your max clocks right away without BSOD's to wonder about. Although I read practically every guide that exists for the 920 and 930's. It was this one I think suits me the most. http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown And by the way, I did use TurboV but only for the fine tuning of voltages and bclk during IBT sessions. It just does not make any sense to me to go back into the BIOS (utter waste of time) when TurboV communicates directly with the BIOS anyway (your on Asus board right?). Saves a gazillion minutes of rebooting time imo.

If you want 4.2 or higher I would set your LLC to "FULL" and see what the 22 and 23 multis do for you. But first you should isolate your true max bclk, by taking cpu and qpi to their highest voltage settings (1.35v per Intel) and lower multi to 15 or 17, and ram to lowest mhz with all timings on auto and ram to either 1.6 or 1.64v (I think 1.65 is a red zone)... ALSO, lower uncore to lowest the bios will allow (1.5x I think). THEN raise BCLK until it no longer passes IBT, then lower it by 5 (215 to 210, or 205 to 200 etc). This will be your Boards/CPU's max safe base clock, and until you know this number nothing else matters. I never found my max bclk on this 5650 because I had already reached my goal of 200 anyway.


----------



## brootalperry

Thank you for the link and the info!!
I've started following the guide.
I have dropped the multiplier to x15, the RAM to the lowest Mhz, upped the voltages on the CPU and QPI to 1.35, and I'm now raising the block slowly to find the max.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Thank you for the link and the info!!
> I've started following the guide.
> I have dropped the multiplier to x15, the RAM to the lowest Mhz, upped the voltages on the CPU and QPI to 1.35, and I'm now raising the block slowly to find the max.


Great...









By the way, the 5 points below max BCLK that I said drop it to? That is totally up to you and is just what I normally do for a 24/7 rig. Not sure if I read that somewhere once or if its just something I do for helping stabilize the OS. But its probably what a Guide told me to do or my overclocking friend in the UK, one of the two. Also, if you do not get the bclk at or above 200, don't sweat it much. 190x23 is better than 215x20. Higher multi's do more for performance than higher bclk does (at same Mhz anway), so I've been told. If you can manage it though, try 200x23 for a 4.6ghz OC. Remember, worry about RAM and Uncore MHZ speeds after you get your CPU and BCLK where you want it, then the final steps would be RAM MHZ, Uncore Mhz (in this order), then stress test, then RAM timings, and stress test again, in that order. Then work on lowering voltages until something breaks. Do not forget when its time to start lowering CPU and QPI voltages, please start with QPI first, mainly because the IMC is less tolerant of the high voltage than the vcore is and if you have a already weak IMC, there is no sense in prolonging the higher QPI voltage. Also, keep your ram voltage high, at least 1.6v until you find the timings you like. Great RAM timings affect performance more than RAM mhz will. If you hit your preferred ram timings right away, then lower voltage 1 down, and so forth, and see if it holds during a stress test. Do NOT take QPI lower than 1.1v unless you are going to drop RAM voltage below 1.6v at the same time. Again I repeat, *do NOT put more than 0.5v between your QPI and RAM, OR more than 1.35v qpi with an uncore that is higher than 1.5x (doing either can kill the CPU)*. Doing 2x on uncore with higher than 1.35v on QPI has killed more Gulftown IMC's than any other accidental setting. However, it is perfectly safe to run 2x uncore if you are lower than 1.35v, especially if your IMC continues to run into the mid 1.20's or lower. We have quite a few people here who are above the 1.35v mark and have not suffered any ill effects yet, but still, the fact is Overclockers around the world have reported instant IMC deaths all from a quick 1.4v on QPI and forgetting to drop uncore to 1.5x *(It is the combination of 2x uncore and over 1.35v that kills it FAST)*. Just saying.... personally I would stay well away from 1.30v on QPI, and would prefer 1.2v or less, LOL. But I'm chicken that way...

Disclaimer: Everything I've said here is just some of the things I learned on my Rampage III and may not necessarily work for you. It is just what I learned from others trial and error. I do not like big risks any more, so I always play it on the safer side these days. What you do is all up to you, so if it does not work, or blows up on you, please do not blame me. I have not tried overclocking my 5650 above 4ghz yet, so I really do not know what to expect when I do, other than what is commonly known. If I am wrong on anything, please do not hesitate to correct me as its been a while since I was really invested in Overclocking, at least three or four years, until this 5650 came along anyway









Good luck and have fun bud...


----------



## brootalperry

So I think I found my highest BCLK of 215. After this what should I do next?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> So I think I found my highest BCLK of 215. After this what should I do next?


Oh wow, that is my highest BCLK on my 930. Hmm, I wonder if my 5650 will allow a BCLK that high?

Do what you want. Did you make it to 220 bclk? What was the highest BCLK? 215? If so, I would bring it down to 210, and start working on something else, namely your multis. Since we know 16, 17 and 18 will work right away, I would take it to 19 (3990 mhz) and jump into a 10 run IBT session. If passes, then take it to 20 and IBT again. 21-23 will be your Turbo multis so if you have C1E and Speedstep disabled you can give 21-23 a try as well. But if you do not disable those, then your Turbo multis will NOT stick.

Anyway, time for you to raise some multis bud and see if you can at least get it to 4.4 right away.









EDIT: Did you install monitoring software to watch your voltages and temps? Did you enable Full LLC? If so, during your IBT session watch to make sure LLC is keeping your QPI and Vcore steady, or steady enough. If you see QPI going above 1.35v at ANY time, then drop it to the next voltage spot down (1.34v?) and continue.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Oh wow, that is my highest BCLK on my 930. Hmm, I wonder if my 5650 will allow a BCLK that high?
> 
> Do what you want. Did you make it to 220 bclk? What was the highest BCLK? 215? If so, I would bring it down to 210, and start working on something else, namely your multis. Since we know 16, 17 and 18 will work right away, I would take it to 19 (3990 mhz) and jump into a 10 run IBT session. If passes, then take it to 20 and IBT again. 21-23 will be your Turbo multis so if you have C1E and Speedstep disabled you can give 21-23 a try as well. But if you do not disable those, then your Turbo multis will NOT stick.
> 
> Anyway, time for you to raise some multis bud and see if you can at least get it to 4.4 right away.


Well it wouldn't boot at all at 220. I tried twice to make sure. I dropped it down to 215 and made it to Windows where I tested it and passed 10 passes of IBT on Very High.
Also my board doesn't seem to like 21 or 23. It only goes to 22 and 20, then it goes down to 19-12 in order which is the minimum. Seems it only goes to 23 when I have EIST and Turbo enabled.

I'll try 19,20, and 22...although I don't think it will work at all on 22.

Also what should I do about the vcore and QPI voltages? Should I leave those at 1.35 still?

And regarding the Uncore frequency, the board will only allow a minimum of 2x the memory frequency.
With the BCLK at 210 the lowest DRAM frequency is 1263Mhz with the lowest UCLK frequency allowed is 2526Mhz

Edit: Just saw your edit. The only monitoring software I have is CPU-Z and HWinfo


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Well it wouldn't boot at all at 220. I tried twice to make sure. I dropped it down to 215 and made it to Windows where I tested it and passed 10 passes of IBT on Very High.
> Also my board doesn't seem to like 21 or 23. It only goes to 22 and 20, then it goes down to 19-12 in order which is the minimum. Seems it only goes to 23 when I have EIST and Turbo enabled.
> 
> I'll try 19,20, and 22...although I don't think it will work at all on 22.
> 
> Also what should I do about the vcore and QPI voltages? Should I leave those at 1.35 still?
> 
> And regarding the Uncore frequency, the board will only allow a minimum of 2x the memory frequency.
> With the BCLK at 210 the lowest DRAM frequency is 1263Mhz with the lowest UCLK frequency allowed is 2526Mhz


Starting with Uncore, NO, your board will allow 1.5x because the CPU dictates that number, not the BIOS. However, you do not change uncore until you have your ram freq set. What Memory sticks do you have and what do you want to run them at? If 1333, then you should have a frequency number that correlates to 1.5x1333=1999 (or around that), if not I do not know, so just set it to the lowest number you do have. BUT, you cant really set it to that number until you have your RAM set to the proper freq you plan on running. Remember, your Uncore numbers change when you set your ram to different settings. I have 1600mhz ram and set my final uncore to 3200mhz (2x).

EDIT: By the way, if it is only letting you run 2x uncore, that is perfectly OK so long you DO NOT TOUCH 1.35v or above, per Intel statements. Anything above that is starting to burn your IMC into a lesser lifespan.

If you have all the power savings stuff turned off (C states, etc) and Turbo on and C1E and SpeedStep disabled, you should have all your multis avail. Are you on the very latest BIOS? Bring your PCIe to 101 mhz, maybe that will kick in the 21 and 23 multis (don't ask because I do not know why lol). Also, you may not be able to see the turbo multis in the BIOS but should be able in Windows. Weird EIST should be disabled in order to go above 20, which is what I was told.

Drop your QPI volts down one spot. Leave CPU Vcore alone until your done overclocking. 1.35v is safe and will keep the cpu stable until your ready to see how low it will go... Test IBT to make sure QPI is still stable. Right now you really need to figure out your Turbo multis and why it isn't sticking with EIST disabled. Keep playing around with it if you can.

I'm sending you a link to some info for your chip and mobo in a PM. So check your PM please.


----------



## brootalperry

Okay .__.

Yes I'm on the latest BIOS which is 0903. I'm not really sure why, but the lowest both the memory and uncore will go are those two that I said. I've already have them both set to the lowest.

Yes I have ALL of the power saving stuff turned off, however the board refuses 23 and 21. I've set the PCIE to 101 and rebooted into the BIOS again, but it still refuses 21 and 23.
I've dropped the QPI voltage to 1.34. I'll go into Windows and test it.

So far for clocks and stuff I've got the multiplier at 19, bclock at 210, dram at 1263, uncore at 2526, and LLC on full.
For voltages I've got vcore at 1.35, QPI at 1.34, and dram at 1.60.

I'll go into Intel Burn Test and run 10 passes on Very High.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Okay .__.
> 
> Yes I'm on the latest BIOS which is 0903. I'm not really sure why, but the lowest both the memory and uncore will go are those two that I said. I've already have them both set to the lowest.
> 
> Yes I have ALL of the power saving stuff turned off, however the board refuses 23 and 21. I've set the PCIE to 101 and rebooted into the BIOS again, but it still refuses 21 and 23.
> I've dropped the QPI voltage to 1.34. I'll go into Windows and test it.
> 
> So far for clocks and stuff I've got the multiplier at 19, bclock at 210, dram at 1263, uncore at 2526, and LLC on full.
> For voltages I've got vcore at 1.35, QPI at 1.34, and dram at 1.60.
> 
> I'll go into Intel Burn Test and run 10 passes on Very High.


Don't sweat it much. I need to figure out why 21 and 23 will not take though. 22 at 210 BCLK is VERY nice for a 2.6ghz chip, right? That is over a 50% increase, not to mention your now on a hexa core proc. Put your multi back to 22 and test IBT. If it passes IBT at 210x22, I would be happy right there and start working on RAM and Uncore, and then RAM timings, and voltages last...

Looks like your ready to try raising your RAM to 1600 if your memory can handle that. Let me know


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

OK, so it failed at 22x210? Try 20x210 real quick please...









Mine also failed at 200x22 as well but I did not raise any voltages as of yet. I just put it back to 20 multi. I need to do a re-test with IBT to see if its stable at these voltages which I never done yet.


----------



## brootalperry

Yeah it boots into Windows at 20x210. I haven't tested it though.

Edit: The system seems stable. I played Crysis and then passed 10 passes of Intel Burn Test on Very High.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Okay .__.
> 
> Yes I'm on the latest BIOS which is 0903. I'm not really sure why, but the lowest both the memory and uncore will go are those two that I said. I've already have them both set to the lowest.
> 
> Yes I have ALL of the power saving stuff turned off, however the board refuses 23 and 21. I've set the PCIE to 101 and rebooted into the BIOS again, but it still refuses 21 and 23.
> I've dropped the QPI voltage to 1.34. I'll go into Windows and test it.
> 
> So far for clocks and stuff I've got the multiplier at 19, bclock at 210, dram at 1263, uncore at 2526, and LLC on full.
> For voltages I've got vcore at 1.35, QPI at 1.34, and dram at 1.60.
> 
> I'll go into Intel Burn Test and run 10 passes on Very High.


You are not the only person encountering this situation, my Sabertooth and x5650 also have the same symptom, it won't accept 21 and 23 multiplier. I think this is normal for Asus mb???


----------



## kckyle

its not the mobo its the chip, x5650 can only do even number while the x5660 can only do odd number at max multi.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> its not the mobo its the chip, x5650 can only do even number while the x5660 can only do odd number at max multi.


WHAT? Is that a joke from Intel? lol

I might as well see what it will take to get it to do 22. If it just needs a small tick of extra voltage I would be OK with that I think.


----------



## kckyle

yeah its weird, me and bradford has this convo last week about how his 5660 can only do 23 and not 22 while i can only do 22 and not 21 or 23


----------



## alancsalt

It was often said that the 1366 i7 chips OCed better on odd number multipliers.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> its not the mobo its the chip, x5650 can only do even number while the x5660 can only do odd number at max multi.


Oh yeah. Can't believe I forgot about that.
I also encountered this while trying to overclock my i5 760. Well that sucks. At this point it seems 4.4-4.6 will be impossible unless running moderately high voltages on x22 multiplier since my max stable base clock is 215.

In order to sustain 20x200 it seems I need the vcore at 1.26, but I'm still testing to make sure.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> its not the mobo its the chip, x5650 can only do even number while the x5660 can only do odd number at max multi.


Thanks for explaining, it clear my doubts now.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah I was not aware of that about the 5650 and 5660 multis being evens and odds. But I was aware of the odd number overclocking thing, in fact it is one of the reasons I run 101 pcie, because using that along with an odd number cpu multi seemed to work better overall on my 930. LOL, maybe I should up my bclk to 205 now since I can't have the 23 multi, haha.

@brootalperry, you could work on 215x22 (4730 mhz) and recoup some performance if you try and force your ram to 1600 and uncore to 3200. Will it even run at 1600 or does it not show that option in your BIOS? Not sure why mine BSOD at 22 multi today which seems strange considering at 20 multi I can run 1.2v, but can't run 22 multi at 1.26v? I think I may try and play around this weekend to see if I can get 205x22 stable. All I would need to do is first set my voltages back to 1.35v, and then set the multi and bclk at the same time just to see if it runs. If it boots to Windows and passes IBT, then I can simply lower v until it dies lol.


----------



## brootalperry

I can run the RAM at 1600 and then some. Putting the CPU at 215x22 I don't think it'll even boot unless I go over 1.35. I'm thinking somewhere around 1.4 would be necessary just to get into Windows.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I can run the RAM at 1600 and then some. Putting the CPU at 215x22 I don't think it'll even boot unless I go over 1.35. I'm thinking somewhere around 1.4 would be necessary just to get into Windows.


Yeah that sucks. I booted at 1.26v, but it died the moment I started IBT. Only tried 200x22 though, which may be my limit. I do not want high voltage or temps as I REALLY love the 30-35C temps. 500 more mhz or less may add over 10C of temp and help make this small room that much more unpleasant, lol....

Are you going to try 1.4v?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I can run the RAM at 1600 and then some. Putting the CPU at 215x22 I don't think it'll even boot unless I go over 1.35. I'm thinking somewhere around 1.4 would be necessary just to get into Windows.


By the way, I figured out something today I think. The Xeon X5650 does not have a 6 core 23x multiplier, it only has a 22 multi for all 6 cores 12 threads. 20X is maximum at default BIOS specs, but with C1E off and EIST, it lets it go to 22x and stay there granted the voltage/cooling is enough. The x5660 omits the 22x and gives you a 23x multi for a price.

I think there is a way to run the 23x multi on the x5650 but it requires turning off HT. But I could be reading data incorrectly, and probably am. This is why our BIOS will not let us input 23. However, 22 is for the people who want to run it at its top speed with all cores/threads active, if voltage and cooling allows it.


----------



## brootalperry

Cooling won't really matter if the voltage is still high. A high voltage will still degrade the chip regardless of cooling and temperature.
I know for me to hit 4.5 using the x22 multiplier, I would need to go over 1.35. I'm not sure if that's even safe or not since it's the max recommended. How much danger is an extra .05 volts?

I'm running it now at 20x200 with 1.25 vcore and 1.20 QPI, along with memory freq. at 1600 and uncore at 3200 with 1.60 volts. No BSOD, crashes, restarts, etc.

My idle temps are ranging in the 30s. At stock they were in the 20s


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Cooling won't really matter if the voltage is still high. A high voltage will still degrade the chip regardless of cooling and temperature.
> I know for me to hit 4.5 using the x22 multiplier, I would need to go over 1.35. I'm not sure if that's even safe or not since it's the max recommended. How much danger is an extra .05 volts?
> 
> I'm running it now at 20x200 with 1.25 vcore and 1.20 QPI, along with memory freq. at 1600 and uncore at 3200 with 1.60 volts. No BSOD, crashes, restarts, etc.
> 
> My idle temps are ranging in the 30s. At stock they were in the 20s


Yeah that chip sounds just like mine then. Well, I guess I need to actually try it before I say that, lol. Not sure but I think my chip will go down to 1.21v at 20x200, at least it ran a week or two at 1.18 before it all of a sudden lost stability (not sure why it took that long though). Maybe I can do 4.5 using something like 1.30v and 22x205? Yeah I know it can degrade going over the Intel recommended max V, which I wont do, but thought maybe you were willing to try. This chip seems to me to be a great cpu for anyone OK with 4ghz, like myself.

Maybe you should have tried the Xeon X5670 which has a native 22x multiplier, for the 4.5 or 4.6 you wanted originally. I found one for only $180 but was not interested in spending that kind of money on this aging platform.


----------



## brootalperry

It boots into Windows at 1.4 with 22x205. At 1.3-1.35 Windows either freezes at the start up screen or BSOD.
You can probably do it at 1.3 seeing as I need about 1.26 for 20x200.

Try it and report back


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> It boots into Windows at 1.4 with 22x205. At 1.3-1.35 Windows either freezes at the start up screen or BSOD.
> You can probably do it at 1.3 seeing as I need about 1.26 for 20x200.
> 
> Try it and report back


I'd love to but I am still working for my clients tonight. once I am done with work I will probably fall over tired, and at that point only the pillow matters, lol... But yeah 22x205 sounds real tempting at 1.3v.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> It boots into Windows at 1.4 with 22x205. At 1.3-1.35 Windows either freezes at the start up screen or BSOD.
> You can probably do it at 1.3 seeing as I need about 1.26 for 20x200.
> 
> Try it and report back


1.4V is the lowest I can get for 22x200 on my chip. I am also running 6 sticks of RAM. My QPI/VTT has to be 1.5-1.6V or it just looses performance. What is crazy is that my max BCLK is 230+ lol. I have to run 2x DRAM frequency for my UNCORE because I don't have a lower multiplier available.

I ran much higher voltages on my 920 than most for years...I guess the x5650 will be no different for me


----------



## brootalperry

That's quite a lot...are you sure that's safe?
I'm nervous about keeping 1.4 vcore for 24/7


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> That's quite a lot...are you sure that's safe?
> I'm nervous about keeping 1.4 vcore for 24/7


No its not safe, but that don't mean he can't afford to replace it when/if it goes kaput. There are plenty of chips that can handle more than Intels max specs and then there are plenty that will die sooner rather then later. If I knew for 100% certain that I could get 2 or 3 more years out of this CPU using voltage 1.4 or higher, I would, however I am not willing to replace this chip even if its only $100 bucks or less. If it dies because it was ready to die is one thing, but if it dies because I purposely hit it harder than it was designed to take, then that is on me, not Intel.

Intel says its not safe above 1.35v, especially if using 2x uncore or higher, so that is the way it is. But that does not mean you can not afford to risk it, lol...


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> No its not safe, but that don't mean he can't afford to replace it when/if it goes kaput. There are plenty of chips that can handle more than Intels max specs and then there are plenty that will die sooner rather then later. If I knew for 100% certain that I could get 2 or 3 more years out of this CPU using voltage 1.4 or higher, I would, however I am not willing to replace this chip even if its only $100 bucks or less. If it dies because it was ready to die is one thing, but if it dies because I purposely hit it harder than it was designed to take, then that is on me, not Intel.
> 
> Intel says its not safe above 1.35v, especially if using 2x uncore or higher, so that is the way it is. But that does not mean you can not afford to risk it, lol...


I heard the same "its not safe" over intel spec statements (factual info like you have said







) for multiple chip architectures and I have yet to kill a CPU or experience the chip degradation that everyone always preaches about.









If I did kill it there is another x5650 in the drawer to take its place. Also I am running a water loop and I want to go fast







If it won't go as fast as I want then I'll make it









Also, is there anyone other than myself running 6 sticks of ram? I'm running 4Gb sticks of Ripjaws (24Gb)


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I heard the same "its not safe" over intel spec statements (factual info like you have said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) for multiple chip architectures and I have yet to kill a CPU or experience the chip degradation that everyone always preaches about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I did kill it there is another x5650 in the drawer to take its place. Also I am running a water loop and I want to go fast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it won't go as fast as I want then I'll make it


Exactly my point, you can obviously afford to risk it and have good luck with not killing them. I on the other hand have friends who have had the exact same chips die almost instantly doing what you are currently doing, and on the same board I am on. I am retired and can not afford to risk it as readily as you can. Don't get me wrong I would love 4.5, or better yet 5ghz, lol I would REALLY love 5ghz, but I just can not afford that. I would need to sell one of my cars, or a bunch of other stuff, or break into the strict retirement plan to buy another chip for this platform.

Glad you have such good luck with them though. Keep it up please









EDIT: Did I mention I would really love 5ghz, really I would...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

By the way, if your on a B1 its probably safe up to 1.4v, not many of those have died, even the B0 revs were OK, A0 chips however pretty much gave you a middle finger when going over 1.35v on QPI. So I've read...


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Exactly my point, you can obviously afford to risk it and have good luck with not killing them. I on the other hand have friends who have had the exact same chips die almost instantly doing what you are currently doing, and on the same board I am on. I am retired and can not afford to risk it as readily as you can. Don't get me wrong I would love 4.5, or better yet 5ghz, lol I would REALLY love 5ghz, but I just can not afford that. I would need to sell one of my cars, or a bunch of other stuff, or break into the strict retirement plan to buy another chip for this platform.
> 
> Glad you have such good luck with them though. Keep it up please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Did I mention I would really love 5ghz, really I would...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> By the way, if your on a B1 its probably safe up to 1.4v, not many of those have died, even the B0 revs were OK, A0 chips however pretty much gave you a middle finger when going over 1.35v on QPI. So I've read...


I completely understand







. Yes I am on Stepping 2 Revision B1. However, Just to see the performance difference I dropped down to the 1.5x DRAM clock (2400 Mhz on the UNCOR). I guess because the last time I was in the BIOS tweaking I couldn't see anything but the 2x and above multiplier because of the RAM divider and BCLK I was running (225 Mhz). I forgot that I have to restart when changing certain things lol. Anywho, I did have a performance decrease dropping to the 1.5x BUT I was able to lower the VTT to 1.35V








(you keep saying QPI but the only QPI I see is QPI PPL Vcore and I've often heard the VTT referred to as QPI/VTT as it is the CPU killer).

More testing to see how low I can go on the QPI/VTT.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Well I just tried 205x22 and into the third or fourth minute of IBT, I blue screened. That was at 1.35v vcore and 1.34 QPI. Going to try 200x22 now for 4.4ghz...

EDIT: Passed at 4.4ghz. But it looks like the CPU started to degrade a little bit at the end of the IBT session. Going to play around with voltage and see if it will lower any. At 205x22 it went up to 77C, but at 200x22 it never went above 66C. BIG difference for a measly 100 extra mhz... LOL

I kept reading how these chips start to degrade after the 4.2-4.4 mhz marks, so it looks like I have a typical x5650 result. With that sign of degradation at the end of the IBT session I am not sure it is worth keeping this at 4.4. Maybe I will try 195x22 since multis are more important than base clock.

SUCCESS!


Temps


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Its interesting to me that even IBT can't keep this chip at 100% for every core, lol... I guess the real stability test will have to be 24 hours of Prime and some gaming and daily usage....


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> you keep saying QPI but the only QPI I see is QPI PPL Vcore and I've often heard the VTT referred to as QPI/VTT as it is the CPU killer.
> 
> More testing to see how low I can go on the QPI/VTT.


Good luck with your testing.

I call it QPI voltage because thats what my Asus BIOS and TurboV call it. Look at my screen shot, TurboV has it labeled as *"QPI/DRAM Core Volt"* and I just shorten that to QPI, lol...

WOW, i just discovered that my chip is performing faster at 190 bclk then it does at 200. Gflops are higher and time to complete is lower at 4.2 then it is at 4.4.

EDIT: OK, I am back down to 4ghz, lol. My GFlops at 200x20 was 65'ish, but at 200x22 it was 81, then at 190x22 (4.2ghz) it was 83, then at 182x22 (4ghz), it was still at 83 GFlops... So my conclusion is this chip is just as good at 4ghz using its highest possible multiplier, as it is at 4.4ghz. At 4.5ghz I was also seeing only 83'ish GFlops, but that seems it will need more voltage to complete the IBT session. The only real difference is that at 4.4 I was in the mid 70's for temps, and at 4ghz I am in the low 60's, or right around 61-62C during full IBT load. I see no benefit running this thing at 4.5 given the negatives it introduces. I'm sure benchmark software would say otherwise though, lol...


----------



## brootalperry

Did you get it stable with x22?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Did you get it stable with x22?


Yeah, its stable at 22. However, the Gflops drops as I lower CPU voltage. It will probably pass the test but that's an indication that it wants the higher voltage. Just going from 1.35v to 1.30v dropped gflops speed from 83 to 79. But it is still running.

EDIT: Lol, load temps also dropped into the upper 50's just removing that tiny amount of voltage... haha


----------



## brootalperry

Interesting. I think I've pretty much given up


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Interesting. I think I've pretty much given up


WHY?

Try lowering BCLK to 182, and upping the multi to 22. Maybe it will accept that instead. You get better CPU performance and its easier on the system as a whole.


----------



## brootalperry

No dice. Anything below 1.35 vcore is unstable....including 1.35


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> No dice. Anything below 1.35 vcore is unstable....including 1.35


Try up the QPI/DRAM core voltage (ASUS mb) to be the same as your vcore, or a little bit higher than the vcore, it works for me.
In my case, the QPI/DRAM core voltage is a notch higher than the vcore, and it is perfectly stable running prime95.

Also, first try to test your stability using the prime95 small fft, the small fft is targeting the CPU only stability.
Only after you pass the small fft, you can then proceed to test the large fft, the large fft will include the testing for RAM.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Try up the QPI/DRAM core voltage (ASUS mb) to be same as you vcore, or a little bit higher than the vcore, it works for me.


I'd rather not...I put it back to 200x20 at 1.25 and it had 2 rebooting fits. When it finally was able to POST after both times it said the overclocking failed. I up the voltage to 1.26 but I'm not sure if it's going to stay stable.

Edit: Didn't take long before it started doing the reboot thing and said the overclock failed.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> No dice. Anything below 1.35 vcore is unstable....including 1.35


Well that's too bad. Sorry to hear that. And this is with Full LLC?

I am finding 182x22 has surprisingly increased the overall snappiness of my system, and so far 1.30v is working great. I did three more 10-pass test runs with IBT on very high and now Prime95 is churning away (it is loading the cores to 100% which IBT would not), but tomorrow I am going to lower voltage some more, at least the QPI voltage.

I read somewhere that top tier water cooling is what lets these chips really shine with lower voltage overclocks, so I was expecting your H80i to work wonders for that chip... I guess you found your chips ceiling. Its still a 50% overclock though, which is what the majority seem to be.


----------



## brootalperry

Yep LLC is on Full. It's fine though.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Yep LLC is on Full. It's fine though.


OK, well if you need any more help or want to see some of my bios settings let me know. Does it at least feel stable at 200x20?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> OK, well if you need any more help or want to see some of my bios settings let me know. Does it at least feel stable at 200x20?


It's not stable anymore with the same 1.25-1.26 vcore. I even tried 1.30 and it keeps rebooting. Not sure what the problem is at this point.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> It's not stable anymore with the same 1.25-1.26 vcore. I even tried 1.30 and it keeps rebooting. Not sure what the problem is at this point.


OK, it must be a weak cpu then.. Did you do a good job with the TIM? How are the temps? Is it stable at stock speeds? Maybe when you get the chance buy another x5650 or x5660 and once you get it in sell this one you have now on ebay to recoup your troubles, lol. I would not put up with a chip that isn't stable at least at 4ghz, especially on your Rampage platform. It has a built in 22 multiplier that should be working at 1.35v or below and considering the fact that these Gulftowns just LOVE LLC, it seems to suggest (to me anyway) that you have a misbehaving CPU.

I hate to keep suggesting things for you (just in case your getting tired of it), but maybe you should try no LLC? Who knows maybe you have a board misbehaving with LLC. I'm now drawing at straws here, lol.. Well good night, hope you figure something out.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> OK, it must be a weak cpu then.. Did you do a good job with the TIM? How are the temps? Is it stable at stock speeds? Maybe when you get the chance buy another x5650 or x5660 and once you get it in sell this one you have now on ebay to recoup your troubles, lol. I would not put up with a chip that isn't stable at least at 4ghz, especially on your Rampage platform. It has a built in 22 multiplier that should be working at 1.35v or below and considering the fact that these Gulftowns just LOVE LLC, it seems to suggest (to me anyway) that you have a misbehaving CPU.
> 
> I hate to keep suggesting things for you (just in case your getting tired of it), but maybe you should try no LLC? Who knows maybe you have a board misbehaving with LLC. I'm now drawing at straws here, lol.. Well good night, hope you figure something out.


Temps aren't a problem considering they haven't even hit 70C yet. I'm gonna try and see if I can get it stable at 4Ghz again. I'm not sure what the problem is, but I'll figure something out. Thanks anyway.


----------



## OCmember

I'm able to hit 3.68GHz @ 1.23v. using the 23 multi but I have to open up the ram to 9.9.9.22 in order for it to work. DRAM speed is 640Mhz


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

I just got my board, CPU, and cooler. Installed it and testing it and it won't post.

I have a Giga EX58-UD3R rev.1, with a known good gskill 1333 cl7 stick and it won't post. All of the phase LEDs are lit and the fans all spin up.

Any thoughts?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I just got my board, CPU, and cooler. Installed it and testing it and it won't post.
> 
> I have a Giga EX58-UD3R rev.1, with a known good gskill 1333 cl7 stick and it won't post. All of the phase LEDs are lit and the fans all spin up.
> 
> Any thoughts?


Check and double check all connections. Make sure you have the cpu connector installed, if you have the larger 8-pin use it over the 6 or 4 pin types. Re-seat EVERYTHING, including ram and cpu. While your reseating the proc, inspect CPU socket pins and the cpu contact pads for debris.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Check and double check all connections. Make sure you have the cpu connector installed, if you have the larger 8-pin use it over the 6 or 4 pin types. Re-seat EVERYTHING, including ram and cpu. While your reseating the proc, inspect CPU socket pins and the cpu contact pads for debris.


I'm thinking it may be an incompatible CPU issue. It only supports hex cores with the F12i for the 970 and F12Q for the 990x.

I have no idea what bios is on here :/

I was so excited.

Also I checked the connections, inspected the socket before installing the cpu, and inspected the bottom of the CPU as well.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I'm thinking it may be an incompatible CPU issue. It only supports hex cores with the F12i for the 970 and F12Q for the 990x.
> 
> I have no idea what bios is on here :/
> 
> I was so excited.
> 
> Also I checked the connections, inspected the socket before installing the cpu, and inspected the bottom of the CPU as well.


I'm going to assume you do not have a standard x58 cpu to throw onto it in order to flash a bios file?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I'm going to assume you do not have a standard x58 cpu to throw onto it in order to flash a bios file?


Not until at least august when my stuff arrives. I have a 920 and a w3520


----------



## bill1024

I have heard that rev2 is needed for x56xx chips on Gigabyte MB. I have asked on a few forums for some one to say for sure their x56xx works on a rev1 and no one replied. It may be the cpu code in the bios that's missing since I have seen that a L-xxxx xeon has worked.
Do you have a any cpu that you can use to update the bios?
You ca buy a new bios chip with latest bios flashed already on it if you do not have a cpu. I did that with my Asus P6T v2 deluxe.The chip was 13$


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Not until at least august when my stuff arrives. I have a 920 and a w3520


Hm, so you have a 920 coming? Or already have one in house? The reason I ask is because I have a good running 930 just sitting here. You can "TRY IT" but I want it back. I will not ship it for anything less then $50 plus $5.25, so $55.25. Once you get your setup working just send it back and I will do a refund of everything except the shipping cost. But only if you promise to use Priority mail small flat rate box ($5.25). I want to try and sell it on ebay for $60 at least, so I do want it back. My ebay seller rating is 100% and I have never and will never rip someone off.

This is just a "service" offer, nothing more. lol, if you do not send it back then you own a 930 for $55.25. It ran at 4ghz at 1.26v for 4 years without once complaining. Up to you bud


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Hm, so you have a 920 coming? Or already have one in house? The reason I ask is because I have a good running 930 just sitting here. You can "TRY IT" but I want it back. I will not ship it for anything less then $50 plus $5.25, so $55.25. Once you get your setup working just send it back and I will do a refund of everything except the shipping cost. But only if you promise to use Priority mail small flat rate box ($5.25). I want to try and sell it on ebay for $60 at least, so I do want it back. My ebay seller rating is 100% and I have never and will never rip someone off.
> 
> This is just a "service" offer, nothing more. lol, if you do not send it back then you own a 930 for $55.25. It ran at 4ghz at 1.26v for 4 years without once complaining. Up to you bud


Thanks for the offer! I just don't have any more money...
Well I have it coming with my household goods since I just moved here.

Haha I have an untested p6t deluxe as well. So if that works, then I'll throw one of the quads in this board. I'll look around locally for one.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Your most welcome, I am nice like that







. If you change your mind my ebay seller user name is http://www.ebay.com/usr/rgray528

I would just send it to you for nothing but I am very tight on cash and cannot risk losing this cpu, which equates to money when I need it (I live off of ebay and paypal right now, I build Motorola Factory Cables for the Kindle Fire series, and am the only one in the USA offering this service, all 100% of my business is based off of XDA word of mouth, lol). In fact, I should not sell it at all just in case something goes wrong with this one, but I have a feeling this xeon will last forever. The offer will stand, but I doubt you will need it. I think you have it under control.

I spoke to Zoson a few minutes ago and I am hoping he figures out why 21 and 23 multi does not work. I'm starting to think I need to tighten up my RAM timings in order for the 23 multi to show itself (that is what happened to someone else anyway). Not sure why that would be tied to ram timings though. lol, it ran Prime95 all night long at 182x22. However, I think I am going to settle it onto 185x22 for now and be done with it. OH, and by the way, to get TurboV working perfectly in Windows 8.1 you need to right click on the installer.exe and set its compatibility to Windows 98. I don't know why but it is running fantastic in my Windows 8.1 and making small BIOS voltage/bclk changes on the fly is just SO MUCH nicer.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Your most welcome, I am nice like that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . If you change your mind my ebay seller user name is http://www.ebay.com/usr/rgray528
> 
> I would just send it to you for nothing but I am very tight on cash and cannot risk losing this cpu, which equates to money when I need it (I live off of ebay and paypal right now, I build Motorola Factory Cables for the Kindle Fire series, and am the only one in the USA offering this service, all 100% of my business is based off of XDA word of mouth, lol). In fact, I should not sell it at all just in case something goes wrong with this one, but I have a feeling this xeon will last forever. The offer will stand, but I doubt you will need it. I think you have it under control.


I really appreciate it, and I know what you mean about being tight on money Haha I used the winnings from the anniversary contest in April to find the upgrade and I don't have any money anymore haha


----------



## brootalperry

So even at stock settings it doesn't seem to be stable.
At this point I don't know if it's the CPU or the RAM that's having a fit.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> So even at stock settings it doesn't seem to be stable.
> At this point I don't know if it's the CPU or the RAM that's having a fit.


Mem test the ram?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Mem test the ram?


Yeah I'll try that.
Perhaps the RAM got worn out running at 1.60 volts at 1600Mhz...

Might have to start looking for some new RAM, so if anyone has some extra sticks I'll be happy to buy them from you for a good price.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Yeah I'll try that.
> Perhaps the RAM got worn out running at 1.60 volts at 1600Mhz...
> 
> Might have to start looking for some new RAM, so if anyone has some extra sticks I'll be happy to buy them from you for a good price.


If you have a good brand like gskill, RMA is easy. I bought a used set that was dead, thought I got burned, and I just sent them in and they replaced them for free (just had to pay shipping which was $6)

I heard a guy RMA a set because it passed memtest86 but would fail prime95 blend test.

Anyways the moral is, if you don't have a good brand, buy a quality set that has lifetime warranty.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> If you have a good brand like gskill, RMA is easy. I bought a used set that was dead, thought I got burned, and I just sent them in and they replaced them for free (just had to pay shipping which was $6)
> 
> I heard a guy RMA a set because it passed memtest86 but would fail prime95 blend test.
> 
> Anyways the moral is, if you don't have a good brand, buy a quality set that has lifetime warranty.


The sticks I'm using were pretty cheap when I bought them back in 2012. 8GB for $32







RMA might be impossible now though considering Newegg doesn't list these particular sticks anymore.
I'm using memtest now. I guess afterwards it will tell me if something is wrong?


----------



## demps709

I recently picked up a X5650. I haven't put it in my rig yet but I was wondering if there is anything special in regards to OCing these or is it basically the same as OCing a 920?


----------



## brootalperry

So I took out 1 stick and what do ya know? It's stable again. However I'm running stock settings.

I'm willing to put money on the fact that it's the RAM and not the CPU.
However RAM is so expensive, and I don't want to be running 4GB...

I'll try different slots to see if that helps any, but I'll still have to look around for some RAM...

Edit: Just tried with 2 sticks in different slots and same results. Removed 1 stick and it boots fine with all at default settings.
Not sure which stick is bad, or if the motherboard or the sticks themselves have decided to not work in dual channel anymore. Looks like I'll have to use 4GB until I can get some new RAM. But I'm relieved it's not the CPU. Maybe if I get new RAM I'll be able to use that x22 multiplier??

Anyway like I said, if anyone have any extra sticks that I can use I'll be happy to buy them from you. Just send me a PM


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> So I took out 1 stick and what do ya know? It's stable again. However I'm running stock settings.
> 
> I'm willing to put money on the fact that it's the RAM and not the CPU.
> However RAM is so expensive, and I don't want to be running 4GB...
> 
> I'll try different slots to see if that helps any, but I'll still have to look around for some RAM...


All RAM should be good up to 1.65v (or just under 1.64v), however what is wintec?

Yeah RAM is becoming ridiculous in price imo, I will probably never go above my 12GB kit. What will subsequently force me to do so is Skylake (my next upgrade path) if I can't find a descent enthusiast board with DDR3 support. IF, I can find a beautiful DDR3 board for Skylake I could just shop around for a 4th identical DDR3 module on ebay that matches my current 3 sticks, assuming Skylake will be quad memory channels and run at 1600 mhz as a minimum (not sure about that one). However, that does not mean Skylake wont run perfectly in tri-channel mode, right? lol, 12GB is still 12GB...


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> All RAM should be good up to 1.65v (or just under 1.64v), however what is wintec?
> 
> Yeah RAM is becoming ridiculous in price imo, I will probably never go above my 12GB kit. What will subsequently force me to do so is Skylake (my next upgrade path) if I can't find a descent enthusiast board with DDR3 support. IF, I can find a beautiful DDR3 board for Skylake I could just shop around for a 4th identical DDR3 module on ebay that matches my current 3 sticks, assuming Skylake will be quad memory channels and run at 1600 mhz as a minimum (not sure about that one). However, that does not mean Skylake wont run perfectly in tri-channel mode, right? lol, 12GB is still 12GB...


This is the RAM I bought back in 2012: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820161468 See? It's not available anymore. And since then the price of RAM has gone up by $40+ for the same size and timings. Here's their website: http://www.wintecind.com/features/dram/Desktop_Memory/DDR3_Value.html

I'm not exactly sure why one of them failed though. I never pushed the voltage pass 1.60. The only thing I pushed was the frequency from 1333 to 1600.
Still I'm not sure if 1 stick really is bad or they just refuse to run in dual channel now.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> This is the RAM I bought back in 2012: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820161468 See? It's not available anymore. And since then the price of RAM has gone up by $40+ for the same size and timings. Here's their website: http://www.wintecind.com/features/dram/Desktop_Memory/DDR3_Value.html
> 
> I'm not exactly sure why one of them failed though. I never pushed the voltage pass 1.60. The only thing I pushed was the frequency from 1333 to 1600.
> Still I'm not sure if 1 stick really is bad or they just refuse to run in dual channel now.


Test them individually at defaults. If one is bad look at this at ebay 181429089651 to replace it. 2012? Maybe it is still under warranty perhaps?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Test them individually at defaults. If one is bad look at this at ebay 181429089651 to replace it. 2012? Maybe it is still under warranty perhaps?


Wow good find!
I'll test the other stick and see if it boots up.

Edit: I put in the other stick, and while the system boots up with no problems, it seems very sluggish. The desktop icons took like a good minute to load up. I loaded up Skyrim and the system didn't crash like it did before.

Will try both again...

Edit 2: I'm running both sticks again and everything SEEMS fine...but i'm being cautious. Gonna load up Skyrim then Crysis Warhead and do 4 passes of ITB and then 5 minutes of Prime on Blend.

If everything checks out I'll go back and try to push for my 4Ghz settings...

Edit 3: Tried 4ghz settings again. Now it doesn't even get to POST because it keeps turning itself off... I'll try each stick individually at 1600mhz and see if it boots or not.

Edit 4: this thing seems really finicky. Each stick running at my 4ghz settings seem to be fine. But running them both seems to be a big no no.
This is just....weird

I'm not sure if I should buy any of those 4gb sticks. Both sticks I have now seem fine when running alone. But flip out once I run them in dual channel.


----------



## brootalperry

Could it be that it's unstable since I'm running it in dual channel instead of triple channel?


----------



## alancsalt

I've run X58 in dual channel no problems.


----------



## brootalperry

Well looks like I'm back to square 1 :/


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Wow good find!
> I'll test the other stick and see if it boots up.
> 
> Edit: I put in the other stick, and while the system boots up with no problems, it seems very sluggish. The desktop icons took like a good minute to load up. I loaded up Skyrim and the system didn't crash like it did before.
> 
> Will try both again...
> 
> Edit 2: I'm running both sticks again and everything SEEMS fine...but i'm being cautious. Gonna load up Skyrim then Crysis Warhead and do 4 passes of ITB and then 5 minutes of Prime on Blend.
> 
> If everything checks out I'll go back and try to push for my 4Ghz settings...
> 
> Edit 3: Tried 4ghz settings again. Now it doesn't even get to POST because it keeps turning itself off... I'll try each stick individually at 1600mhz and see if it boots or not.
> 
> Edit 4: this thing seems really finicky. Each stick running at my 4ghz settings seem to be fine. But running them both seems to be a big no no.
> This is just....weird
> 
> I'm not sure if I should buy any of those 4gb sticks. Both sticks I have now seem fine when running alone. But flip out once I run them in dual channel.


I just think the RAM was not designed for what your doing. I think that RAM is for a cheap desktop computer that runs at stock speeds. Maybe pushing it weakened them as well. You need some real RAM from the likes of Kingston, Corsair or GSkill, preferably in the 1600 mhz range


----------



## brootalperry

Yep, got some 3x4GB Kingston Genesis RAM ordered. Maybe this will make x22 multiplier stable as well?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Yep, got some 3x4GB Kingston Genesis RAM ordered. Maybe this will make x22 multiplier stable as well?


You won't know until you try it. I'd like to bet it will but I can't even afford to bet these days, lol...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

take two. Well I just completed 24 hours of Prime95 at 185x22 and only 1.3v. All day I used it for business, and chatting within several forums, keeping customer informed of deliveries etc and not once did it skip a beat. I don't think my 930 could have done that, even at 4ghz... I LOVE THIS CPU...

Makes me want to find another one that has a working 23 multiplier for a possible 5ghz. Now I want to see what 5ghz feels like on these chips lol...


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have heard that rev2 is needed for x56xx chips on Gigabyte MB. I have asked on a few forums for some one to say for sure their x56xx works on a rev1 and no one replied. It may be the cpu code in the bios that's missing since I have seen that a L-xxxx xeon has worked.
> Do you have a any cpu that you can use to update the bios?
> You ca buy a new bios chip with latest bios flashed already on it if you do not have a cpu. I did that with my Asus P6T v2 deluxe.The chip was 13$


For the record, I have a first edition EX58-UD5 and I'm running a X5670 in it perfectly. That is on the latest BIOS though.

@Ultra-m-a-n: My guess is that you have an older BIOS that doesn't know what to do with the chip. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a way of flashing the BIOS without having a chip installed. Possibly a recovery flash from a floppy (if you still have one in a closet) or a usb stick. You might have to wait until you get your pile of computer parts.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I wish I would have kept my 3x2gb 1600 mhz Corsair Dominators. I didn't know that this thing could run different memory modules at the same time, it didn't even dawn on me. I could have been rocking 18GB. grrr


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> For the record, I have a first edition EX58-UD5 and I'm running a X5670 in it perfectly. That is on the latest BIOS though.
> 
> @Ultra-m-a-n: My guess is that you have an older BIOS that doesn't know what to do with the chip. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a way of flashing the BIOS without having a chip installed. Possibly a recovery flash from a floppy (if you still have one in a closet) or a usb stick. You might have to wait until you get your pile of computer parts.


yeah ive read a few people running the same board, not sure which revision though, but they were able to have the xeons running no problem.

also I messaged a guy on the local classifieds here in Ramstein, and he said he has a friend who recently upgraded from a 920 to a 4770k, wondering if he would part with his old rig for free, cause im broke ahaha, I hope that a young army guy would have no need for a spare rig.


----------



## OCmember

Can't believe the X5670's are going for less than what I paid for my X5660. x24 seems to be a nice multi


----------



## anubis1127

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Can't believe the X5670's are going for less than what I paid for my X5660. x24 seems to be a nice multi


Ikr, it makes me cringe when I remember what I paid for my x5650s.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I was looking at a x5675 yesterday going for just a few hundred. It may guarantee 5ghz depending on what turbo multis it offers. I wish I knew where to find multiplier info because all the official sources do not mention the real multis these chips have.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Ikr, it makes me cringe when I remember what I paid for my x5650s.


Lol yeah and what I paid for my x5679's


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

LOL,

and for us quad core users who always dreamed of a hexa core, it makes me extremely happy.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *anubis1127*
> 
> Ikr, it makes me cringe when I remember what I paid for my x5650s.


Imagine how I felt when I paid 2 of them new in my 2010 Mac Pro back in the days







thats even scarier...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Does anyone have any theories as to why or what has caused these chips to be sold for such huge price reductions in the first place? The i7-970 is still fetching in upwards of $300 on ebay yet the x5650 is less then $100. They seem to be pretty much the same processor, and even then the Xeon has a few more features...


----------



## brootalperry

Skorpn what are your idle temps?
I'm running stock and HWInfo says the Minimums and Maximums are:

Core 1: 31-37 C
Core 2: 26-33 C
Core 3: 31-41 C
Core 4: 29-38 C
Core 5: 23-31 C
Core 6: 32-40 C

With an H80i and running everything at stock...I can't help but think they can be a few degrees cooler.
When I got the H80i I pretty much left the stock thermal paste on since people said it was a good paste. But I'm wondering if I should reseat it and put on a little MX-4. What do you think?

And a side note, my new RAM is already shipped and should be here by next week. It's literally travelling across the country via USPS, so I'm not surprised. If it was UPS it'd probably be here by Friday =P
Can't wait though...the current sticks I have now are driving me crazy with the instability. At least I hope it's the sticks that are the source of my problem.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Does anyone have any theories as to why or what has caused these chips to be sold for such huge price reductions in the first place? The i7-970 is still fetching in upwards of $300 on ebay yet the x5650 is less then $100. They seem to be pretty much the same processor, and even then the Xeon has a few more features...


I would guess big oil and gas companies and other corporations are doing server upgrades. The AMD 12 core chips are selling for 10 cents on the dollar too. The server cpus are 5 years old now and with any large company that has an IT or maintenance budget, if they don't use it, they lose it. So they upgrade to save on electric and have newer parts so there is less down time when older hardware dies.
The companies that recycle all this older hardware gets paid to recycle parts and I am sure they make a good margin on the parts sold.
And I doubt there are as many buyers for used hardware as we think there are. Some gamers and folders that buy used parts to OC and play with, but I bet most folks buy new.
.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I would guess big oil and gas companies and other corporations are doing server upgrades. The AMD 12 core chips are selling for 10 cents on the dollar too. The server cpus are 5 years old now and with any large company that has an IT or maintenance budget, if they don't use it, they lose it. So they upgrade to save on electric and have newer parts so there is less down time when older hardware dies.
> The companies that recycle all this older hardware gets paid to recycle parts and I am sure they make a good margin on the parts sold.
> And I doubt there are as many buyers for used hardware as we think there are. Some gamers and folders that buy used parts to OC and play with, but I bet most folks buy new.
> .


I was thinking the same thing, but why big oil? Not data centers and the like? (I just wanna know what you think)

Yeah I agree most people buy new, and these are def a niche within an already niche market.
Also I assume they made more server chips than consumer chips anyways, since that would be Intel's bread and butter profits right there.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Skorpn what are your idle temps?
> I'm running stock and HWInfo says the Minimums and Maximums are:
> 
> Core 1: 31-37 C
> Core 2: 26-33 C
> Core 3: 31-41 C
> Core 4: 29-38 C
> Core 5: 23-31 C
> Core 6: 32-40 C
> 
> With an H80i and running everything at stock...I can't help but think they can be a few degrees cooler.
> When I got the H80i I pretty much left the stock thermal paste on since people said it was a good paste. But I'm wondering if I should reseat it and put on a little MX-4. What do you think?
> 
> And a side note, my new RAM is already shipped and should be here by next week. It's literally travelling across the country via USPS, so I'm not surprised. If it was UPS it'd probably be here by Friday =P
> Can't wait though...the current sticks I have now are driving me crazy with the instability. At least I hope it's the sticks that are the source of my problem.


My temps are about what yours are. Upper 20's, low 30's (mostly between 32-34) and mid 50's to upper 60's when fully stressed and not too much voltage. Mind you I'm on a premium water loop. Voltage is 1.30v and running the cpu at 185x22.

OK, that makes sense about the server upgrades. I wasn't thinking when I was wondering lol...


----------



## brootalperry

I see. Thanks.
Will worry about temps if/when I can start overclocking again.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I was thinking the same thing, but why big oil? Not data centers and the like? (I just wanna know what you think)
> 
> Yeah I agree most people buy new, and these are def a niche within an already niche market.
> Also I assume they made more server chips than consumer chips anyways, since that would be Intel's bread and butter profits right there.


Going back about a year or so ago, a couple people who worked IT for a large oil co said they were doing upgrades and were going to get a couple CPUs for their folding farm.They we talking about how they upgrade servers every couple/few years. How much money they lose if servers go ff line and how much electric they use. What they said stuck in my head is all.
I worked at IBM and watched them burn money at the end of the year so they would get the same amount in their budget the next year.


----------



## OCmember

I might be one that has encouraged those prices as I wasn't interested in doing a few hard mods to my EVGA Classified Rev1.0 motherboard. Niche market but none-the-less, and I agree with the server upgrade model by big corporations whether big oil companies or whatever. The EVGA Classified Rev1.1 fixed the compatibility issues with the Xeons. Fortunately enough my main rig housed an Asrock X58 Extreme which with a simple Bios update positioned the motherboard to run the Xeons. I still have my Classified X58 system with it's i7 970. I should name it Gluttony. It's great but sad at the same time.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I might be one that has encouraged those prices as I wasn't interested in doing a few hard mods to my EVGA Classified Rev1.0 motherboard. Niche market but none-the-less, and I agree with the server upgrade model by big corporations whether big oil companies or whatever. The EVGA Classified Rev1.1 fixed the compatibility issues with the Xeons. Fortunately enough my main rig housed an Asrock X58 Extreme which with a simple Bios update positioned the motherboard to run the Xeons. I still have my Classified X58 system with it's i7 970. I should name it Gluttony. It's great but sad at the same time.


Don't be scurrrd







There are only two places to solder and it isn't very difficult if you know how to solder







I did it on the classy and the x58 SLi versions (only required one point soldered vs the classy's two).


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Skorpn what are your idle temps?
> I'm running stock and HWInfo says the Minimums and Maximums are:
> 
> Core 1: 31-37 C
> Core 2: 26-33 C
> Core 3: 31-41 C
> Core 4: 29-38 C
> Core 5: 23-31 C
> Core 6: 32-40 C
> 
> With an H80i and running everything at stock...I can't help but think they can be a few degrees cooler.
> When I got the H80i I pretty much left the stock thermal paste on since people said it was a good paste. But I'm wondering if I should reseat it and put on a little MX-4. What do you think?
> 
> And a side note, my new RAM is already shipped and should be here by next week. It's literally travelling across the country via USPS, so I'm not surprised. If it was UPS it'd probably be here by Friday =P
> Can't wait though...the current sticks I have now are driving me crazy with the instability. At least I hope it's the sticks that are the source of my problem.


UPS uses shipping trucks on the ground to move everything unless you're paying them for next day service. USPS uses Air Planes for EVERYTHING including first class mail. They just take their time at the sorting centers because they have 100 times more packages to sort through.

I have shipped tens of thousands of first class mail in the states and going across country is always faster than ups or FedEx. From NM to say NY my packages always arrive in 3 days or less. Once it made in in 36 hours during a hurricane.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> UPS uses shipping trucks on the ground to move everything unless you're paying them for next day service. USPS uses Air Planes for EVERYTHING including first class mail. They just take their time at the sorting centers because they have 100 times more packages to sort through.
> 
> I have shipped tens of thousands of first class mail in the states and going across country is always faster than ups or FedEx. From NM to say NY my packages always arrive in 3 days or less. Once it made in in 36 hours during a hurricane.


Really? That's quite remarkable xD I've always tried to use UPS when ordering stuff online. But lately it seems a lot of people use USPS now.

Anyway it's standard shipping and is traveling from Spokane, Washington to Atlanta, Georgia. Literally across the country. I expect it next Monday or Tuesday if it's going by truck... Which I think it is.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Really? That's quite remarkable xD I've always tried to use UPS when ordering stuff online. But lately it seems a lot of people use USPS now.
> 
> Anyway it's standard shipping and is traveling from Spokane, Washington to Atlanta, Georgia. Literally across the country. I expect it next Monday or Tuesday if it's going by truck... Which I think it is.


Fedex /ups is too expensive for me, I lived in Hawaii, now in an APO address, so flat rate is a lifesaver!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Really? That's quite remarkable xD I've always tried to use UPS when ordering stuff online. But lately it seems a lot of people use USPS now.


Its not remarkable, it has been this way since the 1920's ever since Air fleets became into existance. USPS says 98.5% of all your mail uses Air planes, including yours. It has to since they do not have a trucking fleet, LOL... They use Commercial Jetliners, and EVERY single AIR plane flying overhead at any given time has its cargo bay full of USPS mail. It is the sorting facilities that take forever to get the mail to you, because its a logistics nightmare to say the least. Sorry this is off-topic...

Copied and posted from USPS.com
Quote:


> How A Letter Travels
> 
> Collection
> After a customer has deposited a letter destined for a distant address in a collection box, a postal carrier removes all of the mail from the box and takes it to the Post Office where he or she works. That letter and mail collected by other carriers of that Post Office are placed on a truck and taken to a mail processing plant.
> 
> Culling and Postmarking
> Postal workers send the letter through a machine that rapidly separates mail by shape, separating letters from large envelopes and packages (the culling operation). The machine orients letters so that all addresses face the same way and are right side up. It then applies a postmark with the date and place where the letter was sorted and cancellation lines so the stamp cannot be reused, in order to protect postal revenue.
> 
> Scanning and Lifting Images
> Every letter gets identified by a code consisting of a series of florescent bars imprinted on the back. The address on the front of each letter is scanned by an optical character reader. Images of letters that could not be successfully read are transmitted to a remote encoding center for further processing. All letters are placed in trays and moved to the next piece of automated equipment for barcode application.
> 
> Applying a Barcode and Sorting
> Linked with the identification code, a barcode is sprayed on the front of the letter. Representing the specific delivery address, the barcode consists of tall and short bars used for all further sorting. The barcode sends a letter into a bin on the machine for a particular range of ZIP Codes; these identify the next processing plant.
> 
> Transportation to Processing Plant
> *The letter is placed in a tray with other mail for the ZIP Code range it falls into, and this tray is taken to the airport to fly across the country.* After the plane lands at its destination, postal workers take the tray containing the letter to the mail processing plant that serves the Post Office, station, or branch that will deliver the letter.
> 
> Sorting into Delivery Order
> At the plant, the letters in the tray are fed through a barcode sorter, which separates letters for a specific ZIP Code from other letters in that ZIP Code range. After this, the letter will receive its final sortation. A delivery barcode sorter sorts the letter to the particular carrier who will deliver it. The delivery barcode sorter also arranges that carrier's letters into the order of delivery.
> 
> Transportation to Delivery Post Office
> Next, all the mail for this carrier is taken by truck to the Post Office, station, or branch in which the carrier works. The carrier loads trays of mail, including the letter, into a motor vehicle.
> 
> Delivery to Addressee
> The carrier drives to the street where the letter is to be delivered, safely parks, then loads his or her satchel with the mail to be carried to each house or business. Within minutes of leaving the truck, the carrier delivers the letter to the addressee.
> 
> More than 700 million pieces of mail are sorted and delivered by the Postal Service each delivery day.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*FINALLY* I've setup my RAID 0 configurations. Actually I'm unloading data onto the last partition. I decided to go ahead and the SSDs another try. I setup two SSDs in RAID 0 along with x2-HDDS RAID 0 + another x2 HDD RAID 0. 3 partitions. I have roughly 4TBs of space. I also have 6 TBs for backups. I haven't ran any personal test just yet, but I have performed plenty of benchmarks. All I need know is a RAID [5] backup. I have one partition solely for my high end music programs. So I can't wait to get everything setup again and test it out. Here are some benchmarks.

I still have some things to work out with the SSDs and HDDs results. This all I have for now. I'm running everything at stock settings - 2.8Ghz w/ 1333Mhz

*SSDx2 RAID 0:*

*CrystalDiskMark 100 MB:*









*CrystalDiskMark 1000 MB:*









HD Tach [not really for SSDs, but who cares]

*HD Tach - Quick Benchmark:*









*HD Tach - Long Benchmark:*









*HD Tune Benchmark:*









*HD Tune File Benchmark:*









*ATTO Disk Benchmark:*









Here's data from one of my HDDs RAID Arrays.....I'm moving data on the other two.

*HDDx2 RAID 0:*

*CrystalDiskMark 100 MB:*









*HD Tach - Quick Benchmark:*









*HD Tune Benchmark:*









*HD Tune File Benchmark:*









*ATTO Disk Benchmark:*









My SSDs scores were much worse at first. I've been messing around with the drivers and got my benchmarks scores up







. I'm still gonna have to figure out what the hell is up in the Write MB/s department. I'll have to do some more messing around and testing. Any suggestions are welcomed.

As for the HDDs, they are performing very well.


----------



## 88hurst

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Don't be scurrrd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are only two places to solder and it isn't very difficult if you know how to solder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did it on the classy and the x58 SLi versions (only required one point soldered vs the classy's two).


Must agree here, mod is very easy to do. Just did it a week ago. Glad I did it too, right now I'm at 4.5 on my x5660! ? oh and thanks to kpforce1 for the advice!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

What kind of solder mod are we talking about? Soldering is one of my best skills, for which Intel paid me lots of money to do, lol... Is this mod something I can do to my Rampage III by chance?

Talking about mods, has anyone ever seen the ROG Rampage III (x58) mod by the legendary Ban Nguyen in Vietnam? I always wished I had the tools and shop space to do that kind of work. Check out the build from start to finish, its just insane work. Page 5 has the final build log pics.

Work like that is what inspired me to tear apart my TJ07 and mod the heck out of it as well. But of course, my work doesn't even touch what he did to his x58 mobo... Wish I had a few grand, I think Id start from scratch, slap in a SR-2 and two 5675's and fully water cool everything like Ban did.


----------



## brootalperry

So my RAM has arrived in Atlanta! I was expecting it to be delivered next week, but I just might get it today or tomorrow!
Seriously I can't wait because I'm just now getting back into using After Effects and the 12GB of 1600Mhz RAM (at least I hope they run that fast) will be a huge bonus on top of having a 6 core 12 thread Xeon.

The random reboots I'm suffering right now is driving me up the wall!


----------



## 88hurst

The solder mod is nothing more than allowing compatibility on the early revision classified boards.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *88hurst*
> 
> The solder mod is nothing more than allowing compatibility on the early revision classified boards.


Ahh OK, that is what I was thinking too. I thought about doing something along the lines of that for my brother and his 775 but decided not to even mention it to him... lol


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Ahh OK, that is what I was thinking too. I thought about doing something along the lines of that for my brother and his 775 but decided not to even mention it to him... lol


Don't even need to for the 775 boards to use the 771 xeons







.... they make stickers with traces on them for that


----------



## Lionvibez

Kana have you modified your bios yet to enable trim in Raid if not it has to be done.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nah I haven't, but I have ran a program that concluded that Trim was active\working. In ATTO test the HDDs did better early in the test 4 to 64K. I thought that was surprising and alarming. I guess I should do the mod. I'll look into it.

My HDDs are moving data very well between RAIDS:









I just hate that I have to set everything up again.


----------



## rwarr

i was wondering is it worth upgrading to these xeons? i have a i7 930 at 4.2 and i'm not entirely sure if it would be a nice small upgrade for me in terms of performance? the x5650s are really cheap and i don't think i'll lose much but still, would like some advice.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> Kana have you modified your bios yet to enable trim in Raid if not it has to be done.


Hey I've checked from several sources and it appears that TRIM is working as of right now. Do you have a link to the Sabertooth X58 BIOS mod? I still can't believe that a HDD RAID 0 is outperforming a SDD RAID 0 early in the ATTO Benchmark.










See what I mean? The SSD is boss in the write areas, but early on the HDD is getting way better writes from 4-64.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rwarr*
> 
> i was wondering is it worth upgrading to these xeons? i have a i7 930 at 4.2 and i'm not entirely sure if it would be a nice small upgrade for me in terms of performance? the x5650s are really cheap and i don't think i'll lose much but still, would like some advice.


I know that this topic is huge and it's hard to go through all of the pages for advice and results etc. On the first page I've compared my results from my i7-960 from 3.8Ghz - 4.2Ghz vs my X5660. I have personally seen huge gains across the board. The X5650 is the best bang for your buck right now and I would definitely say that it's worth the upgrade. The X5650 is exactly the same as the X5660 EXCEPT the X5650 is missing one measly multiplier. X5650 = 23x - X5660 = 24x. Nothing major since nearly all X5650 users are hitting 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz rather easily. Now I'm seeing X5650 users hit 4.6Ghz and 4.7-4.8Ghz just like my X5660.

Gaming wise the Hex cores makes your GPUs match X79 GPUs with similar setups. For example I'll use my Crysis 3 expereience....my GTX 670 2-way SLI + i7-960 @ 4.1Ghz was only showing 25fps - 35fps. Sometimes it would dip to 20fps and spike to 40fps randomly. It was very choppy and unplayable at 1080p+Very High+MSAAx8 [100% maxed out]. Several benchmarking sites showed 2 way SLI GTX 670s getting around 50fps-55fps @ 1080p maxed out, but I wasn't even close. When I installed my Xeon L5639 and later my Xeon X5660....AT STOCK I gained a much better experience. No stuttering and no choppy gameplay. The frame times + rates were great. I've also posted my results for this on the first page as well. Overclocking the CPU only made this better and increased my fps increase while my frame time decreased! The i7-960 was pretty much bottlenecking from my experience. The Hex cores solved that problem and allowed more overhead.

Unless you want to upgrade and spend a nice amount of chase on the X79 $550 Hex cores which are pretty 10% faster than the X58 Hex cores be my guest. I'm glad I took a chance and purchased my Hexa core on the X58. I can only recommend that you should upgrade while they are still available. Trust me you will not regret man.







. Make sure your board will support the Hex core. Some boards require a BIOS update and other don't.


----------



## rwarr

thanks for the reply Kana-Maru. I have read the first post with all the comparisons and benchmarks and i was really impressed with the difference but i just wanted to see if others had the same current setup as me and saw a noticeable difference. anyways i will definitely order one right away due to your answer


----------



## Kana-Maru

You are welcome. You can check throughout this topic if you want or you can check out my Xeon Club topic for more X58 users who are using the CPU. I'm sure you'll want more insight than solely my point of view. Just post and ask and I'm sure someone will tell you their experience. There are many others that have jumped ship to the Xeon X58. Some have even downgraded to X58 believe it or not. Good luck and feel free to continue to post with any questions you may have.

I'm sort of having a SSD RAID 0 \ TRIM headache at the moment. I'm trying to figure somethings out.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm sort of having a SSD RAID 0 \ TRIM headache at the moment. I'm trying to figure somethings out.


Have you modified your bios OROM to support TRIM? and using raid drivers that support it?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Have you modified your bios OROM to support TRIM? and using raid drivers that support it?


What controller and raid driver are you using?
Intel?
Because AFAIK RST and intel raid support trim in raid 0 no?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> What controller and raid driver are you using?
> Intel?
> Because AFAIK RST and intel raid support trim in raid 0 no?


No x58 does not officially support trim in raid mode. You have to modify the bios orom to support it.

That is why we have websites like win-raid lol
http://www.win-raid.com/t202f28-TRIM-in-RAID-seems-possible-for-all-Intel-chipsets-from-P-up.html#


----------



## Lionvibez

Thanks for posting this Skorpn.

All the information is on win-raid.

Once you modify your orom trim will be working.

here are my adventures with his mod from the anandtech forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2281849&page=24


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> Thanks for posting this Skorpn.
> 
> All the information is on win-raid.
> 
> Once you modify your orom trim will be working.


Your welcome. I also use both station drivers and bios mods websites to keep my bios up to date and to learn how to modify bios files. Station drivers will get new OROM's for practically everything on your board and bios mods will either mod it for you or teach you how to do it yourself. Fernando over at win raid has put more work into explaining this stuff then almost anyone else on the planet and keeps all the Intel drivers up to date. Extremely resourceful support forum he built there for sure. I may have a x58 mobo but many items onboard (including the NIC) has 2014 firmware. I was not satisfied with Asus update intervals and lack of support so had to go outside the box for it.


----------



## Lionvibez

Yes fernando is great and helped me alot on the anandtech forum.

Hmm i've never thought doing the NIC firmware... you may have just given me a project for the day.

Was there anything else you updated on your board besides the OROM and NIC?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

The Intel orom, JMicron orom and firmware, the nic firmware and the Marvell orom are all the latest versions. I think anything else on the board has other ways of updating such as the USB 3 through a Windows app. But the first I mention are done via a bios flash.

I'm using ZioGTS mod so look for that and he shows you what he did and he offers the files separately for people who want to mod their own bios. His bios is specifically for the Rampage but the files will work on many boards.

EDIT: Here is a list of what is new and or updated on my x58 Rampage III board. My SSD Intel Raid0 has perfect TRIM support. TRIM works every bit as good as it does on newer chipset. It was determined Intel kept TRIM from us for a very long time because they didnt see the need for it until SSD became mainstream and the norm. However, once that happered they also wanted to use TRIM as one of the many selling points and just never enabled for their older chipsets. However, it works perfectly all the way back to the P35 platform and ICH7+ I think.

Intel® ICH10R SATA RAID Controller: v13.1.0.2126
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bios : v1.0.0.1033*
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Firmware: v2.2.0.1125*
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bootloader: v1.0.1.0002b*
JMicron JMB36X Controller: v1.07.28
Intel® 82567V-2 Gigabit Network: v1.5.13

With all this said, the Intel OROM really isn't designed for their older chipsets as performance tests show, however I have found the stability with the newer OROM's are far greater then using something like 11.x OROMs. OR, I am just having much better luck with the newer OROM's. When I flash the older modded OROM back on, the system just does not run as smoothly, or stability becomes an issue. The newest OROMs always seem to just work for me and windows/linux "feels" better lol. OROMs and drivers need to match though for the best benefits.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> The Intel orom, JMicron orom and firmware, the nic firmware and the Marvell orom are all the latest versions. I think anything else on the board has other ways of updating such as the USB 3 through a Windows app. But the first I mention are done via a bios flash.
> 
> I'm using ZioGTS mod so look for that and he shows you what he did and he offers the files separately for people who want to mod their own bios. His bios is specifically for the Rampage but the files will work on many boards.
> 
> EDIT: Here is a list of what is new and or updated on my x58 Rampage III board. My SSD Intel Raid0 has perfect TRIM support. TRIM works every bit as good as it does on newer chipset. It was determined Intel kept TRIM from us for a very long time because they didnt see the need for it until SSD became mainstream and the norm. However, once that happered they also wanted to use TRIM as one of the many selling points and just never enabled for their older chipsets. However, it works perfectly all the way back to the P35 platform and ICH7+ I think.
> 
> Intel® ICH10R SATA RAID Controller: v13.1.0.2126
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bios : v1.0.0.1033*
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Firmware: v2.2.0.1125*
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bootloader: v1.0.1.0002b*
> JMicron JMB36X Controller: v1.07.28
> Intel® 82567V-2 Gigabit Network: v1.5.13
> 
> With all this said, the Intel OROM really isn't designed for their older chipsets as performance tests show, however I have found the stability with the newer OROM's are far greater then using something like 11.x OROMs. OR, I am just having much better luck with the newer OROM's. When I flash the older modded OROM back on, the system just does not run as smoothly, or stability becomes an issue. The newest OROMs always seem to just work for me and windows/linux "feels" better lol. OROMs and drivers need to match though for the best benefits.


Thanks for the version info







I was wondering what versions you were actually running









EDIT: There is an EVGA x58 Classified 760 board for sale in the marketplace


----------



## dbrittain

@}SkOrPn--'

Where did you get the driver updates/ZioGTS mod from?


----------



## Darktrooper78

Will the x5650 work on an EVGA X58 sli? I found a page stated it s supported but I've also seen multiple discussions about the need for modding?

Also, has anyone OCed on the x58 sli with this chip?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darktrooper78*
> 
> Will the x5650 work on an EVGA X58 sli? I found a page stated it s supported but I've also seen multiple discussions about the need for modding?
> 
> Also, has anyone OCed on the x58 sli with this chip?


Is it the EVGA X58 SLI 758? If so you will have to do a solder mod. I have the picture for the location to be soldered. I haven't done my 758 yet (haven't had time) but I have done the x58 Classy 760.


----------



## Darktrooper78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Is it the EVGA X58 SLI 758? If so you will have to do a solder mod. I have the picture for the location to be soldered. I haven't done my 758 yet (haven't had time) but I have done the x58 Classy 760.


I'm not to sure which model in specific it is, how could i check?

Edit: I have the SLI LE, here is the product number - 141-BL-E757-TR


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darktrooper78*
> 
> I'm not to sure which model in specific it is, how could i check?
> 
> Edit: I have the SLI LE, here is the product number - 141-BL-E757-TR


Yes it will require one are by the NB solderd. I think it is the same as the 758's mod

This is what I found on kinkpincooling:

"Just done the mod (only the NB) on my E757 1.0 yesterday and works fine with Xeon L5640 on bios 83"

I'm trying to get the mod info.... I also need to find it for the x58 Micro


----------



## Akadaka

I just got another GTX 780 Kana!


----------



## avp2007

Can somebody look at my rig and tell me if I can run one of these chips ? Is there a certain kind or seller on eBay I need to know about ?


----------



## Akadaka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> Can somebody look at my rig and tell me if I can run one of these chips ? Is there a certain kind or seller on eBay I need to know about ?


Yes Apparently X58 Sabertooth is really good for the 6core Xeon's ask Kana Maru, he has it!


----------



## avp2007

Is there a certain processor ? EBay user that sells them that you guys know about ?might buy one tonight . What's the average OC? I have 1333 ram so I think that might hurt me a bit


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> Is there a certain processor ? EBay user that sells them that you guys know about ?might buy one tonight . What's the average OC? I have 1333 ram so I think that might hurt me a bit


Bought mine form this guy right here:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Processor-Grade-A-/121250737445?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1c3b1b6d25

if you just search x5650, you should get a few results, theyre around $75 now.


----------



## avp2007

Thank you.. I just purchased !


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> Thank you.. I just purchased !


sweet i hope the silicon lottery will be kind to you!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> Thank you.. I just purchased !


Awesome, man!


----------



## avp2007

If it hits at least 4ghz I will be happy and put off upgrading for at least another year


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> Is there a certain processor ? EBay user that sells them that you guys know about ?might buy one tonight . What's the average OC? I have 1333 ram so I think that might hurt me a bit


Most if not all of these will or should work on your board. Scan down the list until you find the 6 core X series, which is what we recommend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Gulftown.22_.2832_nm.29

Anything that claims to be a LGA1366. I see you already purchased but thought you should see the list of Xeons that work anyway. We here usually recommend the X series or L series. L is for their 60 watt low power use and X is their premium 80-130 watt Hexa core processors. Enjoy your newly found cheap upgrade, lol. I'm loving mine...


----------



## crazycrave

On the EVGA x58 3 way Sli it needs to be rev 1.2 board to support Xeon out of the box.. rev 1.0 and rev 1.1 needs the mod.

My board is rev 1.2 and all I needed was bios 83 as I dropped the X5660 in today and it's running great so far.. newegg,com still sells the X5650 brand new for $644 so that is how good a deal these 6 cores really are at the moment.


----------



## OCmember

These chips are a dream!


----------



## Kana-Maru

FINALLY!!!....... KANA MARU HAS COME BACK.............TO OCN......

I had to get TRIM working with my SSD RAID 0 setup before I felt comfortable running my OS[SSD]. Thanks @}SkOrPn--'. Thanks a ton for the links to the OROMs \ TRIM SSD RAID 0 info. I finally appear to have it working. I got both of my SSDs brand new for less than $100 so I couldn't pass them up. So now I have 3 RAID 0 configurations running on my RIG. Everything is much faster and even my HDDs are blazing fast. My high end programs load incredibly fast. I'll post my HDD benchmarks later, but this is my most recent SSD benchmark:










Boot times after SSD loads = 3.4secs

If you include the splash screen:
Boot times from the Windows 7 splash screen to the Welcome screen = 7secs
Shutdown = 3 secs [if that long]

Not to shabby for $100 SSD configuration right?

My backup\storage HDD is 4TB, but it uses USB 3.0. I can backup 1TB of data in approx 1 hour 20 minutes. At least that my average from backing up my data. I'm seriously considering a RAID 5 backup solution. I'm sure that would cost a decent amount of cash.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarthMuse*
> 
> I just got another GTX 780 Kana!


Sounds good. Looks like you are set and ready to max some games and run some benchmarks. Man I can't wait to upgrade my GPUs.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Awesome, man!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> If it hits at least 4ghz I will be happy and put off upgrading for at least another year


You'll probably go over 4Ghz for sure if you can get a decent chip and your rig can handle it, which I'm sure it can. Most X5650 users are hitting 3.8Ghz - 4.2Ghz very easily. Other are getting 4.5Ghz - 4.8Ghz more often now. It's still a 32nm so be careful and don't go crazy trying to break records lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> These chips are a dream!


I agree


----------



## OCmember

Nice setup Kana-Maru! My old OCZ Vertex 2 is still around as my scratch/backup disk on my main rig with an 840 Pro as my boot drive. On my gamer I have a 128G Samsung Evo just waiting to be put to work. That rig has my i7 970 in it


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Lol you very welcome. Now as long as your cheap ssd's don't die on you, you should love how well the OS runs. I've done single drive several times but I always come back to raid 0. It's just a much more pleasurable experience. And as long as you do backups, at least for data I don't mind the increased risk of failure. Installing windows is as easy as it can get and only takes minutes these days. Lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Nice setup Kana-Maru! My old OCZ Vertex 2 is still around as my scratch/backup disk on my main rig with an 840 Pro as my boot drive. On my gamer I have a 128G Samsung Evo just waiting to be put to work. That rig has my i7 970 in it


Thanks man. I think I"m done upgrading now until we get newer graphic cards. Looks like you have plenty of SSDs. I thought about setting up a RAID1 with my SSDs, but since the capacity is only 256GB and the backups takes less than 2 minutes I'll take the chance of running the RAID0. Hopefully these won't die like the others in less than a year.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Lol you very welcome. Now as long as your cheap ssd's don't die on you, you should love how well the OS runs. I've done single drive several times but I always come back to raid 0. It's just a much more pleasurable experience. And as long as you do backups, at least for data I don't mind the increased risk of failure. Installing windows is as easy as it can get and only takes minutes these days. Lol


Cheap or not, they come with a 3 year warranty which was good enough for the $100 purchase. If I felt like spending more I would have. I have no issues running HDDs in RAID 0 as the main drive at all. I just couldn't pass up the warranty and price. I'm going to be performing backups once a week to make sure I never more than a week behind. The single backup will probably be replaced by a RAID 5 backup eventually or at least RAID1. I'm probably going to get a RAID 5 to speed up the backup process. A single backup HDD simply cannot hang with x2 HDDs or x2 SSDs in RAID0. I didn't make a boot disk this time so it took 15 minutes to install Windows 7 x64 and load up to the Desktop. I used a disc of course.


----------



## Seraphic

Is it worth trying to find a dual socket motherboard for the Xeon 1366 socket with the prices of these 6c/12t processors being so low? I want to build a new system but not that impressed with Haswell E/EP. Are the 1366 Xeons performance too inferior to current and coming processors? If I find a cheap SR-2 which two Xeon CPUs are the best bang for the buck and overclock the highest?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> Is it worth trying to find a dual socket motherboard for the Xeon 1366 socket with the prices of these 6c/12t processors being so low? I want to build a new system but not that impressed with Haswell E/EP. Are the 1366 Xeons performance too inferior to current and coming processors? If I find a cheap SR-2 which two Xeon CPUs are the best bang for the buck and overclock the highest?


"Cheap sr-2" ha ha ha!









Sr-2 boards are rare and expensive, but if you want a 2p board that doesn't over clock they're easy to find.

The best bang for the buck would be finding $75 x5650s!

If you do find an sr-2 cheap you are extremely lucky!!


----------



## Seraphic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> "Cheap sr-2" ha ha ha!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sr-2 boards are rare and expensive, but if you want a 2p board that doesn't over clock they're easy to find.
> 
> The best bang for the buck would be finding $75 x5650s!
> 
> If you do find an sr-2 cheap you are extremely lucky!!


Well, I found this post on the EVGA forums:
Quote:


> With overclocking the LGA1366 generation, always go for the highest multiplier you can afford since the Bclk on average can only get to 200-210MHz. If you buy a processor with a base 20x, then you get 4GHz; but you'd need a bclk of to 210MHz achieve 4GHz with 19x. If you choose 18x on down, reaching 4GHz will be very hard or very impractical.
> 
> Because RAM dividers are locked depending on the letter of the Xeon, you may start at 2:8 (thus DDR3-1066) or 2:10 (thus DDR3-1333); therefore at 200MHz Bclk, make sure your RAM can do up to DDR3-1600 or DDR3-2000 beforehand.
> 
> Just so you know, of the Xeon 5x00 series:
> 
> E's are like i5's to the consumer world, they are the most popular or best-bang-for-buck of the Xeon multi-CPU series
> L's are pricier because they have lower power and thermals than E counterparts of the same exact performance.
> X's parts are just the highest frequency for the lower TDP category Intel sticks them in.
> W's are meant for workstation users that tend to demand the highest frequency above all else, thus tend to be the most expensive.
> 
> Prices are based on which letter they get, the Xeon market makes a big deal regarding TDP, so the enthusiast mindset of frequency isn't seeing the whole picture.
> 
> Remember TDP means Thermal Dissipation Power, i.e. heat dissipation, it isn't electrical draw nor is it actual values per processor. It is just a category so multiple types can qualify; if a E5000 is stuck in 80W TDP, then the stock value is guaranteed not to go above that. But if it does, then it gets stuck in the next category of 95W TDP, even if it is 81W or 86W actual. That is the idea behind TDP.
> 
> Historically, lower TDP was easier to overclock since it meant lower temps and thus needing less extra voltage as your cranked it up; but the bclk limit prevents seeing what lower TDP parts are really capable of. So choose wisely.


I have been wanting to build a new system for awhile now and dual core build has had me interested for quite some time. But I am kind of torn if I should be spending money on old Westmere-EP technology when Haswell EP is coming in two months. But I'm not too impressed with the base clocks on the Haswell-EP parts and their prices are really up there. $1,500 for a six core with high TDP. Will Haswell-EPs come unlocked? Not sure (but doubt it). I really feel I could build a two processor Westmere-EP system for a lot cheaper then any two processor Haswell-EP, but is it really something I should consider?

Isn't the Xeon X5690 the only one with an unlocked multiplier? Looking through the posts on this subject in this thread someone suggested that the Xeon X5675 has a chance to hit 5Ghz? It seems to be a difficult task to locate a SR-2 board these days, but even if I spend a lot to purchase one, I could purchase two X5650s on ebay for $75 each at http://www.ebay.com/itm/121250737445. If overclocked, how would two of those chips compare to an overclocked $1000 8c Haswell-E 5860x for example?

Here are the Haswell-EP prices by the way: http://www.chiploco.com/haswell-ep-e5-2600-v3-specs-35055/


----------



## crazycrave

The X5660 I have is unlocked as it's 12 to 24 and the price different going from X5650 to X5660 is the multiplier and stock clocks as I would say each multiplier above x23 is like $65 dollars the way pricing is working out on ebay..

There is no way to compare Haswell-EP to Westmere-EP pricing because most of us have owned our parts for 4 plus years and only needed the cpu..


----------



## Seraphic

Quote:


> The X5660 I have is unlocked as it's 12 to 24 and the price different going from X5650 to X5660 is the multiplier and stock clocks as I would say each multiplier above x23 is like $65 dollars the way pricing is working out on ebay..


But if I found a SR-2 for a good price, which two processors should I consider getting for the most overclocking headroom? Xeon X5650, X5660, X5670, X5675, X5679, X5680 or X5690
Also, I noticed on the Wiki for these processors some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3 What is the difference?
Quote:


> There is no way to compare Haswell-EP to Westmere-EP pricing because most of us have owned our parts for 4 plus years and only needed the cpu.


I'm just posting the prices as reference to their actual cost for Haswell-EP. More concerned with performance. For example, would you think there would be a major performance difference between two 6c Westmere-EP that I could buy for $75 each vs one 8c Haswell-E that costs $1000?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> But if I found a SR-2 for a good price, which two processors should I consider getting for the most overclocking headroom? Xeon X5650, X5660, X5670, X5675, X5679, X5680 or X5690
> Also, I noticed on the Wiki for these processors some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3 What is the difference?
> I'm just posting the prices as reference to their actual cost for Haswell-EP. More concerned with performance. For example, would you think there would be a major performance difference between two 6c Westmere-EP that I could buy for $75 each vs one 8c Haswell-E that costs $1000?


I still say the x5650s cause you'll be able to bin them, in case you have one that's a bad clocker, just get a few and find the best pair since you'll be limited on the lowest clocking CPU.


----------



## Seraphic

What about the Tubro with these processors as some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3 What is the difference?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> What about the Tubro with these processors as some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3 What is the difference?


I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure it means that when it's running with one or two cores loaded you get the extra multiplier. Example the max multi in the x5660 is 24, so that multi will be used when one or two cores are loaded, and when multiple cores are loaded the multi drops to 22. And I think for the higher end ones the have a turbo multiper that is +3 of the normal multi.

That's how I I understand it from reading the threads, I might be wrong so don't quote me on it.

I wouldn't give to much thought into this since people have hit 4+ with the L5639, low power and with the multi of 18.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

If your only interested in a high overclock, then you would obviously want the highest possible multipliers i.e x5690. And that means the most expensive of the Xeon bunch, which is a given. All of them will over clock, it just depends on how much it wants to over clock and what platform your putting it on. On a SR-2, it does not matter much because you have two processors working in tandem, and two processors at say 3.5ghz would be better then one at 4.5ghz. Of course this all depends on what you plan on doing with it... If its dedicated to something that uses many cores and threads then you will surely benefit. But if your just wanting a fast system for gaming, or web browsing, lol the SR-2 and two Xeons is overkill, unless of course the specific game you have in mind can utilize all 12 cores, or at least half of them.

I doubt you will find a cheap SR-2, not less then $400 anyway. It may be best to get natively running 3ghz Xeons and put them on a much cheaper 2P board. That would be the quickest way. Or get a really good over clocking board like the Sabertooth and a expensive x5690 and try and hit 5ghz on water.

If you already have a x58 mobo that can work with a hexa core xeon, then the best bang for your buck is surely the x5650, hands down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Westmere-EP.22_.2832_nm.29_Efficient_Performance


----------



## Seraphic

No, very little gaming (video work). Even if I found a SR-2 for $600, I found two X5675 for $500 or two x5650 for $175 and even two $5660 for $250 as well. Two x5690 seems to go for about $1000ish which is about the same for the new Haswell-E 8core though. Seems like a lot better price/performance here with 12c/24t.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crazycrave*
> 
> The X5660 I have is unlocked as it's 12 to 24 and the price different going from X5650 to X5660 is the multiplier and stock clocks as I would say each multiplier above x23 is like $65 dollars the way pricing is working out on ebay..


Your chip does not have an unlocked multiplier. I stated it before when someone claimed this, the 980X and 990X were unlocked because they could use multipliers upwards of 33+. Just because you can adjust the multiplier in the BIOS does not make it unlocked. At stock, your chip will still take advantage of the 24x multi.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> But if I found a SR-2 for a good price, which two processors should I consider getting for the most overclocking headroom? Xeon X5650, X5660, X5670, X5675, X5679, X5680 or X5690
> Also, I noticed on the Wiki for these processors some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3 What is the difference?
> I'm just posting the prices as reference to their actual cost for Haswell-EP. More concerned with performance. For example, would you think there would be a major performance difference between two 6c Westmere-EP that I could buy for $75 each vs one 8c Haswell-E that costs $1000?


To be fair, there's no guarantee any of those processors will reach a higher frequency. If you have a motherboard that can get a high base clock, it possible to reach a maximum stable frequency that will be in roughly the same range. The difference the multipliers make is how high you would need to raise your base clock to achieve the same frequency. To reach 4.0 GHz with a 20x multi, you need 200MHz bclock, 21x @ 190.5, 22x @ 182, etc. I wouldn't expect to get the X5650 too much above 4.4 GHz. The others will likely max out at 4.6 - 4.8 GHz unless you get something golden.

Comparing to the Haswell-E at this point is impossible. It hasn't been released yet, so we have no benchmarks. If we assume a steady progression of generations, then at the same frequency the 1366 Xeons will be probably 20% slower.

The question you should really be asking is whether you're actually going to take advantage of the 24 threads you'll have on tap with an SR-2 build. It'll be cheaper to build than a Haswell-E, but if you're only going to be playing games, the second chip will be wasted. If you're crunching numbers, then its a different story altogether.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I still say the x5650s cause you'll be able to bin them, in case you have one that's a bad clocker, just get a few and find the best pair since you'll be limited on the lowest clocking CPU.


^This is good advice, if you don't mind selling off what you don't use afterwards.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

If you're really worried about price to performance nab one of these
http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=201100278670&alt=web
$144 OBO
+ two x5650s $150
Then buy some used ECC and there the most cores without having to use your left kidney as a down payment.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> No, very little gaming (video work). Even if I found a SR-2 for $600, I found two X5675 for $500 or two x5650 for $175 and even two $5660 for $250 as well. Two x5690 seems to go for about $1000ish which is about the same for the new Haswell-E 8core though. Seems like a lot better price/performance here with 12c/24t.


Yeah precisely, 12 Westmere cores will probably out do 8 Haswell-E cores (or at least match it?). I say probably because I do not want to make claims I am not sure about, although I would almost bet money it is this case. lol

However, I think if I was spending money today, in the thousands of dollars, I would want 8 core Haswell. But that is me because the extra stuff the new Haswell platform brings would be worth it for me (I assume we are talking about x99 right?). If you are just needing a fast multi core system, and things like PCIe, USB etc is of no real concern, then I think the SR-2 is the way to go BY FAR. But frankly for me, I want native USB 3.1 and much better performing SATA. You may not care about that as much.

At any rate, I hope you make the best decision for you. I agree with the others, two binned x5650's are the best bang right now for a 12C24T system.


----------



## Seraphic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Your chip does not have an unlocked multiplier. I stated it before when someone claimed this, the 980X and 990X were unlocked because they could use multipliers upwards of 33+. Just because you can adjust the multiplier in the BIOS does not make it unlocked. At stock, your chip will still take advantage of the 24x multi.
> To be fair, there's no guarantee any of those processors will reach a higher frequency. If you have a motherboard that can get a high base clock, it possible to reach a maximum stable frequency that will be in roughly the same range. The difference the multipliers make is how high you would need to raise your base clock to achieve the same frequency. To reach 4.0 GHz with a 20x multi, you need 200MHz bclock, 21x @ 190.5, 22x @ 182, etc. I wouldn't expect to get the X5650 too much above 4.4 GHz. The others will likely max out at 4.6 - 4.8 GHz unless you get something golden.
> 
> Comparing to the Haswell-E at this point is impossible. It hasn't been released yet, so we have no benchmarks. If we assume a steady progression of generations, then at the same frequency the 1366 Xeons will be probably 20% slower.
> 
> The question you should really be asking is whether you're actually going to take advantage of the 24 threads you'll have on tap with an SR-2 build. It'll be cheaper to build than a Haswell-E, but if you're only going to be playing games, the second chip will be wasted. If you're crunching numbers, then its a different story altogether.
> ^This is good advice, if you don't mind selling off what you don't use afterwards.


This build would be for video capturing, editing and emulation. The reason I am considering this in the first place is because I thought it would be cheaper and I could cannibalize parts from my two much older builds below then sell the rest for parts. As for a Haswell-E build being a cheaper build, not so sure. If I went that way, I would go with the 8core chip, so that's $1000 right there, good X99 boards will be around $400 at least, then 2133 DDR4 ram as well be a good chunk for 8GB sticks. If I went SR-2 I would want at least 4.5Ghz on both chips, so I should look at Xeon X5675 and up or could I get away with two Xeon X5650? Lets just say and SR-2 for $600, two x5660 CPUs $250 right there it's $550 less just for the MB/CPUs not including ram. When all set and done, it should add up to a lot less and more gain in terms of performance, no?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> If you're really worried about price to performance nab one of these
> http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=201100278670&alt=web
> $144 OBO
> + two x5650s $150
> Then buy some used ECC and there the most cores without having to use your left kidney as a down payment.


Is that board able to overclock?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> This build would be for video capturing, editing and emulation. The reason I am considering this in the first place is because I thought it would be cheaper and I could cannibalize parts from my two much older builds below then sell the rest for parts. As for a Haswell-E build being a cheaper build, not so sure. If I went that way, I would go with the 8core chip, so that's $1000 right there, good X99 boards will be around $400 at least, then 2133 DDR4 ram as well be a good chunk for 8GB sticks. If I went SR-2 I would want at least 4.5Ghz on both chips, so I should look at Xeon X5675 and up or could I get away with two Xeon X5650? Lets just say and SR-2 for $600, two x5660 CPUs $250 right there it's $550 less just for the MB/CPUs not including ram. When all set and down, it should add up to a lot less and more gain in terms of performance, no?
> Is that board able to overclock?


That is my guess... Again, if you need the extra cores the SR-2 is definitely the way to go. BUT, 4.5ghz on both CPU's will be gambling. You will probably need to go through several chips in order to find two that will cooperate together, which is what Evilmonk was trying to say. It all depends on what you feel safe doing. I can only get 4.5ghz on my 5650 if I go over the intel safe voltage claim of 1.35v, and I am not willing to do that. So if you want 4.5ghz for sure, then yes you will probably need something like 5675's and a lot of time to play... lol

EDIT: I am already envious of what ever you build, LOL...
EDIT2: Yes, the SR-2 is an Enthusiast Class overclocking board based on x58. It is probably the single most [email protected] 1366 board in existence IMO.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> Is that board able to overclock?


Haha no!

But then again its cheap as hell Haha









You can save your money up for an sr-2 or the haswell ep.

I hope you get an sr-2 and have a build log for it!
And yeah whatever route you choose I hope it works out for you!


----------



## Seraphic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> That is my guess... Again, if you need the extra cores the SR-2 is definitely the way to go. BUT, 4.5ghz on both CPU's will be gambling. You will probably need to go through several chips in order to find two that will cooperate together, which is what Evilmonk was trying to say. It all depends on what you feel safe doing. I can only get 4.5ghz on my 5650 if I go over the intel safe voltage claim of 1.35v, and I am not willing to do that. So if you want 4.5ghz for sure, then yes you will probably need something like 5675's and a lot of time to play... lol
> 
> EDIT: I am already envious of what ever you build, LOL...


A new build for me has been a long time coming and I have been interested in a dual processor system.
So much to consider here. Like with sata 6 and usb 3.1... and maybe haswell-e 8c/16t would be enough... not sure myself.

Do you by chance know for sure what about the Tubro with these Xeon processors means? Some have 1/1/1/1/2/2 while others have 2/2/2/2/3/3.
For example, the Xeon X5675 has 2/2/2/2/3/3 and the Xeon X5679 has 1/1/1/1/2/2. Does that make the 79 "better"?
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Haha no!
> 
> But then again its cheap as hell Haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can save your money up for an sr-2 or the haswell ep.
> 
> I hope you get an sr-2 and have a build log for it!
> And yeah whatever route you choose I hope it works out for you!
Click to expand...

Build log for sure!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> EDIT: I am already envious of what ever you build, LOL...
> EDIT2: Yes, the SR-2 is an Enthusiast Class overclocking board based on x58. It is probably the single most [email protected] 1366 board in existence IMO.


The sr-2 is flippin legendary. Even the name is awesome.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> The sr-2 is flippin legendary. Even the name is awesome.


Yeah I know, however somehow that legend missed me until I found this thread. I was into ROG at the time 1366 came around, so somehow missed the SR-2, although I had seen it mentioned and images many times, it just did not click. Every time I saw an SR-2 the only thought that came to mind was dual 980x or 990x and that is/was super EXPENSIVE and instantly turned me off. Until these Hexa cores came down in price I did not want one... Now I drool over the SR-2, but I would need to find a use for it to justify owning it. If you seen my setup you then know it would take a lot of work for me to put a SR-2 and two Xeons into my water loop and custom TJ07 case. But for this guy, I really hope he goes down that SR-2 road, lol... really I do...


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah I know, however somehow that legend missed me until I found this thread. I was into ROG at the time 1366 came around, so somehow missed the SR-2, although I had seen it mentioned and images many times, it just did not click. Every time I saw an SR-2 the only thought that came to mind was dual 980x or 990x and that is/was super EXPENSIVE and instantly turned me off. Until these Hexa cores came down in price I did not want one... Now I drool over the SR-2, but I would need to find a use for it to justify owning it. If you seen my setup you then know it would take a lot of work for me to put a SR-2 and two Xeons into my water loop and custom TJ07 case. But for this guy, I really hope he goes down that SR-2 road, lol... really I do...


Why? Because... Can. That's reason enough









I'm a new comer, just recently getting seriously into PCs within the last couple months. And after I read about this I can still only drool over even years after this beast was released.

I wish Intel would allow more of this. Like making extreme i7 SKUs have 2 qpi links. That would justify the stupid cost. And allow for internet epeen rigs that I can drool over. Its all the same silicon with stuff turned on an off. But besides features, modern stuff is really vanilla nothing exciting or ground breaking. No competition leads to lazy nerfed products for the consumer. Cmon even lowly CPUs could've been over clocked back in the day, now all this fuss over the overclockable Pentium, not taking away from it, but that should be EVERY desktop processor they build.

To me, a 20 year old, I enjoy BCLK overcloking on an older platfom like 775 (did some dabbling with an e8400 as my first PC) and I wished everything was so friendly as that little wolfdale.

(I hope AMD does a 2p with their new FX just as a middle finger to Intel, just because they can. Maybe Intel will do a 2p enthusiast CPU. Imagine a ridiculous board with a CPU with a stupid number of cores that doesn't cost as much a a Xeon)


----------



## Seraphic

What is this "matched pair" stuff all about? Does it REALLY matter? Also, for Turbo Boost te Xeon X5675 has 2/2/2/2/3/3 and the Xeon X5679 has 1/1/1/1/2/2. Does that make the 79 "better"?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> What is this "matched pair" stuff all about? Does it REALLY matter? Also, for Turbo Boost te Xeon X5675 has 2/2/2/2/3/3 and the Xeon X5679 has 1/1/1/1/2/2. Does that make the 79 "better"?


The matched pair mess (since I don't own an sr-2, from what ive read) the CPUs have to run at the same clock speed (duh) so when you overclock them they're gonna have to run symmetrically, so if one taps out at 3.9 and the other one is golden, it won't matter, you're stuck at the lowest common denominator, which would be your the lesser of the two CPUs.

I'm not sure about the sr-2 bios and the options it has, and how the adjustments for vcore is like, if it has to be the same for both CPUs; but just read the amount of tweaking the guys here have to do to extract the most from their xeons, now you'll have to double the headaches and that's what I imagine sr-2 tuning is like Haha, that's why one of the guys says he hopes you have a lot of time.

That's why we advocate binning, especially with the cheap x5650s, you can find a nice pair that can both clock nicely without using a lot of voltage.

Edit:

Since were on the 2p subject I wonder what the benches are for the x5650 on a cheap 2p board would look like....

Someone please do this.....for science!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Ultraman is right, if you plan on overclocking past 4ghz then you need two chips that can do the same speeds at the same voltages, and if you want 4.5ghz, that "may" take time to accomplish. 3.5-4ghz would be much easier to do, but I think 4.5 or higher will take you going through 3 or 4 chips or more before you find a winning combination (just a sheer guess on my part), that is assuming were talking about the lower multi chips like a 5650 or 5660. Now with 5675's or higher, it may be much easier I think. A 5690 already runs at 3.47ghz I think, so it may be much easier to hit 4.5ghz with them.

You might want to talk with people who own these SR-2's before making the decision... I would


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Ultraman is right, if you plan on overclocking past 4ghz then you need two chips that can do the same speeds at the same voltages, and if you want 4.5ghz, that "may" take time to accomplish. 3.5-4ghz would be much easier to do, but I think 4.5 or higher will take you going through 3 or 4 chips or more before you find a winning combination (just a sheer guess on my part), that is assuming were talking about the lower multi chips like a 5650 or 5660. Now with 5675's or higher, it may be much easier I think. A 5690 already runs at 3.47ghz I think, so it may be much easier to hit 4.5ghz with them.
> 
> You might want to talk with people who own these SR-2's before making the decision... I would


Yeah talk to those guys...

I hope you do find one, and one of those full cover water blocks that covers the whole board!

We don't want to discourage you, but we don't want you paying too much for a higher end x5600, when we know that 5650s and 5660s will do decent clocks.

Honestly my opinion is, if your gonna end up spending a ton of money on the CPUs, you might as well spend it on newer stuff, especially with all this anticipation over ddr4.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

http://www.ebay.com/itm/270-WS-W555-A1-EVGA-SR-2-Motherboard-with-Koolance-MB-EVCSR2-Water-Block-/271548987750?pt=Motherboards&hash=item3f3994b966

Less then $400 with a full cover water block. Says it was never used... lol

If I had $1000 or a little less I would do SR-2 for sure. If I had $1500 or more, I would sell what I have now and do x99 and Haswell-E in a heartbeat.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/270-WS-W555-A1-EVGA-SR-2-Motherboard-with-Koolance-MB-EVCSR2-Water-Block-/271548987750?pt=Motherboards&hash=item3f3994b966
> 
> Less then $400 with a full cover water block. Says it was never used... lol
> 
> If I had $1000 or a little less I would do SR-2 for sure. If I had $1500 or more, I would sell what I have now and do x99 and Haswell-E in a heartbeat.


Sweet find!

"never used" hahaha but all the original stuff is with it and it looks to be in good condition, man I wish that I had some cash to drop!

But the thing about the $1000 barrier, i would say that that is a pretty good benchmark for the price that you can be aiming for, since x99 doesnt even exist yet and were just waiting for it to be released.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah never used seems like a empty statement to me too. As far as I am concerned if you opened the box, it was used, lol









I'd hate to see how much work I would have to do on my mobo tray just to fit this beast. That mobo would possibly stretch all the way into my optical and coolant reservoir bays, lol. Beautiful though isn't it? I said earlier it was based on the x58, but it has a Intel 5520. Was there another 2P SR-2 board I was thinking of? Or has this always been based on the Intel 5520? I also see an A1 model and A2 model? Hmm

270-WS-W555-A1 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188067
270-WS-W555-A2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188070

I wonder what the dif is?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah never used seems like a empty statement to me too. As far as I am concerned if you opened the box, it was used, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd hate to see how much work I would have to do on my mobo tray just to fit this beast. That mobo would possibly stretch all the way into my optical and coolant reservoir bays, lol. Beautiful though isn't it? I said earlier it was based on the x58, but it has a Intel 5520. Was there another 2P SR-2 board I was thinking of? Or has this always been based on the Intel 5520? I also see an A1 model and A2 model? Hmm
> 
> 270-WS-W555-A1 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188067
> 270-WS-W555-A2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188070
> 
> I wonder what the dif is?


"Newer is always better" -Barney Stinson

haha thats what i thought when you posted that









and holy crap theres two different types?! what is the difference?! and this shows how little i know about this board, and 2p in general....

and yes that a beast of a board haha! and whats this of putting it in a tj07 ?! id put that thing in a caselabs case! or something to show that monstrosity of a board off!

EDIT:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1500620/wanted-evga-sr-2-motherboard#post_22593881
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WFeather*
> 
> I will have an SR2 + 2x X5680 + 24 GB G.Skill RipJaw X (3x 8gb kit) + 2x Cogage True Spirits for sale here shortly. Shoot me a PM if you would be interested or want more info (Should have it ready to sell by mid Aug at the latest)


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I'd be shooting off 20 PM's every 5 minutes if I was in the market for that board and a set of 5680's lol. He would have to beg me to stop begging him to sell it to me, lol... But Im not in the market.

I wonder what he wants for it all? Want to make play bets for fun? I say he asks $1000 for that setup.


----------



## Seraphic

Good find, sent a PM to see what he wants. Too bad their not X5690.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seraphic*
> 
> Good find, sent a PM to see what he wants. Too bad their not X5690.


hahahahahhaa youre funny! not x5690s dude just finding a setup like that is rare, if you end up buying it, count your blessings! the difference is literally one measy multiplier, or a 130mhz clock difference at stock ahahha its pretty much the same thing, the limiting factor with overclocking those ones would most likely be the BCLK..

EDIT:
please dont take that the wrong way!


----------



## Seraphic

No, you're right. Beggars can't be choosers!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Just so you guys know I'm still looking for an i7 or a w35xx to do a bios flash!

I just wanna borrow it and I can cover small flat rate shipping both ways. So if any of you guys still have your i7s as a back up chip, care to help me out?


----------



## Firehawk

I wonder if WFeather realizes he needs 35 rep before he can sell that SR-2 system here?

@Seraphic You misread my post, I said that an SR-2 build would cost less than a HW-E build, not the reverse. Doesn't matter though, for what you do the SR-2 would definitely be a better system. You'll be able to take your video cards, hard drives and power supplies from your "donor" systems, but not much else. The cases will be too small, and it'll use DDR3.

My understanding with the SR-2 is that the chips need to run at the same frequency but you can adjust voltages independently. It'll make overclocking a little easier.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> I wonder if WFeather realizes he needs 35 rep before he can sell that SR-2 system here?
> 
> @Seraphic You misread my post, I said that an SR-2 build would cost less than a HW-E build, not the reverse. Doesn't matter though, for what you do the SR-2 would definitely be a better system. You'll be able to take your video cards, hard drives and power supplies from your "donor" systems, but not much else. The cases will be too small, and it'll use DDR3.
> 
> My understanding with the SR-2 is that the chips need to run at the same frequency but you can adjust voltages independently. It'll make overclocking a little easier.


To make classified ads is my understanding of the rule... He was responding to a wanted ad. I linked the post he was replying to... Hopefully that's not breaking rules!

I would think voltage can be adjusted individually!

I wonder if any sr-2 owners can share their experience.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Just so you guys know I'm still looking for an i7 or a w35xx to do a bios flash!
> 
> I just wanna borrow it and I can cover small flat rate shipping both ways. So if any of you guys still have your i7s as a back up chip, care to help me out?


Again I'd give you that X5550 but with shipping from canada and customs it would probably be too expensive for you... I'm sorry I live so far away from you bud









Freaking icehole of a country... always pissing me off... why didn't they discover it 1500miles up north so we can even be more fed up with it eh...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I offered to send my i7 to him multiple times if he was to purchase the return label at the same time and show it to me via email, but he still has not replied. I just want some kind of reassurance its coming back, nothing more.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I offered to send my i7 to him multiple times if he was to purchase the return label at the same time and show it to me via email, but he still has not replied. I just want some kind of reassurance its coming back, nothing more.


Well yeah its normal... I'd just give it to him thats even less of a stress for him lol


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I offered to send my i7 to him multiple times if he was to purchase the return label at the same time and show it to me via email, but he still has not replied. I just want some kind of reassurance its coming back, nothing more.


But he has to make his mind before winter... when winter hit Canada... Canada's Postal Services take the dog sleds out and it might take a while before he receive his parcel and dogs don't swim fast to Hawaii


----------



## EvilMonk

gimme a good laugh for that one at least guys come on


----------



## Firehawk

Doesn't Canada Post use dog sleds year round?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Doesn't Canada Post use dog sleds year round?


dog carts in summer







or cats depends


----------



## Firehawk

Definitely no cats, the dogs would file a grievance.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Well yeah its normal... I'd just give it to him thats even less of a stress for him lol


Yeah that would be best. I ship to Canada all the time but it is fairly easy for me. Is it much harder for you to ship to the US?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> But he has to make his mind before winter... when winter hit Canada... Canada's Postal Services take the dog sleds out and it might take a while before he receive his parcel and dogs don't swim fast to Hawaii


LOL, dog sleds swimming to Hawaii... Well can't they hike over the Great Pacific garbage patch these days? lmao


----------



## DividebyZERO

I picked up an x5650 on ebay for 74$ for my 4 way classified board. Will it overclock like my i7 930 and 920's did? Always wanted to get a hexacore for that board. Is 5650 vs 5660 like 920 vs other 9XX where the overclock will close the gap and all x5xxx will OC about to the same general ceiling?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> To make classified ads is my understanding of the rule... He was responding to a wanted ad. I linked the post he was replying to... Hopefully that's not breaking rules!
> 
> I would think voltage can be adjusted individually!
> 
> I wonder if any sr-2 owners can share their experience.


Yes, CPU voltages can be adjusted individually..... not only that but you can set the voltages you want it to "POST" with separate from what it will actually run after BIOS check lol. However, there are Waaaaaaaay more complicated settings availible for tweaking than a standard x58 high end board has. It is a little intimidating. BUT, it is THE board to have or had if you are a hard core overclocker (or just want a beast of a setup lol). Stock clocks on my x5679's scored like 500 higher in CB11.5 than my 4.6Ghz x5650 in my x58 rig did.... the RAM was only running at 1033 Mhz as well lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> I picked up an x5650 on ebay for 74$ for my 4 way classified board. Will it overclock like my i7 930 and 920's did? Always wanted to get a hexacore for that board. Is 5650 vs 5660 like 920 vs other 9XX where the overclock will close the gap and all x5xxx will OC about to the same general ceiling?


I'm not sure if the hex core xeons work without a mod on the 4 way classy board. We can help you do it if need be


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Hey guys, I just woke up.

Just so you guys know I live in an APO address so the shipping time will be a little bit longer! I'll reply to the PMs now









Thank you for the help!!!

}SkOrPn--'

EDIT:

I do own a spare! ....its just not with me. I just have no idea when all my junk gets here since I bought some stuff right before I moved. And being here I got bored and got a mobo and Xeon









EDIT 2:
I bought that stuff right before I left Hawaii and now living in Germany since my dad got a job at the US hospital here. That's why I'm asking to borrow one because the moving services here are notorious for taking forever to deliver household goods. They said Aug 7, but I suspect it will be October when my things arrive. And I don't want to just look at the stuff I picked up sitting on a shelf









@EvilMonk did offer! He was the first one in fact. But him being in Canada and having to do all the extra steps to ship here... I know they do because there's Canadians stationed here (I think, there's a building on base near the NATO headquarters..) It would be a hassle to have to pay duty on something that's a loaner and going to be sent back.

Anyways you guys are great. Sorry again for the late reply, its a big time difference here across the ocean, it stinks because I'm sleeping when you guys are online.

And PMs replied to!


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> LOL, dog sleds swimming to Hawaii... Well can't they hike over the Great Pacific garbage patch these days? lmao


I've heard about the pacific garbage patch and that thing really makes me sick... I can't believe what mankind is doing to our beautiful planet... I guess we are responsible for all the sick crap our world is stuck with ... I just wish there was a way to get rid of all that junk...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Hey guys, I just woke up.
> 
> Just so you guys know I live in an APO address so the shipping time will be a little bit longer! I'll reply to the PMs now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the help!!!
> 
> }SkOrPn--'
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I do own a spare! ....its just not with me. I just have no idea when all my junk gets here since I bought some stuff right before I moved. And being here I got bored and got a mobo and Xeon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT 2:
> I bought that stuff right before I left Hawaii and now living in Germany since my dad got a job at the US hospital here. That's why I'm asking to borrow one because the moving services here are notorious for taking forever to deliver household goods. They said Aug 7, but I suspect it will be October when my things arrive. And I don't want to just look at the stuff I picked up sitting on a shelf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @EvilMonk did offer! He was the first one in fact. But him being in Canada and having to do all the extra steps to ship here... I know they do because there's Canadians stationed here (I think, there's a building on base near the NATO headquarters..) It would be a hassle to have to pay duty on something that's a loaner and going to be sent back.
> 
> Anyways you guys are great. Sorry again for the late reply, its a big time difference here across the ocean, it stinks because I'm sleeping when you guys are online.
> 
> And PMs replied to!


Where you stationed at bud? If you are deployed and there are Canadians over there I guess you are in Afghanistan... I have a bunch of my buddies that are still doing training missions for the transition forces over there... well Canada is supposed to be pulling out of the war now but its just the government way of saying we're not at war anymore... after losing soldiers there and all the veterans that came back with PTSD... its just sad... one of my best friends came back with some serious injuries and PTSD after his convoy was hit by an IED near Kandahar...

***Edit***

Ahhh I saw you're in Germany... its a NATO base so its just a canadian army detachment not a brigade right?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Where you stationed at bud? If you are deployed and there are Canadians over there I guess you are in Afghanistan... I have a bunch of my buddies that are still doing training missions for the transition forces over there... well Canada is supposed to be pulling out of the war now but its just the government way of saying we're not at war anymore... after losing soldiers there and all the veterans that came back with PTSD... its just sad... one of my best friends came back with some serious injuries and PTSD after his convoy was hit by an IED near Kandahar...


My dad is the one stationed here at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, but its near Ramstein Air Base where the NATO AIRCOM is headquartered at, and there all kinds of NATO people here, I dont think ive seen any Canuks around though, just the building where their support unit is housed. I used to see plenty in Hawaii when Canadian ships would stop at pearl harbor, I always saw them walking to the exchange shopping for stuff and extremely sunburnt hahaha

The bases here in Germany are like the stop in between here and Afghanistan, so people coming back from the war stop here, as well as the people who are injured, they go to the hospital that my dad works at, its not as busy as it once was though.

Yeah it is sad how good men have to fight wars for politicians.

I knew plenty of people who went to Iraq and Afghanistan, but it was really brought home to me when a guy that I met was killed in Afghanistan.

EDIT:
my dad is stationed here as a civilian, he's retired air force so I've spent my whole life in and around military bases and what not.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I've heard about the pacific garbage patch and that thing really makes me sick... I can't believe what mankind is doing to our beautiful planet... I guess we are responsible for all the sick crap our world is stuck with ... I just wish there was a way to get rid of all that junk...


Most of that crap gets washed up on midway and the other northwestern atolls and stuff on the Hawaiian chain. Its pretty nasty. Lots of old fishing nets tangled up, mixed with plastics, and trash, with all kinds of other stuff. I've seen the NOAA scientist pull out net balls as big as small boats.

Haha we can send it to space







or turn a huge lava pit into a giant incenerator, but our atmosphere wouldn't like that


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> My dad is the one stationed here at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, but its near Ramstein Air Base where the NATO AIRCOM is headquartered at, and there all kinds of NATO people here, I dont think ive seen any Canuks around though, just the building where their support unit is housed. I used to see plenty in Hawaii when Canadian ships would stop at pearl harbor, I always saw them walking to the exchange shopping for stuff and extremely sunburnt hahaha
> 
> The bases here in Germany are like the stop in between here and Afghanistan, so people coming back from the war stop here, as well as the people who are injured, they go to the hospital that my dad works at, its not as busy as it once was though.
> 
> Yeah it is sad how good men have to fight wars for politicians.
> 
> I knew plenty of people who went to Iraq and Afghanistan, but it was really brought home to me when a guy that I met was killed in Afghanistan.


Yeah lots of my friends enlisted to have the chance to study communications in the army... like my friend did... I almost did myself... lucky I changed my mind... it might have been me instead of him that got hit by that IED... takes a lot of brave people to fight for the freedom of all of us... god bless all of them







my parents are both doctors but not for the army... my mothers father was a surgeon for the army during the Korean war... well, for what the Canadians saw of it rofl








I don't know why but when I read Canadian and war in a sentence the image of a caveman and a club comes to my mind


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Yeah lots of my friends enlisted to have the chance to study communications in the army... like my friend did... I almost did myself... lucky I changed my mind... it might have been me instead of him that got hit by that IED... takes a lot of brave people to fight for the freedom of all of us... god bless all of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my parents are both doctors but not for the army... my mothers father was a surgeon for the army during the Korean war... well, for what the Canadians saw of it rofl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why but when I read Canadian and war in a sentence the image of a caveman and a club comes to my mind


Most of the guys that went to my high school are now in the military, even the ones that I would have never expected are in... im probably going to end up joining when im too old to be a dependent with my dad, which is when I turn 23.

And my dad isnt a doctor ahaha or else he would be making the big bucks







hes just a heath care admin guy now that hes out of the military.

Canadians in war.... what country hates Canadians?


----------



## DividebyZERO

Yeah I've had like 4 or 5 evga x58 boards and sold all off except my e762. Haha who would guess the SLI 3 supports it natively and not the 4 way classified.
Now I feel silly for selling off my SLI 3 and Classified 3.

Can anyone point me to the right mods needed??


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Most of the guys that went to my high school are now in the military, even the ones that I would have never expected are in... im probably going to end up joining when im too old to be a dependent with my dad, which is when I turn 23.
> 
> And my dad isnt a doctor ahaha or else he would be making the big bucks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hes just a heath care admin guy now that hes out of the military.
> 
> Canadians in war.... what country hates Canadians?


Russia, because we're pretty close to them for the suckiest winters and amount of bears in streets







oh and I forgot alcohol tolerance as well


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Russia, because we're pretty close to them for the suckiest winters and amount of bears in streets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh and I forgot alcohol tolerance as well


but you cant beat Russians for sheer craziness... no one watches Canadian dash cams for a reason! haha no one wants to watch people driving to Tim Hortons for morning coffee ahahhahaahha


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> but you cant beat Russians for sheer craziness... no one watches Canadian dash cams for a reason! haha no one wants to watch people driving to Tim Hortons for morning coffee ahahhahaahha


Youd be pretty surprised to see what can happen at 5 AM at Tim Hortons drive through on christmas eve 2012







I wish I had a dash cam when that drunk dude rammed that cop car completely drunk 2 years ago in Montreal







that was priceless







I would have paid just to see it thanks god I was on call at the office and I had to get to work









Edit:

It was like
Yawnnn... damn I really need that coffee... what the hell is that dude cutting the line for... its a cop in front... stupid ******... vrrrrmmmmmm baaaaaammmmmmmmmm crrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaasssssshhhhhhhhhh wwooooooooooooppppp wwwwooooooppppppppppppp


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Yeah I've had like 4 or 5 evga x58 boards and sold all off except my e762. Haha who would guess the SLI 3 supports it natively and not the 4 way classified.
> Now I feel silly for selling off my SLI 3 and Classified 3.
> 
> Can anyone point me to the right mods needed??


Above the CPU and to the right of the IOH are points that have to be soldered. See pictures







. The mod is the same for the 759, 760 and 762 (4-way)


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Above the CPU and to the right of the IOH are points that have to be soldered. See pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . The mod is the same for the 759, 760 and 762 (4-way)


The SLI3 you are talking about is the 767 (The new one) or the old one?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Youd be pretty surprised to see what can happen at 5 AM at Tim Hortons drive through on christmas eve 2012
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish I had a dash cam when that drunk dude rammed that cop car completely drunk 2 years ago in Montreal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that was priceless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would have paid just to see it thanks god I was on call at the office and I had to get to work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> It was like
> Yawnnn... damn I really need that coffee... what the hell is that dude cutting the line for... its a cop in front... stupid ******... vrrrrmmmmmm baaaaaammmmmmmmmm crrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaasssssshhhhhhhhhh wwooooooooooooppppp wwwwooooooppppppppppppp


hahahahahhahahahhahahahahahaha!


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> The SLI3 you are talking about is the 767 (The new one) or the old one?


The only boards that "Natively" support the Westmere hex cores are the X58 SLI3 (e767), FTW3 (e768), and Classified3 (e770) Models.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> hahahahahhahahahhahahahahahaha!


Didn't think a crown victoria could lift off the ground so easily







especially the police interceptor ones with all the extra weight added with the back holding space to keep the inmates and all the cargo space for the equipment in the trunk


----------



## EvilMonk

Hey guys sorry I just remember the talks you were having the other day about ICH10R with TRIM in raid0 the other day and I wanted to know if anyone could help me get it up and running on my P6T with my 2 Agility 4 that I have in raid0. would it also be possible with my 2 Crucial M500 480Gb that I have in raid 0 on a PCIe x2 Vantec card with a Marvell 88SE9230 SATA 6Gbps raid controller


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Hey guys sorry I just remember the talks you were having the other day about ICH10R with TRIM in raid0 the other day and I wanted to know if anyone could help me get it up and running on my P6T with my 2 Agility 4 that I have in raid0. would it also be possible with my 2 Crucial M500 480Gb that I have in raid 0 on a PCIe x2 Vantec card with a Marvell 88SE9230 SATA 6Gbps raid controller


The best thing to do is to start a thread over at bios-mods asking for your bios to be modded and what mods items you want. Supply links to the files in question, including the BIOS file and the motherboards page at its manufacturer. I know several guys at bios-mods who do mods, but not sure if they take requests for BIOS's other then their motherboard. So, best thing to do is post for help in the forum where asking for mods is allowed.

I know the actual Raid0 mod is very easy to do on our platform, but I do not know how to do it myself. I tried to learn it myself but with TWO bios modders already making them for the R3E I just got lazy, lmao... sinders and ZioGTS is who supplied my bios to me. I have not heard from sinders in a long time but spoke with ZioGTS just the other day when I informed him of these cheap xeons. He has moved on to x79 and sold his R3E, so I may have to learn to mod these BIOS files myself now...

With that said, I have two PM's I need to answer in regards to modding bios files. I guess this TRIM in RAID is starting to catch on finally.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> The best thing to do is to start a thread over at bios-mods asking for your bios to be modded and what mods items you want. Supply links to the files in question, including the BIOS file and the motherboards page at its manufacturer. I know several guys at bios-mods who do mods, but not sure if they take requests for BIOS's other then their motherboard. So, best thing to do is post for help in the forum where asking for mods is allowed.
> 
> I know the actual Raid0 mod is very easy to do on our platform, but I do not know how to do it myself. I tried to learn it myself but with TWO bios modders already making them for the R3E I just got lazy, lmao... sinders and ZioGTS is who supplied my bios to me. I have not heard from sinders in a long time but spoke with ZioGTS just the other day when I informed him of these cheap xeons. He has moved on to x79 and sold his R3E, so I may have to learn to mod these BIOS files myself now...
> 
> With that said, I have two PM's I need to answer in regards to modding bios files. I guess this TRIM in RAID is starting to catch on finally.


Thanks bud I'll catch up with some emails I got from work on my way home and will get to it after!!! I'll let you know how it goes! Thanks again!

Edit:
+rep!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Hey if you want, since I have a little bit of rep over at bios mods, just let me know the info, what bios version, mobo, what OROM version your interested in etc, and I will make the request over at those forums for you. Maybe I can get sinders to do it since he seemed to enjoy doing that. Do your OROM research over at Win-Raid, it should tell you everything you need to know about version numbers. They will recommend version 11.x (usually 11.2.0.1527), but all the newer OROMs up to 13.1 still work just fine IMO, that is what I am running now with two Samsung 840 Pros.

If you do your research good enough, you can probably find the files for other items on your board, such as NIC, BT, USB, eSATA, WIFI etc. Much of it is upgraded through bios flashing. lol


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Hey if you want, since I have a little bit of rep over at bios mods, just let me know the info, what bios version, mobo, what OROM version your interested in etc, and I will make the request over at those forums for you. Maybe I can get sinders to do it since he seemed to enjoy doing that. Do your OROM research over at Win-Raid, it should tell you everything you need to know about version numbers. They will recommend version 11.x (usually 11.2.0.1527), but all the newer OROMs up to 13.1 still work just fine IMO, that is what I am running now with two Samsung 840 Pros.
> 
> If you do your research good enough, you can probably find the files for other items on your board, such as NIC, BT, USB, eSATA, WIFI etc. Much of it is upgraded through bios flashing. lol


perfect, I'm on it, I'll do all of that and provide you with all the files and infos you need! thanks a lot bud! I finish to eat and I'll be more effective, not easy to eat and type with the face munching in the plate num num num


----------



## EvilMonk

Since I pimped my P6TSE into a P6T by bios hack is it possible to flash the P6T bios with the P6T SE JMicron 363 controllers ROM since they are different so I can finally use the eSATA port?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Since I pimped my P6TSE into a P6T by bios hack is it possible to flash the P6T bios with the P6T SE JMicron 363 controllers ROM since they are different so I can finally use the eSATA port?


Good question, I do not know but with enough effort you could possibly flash your board into a space shuttle controller console. lol

What version Jmicron do you have? JMicron JMB36X ? If so when you enable it and connect something to the port, what version OROM does it report during bios boot sequence? If its less then v1.07.28, then you have something to update lol.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Ok so I've been away and since my last post there has been nearly 60 post! Damn the topic is still moving fast









So what did I miss?


----------



## EvilMonk

I'm now officially a woman you missed a whole lot damn where did you go I had the time to finish university and get a sex change surgery!!! rofl







kidding


----------



## rwarr

so i just got my cpu in today and i'm running it stock at the moment. i am currently running on my i7 930 settings (set bclk and other voltages on auto for now) but i'm not sure if the settings should apply to xeons?

i currently have:

intel speedstep tech: enabled (i had this disabled when i overclocked my 930 but i read it's recommended to turn it on from reading this thread?)
xtreme phase full power mode: enabled

load-line calibration: enabled
cpu differential amplitude: 800mv
cpu clock skew: delay 300ps
cpu spread spectrum: disabled
ioh clock skew: auto
pcie spread spectrum: disabled

c1e support: disabled
hardware prefetcher: enabled
adjacent cache line prefetch: enabled
intel virtualization tech: disabled
cpu tm function: disabled
execute disable bit: enabled
intel ht technology: enabled
active processor cores: all
a20m: disabled
intel speedstep tech: enabled
intel c-state tech: disabled


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rwarr*
> 
> so i just got my cpu in today and i'm running it stock at the moment. i am currently running on my i7 930 settings (set bclk and other voltages on auto for now) but i'm not sure if the settings should apply to xeons?
> 
> i currently have:
> 
> intel speedstep tech: *enabled* (i had this disabled when i overclocked my 930 but i read it's recommended to turn it on from reading this thread?)
> xtreme phase full power mode: enabled
> 
> load-line calibration: enabled
> cpu differential amplitude: 800mv
> cpu clock skew: delay 300ps
> cpu spread spectrum: disabled
> ioh clock skew: auto
> pcie spread spectrum: disabled
> 
> c1e support: disabled
> hardware prefetcher: enabled
> adjacent cache line prefetch: enabled
> intel virtualization tech: disabled
> cpu tm function: disabled
> execute disable bit: enabled
> intel ht technology: enabled
> active processor cores: all
> a20m: disabled
> *intel speedstep tech: enabled*
> intel c-state tech: disabled


From what I have read its better to disable speedstep, I have always achieved better stability with it disabled, all your other settings are the same I am using as well, so I think you are all good on these one.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

So id like to say many thanks for all of the help @DOS_equis and }SkOrPn--' you guys are awesome!

These two guys were willing to take the risk in letting me borrow a CPU!
I am really amazed at the fact that people would be willing to take a risk and help out a stranger, and it proves to me yet again how awesome the community here at OCN is!
















Anyways I talked to my girlfriend, and I just threw the rest of my paypal balance into hers and she let me buy a used w3520 off of ebay, shes freaking awesome, even though shes back home in hawaii and literally on the other side of the globe, she still takes care of me!









It just cost me $12.25 with free shipping!

so this might be a perfect little back up chip for all of you guys still rocking x58! since it is pretty much a guaranteed D0 stepping i7 920, hmm since its cheap I might abuse it a little


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm now officially a woman you missed a whole lot damn where did you go I had the time to finish university and get a sex change surgery!!! rofl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kidding


Nah man I think you are serious lol. Well I setup my SSD RAID 0, but I had to mod my BIOS to add TRIM. So I had to set everything up again. I'm thinking about just going with a single SSD - Samsung EVO 250GB, but I'm not sure how good my scores would be with a Single SSD + SATA II _I've been busy with work and stuff. I came back there were so many messages added to the topic. I was a bit lost. I still see the X58 platform is still going strong with a some newcomers._


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I still see the X58 platform is still going strong with a some newcomers.


haha you see what you started?!?!


----------



## rwarr

this is quite weird... cpuz and the bios shows the correct overclock but all the other benchmarks are showing the wrong overclock? did i break something?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rwarr*
> 
> this is quite weird... cpuz and the bios shows the correct overclock but all the other benchmarks are showing the wrong overclock? did i break something?


Nah sometimes they just don't report correctly... AIDA64 does that from times to times and need a reboot for me to fix that...


----------



## rwarr

restarting doesn't help and i'm sure i turned off all of the power saving options through bios. i tried aida and occt and they both show the overclock but windows or cinebench for example doesn't show it. i tried down clocking and see if it works but nope, doesn't show it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> haha you see what you started?!?!


Yeah I see. Ebay skyrocketed for the boards....L5639s overpriced.....everyone upgrading. What kinda of monster am I........there's only one thing left to do.


----------



## rwarr

seems like i figured out the problem. it goes bonkers at x22 multiplier which gives me the benchmark and windows problem but if i switched over to x20, everything is fine. i wish there is a way to use it at x21 multiplier :\

weird :S


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rwarr*
> 
> seems like i figured out the problem. it goes bonkers at x22 multiplier which gives me the benchmark and windows problem but if i switched over to x20, everything is fine. i wish there is a way to use it at x21 multiplier :\
> 
> weird :S


Nah, don't worry too much, i have the same problem, just the windows and the benchmark software showing wrong info, not a big deal.
You may refer to the old post here.


----------



## burntheskies

Am i too late to cash in on the L5639 sidegrade business?

maybe the x5650 instead??

Oh i wanted to ask OP, did you have any TDP or power consumption related benchmarks?


----------



## rwarr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Nah, don't worry too much, i have the same problem, just the windows and the benchmark software showing wrong info, not a big deal.
> You may refer to the old post here.


Thanks. Good to hear that there is others that have the same problem. A bit relieving actually.

Anyhow, I manage to get mine to 4.35ghz @ 1.36v stable after a days worth of tinkering around. Here's some small benchmarks comparing my old 930 4.2ghz. I'm a bit sad since I couldn't hit 4.4 with out putting too much voltage into it.

i7 930 4.2ghz

cinebench r15 - 652cb
uniengine heaven extreme - 1386
3dmark:
firestrike - 9060
ffxiv benchmark maximum - 14002
ibt standard x10 - 235.76 seconds

xeon x5650 4.35ghz

cinebench r15 - 977
uniengine heaven extreme - 1405
3dmark:
firestrike - 9446
ffxiv benchmark maximum - 14250
ibt standard x10 - 202.08 seconds

There's certainly a improvement. I notice it's much smoother and snappier than the 930.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *burntheskies*
> 
> Am i too late to cash in on the L5639 sidegrade business?
> 
> maybe the x5650 instead??
> 
> Oh i wanted to ask OP, did you have any TDP or power consumption related benchmarks?


Nope it's not to late, but the X5650 would be the best bang for your buck at this point. I hear that the prices are even cheaper than before. Before they were roughly $80-$85. It really wasn't a "side-grade" to me coming from a OC'd i7-960. X79+price was the side grade.

*Cinebench R15:*
i7-960 @ 4.1Ghz = 7.03pts
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 12.44 pts
*77% increase.*

*Crysis 3 100% MAXED @ 1080p + GTX 670 2-Way SLI stock settings*
i7-960 @ 4.1Ghz = Average FPS: 20-35fps [choppy as hell........micro, micro stuttering was massive....horrible experience]
X5660 @ 4.6Ghz = Average FPS: 53fps [very nice and smooth Frame time was only 19ms]
*100% increase to my eyes and experiencing.*

*WinRAR v4.20*
i7-960 @ 4.2Ghz = 8,519KB/s
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 16,458KB/s
*93.19% increase*

That's not a side grade......that was an upgrade to my X58 platform. Spending $1200-$2000 for X79 +Quad\Hexa Core for a 9% difference would've been a waste and the side grade.

In my case my entire rig feels more "snappy" and every is much faster. No bottlenecks while high end gaming. Plus it's a 32nm and gives off much less heat [very low TDP], but can overclock easily over 45nm Bloomfields.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Well I got my x5650 in slapped it in my E762 and checked my board for mod. Sure enough mine has already been modified.
So all I have to do is setup now the box again. I am not sure what components yet but I have R9 290s I can put on this puppy.

I am really excited to see how it does since I wasted money on x79 and was never really happy with it. X58 has always been my favorite board from intel camp. IMO it's the last real platform that allowed both good stable OC and a range of chips from low to high end were allowed OC. Not this new restricted plan they went with afterwards. Not those X, K, SKU's garbage and locked xeons.


----------



## avp2007

Well I am damn happy about this Xeon X650 chip. It took about 15 minutes to get it to 4.4GHz at 1.344, I will try to lower that voltage a bit but still very impressed. I had a i7-950 that only got me up to 3.9GHZ at 1.3. I can tell a difference on temperature also, when idle its about 5-10 degrees cooler and when on full load it is roughly where my i7-950 was at 3.9 with a tad bit of lower voltage.

I tried running some benchmarks but it now says it doesn't read my CPU or GPU??? never seen that before so I don't know if it has something to do with the chip but will give it a few days and see.

Thank you for everybody and a special thanks to Kana-Maru for bringing this to my attention and how great of a chip this is. I was thinking of Haswell-E but wasn't sure how much of a gain I would get after forking over $1500 for a new system. This was the best $75 I have spent and should hold me over for at least another year!

4.4Results.jpg 236k .jpg file


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> I tried running some benchmarks but it now says it doesn't read my CPU or GPU??? never seen that before so I don't know if it has something to do with the chip but will give it a few days and see.


I've never heard of that happening. Keep us updated just in case other users run into this issue.

Quote:


> Thank you for everybody and a special thanks to Kana-Maru for bringing this to my attention and how great of a chip this is. I was thinking of Haswell-E but wasn't sure how much of a gain I would get after forking over $1500 for a new system. This was the best $75 I have spent and should hold me over for at least another year!


You are welcome. I'm planning to go with X58 until Skylake-E. Even when Skylake-E releases I'm going to wait a good while before upgrading. Skylake-E is on my radar, but if I'm still inlove with the X58....I'm staying married to the X58 lol. I was in the same boat that you were in, thinking about spending a ton of cash for X79 [$2000 was my max]. These Xeons are the best money I've spend on my Gaming Rig in awhile. Everything is speedy and rendered quickly.

I think X58 users will get well over a year worth out of these Xeons. With PCI 2.0 still competing and showing no sign of aging just yet I think that we can get plenty of years out of this platform. Especially for high end gaming and other task.


----------



## Brett0712

Man, I've missed out on the action in this thread. I bought my first house a couple months ago so it's been keeping me busy.

Anyways, last I left off I was working with a Gigabyte X58A-UD3R / X5650 and wasn't able to get past ~3.8ghz due to the limitations of the board (so it seemed). It seemed as though my board doesn't like the higher BCLK settings. So I started looking on eBay for a new board but damn these X58 boards are pricey. Asus Rampage boards have always caught my attention but have always been too pricey for me. Well, I've had luck buying as-is stuff off eBay in the past so I took a plunge on an Asus Rampage III Extreme with a jacked up socket. Lots of pins were bent/missing so I managed to win a best offer bid for $60. Originally I was going to see if I could RMA the board and just pay to have ASUS replace the socket but I stumbled across a guy that offers a reballing service for laptop/console GPUs. He was able to replace the LGA1366 socket for $65 with a 1yr warranty on his work. (he even mentioned that the original socket had some crappy solder joints) I got the board back last night and tossed in my test Xeon E5502 with a stick of ram and an ancient graphics to test the board without frying any of my good hardware. Much to my surprise it worked! So I updated the bios, cleared the CMOS, put in all of my good hardware and fired it up. Bam, works flawlessly. I got myself a pretty good motherboard for $125 with more bios options than I know what to do with.

Can't wait to get home tonight and start putting it to the test and see just how extreme it really is.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> Man, I've missed out on the action in this thread. I bought my first house a couple months ago so it's been keeping me busy.
> 
> Anyways, last I left off I was working with a Gigabyte X58A-UD3R / X5650 and wasn't able to get past ~3.8ghz due to the limitations of the board (so it seemed). It seemed as though my board doesn't like the higher BCLK settings. So I started looking on eBay for a new board but damn these X58 boards are pricey. Asus Rampage boards have always caught my attention but have always been too pricey for me. Well, I've had luck buying as-is stuff off eBay in the past so I took a plunge on an Asus Rampage III Extreme with a jacked up socket. Lots of pins were bent/missing so I managed to win a best offer bid for $60. Originally I was going to see if I could RMA the board and just pay to have ASUS replace the socket but I stumbled across a guy that offers a reballing service for laptop/console GPUs. He was able to replace the LGA1366 socket for $65 with a 1yr warranty on his work. (he even mentioned that the original socket had some crappy solder joints) I got the board back last night and tossed in my test Xeon E5502 with a stick of ram and an ancient graphics to test the board without frying any of my good hardware. Much to my surprise it worked! So I updated the bios, cleared the CMOS, put in all of my good hardware and fired it up. Bam, works flawlessly. I got myself a pretty good motherboard for $125 with more bios options than I know what to do with.
> 
> Can't wait to get home tonight and start putting it to the test and see just how extreme it really is.


whoa! thats pretty sweet! how did he end up replacing the whole socket?! thats pretty cool!

what happened to your old board?

and $65 seems like a pretty reasonable price, you should give a link to in case people want to go the same route...


----------



## Brett0712

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> whoa! thats pretty sweet! how did he end up replacing the whole socket?! thats pretty cool!
> 
> what happened to your old board?
> 
> and $65 seems like a pretty reasonable price, you should give a link to in case people want to go the same route...


Don't know the name of the equipment but it's specifically for reballing/resoldering chip/sockets that utilize a ball grid array. It's critical to get focused and controlled heat to remove the chip/socket without damaging the surrounding components let alone making sure it's all aligned properly. Not something you do with a soldering iron.







He has lots of pictures on his website.

If it's OK to share his info on here, I gladly will in the hopes it can help someone else out.

For what it's worth, there are some damn nice motherboards on eBay for reasonable prices with bad sockets. Just need to consider the fact that it could be shorted out/dead as the previous owner could have attempted to power on the board with a CPU in the bad socket. I would have to assume the bent/touching pins could short/damage the board. Luckily this was not the case.

I still have my X58A-UD3R. I am going to hang onto it for a bit until I see how the R3E pans out in terms of overclocking.


----------



## dasparx

So on my 2nd rig i'm now running an L5639 on a Asrock Extreme3, but for the love of god i can't get the 20 multi when im over 133 bclock, i have speedstep and everything related to it enabled. Multiplier set to "auto" in the BIOS. So for now im stuck on a 19 multi.








Any ideas what i can do to fix this?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> Don't know the name of the equipment but it's specifically for reballing/resoldering chip/sockets that utilize a ball grid array. It's critical to get focused and controlled heat to remove the chip/socket without damaging the surrounding components let alone making sure it's all aligned properly. Not something you do with a soldering iron.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He has lots of pictures on his website.
> 
> If it's OK to share his info on here, I gladly will in the hopes it can help someone else out.
> 
> For what it's worth, there are some damn nice motherboards on eBay for reasonable prices with bad sockets. Just need to consider the fact that it could be shorted out/dead as the previous owner could have attempted to power on the board with a CPU in the bad socket. I would have to assume the bent/touching pins could short/damage the board. Luckily this was not the case.
> 
> I still have my X58A-UD3R. I am going to hang onto it for a bit until I see how the R3E pans out in terms of overclocking.


a link should be fine! its not like youre getting paid to advertise them








I wanna see their pics and a bga soldering machine!

Sweet if you wanna run your giga board a solid under $20 cpu would be the W3520, i picked one up for $12.25 last night on ebay!


----------



## Brett0712

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> a link should be fine! its not like youre getting paid to advertise them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wanna see their pics and a bga soldering machine!
> 
> Sweet if you wanna run your giga board a solid under $20 cpu would be the W3520, i picked one up for $12.25 last night on ebay!


If sharing this info is against forum rules, I will take it down immediately.

I used: PS3Specialist. If you want to see cool pictures, check out "Macbook Pro GPU Reballing repair service" - there are lots of pictures in there. I purchased the "Computer Motherboard CPU Socket Replace" service. He was VERY communicative and provided what I would consider to be outstanding customer service.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> If sharing this info is against forum rules, I will take it down immediately.
> 
> I used: PS3Specialist. If you want to see cool pictures, check out "Macbook Pro GPU Reballing repair service" - there are lots of pictures in there. I purchased the "Computer Motherboard CPU Socket Replace" service. He was VERY communicative and provided what I would consider to be outstanding customer service.


It shouldnt be, we link stuff all the time!









And thats some pretty awesome stuff right there!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

What I would like to know is how in the heck do people damage these sockets in the first place? I could swap processors for the next 1000 years and never damage a socket. I just do not understand, are there really people in this world that are not careful with doing this procedure? lol


----------



## Brett0712

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> What I would like to know is how in the heck do people damage these sockets in the first place? I could swap processors for the next 1000 years and never damage a socket. I just do not understand, are there really people in this world that are not careful with doing this procedure? lol


You should have seen this thing. It looked like the socket was jabbed with a screwdriver.

I have changed out so many processors and never have I damaged a socket. Oh well, their loss is my gain.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> You should have seen this thing. It looked like the socket was jabbed with a screwdriver.
> 
> I have changed out so many processors and never have I damaged a socket. Oh well, their loss is my gain.


Yeah congrats on that by the way. I have heard that the pins can get weaker and weaker as you replace cpu's, but not sure how they could get damage unless someone tried installing a piece of concrete into it.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah congrats on that by the way. I have heard that the pins can get weaker and weaker as you replace cpu's, but not sure how they could get damage unless someone tried installing a piece of concrete into it.


I think that comes from the premise of work hardening a piece of metal, like if you keep bending a paper clip back and forth it soon becomes hard then brittle then breaks....

but then again the pins are at an angle and are designed to bend.... so damaging a socket by inserting a cpu is beyond me...


----------



## DOS_equis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> What I would like to know is how in the heck do people damage these sockets in the first place? I could swap processors for the next 1000 years and never damage a socket. I just do not understand, are there really people in this world that are not careful with doing this procedure? lol


Maybe this is the caliber of people that damage the sockets or PC's in general:





















 <--- troll video








 <--- fake but funny to watch




 <---same




 <---Finale


----------



## DOS_equis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> So id like to say many thanks for all of the help @DOS_equis and }SkOrPn--' you guys are awesome!
> 
> These two guys were willing to take the risk in letting me borrow a CPU!
> I am really amazed at the fact that people would be willing to take a risk and help out a stranger, and it proves to me yet again how awesome the community here at OCN is!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways I talked to my girlfriend, and I just threw the rest of my paypal balance into hers and she let me buy a used w3520 off of ebay, shes freaking awesome, even though shes back home in hawaii and literally on the other side of the globe, she still takes care of me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It just cost me $12.25 with free shipping!
> 
> so this might be a perfect little back up chip for all of you guys still rocking x58! since it is pretty much a guaranteed D0 stepping i7 920, hmm since its cheap I might abuse it a little


No problem Ultra-m-a-n.


----------



## Brett0712

I need to make a correction. I have a Rampage III Gene not Extreme. I was reading about overclocking the extreme and mixed up the names. With that said, this thing is effortless:



Now it's time to tweak, tweak, tweak.


----------



## avp2007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brett0712*
> 
> I need to make a correction. I have a Rampage III Gene not Extreme. I was reading about overclocking the extreme and mixed up the names. With that said, this thing is effortless:
> 
> 
> 
> Now it's time to tweak, tweak, tweak.


Pretty much where you are at but with the multiplier at 21, 22 was crashing windows and boot like crazy.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> What I would like to know is how in the heck do people damage these sockets in the first place? I could swap processors for the next 1000 years and never damage a socket. I just do not understand, are there really people in this world that are not careful with doing this procedure? lol


Saw people damage those by just doing many things at the same time and just not paying attention and being focused... people just are dumb sometimes... its not the time to have lots of unstable things around an open LGA socket when you are installing a cpu... stuff happen... I bought a couple of boards used and sometimes they arrived with bent pins I had to send them back and ask for refunds... I don't take the risk to bend them back


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I think that comes from the premise of work hardening a piece of metal, like if you keep bending a paper clip back and forth it soon becomes hard then brittle then breaks....
> 
> but then again the pins are at an angle and are designed to bend.... so damaging a socket by inserting a cpu is beyond me...


Droping something on the pins is not dumbass proof still


----------



## chux

Hi Guys

So I got a x5670 in my Gigabyte x58 UD4P and after many many hours I have more or less given up overclocking it past 150 bclk as it does not even post. I think it is more of a motherboard issue than CPU.

Anyway I have another issue that is bothering me.

Even at optimised defaults I have a wierd issue with the cpu where it will cold boot but it does not soft reboot eg (from a control alt delete) or a windows restart. It is not an OS issue as it does nto reboot from an control alt delete before the OS is even loaded.

If i put back my original CPU an i7920 i have no issue

Any ideas what might be causing this.

I tried different keyboard/mouse combo and different bios verisons but no difference.

Maybe just he cpu is not compatible with the motherboard?


----------



## Brett0712

This is probably an obvious question, but did you clear out the CMOS and start fresh? I know you said you tried a different bios and optimized defaults. No difference with latest bios (F14P) and all default settings?


----------



## Firehawk

I don't know what's causing the reboot issue, but the other one I have a solution for.

I'm running an X5670 in an EX58-UD5 and if your QPI link speed hits 8GHz it won't POST. Solution: turn the multiplier down from x48 to x44 or x36. You'll be limited to a bclock of ~222 MHz at x36, but if you're able to get stable at that speed you should be happy anyway.


----------



## Lionvibez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> perfect, I'm on it, I'll do all of that and provide you with all the files and infos you need! thanks a lot bud! I finish to eat and I'll be more effective, not easy to eat and type with the face munching in the plate num num num


Hey did you end up completing this mod?

I did it myself on my board.

Let me know if you still need a hand.


----------



## WallySimmonds

Was looking in this forum for info on Haswell E, and stumbled across this thread. Spent the last hour reading through the thread and am pretty convinced this is the way to go. Currently running a 930 on a Gigabyte UD3R board (stock).

Tossing up between a X5650 or 75 - bout a hundred bucks AU difference - I'm tempted to spend less at this point and by the sounds of things I should hit at least 3.8 based on what other people have mentioned (limitation of the GB board apparently). As I do a fair whack of VM work as well, I'll probably be swapping out my 6x4gb dimms to 6x8 - does anyone see any problem with this?

Also, as someone here may have done it - has anyone tried 16GB dimms with this board (or x58 at all)?


----------



## avp2007

These chips are awesome I had a I7-950 that could only do 4GHz at 1.37 . I got the Xeon x5650 off of eBay for $75 and what a difference . After 20 minutes I got it to 4.5GHz but settled at 4.4GHz at 1.290! So lower voltage and higher overclock. The temps are also about 20 degrees lower on idle and 100% load. I thought I might have a problem with 24gb of ram bit not a problem at all. I was in your boat thinking of Haswell E but the cost and the uncertainty of DDR4 along with it actually being the best upgrade potentinal with broadwell and skylake coming around the corner I just didn't feel great about upgrading . Then I was told and read about this chip! This will hold me over for at least another year or more. I also have a GTX 780 and get about 10 fps more on BF4 . You can tell a difference . And for 75 bucks you can't beat it for a 6 core that overvlocks great!


----------



## Avrion

Love to see a x58 thread still active in 2014, got a question though.

Does anyone have any experience with the Foxconn Flaming Blade (non GTi) motherboard?
I can't find any concrete evidence that it will run Xeons.

That's what I'm using right now with a i7-920 @ 4.2ghz.

I'd like to try the X5650 since they are only $70 right now on ebay, some of them seem to overclock really well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2007*
> 
> These chips are awesome I had a I7-950 that could only do 4GHz at 1.37 . I got the Xeon x5650 off of eBay for $75 and what a difference . After 20 minutes I got it to 4.5GHz but settled at 4.4GHz at 1.290! ... I also have a GTX 780 and get about 10 fps more on BF4...


Did you buy a completely random one of off ebay or something specific? I seem to be cpu bound in bf4 but since it multithreads so well, 2 extra threads with my crossfire setup might help.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Avrion*
> 
> Love to see a x58 thread still active in 2014, got a question though.
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with the Foxconn Flaming Blade (non GTi) motherboard?
> I can't find any concrete evidence that it will run Xeons.
> 
> That's what I'm using right now with a i7-920 @ 4.2ghz.
> 
> I'd like to try the X5650 since they are only $70 right now on ebay, some of them seem to overclock really well.
> Did you buy a completely random one of off ebay or something specific? I seem to be cpu bound in bf4 but since it multithreads so well, 2 extra threads with my crossfire setup might help.


I look for a seller that has a bunch of them in stock, aka some company that did a mass server pull and is selling them off. The reason I say this is because if you buy it from a person, they wer probably binning them and were getting rid of the duds that dont clock well... the seller I bought mine from was from TX and offered free shipping to my APO address, so I was happy


----------



## dasparx

Does the rampage 2 extreme support 6 core xeons? i can pick one up for $35 locally.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Asus support says they try and make all ROG motherboards support Xeons. Look at the memberslist to the x58 Xeon Club and see if anyone else is running a Xeon on their R2E

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> Does the rampage 2 extreme support 6 core xeons? i can pick one up for $35 locally.


lucky...
yeah im sure that it does, some one is selling one on the marketplace with a hexcore westmere. The asus boards are really good at supporting the processors...

Heres the listing, its a rampage II gene (matx) and if that supports it im sure the ful sized one does too. with a bios updat a. you can PM him and ask him about it, he was pretty fast when he replied to me.

heck even if it doesnt for $35 thats a steal... and if you dont need it i wonder how much it would be to ship down to Germany..


----------



## Avrion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I look for a seller that has a bunch of them in stock, aka some company that did a mass server pull and is selling them off. The reason I say this is because if you buy it from a person, they wer probably binning them and were getting rid of the duds that dont clock well... the seller I bought mine from was from TX and offered free shipping to my APO address, so I was happy


Makes sense, thanks for the tip.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah I agree, I got mine from a seller on ebay that claimed they were retired from a datacenter. I like this because many or at least most would be processors that were never overclocked or abused in any way and usually in controlled AC climates.


----------



## WallySimmonds

Just pulled the trigger on a 5650 for $74US. Costs a bit more to ship it out to Australia but still worth it at that price. My 930 has been good to me but I can't pass up the two extra cores and the potential to get a bit more juice out of it!

I have a feeling this thread has just saved me about 1500 bucks - I was pretty keen for Haswell E. Now to address the lousy Sata3 speeds, and get 6x8GB installed. Anyone got any recommendations for memory?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

If it's a good chip you will be surprised, I know I was. Never in a million years would have guessed a processor replacing an i7 would come with a noticeable performance boost. Finally purchased crysis 3 and couldn't believe it, my old 5870 feels smoother then ever and that is with everything on high. Its just a whole new computer with just this chip dropped in. Wow

Sent from my Nexus 7


----------



## dasparx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> If it's a good chip you will be surprised, I know I was. Never in a million years would have guessed a processor replacing an i7 would come with a noticeable performance boost. Finally purchased crysis 3 and couldn't believe it, my old 5870 feels smoother then ever and that is with everything on high. Its just a whole new computer with just this chip dropped in. Wow
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 7


All of these 6-cores are nothing to sneeze at, feel bad for all the people hopping on the unlocked pentium train. these puppies compare to huge overclocked ivy's and haswell's, most of the time even outperforming those. My "lowly" l5639 @4ghz beats an 2600k @4.8ghz in most tasks. Now compare what a X5650/60/70 does


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> All of these 6-cores are nothing to sneeze at, feel bad for all the people hopping on the unlocked pentium train. these puppies compare to huge overclocked ivy's and haswell's, most of the time even outperforming those. My "lowly" l5639 @4ghz beats an 2600k @4.8ghz in most tasks. Now compare what a X5650/60/70 does


Haha I want an unlocked pentium!







I wanna make a rig for my friend with that!
Maybe in a year I can score an itx board and g3258 for uber cheap!

But I can't wait to run my x5650, and I'm looking to buy a 670 since I've doing some computer repairs for folks


----------



## dasparx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> All of these 6-cores are nothing to sneeze at, feel bad for all the people hopping on the unlocked pentium train. these puppies compare to huge overclocked ivy's and haswell's, most of the time even outperforming those. My "lowly" l5639 @4ghz beats an 2600k @4.8ghz in most tasks. Now compare what a X5650/60/70 does
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha I want an unlocked pentium!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wanna make a rig for my friend with that!
> Maybe in a year I can score an itx board and g3258 for uber cheap!
> 
> But I can't wait to run my x5650, and I'm looking to buy a 670 since I've doing some computer repairs for folks
Click to expand...

do your friend a favor and get him a l5639 + matx motherboard, those alienware motherboards overclock quite well.
i mean sure, those pentiums are nice for having some fun, but these builds cost the same and have way better performance ^^

Or do you secretly hate that person


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dasparx*
> 
> do your friend a favor and get him a l5639 + matx motherboard, those alienware motherboards overclock quite well.
> i mean sure, those pentiums are nice for having some fun, but these builds cost the same and have way better performance ^^
> 
> Or do you secretly hate that person


Haha I'd just keep the Matx board!







I want a rampage II/III gene badly!

Low power, size and silence are worth more to my friend! And he only plays old republic! And I'll have to ship it to him so I'm hoping to stick it in a large flat rate box!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Haha I'd just keep the Matx board!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want a rampage II/III gene badly!
> 
> Low power, size and silence are worth more to my friend! And he only plays old republic! And I'll have to ship it to him so I'm hoping to stick it in a large flat rate box!


Purchase from Amazon and they will happily drop ship to any address you want. I have a friend out in Angel Fire Resort New Mexico who refuses to try the internet but builds his computer over the phone with instruction from me. He sends me a check with 20 percent over the top then I have Amazon drop ship what ever he needs. He calls me when it comes in and follows my instructions so good its like I am there. Lol

I am shipping him a Asus 144hz 1ms monitor today in fact. He builds computer models of planes and submarines for fun and then flies them or pilots the subs under water in a game called Silent Hunter. Anyway Amazon will drop ship for you.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lionvibez*
> 
> Hey did you end up completing this mod?
> 
> I did it myself on my board.
> 
> Let me know if you still need a hand.


Hi,
I didnt have time to do it yet, things came up with my fathers leukemia and I've spent most of my time between work and hospital, just came to change my mind a little since I'm taking some time off work to handle all that since I can't continue all that at the same time its just too much right now... would you be able to help me with that? that would be really appreciated I really need to take my mind on something else now I'm starting to get crazy with all this... thanks


----------



## chux

Quote:


> This is probably an obvious question, but did you clear out the CMOS and start fresh? I know you said you tried a different bios and optimized defaults. No difference with latest bios (F14P) and all default settings?


Yes I tried F14P as well as F14Q from tweaktown and loaded optimised defaults - still wouldn't reboot.

It was definately something to do with motherboard incompatability. I borrowed a friends no longer used asus p6tx58d premium and it has no issues.
I have also been able to clock it past 150 bclk now so just seeing where I want to land.

Is there any consensus about whether a higher blck with lower multipler is better or lower bclk with higher cpu multipler (in terms of voltages/heat)


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chux*
> 
> Is there any consensus about whether a higher blck with lower multipler is better or lower bclk with higher cpu multipler (in terms of voltages/heat)


If your CPU is not an unlocked version such as the i7-980x or i7-990x, then it is not much difference playing around with the multiplier.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

True although most if not all overclocking sites and professionals have always said that on Gulftown based cpu's it seems the highest multiplier you can maintain for all cores is better than the highest possible bclk. Some of the best results I have seen during stress tests have been from Gulftown running bclk in the 150 to 160 range but those were unlocked cpu's. Westmere's on the other hand, depending on which one, you will want to aim for the highest multi that runs all cores. In fact once you dial in the highest multi then work on higher bclk until either you see no more benefit or too dangerous of a voltage. For my x5650 the sweet spot was 190x22 at 1.3v but I can force my bclk all the way up to 215 using dangerous voltages.


----------



## kpforce1

ahhhhhh...... I found a "Problem" with the x5679 CPUs







. They are limited to the 2:8 Memory divider!!! Damn.... wish I would have figured that out before now because I was really wanting that 2:10 multiplier for benching







. Looks like I'll only be running 1600 Mhz RAM frequency on the Force1 build after all. Up to 4.4 Ghz and climbing. 185 BCLK so far. I'm hoping for 200*24x for 4.8Ghz (25x turbo @ 5 Ghz).


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> ahhhhhh...... I found a "Problem" with the x5679 CPUs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . They are limited to the 2:8 Memory divider!!! Damn.... wish I would have figured that out before now because I was really wanting that 2:10 multiplier for benching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Looks like I'll only be running 1600 Mhz RAM frequency on the Force1 build after all. Up to 4.4 Ghz and climbing. 185 BCLK so far. I'm hoping for 200*24x for 4.8Ghz (25x turbo @ 5 Ghz).


Would 25 multi allow you to run all cores and all threads though? or just one or two cores?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Would 25 multi allow you to run all cores and all threads though? or just one or two cores?


Just two. For benching purposes I'm hoping for 210 BCLK for 5GHz and 5.2GHz turbo


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Just two. For benching purposes I'm hoping for 210 BCLK for 5GHz and 5.2GHz turbo


210 on a SR-2? Is that even possible when running two chips at once? Or are you trying only one chip at 210 bclk? Sounds like a beast. lol


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> 210 on a SR-2? Is that even possible when running two chips at once? Or are you trying only one chip at 210 bclk? Sounds like a beast. lol


Yes, they do exist lol.... they are just white buffalo. I'm hoping that I got a "good" one lol







It may just require a little more tweaking in the end


----------



## DividebyZERO

Alright so i just post tested my Xeon 5650 on my 4 way classified x58 (e762) and its good to go. I do have a few questions maybe someone can answer easily.

1. whats a normal VID range for the X56XX xeons? Mine is showing 1.025v is this in a normal range?
2. Whats the max multiplier on x5650 and is it bad to use 20x or 22x(if possible) on Xeon westmeres like it was with i7 920/30/etc..

If i recall the even multi cause instability or something.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Alright so i just post tested my Xeon 5650 on my 4 way classified x58 (e762) and its good to go. I do have a few questions maybe someone can answer easily.
> 
> 1. whats a normal VID range for the X56XX xeons? Mine is showing 1.025v is this in a normal range?
> 2. Whats the max multiplier on x5650 and is it bad to use 20x or 22x(if possible) on Xeon westmeres like it was with i7 920/30/etc..
> 
> If i recall the even multi cause instability or something.


1. If you mean VID as in Intels max safe vcore voltage, it is 1.35v. Same with the QPI voltage, especially if your using 2x uncore, anything over 1.35v will degrade the IMC fast. However, many people still go over the 1.35v mark to accomplish their overclocks, but many have also killed their IMC's doing so.

2. 23 is max multi for one or two cores (I still as of yet have not seen 23 multi on my 5650 and gave up trying to find it, lol), 22 is max for all 6 cores. 21 apparently does not exist. My 5650 is happily running at 190x22 at only 1.30v, but going to 200x22 needed over 1.35v and 205x22 needed over 1.4v. We have users here that can not seem to get the 22 multi to run safely, but 200x20 runs great for them and less then 1.3v needed.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> 1. If you mean VID as in Intels max safe vcore voltage, it is 1.35v. Same with the QPI voltage, especially if your using 2x uncore, anything over 1.35v will degrade the IMC fast. However, many people still go over the 1.35v mark to accomplish their overclocks, but many have also killed their IMC's doing so.
> 
> 2. 23 is max multi for one or two cores (I still as of yet have not seen 23 multi on my 5650 and gave up trying to find it, lol), 22 is max for all 6 cores. 21 apparently does not exist. My 5650 is happily running at 190x22 at only 1.30v, but going to 200x22 needed over 1.35v and 205x22 needed over 1.4v. We have users here that can not seem to get the 22 multi to run safely.


TY and i was referring to STOCK VID and forgot to say STOCK lol. I am not with it today


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> TY and i was referring to STOCK VID and forgot to say STOCK lol. I am not with it today


Sorry, I am not used to it being called VID. I guess I know it as vcore or cpu core voltage, lol. My bad... I had my board so long now that I am forgetting other terms, haha...


----------



## kpforce1

I don't know what the VID range is on them. All I know is that every CPU and GPU has a VID and the lower the VID the better







It just means lower voltage at stock speeds and usually translates to lower voltages when over clocking.


----------



## Xevi

lol









QPI 1.1v (AUTO)
QPI PLL 1.1v (AUTO)







http://valid.canardpc.com/tclxqn


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> QPI 1.1v (AUTO)
> QPI PLL 1.1v (AUTO)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/tclxqn


Just look at the voltage 1.5v!!!








How hot is the temp when you run prime with 1.5v?


----------



## Xevi

The results were much better than expected


















http://valid.canardpc.com/4u6jwp

1m


----------



## OCmember

What Xeon uses a 25 multi with all 6 cores?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What Xeon uses a 25 multi with all 6 cores?


I would think the x5680 for sure, and then there's the x5690 which has a 26 multi, plus maybe the x5679 which has a 24 multi but may have a 25 or 26 turbo multi. All speculation as I do not own one of these.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Westmere-EP.22_.2832_nm.29_Efficient_Performance

Go down to the Six Core section.


----------



## Xevi

QPI x38 fails


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I would think the x5680 for sure, and then there's the x5690 which has a 26 multi, plus maybe the x5679 which has a 24 multi but may have a 25 or 26 turbo multi. All speculation as I do not own one of these.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#.22Westmere-EP.22_.2832_nm.29_Efficient_Performance
> 
> Go down to the Six Core section.


How about the X5675 ? I hear it has a 25 multi but I thought I'd ask around to dig up any other info on it.. I've never heard of these X5675, X5679, etc chips..


----------



## Xevi

Is X5670 without turbo


----------



## chux

When you guys overclock using offset voltage do you leave the cstates enabled of disabled.

I find with the cstats enabled I get bsods on light loads until I increase the offset voltage a few notches .. in which case I might as well just disable the cstates?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Very few people run with C-states enabled when overclocking. I turn off everything in the way of saving power including C-States and SpeedStep and run max ghz 24/7. I think it is more stable that way myself.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chux*
> 
> When you guys overclock using offset voltage do you leave the cstates enabled of disabled.
> 
> I find with the cstats enabled I get bsods on light loads until I increase the offset voltage a few notches .. in which case I might as well just disable the cstates?


I run C-States when I overclock. It depends on the OC \ Ghz that I'm running. The voltages are roughly the same up until a certain point. Of course that would all depend on your CPU.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Upcoming rig i will be playing and testing, if it does well i may just adopt it to my main rig.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









4 R9 290's and Xeon x5650


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Upcoming rig i will be playing and testing, if it does well i may just adopt it to my main rig.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 R9 290's and Xeon x5650


With all those graphic cards, i would imagine that the power supply will at least be 1200watts?


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> With all those graphic cards, i would imagine that the power supply will at least be 1200watts?


If it stays with 4 gpus it will need at least 1500watts or so. Chances are if that it goes that route i will probably dual PSU this one. I do have a 1600w Lepa as well. There is a better chance it will end up just 2x gpu's That being said i possibly will be doing a Mantle benchmark thread with Sgt. Bilko and i have various i7/xeons/chipsets to test on, and AMD FX as well. We are kind of wanting to see how Mantle will benefit multiple platforms. Just need more Mantle games


----------



## DividebyZERO

Also forgot to modify that pic of the CPU/socket area. I have a Classified 4 way SLI x58 (E762). It needs a hardmod for the Xeons to work as someone mentioned earlier in the thread. So i highlighted the spots for soldering. Not sure if this will help anyone but maybe it will.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Also forgot to modify that pic of the CPU/socket area. I have a Classified 4 way SLI x58 (E762). It needs a hardmod for the Xeons to work as someone mentioned earlier in the thread. So i highlighted the spots for soldering. Not sure if this will help anyone but maybe it will.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Just curious, will the normal i7 cpu (non xeon cpu) work okay once after you did the hardmod?


----------



## Xevi




----------



## zzss

X5650 on GA X58A-UD7/GA X58A -OC doesn't boot，when Uncore at 20X multi.Maybe that is a BUG of BIOS.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zzss*
> 
> X5650 on GA X58A-UD7/GA X58A -OC doesn't boot，when Uncore at 20X multi.Maybe that is a BUG of BIOS.


What BCLK are you at and what voltages?


----------



## OCmember

Love this thread!


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Just curious, will the normal i7 cpu (non xeon cpu) work okay once after you did the hardmod?


I don't have any i7 on hand right now, but i am pretty sure i had a i7 in it a couple years back, i believe a 930 or 950. I didn't mod mine it was premodded at some point. i originally ordered mine as a b-stock board


----------



## DividebyZERO

Hate to post right next to my last, but no ones said much lately. Does anyone here have any R9 series multi-gpu on x58 boards with NV200 PLX?

I am still moving things around and was wondering if anyone has any real world usage with R9 29x CF/tri/quad on any mainboards with Nv200 PLX?

Thanks.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Hate to post right next to my last, but no ones said much lately. Does anyone here have any R9 series multi-gpu on x58 boards with NV200 PLX?
> 
> I am still moving things around and was wondering if anyone has any real world usage with R9 29x CF/tri/quad on any mainboards with Nv200 PLX?
> 
> Thanks.


I've see a bunch of info from people having issues with Crossfire and the R9's and boards with NF200 chips but I do not have any first hand experience so I can't really comment







. My SR-2 has two PLX chips but I'm not running 290's.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Love this thread!


I love that you posted that throughout the topic lol.








There has been a ton of great discussion. The X58 platform never dies.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The X58 platform never dies.


NEVER!!!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> NEVER!!!


lol....I guess I should've said the X58 never "died".


----------



## JR88

I hope it never dies xD


----------



## zzss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> What BCLK are you at and what voltages?


200 BCLK，1.25 Vcore，1.4-1.6 VTT


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zzss*
> 
> 200 BCLK，1.25 Vcore，1.4-1.6 VTT


Bro, try oc the cpu slowly, don't just put 200bclk and then expect it to boot straight away.
You can start with 180bclk and then increasing it slowly to 185, 190, 195 and so on.....


----------



## zzss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Bro, try oc the cpu slowly, don't just put 200bclk and then expect it to boot straight away.
> You can start with 180bclk and then increasing it slowly to 185, 190, 195 and so on.....


same BCLK and Voltage,Uncore 19X and 21X no problem


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zzss*
> 
> same BCLK and Voltage,Uncore 19X and 21X no problem


This is x5650 right?
If yes, then the Gigabyte mobo is very different from the Asus Sabertooth mobo, because the Sabertooth do not allow me to enter multiplier 21.


----------



## zzss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> This is x5650 right?
> If yes, then the Gigabyte mobo is very different from the Asus Sabertooth mobo, because the Sabertooth do not allow me to enter multiplier 21.


Yes,X5650.
In my case,L5639 doesn't boot at 16X Uncore multiplier on EX58-UD5,and X5650 doesn't boot at 20X Uncore multiplier on X58A-OC/UD7.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zzss*
> 
> Yes,X5650.
> In my case,L5639 doesn't boot at 16X Uncore multiplier on EX58-UD5,and X5650 doesn't boot at 20X Uncore multiplier on X58A-OC/UD7.


What RAM frequency are you running 2000 Mhz?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Wasn't 2000 mhz RAM proven to not work very good on these chips and provides pretty much nothing in the way of a faster system? I thought 1500-1850'ish was the sweet spot?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Wasn't 2000 mhz RAM proven to not work very good on these chips and provides pretty much nothing in the way of a faster system? I thought 1500-1850'ish was the sweet spot?


In the very first post I added this category: *"DDR3- 1600Mhz vs1900Mhz vs 2000MMhz Performance % Comparisons"*

I won't post all of my results here. From what I've tested 1600Mhz was the sweet spot since it's more flexible for nearly everything and easy to achieve = Most 1333Mhz can hit 1600Mhz vice versa with high clocked RAM downclocked.

You'll get higher benchmarks numbers, but it's still less than few percent. Everyday use is no different or even worse with higher RAM in some benchmarks. X58 simply doesn't utilize anything higher than 1600Mhz-1900Mhz. Intel made them this way [X79 was in the pipline!!!







]


----------



## zzss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> What RAM frequency are you running 2000 Mhz?


1600Mhz and 2000Mhz


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> In the very first post I added this category: *"DDR3- 1600Mhz vs1900Mhz vs 2000MMhz Performance % Comparisons"*
> 
> I won't post all of my results here. From what I've tested 1600Mhz was the sweet spot since it's more flexible for nearly everything and easy to achieve = Most 1333Mhz can hit 1600Mhz vice versa with high clocked RAM downclocked.
> 
> You'll get higher benchmarks numbers, but it's still less than few percent. Everyday use is no different or even worse with higher RAM in some benchmarks. X58 simply doesn't utilize anything higher than 1600Mhz-1900Mhz. Intel made them this way [X79 was in the pipline!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


LOL, OK I must have already read your report then. I tried several frequencies, including 18xx mhz and keeping my RAM at 1T using 761 mhz x 2 = 15xx was my sweet spot. Anything higher on RAM forced it to auto to 2T and my benches stopped rising. I did not try forcing the issue though.


----------



## JR88

Don't run on the 20X multiplier its very unstable....haha


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> In the very first post I added this category: *"DDR3- 1600Mhz vs1900Mhz vs 2000MMhz Performance % Comparisons"*
> 
> I won't post all of my results here. From what I've tested 1600Mhz was the sweet spot since it's more flexible for nearly everything and easy to achieve = Most 1333Mhz can hit 1600Mhz vice versa with high clocked RAM downclocked.
> 
> You'll get higher benchmarks numbers, but it's still less than few percent. Everyday use is no different or even worse with higher RAM in some benchmarks. X58 simply doesn't utilize anything higher than 1600Mhz-1900Mhz. Intel made them this way [X79 was in the pipline!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zzss*
> 
> 1600Mhz and 2000Mhz


2000 Mhz is not worth the large voltage increases across the entire system honestly but I ran it for years







. I've since dropped down to 1600 Mhz with CL8 timings and lower voltage.

---EDIT--- Kana, what was the highest you were able to comfortably get on the DRAM? 2200Mhz? Seems like I was able to get 2200-2300Mhz but I can't remember exactly. I just remembered that it was basically identical to what you ran.

ZZSS i need more info on what you are actually running to help.

Can you post your some of your BIOS settings?

BCLK = ?
Memory Multiplier (i.e. 2:8, 2:10 etc.) = ?

Remember, you should use an UnCORE frequency 1.5x the DRAM clock for the Westmere Xeons







. You CAN use the 2x like Nehlam but the Westmeres were designed for 1.5x. There is a performance increase with a higher UnCORE but at the cost of higher QPI/VTT/Heat and other voltages.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> .
> 
> ---EDIT--- Kana, what was the highest you were able to comfortably get on the DRAM? 2200Mhz? Seems like I was able to get 2200-2300Mhz but I can't remember exactly. I just remembered that it was basically identical to what you ran.


The highest I decided to run was 2208Mhz. I could've went well over 2200Mhz, but it would've been pointless just as 2208Mhz was. I could run 2208Mhz comfortably, but without the outrageous voltages 2208Mhz was simply pretty numbers. Benchmarks were either the exact same as 1600Mhz and\or generally worse. Even 2000Mhz with higher voltage [but lower than 2200Mhz voltage] wasn't worth it IMO. Timings above 1333Mhz - 1600 get way to lose for my taste. I need to my performance.


----------



## JR88

That's negligent anyways....better to just have better/tighter timings....you won't notice too much between 1066-1600mhz anyways, maybe in benching but real world/every day tasks its pretty hard to distinguish the difference....


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

IT LIVES!!!

I got my x5650 to work in my rev 1 ex58-ud3r, IT WORKS! I flashed the bios F12q and swapped out the w3520 for the x5650 and it works!!

I'm so happy!


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> IT LIVES!!!
> 
> I got my x5650 to work in my rev 1 ex58-ud3r, IT WORKS! I flashed the bios F12q and swapped out the w3520 for the x5650 and it works!!
> 
> I'm so happy!


congratz!


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Hi All, I was looking to upgrade my i7 920 to a Xeon and found this thread, so I ordered a X5660 from e-bay for just $140, the processor looks brand new can't wait to play with it, My motherboard is EVGA X58 SLI3 which supports this processor natively as per EVGA website. Anyone else here have an X58 SLI3? How was your overclocking experience with the Xeons? the board is fantastic with my i7 where I was running it @ 4.3GHZ


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> IT LIVES!!!
> 
> I got my x5650 to work in my rev 1 ex58-ud3r, IT WORKS! I flashed the bios F12q and swapped out the w3520 for the x5650 and it works!!
> 
> I'm so happy!


Nice. Don't forget to join my X58 - Xeon club. The topic should be on the first page. Here is the link: http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club
Have fun overclocking.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Hi All, I was looking to upgrade my i7 920 to a Xeon and found this thread, so I ordered a X5660 from e-bay for just $140, the processor looks brand new can't wait to play with it, My motherboard is EVGA X58 SLI3 which supports this processor natively as per EVGA website. Anyone else here have an X58 SLI3? How was your overclocking experience with the Xeons? the board is fantastic with my i7 where I was running it @ 4.3GHZ


You could've saved roughly $65.00 by simply getting the X5650 which is the EXACT SAME [other than 1 measly multiplier] as the X5660. However, you won't be paying anywhere near the price of a Xeon so it's still a steal.

A few people with a EVGA X58 3X SLI [132-BL-E758] in the Xeon Club has hit 3.7Ghz, 4.2Ghz with ease. There didn't appear to be a lot of issues with overclocking them. I'm sure some of those users will be posting here shortly or sometime today. Congrat on the new 6 core Xeon.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> A few people with a EVGA X58 3X SLI [132-BL-E758] in the Xeon Club has hit 3.7Ghz, 4.2Ghz with ease. There didn't appear to be a lot of issues with overclocking them. I'm sure some of those users will be posting here shortly or sometime today. Congrat on the new 6 core Xeon.


I actually ordered a X5650 also for $65 from china, it looks pretty beat up though (ton of scratches on the IHS), contacts looks good. I'll post results of both of them when I get em.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> I actually ordered a X5650 also for $65 from china, it looks pretty beat up though (ton of scratches on the IHS), contacts looks good. I'll post results of both of them when I get em.


I've heard nothing, but BAD THINGS about those CPUs from China. Being scratched up or damaged. Sometimes they won't work or won't read the specs correctly.. What the hell are they doing to those CPUs over there. It's the main reason I went with American sellers. Post the results when you get a chance. Nice pickup for the price. :thumb

.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've heard nothing, but BAD THINGS about those CPUs from China. Being scratched up or damaged. Sometimes they won't work or won't read the specs correctly.. What the hell are they doing to those CPUs over there. It's the main reason I went with American sellers. Post the results when you get a chance. Nice pickup for the price. :thumb
> 
> .


Beats me! Some of them looks like they have used nails and hammers on them, totally raked!! It's too expensive for me to ship from the US, so I ordered the X5660 from a Israeli seller, he took photos of all the chips he had and told me to pick the one I wanted, nice fellow, all of them looked like brand new though. I do a lot of 3d rendering so this will be a very nice speed bump I hope! I was going to buy an X99 when it comes out but honestly this is the best possible route, almost the same performance for under $200


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice. Don't forget to join my X58 - Xeon club. The topic should be on the first page. Here is the link: http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club
> Have fun overclocking.
> 
> Thanks, Ive been posting there for a while, just havent put up a cpuz validation and didnt want to break the rules
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but i will as soon as I can!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Beats me! Some of them looks like they have used nails and hammers on them, totally raked!! It's too expensive for me to ship from the US, so I ordered the X5660 from a Israeli seller, he took photos of all the chips he had and told me to pick the one I wanted, nice fellow, all of them looked like brand new though. I do a lot of 3d rendering so this will be a very nice speed bump I hope! I was going to buy an X99 when it comes out but honestly this is the best possible route, almost the same performance for under $200


Sorry I didn't realize that you were outside of the US. I hope everything works as well as they look. I also do a lot of 3D rendering as well. Other times it's real time rendering, other times video compression+render. It all depends what I have to do that week.

I agree about the X99 comment. I think simply slapping a Xeon into the 1366 would be the best and cheapest route at this point. With a good system you'll be 10% slower than X79 and no X58 user can complain about that. So far the system is doing everything I want. Even when I'm running stock speeds the CPU gets the job done easily.

@ Ultra-m-a-n

Work+Programming+Phone Call and basically multitasking gives you post like that. LOL didn't even notice that until you posted it.









I guess I'll get around to breaking those rules and get perma banned from OCN maybe?


----------



## crazycrave

This is for the EVGA 3 way SLi board.. the board needs to be rev 1.2 to be able to drop the Xeon in and run it.. rev 1.0 and 1.1 has to be modded by owner or EVGA to run a Xeon.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Got it! I have the X58 SLI3 (board 767) which natively supports all westmere processors!!


----------



## Kana-Maru

@crazycrave

Love the OCN picture








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Got it! I have the X58 SLI3 (board 767) which natively supports all westmere processors!!


Congrats.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've heard nothing, but BAD THINGS about those CPUs from China. Being scratched up or damaged. Sometimes they won't work or won't read the specs correctly.. What the hell are they doing to those CPUs over there. It's the main reason I went with American sellers. Post the results when you get a chance. Nice pickup for the price. :thumb
> 
> .


It's kinda funny, 'cause my first x5650 was from an American seller and it was pretty much DOA.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> It's kinda funny, 'cause my first x5650 was from an American seller and it was pretty much DOA.


I'm sure it is funny now. There was no laughing when you were going through that







. You were the only case that I could remember. Everyone else, even on different websites, had little to no issues with American sellers. There were a ton of negative feedback from foreign sellers. Not all X58 Xeons coming from overseas were bad. After all of the things that I read I just wouldn't take the chance.

Did you buy from someone selling a crap load of Xeons or a guy selling one or a few? I can't remember.


----------



## Timeofdoom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm sure it is funny now. There was no laughing when you were going through that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . You were the only case that I could remember. Everyone else, even on different websites, had little to no issues with American sellers. There were a ton of negative feedback from foreign sellers. Not all X58 Xeons coming from overseas were bad. After all of the things that I read I just wouldn't take the chance.
> 
> Did you buy from someone selling a crap load of Xeons or a guy selling one or a few? I can't remember.


Yeah, I was really sad then. And pretty salty.

He was selling a couple xeons. 4 or 5 as far as I can remember.


----------



## OCmember

That profile fits a person who bought a few looking for the best. That's not to say buying from person selling 29 of them won't get you a bad one but you'll have a better chance of getting a non-abused chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timeofdoom*
> 
> Yeah, I was really sad then. And pretty salty.
> 
> He was selling a couple xeons. 4 or 5 as far as I can remember.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> That profile fits a person who bought a few looking for the best. That's not to say buying from person selling 29 of them won't get you a bad one but you'll have a better chance of getting a non-abused chip.


EXACTLY OCmember, that's what I was getting at. Since these Xeon CPUs will sell easily on the X58 platform some people will purchase a couple of them. They are cheap and they will make at least 90% or more of their money back very easily. They are basically abusing the hell out of these CPUs while digging for the "golden chip". Shoving vCore into the CPUs more than likely. If it doesn't hit a high OC then they'll re-sell them to whomever will buy them. I usually buy from a company or a seller who has tons of Xeons. There will always be defectives with anything in electronics for sure, but you have less of a headache when you figure out what resellers are doing. I doubt if a seller with 50 - 200+ will be digging for the best CPU. I've been trying to warn people to stop buying from sellers who own 1-5 or some other small number. They price is good, but the CPUs probably won't hit 4.2Ghz - 4.4Ghz easily [which is why they are reselling them]. Just saying.


----------



## OCmember

In other news 4GHz seems to be running fine @ 1.23v, no HT, lowest memory divider.. using 174 BLCK @ 23x, idles at the same temp as 3.7GHz.. 79*F lowest core is 35*c using RealtempGT, highest core is 39*c


----------



## Kana-Maru

Why not use HT? I can never wrap my head around why people won't use the feature. Are you trying to get the lowest vCore and\or temperatures or something?

Congrats as well. Nice Vcore.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Why not use HT? I can never wrap my head around why people won't use the feature. Are you trying to get the lowest vCore and\or temperatures or something?
> 
> Congrats as well. Nice Vcore.


Just seeing how it acts with these parameters. Seems to be a little more stable than 3.7GHz with HT and a higher divider.. Maybe it's just the memory clock causing the little instabilities with some apps. I'd get a UE3 engine game (not responding) message sometimes when scrolling out of the game menu sometimes/infrequently it would hang. Hasn't appeared and other things I've noticed are smoother


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Starting slow, now @ 4.3GHz, the temps are seriously fantastic compared to my old i7 920 D0, which would have been over 80C by now.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Starting slow, now @ 4.3GHz, the temps are seriously fantastic compared to my old i7 920 D0, which would have been over 80C by now.


You can't get the 23x ? Is that an X5660?


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> You can't get the 23x ? Is that an X5660?


I can, I just had the Turbo Mode disabled, wanted to see how far I can push the RAM and BCLK! now running @ 4.4GHz x23


----------



## JR88

nice....really want to pick up one/try one of those gulftown/westmere's.....they gotta run so much better/cooler.....my old 920 DO sounds like yours gets hot really fast....this w3520 is a little better at that though....


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JR88*
> 
> nice....really want to pick up one/try one of those gulftown/westmere's.....they gotta run so much better/cooler.....my old 920 DO sounds like yours gets hot really fast....this w3520 is a little better at that though....


Haha just pick one up already!









I bought a w3520 just to do a bios flash and as a backup!


----------



## JR88

the w3520 bought used off of ebay for $15 not bad haha, so yes I should pick up like a used X5650 for a good deal.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JR88*
> 
> the w3520 bought used off of ebay for $15 not bad haha, so yes I should pick up like a used X5650 for a good deal.


I got one locally last year for $20, and a second one just recently off ebay for $12.25









hahaha


----------



## JR88

I'm eyeing a X5650 used you can get them from like $70-100+ on ebay I don't know fear of getting a dead chip haha

might have to take the chance though, i think my rampage ii gene will run it....maybe not overclocked real high though....


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JR88*
> 
> I'm eyeing a X5650 used from like $70-100+ on ebay I don't know fear of getting a dead chip haha


this seller was really good, the chip was well packaged and in good condition, also I think it was a server pull and not a personal sale, since they have a butt ton, as well as the person being a top rated seller. Also he was the only one that would ship to APO so I would gladly recommend this seller.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Processor-Grade-A-/121250737445?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1c3b1b6d25


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> this seller was really good, the chip was well packaged and in good condition, also I think it was a server pull and not a personal sale, since they have a butt ton, as well as the person being a top rated seller. Also he was the only one that would ship to APO so I would gladly recommend this seller.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66-GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Processor-Grade-A-/121250737445?pt=US_Server_CPUs_Processors&hash=item1c3b1b6d25


I agree. I bought an X5650 from this seller for myself, and I was able to hit 4.0GHz (200x20 w/turbo disabled) @1.25V on my Sabertooth X58. Three of my friends have since bought their's from this seller, and they all seem to have as good chips as, or better than, mine.

Kana-Maru, I totally recommend Ultra-m-a-n's seller if you need to advise any new buyers. Additionally, I entirely agree with your thoughts on the sellers who have only 4-5 available as being potential "con-artists."


----------



## JR88

Nice it is tempting to get one....from what I have seen they are far superior performance wise to Nehalem/first gen

getting high oc stable with my 920 or my w3520 is pretty difficult......4ghz is still my limit for stability for any long period of time.....

thermal barrier issue.. huge Vcore increase needed and having to turn off all power saving/C states/speedstep for stabilty

waiting on my thermalright heatsink, better definitely than this foxconn heatsink.....and put the build back in old atx full tower....just too much/too hot trying to run it in my ibuypower arc 647 mid size case not good/restricted airflow in that case/not ideal... even with both 120mm intakes and 1 high speed rear exhaust and 2 top 120mm exhaust still runs hot as hell/poor airflow....

just putting it in my old full tower again with 1 front intake and high speed rear....temps already dropped 5-10c with side panel off.....haha

that mid case with all the drive/expansion bays in front seriously hurting air flow


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Hmm so all I did was leave everything stock and cranked up the BCLK to 160. I dont know how to fine tune stuff on this platform, and I dont know how to overclock this platform in general; but the max temp at this setting that I was hitting was 71 on core 5.

Is there any pointers? The board does throttle, but oh well.

Also under idle the voltage doesnt drop and stays at 1.2 on the P6T Deluxe. The EX58-UD3R that I had would drop the voltage under idle, any ideas on this?


----------



## KarlX58

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> I agree. I bought an X5650 from this seller for myself, and I was able to hit 4.0GHz (200x20 w/turbo disabled) @1.25V on my Sabertooth X58. Three of my friends have since bought their's from this seller, and they all seem to have as good chips as, or better than, mine.


I'll give this seller a 3rd recommendation. I am also running an X5650 at an identical 4.0 GHz (200x20) and 1.25 V.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Hmm so all I did was leave everything stock and cranked up the BCLK to 160. I dont know how to fine tune stuff on this platform, and I dont know how to overclock this platform in general; but the max temp at this setting that I was hitting was 71 on core 5.
> 
> Is there any pointers?


71 does seem a tad high for that voltage, but maybe that is due to the heatsink and case airflow? I think I maxed out at 66/67 at 1.25 V with a Phanteks PH-TC12DX in a Corsair Air 540. You might want to check out the the QPI voltage. I don't know what Uncore/Ram ratio you're running at, but if you lower it down to 1.5 you can potentially get away with less QPI V.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarlX58*
> 
> I'll give this seller a 3rd recommendation. I am also running an X5650 at an identical 4.0 GHz (200x20) and 1.25 V.
> 71 does seem a tad high for that voltage, but maybe that is due to the heatsink and case airflow? I think I maxed out at 66/67 at 1.25 V with a Phanteks PH-TC12DX in a Corsair Air 540. You might want to check out the the QPI voltage. I don't know what Uncore/Ram ratio you're running at, but if you lower it down to 1.5 you can potentially get away with less QPI V.


I think its the push pull fans on my cooler being faster than the exhaust fan on the back of the case. I'll swap it out and see if there's a difference.

Also everything is on auto.. Hahaha I just bumped the Bclck up and it's just quick an dirty.

One last question. Should I use my 8gb of dual channel 2
1866 gskill sniper, or the 3x2gb 1600 gskill sticks?


----------



## kckyle

me and couple others bought from esiso, just watch out for the packaging, but if you get a dud or damaged chip, like i did, esiso will ship you another one without asking you to return the damage chip next day air. so now i got two spare x5650 laying around lol.

also these of you with corsair AIO, what temps are you getting at 4ghz loaded?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Wish I could help man. I only have the Antec khuler 620 AIO.


----------



## JR88

Got this Thermalright true spirit 90m in today, pretty impressive over the foxconn heatsink I had I don't hit 80-100c anymore haha, this chill factor paste it came with is pretty good too, damn near equal if not better than old arctic silver 5.


----------



## nitrobg

Hello guys. How do you get past or fix the locked 20x uncore multiplier of the X56xx Xeons? I've been struggling a lot with this issue and can't find a real solution.
This ridiculously high multiplier forces me to go much higher on the CPU VTT than it's necessary just to reach some mediocre clocks.
I'm aware that the max safe CPU VTT voltage is 1.35V and I shouldn't get past that, so I'm following this rule of thumb. So this voltage gives me 193x22 for X5650 and I can't go higher without increasing it.
I'm almost certain that if I somehow manage to reduce the uncore multi, I'd be able to either go higher on BCLK or reduce the CPU VTT.
I've read that there are "hacked" bioses for some motherboards with added microcode for these specific CPUs which actually fully unlock these multipliers. Any idea how to achieve that and mod my own bios?

The motherboard is Foxconn FlamingBlade GTI with the latest BIOS.
The CPU is Xeon X5650 B1.

Any ideas or advices would be highly appreciated.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Hello guys. How do you get past or fix the locked 20x uncore multiplier of the X56xx Xeons? I've been struggling a lot with this issue and can't find a real solution.
> This ridiculously high multiplier forces me to go much higher on the CPU VTT than it's necessary just to reach some mediocre clocks.
> I'm aware that the max safe CPU VTT voltage is 1.35V and I shouldn't get past that, so I'm following this rule of thumb. So this voltage gives me 193x22 for X5650 and I can't go higher without increasing it.
> I'm almost certain that if I somehow manage to reduce the uncore multi, I'd be able to either go higher on BCLK or reduce the CPU VTT.
> I've read that there are "hacked" bioses for some motherboards with added microcode for these specific CPUs which actually fully unlock these multipliers. Any idea how to achieve that and mod my own bios?
> 
> The motherboard is Foxconn FlamingBlade GTI with the latest BIOS.
> The CPU is Xeon X5650 B1.
> 
> Any ideas or advices would be highly appreciated.


What is your uncore set at currently? You can go as low as 1.5x of memory freq and as high as matching CPU speed. Make sure both vtt and qpi are not over 1.35v and make sure your running qpi/uncore by a ration of 9:8. If you go above 1.35v and uncore is at least 2x memory speed, you run the chance of prematurely damaging your IMC. But its just a chance, and what % of a chance that is is up for debate. I prefer to listen to Intel myself.

190x22 with uncore at 3.2ghz and qpi at the lowest setting and running at 1.3v (or lower) is already a damn near perfect overclock for the x5650. That's exactly what I run mine at. Lowering uncore did help with raising bclk but I also lost some gflops and snappiness of the over all system. A higher CPU multiplier almost always trumps higher bclk. Unless you have a fantastic high end cooling solution I think you already found your xeons sweet spot. I had nearly zero benefit forcing 4.4 or 4.5 ghz as this thing is a beast at 4ghz already and is not mediocre. Mediocre would be a Gulftown at 4ghz, LOL... This chip smokes my 930 at the same clocks and settings.


----------



## buttface420

i really want to get a 5650 for my next gaming upgrade but i swear all the x58 motherboards that support these and can overclock them are too expensive, im talking a used sabertooth is over 200 bucks! i wish i knew about these before the x58 price boom. im guessing i just get a 8350 for my gaming needs but a oc'd 5650 would've been sweeeeet


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I always seem to see Sabertooths for around $175. But yeah you would think something older and behind the current technology times, not to mention used, would be cheaper then a new board. But for us who already have one of these its nice to know its not losing much value. I'd be tickled to get $250 for my R3E 6 or 7 years after paying $350 for it. haha


----------



## OCmember

Glad I never upgraded since my 1366 boards. Have an Asrock X58 Extreme (1st gen) and an EVGA 760 A1 rev.1.0 - needs mod for Xeons so i bought an i7 970 - hah


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

The synthetic scores look good but is something off with the game benchmarks? I see some very low minimum fps on a lot of those, unless it's normal even compared to newer cpu's..?

Ordered a 5670 anyway which i should be getting soon.. this should keep my system going till at least Skylake. Just need to change my old 5870 GPU when new ones come out.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> What is your uncore set at currently? You can go as low as 1.5x of memory freq and as high as matching CPU speed. Make sure both vtt and qpi are not over 1.35v and make sure your running qpi/uncore by a ration of 9:8. If you go above 1.35v and uncore is at least 2x memory speed, you run the chance of prematurely damaging your IMC. But its just a chance, and what % of a chance that is is up for debate. I prefer to listen to Intel myself.
> 
> 190x22 with uncore at 3.2ghz and qpi at the lowest setting and running at 1.3v (or lower) is already a damn near perfect overclock for the x5650. That's exactly what I run mine at. Lowering uncore did help with raising bclk but I also lost some gflops and snappiness of the over all system. A higher CPU multiplier almost always trumps higher bclk. Unless you have a fantastic high end cooling solution I think you already found your xeons sweet spot. I had nearly zero benefit forcing 4.4 or 4.5 ghz as this thing is a beast at 4ghz already and is not mediocre. Mediocre would be a Gulftown at 4ghz, LOL... This chip smokes my 930 at the same clocks and settings.


The main problem is that all these Xeons have a locked uncore multiplier to 20x regardless of the settings the user chooses. Some people even report that the memory multiplier is locked as well.
These are the OC settings in the BIOS. Please note the 12x Uncore and 6x memory. Even if I set it to 12x, in Windows I can see that the multiplier is actually 20x (screenshot). CPU-Z also reports the same observation (Memory tab - NB Frequency). This is the limiting factor in the OC perhaps for most of the users here unless they have a patched BIOS with a fixed microcode for this CPU.
I indeed have a fantastic high end cooling solution - CM Seidon 240M. Even at 1.45V, the cores wouldn't go past 60C. This is what bothers me. The motherboard itself is capable of running at much higher BCLK, perhaps would easily reach 210+. However, because of this bug, I can't go that high as I would have to increase the CPU PLL voltage as well.

Can some users run CPU Tweaker and tell me whether their reported Uncore multiplier matches the one set in the BIOS.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> The main problem is that all these Xeons have a locked uncore multiplier to 20x regardless of the settings the user chooses. Some people even report that the memory multiplier is locked as well..


This is not correct.
The x5650 has a max 22 multiplier (23 if turbo on), and the x5660 has a max 23 multiplier (24 if turbo on).


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> This is not correct.
> The x5650 has a max 22 multiplier (23 if turbo on), and the x5660 has a max 23 multiplier (24 if turbo on).


I'm referring to the Uncore multiplier, not the actual core multiplier. There is a huge difference between both


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> I'm referring to the Uncore multiplier, not the actual core multiplier. There is a huge difference between both


My bad, i apologize for my mistake. I mis-interpret what you are trying to say.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> The main problem is that all these Xeons have a locked uncore multiplier to 20x regardless of the settings the user chooses. Some people even report that the memory multiplier is locked as well.
> These are the OC settings in the BIOS. Please note the 12x Uncore and 6x memory. Even if I set it to 12x, in Windows I can see that the multiplier is actually 20x (screenshot). CPU-Z also reports the same observation (Memory tab - NB Frequency). This is the limiting factor in the OC perhaps for most of the users here unless they have a patched BIOS with a fixed microcode for this CPU.
> I indeed have a fantastic high end cooling solution - CM Seidon 240M. Even at 1.45V, the cores wouldn't go past 60C. This is what bothers me. The motherboard itself is capable of running at much higher BCLK, perhaps would easily reach 210+. However, because of this bug, I can't go that high as I would have to increase the CPU PLL voltage as well.
> 
> Can some users run CPU Tweaker and tell me whether their reported Uncore multiplier matches the one set in the BIOS.


I can assure you that the x5650 and x5660 do not have a locked uncore multipliers. The only multiplier that some of them are limited on is the DRAM ratio. For example my x5679's are limited from using the 2:10 ratio multi whereas the x5650 and x5660 can utilize it. The only reason you would be limited to specific uncore multipliers is due to your DRAM frequency and/or your motherboard not identifying your CPU as requiring 1.5x the DRAM frequency vs the 2x Bloomfield/Nehlam does.

--EDIT-- Also I would highly recommend manually setting your memory multiplier, otherwise you cannot determine what the board is actually going to use.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Can some users run CPU Tweaker and tell me whether their reported Uncore multiplier matches the one set in the BIOS.


If that tool works on Windows 8.1 I can try it a bit later today maybe. I don't remember anything other than the cpu multi being locked so you may be correct about the assumption of a bug in your bios.

Unfortunately I am so busy today so if anyone else can test his locked uncore theory, that would be really nice of you.


----------



## tarvilian

Same board and cpu,same problem here.No matter what I choose in bios for uncore multiplier,real value is x20.I am absolute sure,i check it with several programs.I can easy control ram multiplier,and real value is what I choose(I have x6 ram with 190 fsb,and frequency Is around 1150mhz).Big problem is that I can't really control uncore multiplayer.It's allways x20(even if I choose x12 value in bios,real is again x20...),and somewhere near 190fsb,my QPI frequency became too high,and I am hitting the wall of overclock.My core voltage is LOW,temperatures are simply amazing,but I have to set too high CPU VTT voltage,to be able to get more than 190 fsb!I will be pleased with any advice,any cracked bios ot whatever.
p.s. mobo is Flamingblade GTI,cpu is Xeon X5650.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

You guys do realize that in order to push the 5650 over the stock 20 multi you need all c-states and anything related to energy savings disabled, right? There is no 21 multi on the 5650 and in order to hit 23 multi (which only works for two cores), you need to have Turbo enabled (I do not remember if HT needs to be enabled or disabled). With Turbo enabled you lose the 22 multi for 24/7 (on my board anyway) and can only use 20 multi for 24/7, but Turbo will kick in and jump to 22 for 6 cores, and then 23 for two cores only, if really needed. I tried using Turbo and it NEVER once kicked in even during heavy loads so its worthless to me (I just gave up trying different combos of settings). I want all 6 cores and all 12 threads working at all times and that is only possible with the 20 multi and c-states enabled or disabled, and or 22 multi with everything disabled, c-states AND Turbo. The 23 multi might be great for a CPUID Validation link though. Its better to disable everything (related to energy savings) including Turbo and stick with the 22 multi so long you don't go above 1.35v. At 20 multi I could run low voltage down to 1.1v (even at 200 bclk), but the 22 multi is a carbon hog and it needed 1.3v (which is still safe) just to run it at 190 bclk. Just find your highest BCLK at the highest voltage your OK with and be happy. I can go as high as 205 bclk (and 215 on my 930) but I need to break the safe voltage margin and I'm not willing to do that. I probably can go slightly higher then 190 and stay under the 1.35v but have not found the time to try it yet. Even 180x22 was smashing gflop records for me, so 190 is just fine. I would like to stay as far away from the 1.35v as possible and sell this chip in a few years still running great.

Anyway, again make sure your C-States (C1E etc) and Turbo are disabled if you want to use the 22 multi on a x5650. Also, the Westmere's LOVE Load-Line Calibration (LLC) if you have it. Set it to the highest setting and your Westmere will smile. Remember, Gulftown's didn't really like LLC, and or it was bad for the chip (I can't remember which), but for what ever reasons Westmere's love it and work great with LLC enabled. I have mine set at aggressive (or what ever it is) and can run 200x20 stable at 1.1v. This was not possible with LLC disabled (close though), but for what ever reason when it was enabled my Westmere x5650 jumped up and said thank you... lol

You might want to try setting all voltages to stock (NOT AUTO) or a tad higher, and put your PCI-E to 101 mhz. Don't ask why, it just seems to help for some boards "sometimes" according to "some" over clockers (I just read that in a overclocking thread once, lol, so I don't know if its true or not). Also run your memory at 1600 mhz (In fact, set that to 1600 first using either 1.5 or 1.6v) unless you have a valid reason not to, lol. Everything is rounded off perfectly and its the #1 most commonly used memory speed for 1366 these days. Yeah I know 1333 is very close, but not in the over clocking world









P.S. I am drawing experiences from a very bad memory core in my brain. Everything above is experiences and/or here say from others experiences. The above may or may not be true, but it is the thought and time I took that counts. lol


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I can assure you that the x5650 and x5660 do not have a locked uncore multipliers. The only multiplier that some of them are limited on is the DRAM ratio. For example my x5679's are limited from using the 2:10 ratio multi whereas the x5650 and x5660 can utilize it. The only reason you would be limited to specific uncore multipliers is due to your DRAM frequency and/or your motherboard not identifying your CPU as requiring 1.5x the DRAM frequency vs the 2x Bloomfield/Nehlam does.
> 
> --EDIT-- Also I would highly recommend manually setting your memory multiplier, otherwise you cannot determine what the board is actually going to use.


It is quite possible that you are correct. The problem is that some motherboards can't control the UNCORE multiplier and automatically revert to the default UNCORE multiplier which seems to be 20x for these Xeons.
The memory multiplier is set to 6x in order to isolate and test the BCLK limits of the motherboard. Otherwise I know that I should go for the nearest max memory multiplier.
Perhaps this particular motherboard doesn't fully identify and utilize the processor, this is why I'm looking for a way to modify and add the X5600 series microcode so it would let me lower the multiplier.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> You guys do realize that in order to push the 5650 over the stock 20 multi you need all c-states and anything related to energy savings disabled, right?


I hope that you know that we're not talking about the CPU Core multiplier but the UNcore multiplier, right?
Both multipliers are completely independent and the UNcore multi generally follows the rule "2x memory multi or slightly higher" for 45nm Nehalem and "1.5x memory multi or slightly higher" for 32nm Gulftown.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> It is quite possible that you are correct. The problem is that some motherboards can't control the UNCORE multiplier and automatically revert to the default UNCORE multiplier which seems to be 20x for these Xeons.
> The memory multiplier is set to 6x in order to isolate and test the BCLK limits of the motherboard. Otherwise I know that I should go for the nearest max memory multiplier.
> Perhaps this particular motherboard doesn't fully identify and utilize the processor, this is why I'm looking for a way to modify and add the X5600 series microcode so it would let me lower the multiplier.
> I hope that you know that we're not talking about the CPU Core multiplier but the UNcore multiplier, right?
> Both multipliers are completely independent and the UNcore multi generally follows the rule "2x memory multi or slightly higher" for 45nm Nehalem and "1.5x memory multi or slightly higher" for 32nm Gulftown.


I looked around a little bit and it appears that you may be right about some boards/BIOSs defaulting Xeons uncore multipliers to 20x if the microcode hasn't been updated. I will have to look more into this. My EVGA x58 Classy, Micro, and SR-2 can control the uncore multiplier without an issue. The BIOS should also prevent you from selecting anything lower than 1.5x the DRAM clock.


----------



## tarvilian

I have all C-States Enabled,i have turbo core enabled,and I still do x22 multiplier on cores.Basicly my mobo can set maximum x20 multy for cores,but turbo raise them to x22 when torture all cores!If I give load to half cores for example,i get even x23 multi.But as bitro says,our ptoblem is not cores multiplayer,but UNcore multiplayer.Sorry,but sometimes you don't read carefull.UNCORE...That value must be 1.5 times ram multi.Problem is that my bios set it ALLWAYS x20!So I have to do x15 ram multi.I guess you know what will happen with ram frequency on 180+ fsb and x15 multi?And this is not the only problem.This stupid high level UNcore multiplayer,kick ram controller and fsb controler in UNcore part of the cpu very hard.This means I have to do +2/+4 steps CPU VTT voltage for every 2-3 fsb.So basicly I need around 1.36 CPU VTT for 190 fsb,and probably(I never even tried...) more than 1.50 CPU VTT for fsb 200+.I guess all of you know what is safe maximum of CPU VTT?If I can control really UNcore multiplayer,i can set it...for example ram x8/UNcore x12,that will give me 2400 QPI frequency on 200 fsb,and I will be able to put it even over it.My system dies when I reach 3500 QPI.I am sure I can reach really high clock with this cpu,only if I could lower QPI frequency by lowering UNcore multi!I am sorry that I cant explain more clear,but English is not my birth language.
Another bad thing is,that in that same moment,my cpu is clocked to 4,2ghz with 192 fsb,with RAM milti x6 and ram frequency 1152mhz,and I am wondering,how much my CPU will survive,if I know wery well that my mobo force UNcore multi to x20,instead of x9-x12 that has to be on that ram multiplayer....


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> It is quite possible that you are correct. The problem is that some motherboards can't control the UNCORE multiplier and automatically revert to the default UNCORE multiplier which seems to be 20x for these Xeons.
> The memory multiplier is set to 6x in order to isolate and test the BCLK limits of the motherboard. Otherwise I know that I should go for the nearest max memory multiplier.
> Perhaps this particular motherboard doesn't fully identify and utilize the processor, this is why I'm looking for a way to modify and add the X5600 series microcode so it would let me lower the multiplier.
> I hope that you know that we're not talking about the CPU Core multiplier but the UNcore multiplier, right?
> Both multipliers are completely independent and the UNcore multi generally follows the rule "2x memory multi or slightly higher" for 45nm Nehalem and "1.5x memory multi or slightly higher" for 32nm Gulftown.


Yes I realize that. But uncore is not locked on these Westmere Xeon's. Gulftown is based on Westmere-EP *but not the same as*. Gulftown's are the Enthusiast equivalent chips such as i7-970-990x and come with a different IMC and completely unlocked. They work slightly different then these Xeon's quite simply because the IMC is built differently in order to support ECC and two physical chips (Its not a identical chip thus does not over clock the same way). Slight differences means everything seemingly changes, haha. You can't use what you learned with your old Gulftown (not entirely anyway) because your not trying to overclock a Gulftown. On my board uncore is called UCLK and it is NOT locked on Westmere based Xeons (maybe on your board). I do not show multipliers such as 20x, or 6x or even 2x, etc in the UCLK section. In my Uncore settings (a.k.a UCLK), only frequencies such as 3047 Mhz is shown, which is exactly 2x of memory speed (which RAM is set to 1523 mhz). On these Westmere Xeon's it is OK to run up to and beyond 2x Uncore *so long as you don't go above the 1.35v* limit (PER INTEL ENGINEERS, the voltage is what matters not the uncore, which is why there is a million different Uncore freq settings to chose from, lol). The chips default uncore is 1.5x for safety concerns related to Intel's goal of protecting the IMC and simply carried over from Gulftown-Westmere and vice versa. However, as you raise the Xeon's uncore it appears to become more energy efficient and thus uses less voltage (ONLY on Westmere Xeon's, NOT I7's). If you think these chips are identical and thus have identical over clocking characteristics you would be wrong. On these chips you are supposed to use the 1.5x uncore ratio to start out with according to Intel. On 45nm yes it is 2x (but this is not needed to know here), but on Gulftown and Westmere chips it is 1.5x, but on Gulftown it is dangerous to run higher than 2x especially when your working with higher than 1.35v on QPI and VTT. But not so on Westmere Xeon's, because the IMC is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. If uncore is locked for you then there is something wrong with your board or bios, because I can guarantee that these Westmere Xeon's do NOT have a locked uncore. The ONLY thing locked on this chip is the CPU multiplier, and even that seems to vary from board to board for some odd reason. LOL

You are correct in trying to find a fix for your seemingly locked uncore but there is no reason to get rude with someone only trying to help you. *The only reason I stated what I stated is because it appears your trying to use what you learned with a Gulftown chip and that "might" (I'm not saying it will) get you in trouble with your new Xeon chip.* Xeon's are locked CPU multi chips but have a more energy efficient IMC thanks to different architecture, thus things have slightly changed. Gulftown i7's are unlocked all the way around and has an IMC built specifically for Desktop memory and the Enthusiast crowd... One can run up to 298 GB of RAM (Westmere-EP Xeon's) and the other (Gulftown i7's) is limited to something like 24 GB.

Now back to your Uncore problem. I have no clue









EDIT: it appears I said it is not dangerous to run the Xeon over 2x. This is NOT true, it is VERY dangerous to run it over 2x (even over 1.5x) *IF AND ONLY IF the voltage HAS surpassed 1.35v.* Example: You can run the Westmere's at 8000 mhz Uncore if you want to, so long 1.35v has not be broken







I bet you wont make it there though, haha. This explains why we have such a very long list of frequencies in the Uncore drop down (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense at all). I retain the right to be wrong though, but this is what I gathered from thousands of hours of reading tech material on this subject.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yes I realize that. But uncore is not locked on these Westmere Xeon's. Gulftown is based on Westmere-EP *but not the same as*. Gulftown's are the Enthusiast equivalent chips such as i7-970-990x and come with a different IMC and completely unlocked. They work slightly different then these Xeon's quite simply because the IMC is built differently in order to support ECC and two physical chips (Its not a identical chip thus does not over clock the same way). Slight differences means everything seemingly changes, haha. You can't use what you learned with your old Gulftown (not entirely anyway) because your not trying to overclock a Gulftown. On my board uncore is called UCLK and it is NOT locked on Westmere based Xeons (maybe on your board). I do not show multipliers such as 20x, or 6x or even 2x, etc in the UCLK section. In my Uncore settings (a.k.a UCLK), only frequencies such as 3047 Mhz is shown, which is exactly 2x of memory speed (which RAM is set to 1523 mhz). On these Westmere Xeon's it is OK to run up to and beyond 2x Uncore *so long as you don't go above the 1.35v* limit (PER INTEL ENGINEERS, the voltage is what matters not the uncore, which is why there is a million different Uncore freq settings to chose from, lol). The chips default uncore is 1.5x for safety concerns related to Intel's goal of protecting the IMC and simply carried over from Gulftown-Westmere and vice versa. However, as you raise the Xeon's uncore it appears to become more energy efficient and thus uses less voltage (ONLY on Westmere Xeon's, NOT I7's). If you think these chips are identical and thus have identical over clocking characteristics you would be wrong. On these chips you are supposed to use the 1.5x uncore ratio to start out with according to Intel. On 45nm yes it is 2x (but this is not needed to know here), but on Gulftown and Westmere chips it is 1.5x, but on Gulftown it is dangerous to run higher than 2x especially when your working with higher than 1.35v on QPI and VTT. But not so on Westmere Xeon's, because the IMC is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. If uncore is locked for you then there is something wrong with your board or bios, because I can guarantee that these Westmere Xeon's do NOT have a locked uncore. The ONLY thing locked on this chip is the CPU multiplier, and even that seems to vary from board to board for some odd reason. LOL
> 
> You are correct in trying to find a fix for your seemingly locked uncore but there is no reason to get rude with someone only trying to help you. *The only reason I stated what I stated is because it appears your trying to use what you learned with a Gulftown chip and that "might" (I'm not saying it will) get you in trouble with your new Xeon chip.* Xeon's are locked CPU multi chips but have a more energy efficient IMC thanks to different architecture, thus things have slightly changed. Gulftown i7's are unlocked all the way around and has an IMC built specifically for Desktop memory and the Enthusiast crowd... One can run up to 298 GB of RAM (Westmere-EP Xeon's) and the other (Gulftown i7's) is limited to something like 24 GB.
> 
> Now back to your Uncore problem. I have no clue


Oh, my deepest apologies if I've sounded rude, this wasn't my intention at all.







I was just trying to say that the Uncore seems to be locked, or to be more precise - not responding to changes on Xeon 5600 series for some motherboards which don't have a special updated microcode to support changes to the uncore.
Thank you for the rest, I've learned something new and it sounds completely possible and logical. If your RAM is 1523MHz, the memory multiplier should be set to 8x just to reach 190MHz BCLK, am I correct? Therefore, if UCLK/Uncore is actually set to the lowest possible option (3047MHz), its multiplier would be 16x. Can you please confirm that using either CPU-Z - Memory tab - NB Frequency or check CPU Tweaker.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it recommended to go for the lowest possible uncore in order to reduce both the load on the IMC and the required voltage needed to reach this multiplier?
Can you please clarify further what you meant on the more energy efficient part? What uses less voltage - the CPU itself, the BCLK/Uncore, or the IOH?
Are you trying to say that the 1.35V BCLK safe limit is not applicable on Westmere-EP? If so, what are the safe limits?
If you are trying to say that I might get in trouble by using Gulftown's OC knowledge, I'd appreciate if you can point me at the right direction









Thank you!


----------



## GENXLR

Can i get a hand getting my X5650 upto 191 blck with 1914mhz ram speeds? replaced my 920 but i can't get it to work. Voltages and ration points plz? o.o Been killing myself for days on this.

i can post, run windows, but fail linpack and occasionaly bsod with 0x124


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Can i get a hand getting my X5650 upto 191 blck with 1914mhz ram speeds? replaced my 920 but i can't get it to work. Voltages and ration points plz? o.o Been killing myself for days on this.
> 
> i can post, run windows, but fail linpack and occasionaly bsod with 0x124


How many sticks of RAM are you running?

--edit-- also there is no real benefit running over 1600 MHz on them especially if you are running 6 sticks


----------



## GENXLR

3 sticks. theres a huge difference between 1600 and 2k with them. I got them upto 2k on my i7 920 with 8-9-8-21 timings. had a nice run in maxpi too


----------



## kpforce1

If you are talking purely about synthetics there is a marginal difference. Real world it isn't worth running 2000Mhz on the RAM. Kana and I both have done testing at 2000 and 2100Mhz. Wasn't worth the voltages required for the minimal gains.

You'd be better off running 1600 with tighter timings and getting your MCH strap down to 1333Mhz along with 1.75x QPI/uncore frequency. That's what I ended up doing. If you really want 2000 MHz I'll help you but without being on water and 4.4Ghz or better core you will have lots of heat.

Kp


----------



## nitrobg

I think I'm getting 1 step further.

I've found that Intel provides publicly regular updates on the microcodes: Linux Processor Microcode Data File
I've found out that there is a small CLI tool used to unpack this .dat file: Tool to extract latest Intel microcode for bios modding
Therefore, I've managed to unpack all microcodes from all .dat files starting from the oldest one and uploaded it for you guys: click me.

The microcodes are labelled as follows:
cpu000006f2_plat00000020_ver0000005c_date20101002.bin
CPUID - Platform ID - version (?) - date YYYYMMDD

Now I'll have to research on how to update a selected microcode in a motherboard's BIOS.

In the list of the microcodes, I can find:
*cpu000206c2_plat00000003_ver0000000f_date20100618.bin
cpu000206c2_plat00000003_ver00000013_date20100907.bin*

This thread confirms that the microcode from 20100907 fixes the 20x uncore bug.

Now the question remains - what to do with it.

Ideas?









Edit:
*All 6-core Westmere-based CPUs have CPUID 206C2.* Therefore a patch with the second microcode would be universal to every single processor that has CPUID 206C2. This is huge guys.
I need more data from you. Please run AIDA64, go to Motherboard - CPUID and tell me what is your *Microcode Update Revision*. If it is *13*, you shouldn't have the locked Uncore bug. If it is *0F*, you most likely are affected by it. Confirm it with CPU-Z - Memory tab - NB Frequency (divide it by your current BCLK speed) or check the actual multiplier in CPU-Tweaker. If I dig further, I should be able to patch the microcode in the latest BIOS of your motherboard and give it to you for testing.
I'm getting closer, I need your help on this.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> If you are talking purely about synthetics there is a marginal difference. Real world it isn't worth running 2000Mhz on the RAM. Kana and I both have done testing at 2000 and 2100Mhz. Wasn't worth the voltages required for the minimal gains.
> 
> You'd be better off running 1600 with tighter timings and getting your MCH strap down to 1333Mhz along with 1.75x QPI/uncore frequency. That's what I ended up doing. If you really want 2000 MHz I'll help you but without being on water and 4.4Ghz or better core you will have lots of heat.
> 
> Kp


huh, so i didn't have that bad of heat and whatnot with my i7 920? is this just the result of the x5650's IMC? I'm sorta lost on my X5650 right now. So i gt to 190mhz with dram at 1900 and a uncore of 2850 and qpi of 3420. voltages are 1.35 cpu vcore, 1.35 qpi/dram core(vtt) 1.2 IOH, 1.4 ICH, 1.66 dram bus. Timed 9-9-9-24. look to be stable but is as slow if not slower than my i7 920? i'm getting 50 gflops in IBT, which is what my i7 920 normally gets. it may be thermally throttling due to the lack of cold air. AMB temps are in the upper 90's right now.

bumping even 1 mhz for the 191 mhz i wanted results in failing linpack


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> huh, so i didn't have that bad of heat and whatnot with my i7 920? is this just the result of the x5650's IMC? I'm sorta lost on my X5650 right now. So i gt to 190mhz with dram at 1900 and a uncore of 2850 and qpi of 3420. voltages are 1.35 cpu vcore, 1.35 qpi/dram core(vtt) 1.2 IOH, 1.4 ICH, 1.66 dram bus. Timed 9-9-9-24. look to be stable but is as slow if not slower than my i7 920? i'm getting 50 gflops in IBT, which is what my i7 920 normally gets. it may be thermally throttling due to the lack of cold air. AMB temps are in the upper 90's right now.
> 
> bumping even 1 mhz for the 191 mhz i wanted results in failing linpack


We will continue in the x58 Xeon owners club thread







. I posted some settings I have to use to show you the Voltages I have to run. The reason your GFLOPS are low is because you aren't running enough voltages i'm sure. at 4.4Ghz and 2000 Mhz RAM I get ~80 GFlops


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> If you are trying to say that I might get in trouble by using Gulftown's OC knowledge, I'd appreciate if you can point me at the right direction
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you!


Your welcome. Actually I only said that because I am not sure what your coming from, a 45nm chip or a 32nm chip (sorry for not asking this first)? If your coming from a hexa core i7, then there is very little to concern yourself with other then that QPI vtt over 1.35v and 2x uncore combo is a BIG no no, if you like your chip. That is not to say it can;t be done because many have done it, but many have also killed them doing it. On the 32nm i7's its not as big of a deal, but still a concern. If your coming from a 45 nm i7, then be VERY careful because Intel claims that direct upgrade (45nm to 32nm) has killed more IMC's then overlocking them alone. And apparently it has to do with the assumption that going even slightly over 1.35v is OK (which it is with 45nm, and even on some Gulfies). Many people have the 2x uncore minimum stuck in there head from the early 1366 days and completely ignore that there system may be set to 2x memory speed, and then get busy pushing everything they see, including QPI voltage lol. BAM dead IMC, or one channel now missing, thousands and thousands of times around the world.

Anyway, I keep getting myself off the subject your looking to solve and I apologize for that. I would just request that users in here strictly understand that we are NOT in a Gulftown thread, albeit if close but not the same, so we must use the little Xeon info we have which is VERY little, haha.

What board do you have? BIOS version? Have you looked at the Bios-Mods website to see if anyone has a 3rd party BIOS to fix it? Do you have a EP or ES chip? What about your previous overclocking ventures, did you possibly run it too high voltage/uncore wise and now its slightly degraded the BCLK over clock? Man I am amazed at all the different experiences in these Xeon threads. lol

Lol, if you are like kpforce1 and do not care about Intels warnings on these 32nm xeons, then you will definitely get higher gflops with more voltage, well until it dies on you anyway. If you do go this route over 1.35v make sure you keep Uncore at 1.5x. I think I seen someone here running 1.65v but I think it was just for a validation link? crazy


----------



## GENXLR

this was almost as fun as when i built my D5400XS with the twin X5450 xeons. they don't what so ever follow the lines of our core 2 quad friends. I should have known better with my X5650 *facedesk* anyhow, i don't think i killed my chip fortunately. I was still used to my 920 which i cranked the vtt(qpi/dram core) 1.525. With the small info i knew about the xeons and lack of help, i thought doing it with the x5650 would be a no big deal. I MAY have degraded it, but so far, it looks like it's ok, just needs a new layer of thermal paste


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> this was almost as fun as when i built my D5400XS with the twin X5450 xeons. they don't what so ever follow the lines of our core 2 quad friends. I should have known better with my X5650 *facedesk* anyhow, i don't think i killed my chip fortunately. I was still used to my 920 which i cranked the vtt(qpi/dram core) 1.525. With the small info i knew about the xeons and lack of help, i thought doing it with the x5650 would be a no big deal. I MAY have degraded it, but so far, it looks like it's ok, just needs a new layer of thermal paste


LOL, at the turn of the Century I was much more OK in the money throwing away dept, so I was forcing Socket 370's Celeron's to run at 900 mhz on an Abit BP6 using my own water cooling solution and a large AC system dedicated to just the computer case. I later upgraded to P3, only to discover I could no longer run in SMP mode so I downgraded back to Windows 98 (or run Linux), or ME which sucked hard at the time, from Windows 2000 beta... THANK GOD for WINDOWS XP man... That allowed me to go back to SMP mode and enjoy the fastest computer for miles around (which was nothing more than a "I have more then you" farce since I could not find a program to take advantage of it). Apparently I'm not as nerdy these days, according to my daughter anyway.

Yeah, try some HeGrease Extreme, that's what I'm using with great success. I have an unopened package of Indigo Xtreme for sale if your feeling dangerously frisky....


----------



## GENXLR

I can't wait on shipping, time to buy.....

AS5

O_O

hopefully it's better than the mayonnaise i'm currently using o-o


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> The synthetic scores look good but is something off with the game benchmarks? I see some very low minimum fps on a lot of those, unless it's normal even compared to newer cpu's..?


Bump on this question if someone can answer please.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Just need to point some things out, Intel's Absolute Maximum voltage ratings for X5600 series Xeons are 1.4V for VCore and 1.4V for the VTT or Uncore (These voltage ratings are obviously very loose and most chips will handle a little more voltage without any problems at all, specially for the VCore). It's generally a good idea to keep within this voltage range specially when the CPU is under heavy load.



Regarding getting the Maximum multiplier (that will be applicable for all the cores), you must have an option on the Motherboard to force constant Turbo mode, I have an EVGA X58 SLI3 and when this mode is enabled the bios forces the CPU to stay at the Maximum multiplier at all times (X23 for my X5660), this might be implemented differently or does not exist at all on some motherboards, hence all this confusion I see on this thread, when you don't have the option to force the Turbo mode maximum multiplier you will get is the one that will give you the stock processor frequency when the BCLK is at 133MHz (ex: for X5660 this would 133x21 = 2.8Ghz) you can have EIST safely enabled when overclocking, it will reduce the amount of voltage constantly fed to the processor and save some power too when the processor is idle, even the C states can be enabled but it's a little bit trickier to get things stable, but it can be done. Turbo Mode works with all the power saving features enabled at least on my board.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Intel recommends 1.35v on their X5660 [and other Xeon] specification page.
_VID Voltage Range_: 0.750v - 1.350v.

This makes sense as well. I'm sure they want 1.35+ voltage shooting through the 32nm Hexa core. I've read the 1.4v, but I generally follow the spec page + VID Range that's recommended.


----------



## loop16

http://hwbot.org/submission/2618834_
http://valid.canardpc.com/j63l7m
i stopped at 4725 with 1.4 vcore of course i could push more but i m afraid that i ll fry my xeon, i dont have problems with temps due to watercooling


----------



## SmOgER

Can someone run CInebench R10 multithreaded to confirm it's around 18k on stock for this CPU?
I still find that program as a best reference to compare different platforms and different CPU generations.









Anandtech has a great database for that, but there is obviously almost no Xeons and I'am not quite sure which consumer CPU would correspond to X5660, it seems to just about match i5-2300, but that's another generation...


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> you can have EIST safely enabled when overclocking, it will reduce the amount of voltage constantly fed to the processor and save some power too when the processor is idle, even the C states can be enabled but it's a little bit trickier to get things stable, but it can be done. Turbo Mode works with all the power saving features enabled at least on my board.


So EIST is more effective at saving power than the C-states? I have EIST off, but I keep all the C-states enabled. My 5650 is overclocked to 4Ghz and I don't have any stability issues. I keep my PC on literally 24/7 because if I let it sleep then I have to hard reset it each time. But I don't want max voltage going through the CPU when I'm not using it. But my next question really brings me to Kana's post...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Intel recommends 1.35v on their X5660 [and other Xeon] specification page.
> _VID Voltage Range_: 0.750v - 1.350v.
> 
> This makes sense as well. I'm sure they want 1.35+ voltage shooting through the 32nm Hexa core. I've read the 1.4v, but I generally follow the spec page + VID Range that's recommended.


I thought the absolute max was 1.3 volts? If the safe is 1.35 or around 1.4 like the post above claims, then I can literally push my Xeon to the 4.4Ghz that I've been itching for. It refuses to boot at 4.4Ghz at anything at or below 1.3 volts, so if 1.35 really is the max then I'd be willing to try. However, I keep my PC running when I'm not using it as I said above. I do not want 1.35 or whatever volts running though the CPU 24/7. I have the C-states enabled but EIST disabled. I'd like to know which will give me more stability and allow the CPU to downclock and/or undervolt itself when I'm not using it. Idle temps are good in the low 30s C at 4.0Ghz and 1.25 volts. I suspect that to jump a bit higher to maybe the mid 30s at 1.32 at 4.4Ghz maybe. Anyway I guess I better do some Googling on this as well.


----------



## nitrobg

Don't worry. The reasonable safe 24/7 Vcore for these CPUs is around 1.45 at most. To reach a stable 4.4, you need around 1.42 Vcore. Unless you have a good water cooling setup, this is your max because you're being limited by temperatures, not voltages. Only a high end air cooling can keep 1.42V under 75C.
On the other hand, you have a hard limit on the CPU VTT - it is 1.35V, not even a step further if you want to keep your CPU alive. CPU VTT is the voltage supplied to the memory controller and the caches (generally labelled as Uncore).
You shouldn't exceed 1.30V on IOH Vcore, but generally you don't need high voltage on it anyway.

To summarize, the safe cap on voltages is:
CPU Vcore: 1.45V
CPU VTT / Uncore / QPI/DRAM: 1.35V
IOH Vcore: 1.30V

Also, I have a good news. If you remember, few pages back I've asked you about the unresponsive Uncore multiplier on my motherboard. You laughed at me and called me an idiot for claiming such thing. Lots of motherboards are plagued by this bug unless the manufacturer was kind enough to update their BIOS.
Yeah, turned out that I was right








The reason some motherboards can't control the uncore multiplier is dead simple - outdated microcode. There is one simple way to verify that: open your BIOS ROM file in Intel Microcode List. If the microcode for CPUID 206C2 is 0F or similar - you are affected by this bug.

There are 2 known revisions of the microcode that have the bug fixed at 100% - 13 and 14.
If you want it fixed - make a thread in bios-mods with a link to your BIOS and a link to a donor BIOS that has rev13 or 14 of the microcode (Sabertooth X58 for example).

Thank me later


----------



## brootalperry

Ah the QPI voltage limit...I completely forgot about that







I have this voltage set to 1.25 as well. I also thought that the max for this was 1.30 volts...
I suppose I can mess around with it to see if I can stay below 1.35 vcore for 4.4Ghz and 1.30 for QPI.

Like my sig says I've got an H80i that does a pretty good job with the heat. At full 100% load the highest I've seen my temps go is in the low 60s.
I don't think there will be any game that will push my CPU that far. Rendering maybe... but I usually test my CPU's stability with day to day tasks and not stress test it. I find that my CPU is usually stable even though it would fail a pass in IBT.

Anyway there's another rule to overclocking these chips that I forgot. It has to do with DRAM and Uncore frequency I think.
I know for these chips it's okay for the uncore frequency to be 1.5 times the DRAM frequency. But it's not supposed to exceed a certain difference or something :S

I'll have to check before I fry my system. I hope you guys are right about these voltages, because for months I've been sweating about that 1.30 voltage limit on vcore and QPI. Now you're saying 1.45 and 1.35...

Edit: A screenshot of my temps and speeds now


----------



## Firehawk

The old rule for overclocking RAM is as follows: vDRAM should never be more than 0.5v more than QPI/Vtt.

This is usually not an issue, because if you're overclocking your chip you'll likely raise QPI/Vtt to 1.3v or so and that gives you a max vDRAM of 1.8v. Where people had problems was if they were just overclocking RAM, and trying to get MaxOC from it, they'd crank up vDRAM and fry their IMC because the voltage difference was too high.

Really not something you should need to worry about unless you're benching.

With regards to uncore....on Westmere and Gulftown, minimum 1.5x maximum 2x. On the Bloomfield line, it was minimum 2x, but there were people who ran it a little higher, like DRAM x8 uncore x17. Most didn't bother with that though.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> The old rule for overclocking RAM is as follows: vDRAM should never be more than 0.5v more than QPI/Vtt.
> 
> This is usually not an issue, because if you're overclocking your chip you'll likely raise QPI/Vtt to 1.3v or so and that gives you a max vDRAM of 1.8v. Where people had problems was if they were just overclocking RAM, and trying to get MaxOC from it, they'd crank up vDRAM and fry their IMC because the voltage difference was too high.
> 
> Really not something you should need to worry about unless you're benching.
> 
> With regards to uncore....on Westmere and Gulftown, minimum 1.5x maximum 2x. On the Bloomfield line, it was minimum 2x, but there were people who ran it a little higher, like DRAM x8 uncore x17. Most didn't bother with that though.


THIS is what I was really trying to remember. Thanks.

So a QPI of 1.35 and a DRAM voltage of 1.60 should be okay then...it's a 0.25 difference. I'm not planning on really overclocking RAM, but the highest voltage I'd go on the DRAM would be 1.65, and the highest I'd go on QPI is 1.35. I don't plan on going close to 2x uncore frequency.

My RAM is at 1600 Mhz at 1.60 volts. I'm not really sure if my system would boot beyond that, but I'll have to see.
Uncore freq. is at 2400Mhz and QPI is at 1.25 volts - same as my vcore. If I plan to hit 4.4Ghz for my CPU speed I know for sure I'd need to go over 1.30 vcore...maybe 1.32-1.34. I don't know what this means for RAM, uncore, and QPI yet though. I'll have to go into the BIOS and see.

Thanks for all the info and help. I have to pretty much refresh myself on this stuff since I convinced myself I couldn't go above 4.0Ghz without degrading my CPU. so I pretty much forgot about it and moved on. But with new information saying 1.35 max safe for vcore, I got the itch again!


----------



## GENXLR

My x5650 is now stable finally..... kinda. I pass IBT and Prime and every bench mark at 1.35 v qpi and 2x uncore with a 191 blck and 15xx ram. i have a 70 gflops in IBT and good temps..... 1.34 somthing cpu volts and i'm getting awesome perf. However, if i leave it idle, at random(anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 days) it will just freeze. no bsod or anything, just freeze, what did i do wrong?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My x5650 is now stable finally..... kinda. I pass IBT and Prime and every bench mark at 1.35 v qpi and 2x uncore with a 191 blck and 15xx ram. i have a 70 gflops in IBT and good temps..... 1.34 somthing cpu volts and i'm getting awesome perf. However, if i leave it idle, at random(anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 days) it will just freeze. no bsod or anything, just freeze, what did i do wrong?


I see you like to live on the edge.

Edit: I'll try overclocking tomorrow after class...or Friday. Will post results here when I do. Both failures and success.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Going over 1.35v AND having uncore at or higher than 2x of memory speed is only "taking a risk". *It is NOT certain death*. Its like sky diving out of an airplane, or WingSuit flying 10 feet above the ground at 150 mph. *Absolutely positively it is risky to do so*, but that does not mean you will be the one to eventually die from doing it. Same thing here, Intel says it is extremely risky to go over 1.35v vcore/qpi while having uncore as high as 2x, or having more than a 0.5v difference between dram and vtt. Westmere is NOT designed to handle that. They reduced the Uncore ratio to 1.5x because of how many chips were suddenly going bad from high voltages and high uncore, and they determined it was because of having uncore as high or higher than 2x of memory, so they reduced it to 1.5x in an attempt to reduce the amount of chips people were killing. The lower 1.5x ratio gave people more room to push on voltages and thus higher stable overclocks, with minimal performance loss. One or the other can be high, if your lucky, while the other much lower and still maintain within reasonable safety (I assume this part myself). Some people here seem to think the 1.35v is certain death, or that uncore at or above 2x is certain death. *It is NOT, it is just very risky to do so but it does not mean YOU will be the one to experience sudden death from it*.

Further, if you're OK with the risk and want the higher clocks then do so and have fun, but be prepared for "possible degradation" of your IMC, or needing to "possibly" buy another chip altogether. But do not come here and complain if you kill your chip. *Anybody who goes past the already well established beat to death Intel rule of 1.35v vcore/qpi safety limit only needs to know one thing, YOU DO SO AT YOUR OWN RISK!* No one is going to tell you its OK, except for others who are already taking the risk without any ill effect and or do not care what Intel says. I certainly will not tell you its OK, but I will tell you to go for it.

Push that baby and stop worrying that it's unsafe to go beyond 1.35v. This is Overclock.net... You kill it, your fault! Now show us some Xeon world records please...


----------



## GENXLR

.-.

All i am asking as what i did wrong. I'm anot above 1.35 qpi, thats what i was told not to pass. I was told to slowly work up my uncore from 1.5x to 2x without bumping voltages to get the best speed i could. Drop the ram from my 19xx speed to 15xx and set timmings to 1t. Move my Vcore around till i find a sweet spot. I drop my uncore from 2x to 1.5 go from 70 to 50 gflops. move my vcore 1 notch up or down, i lose 8 gflops. I'm trying to get the most out of this CPU. I had it as a spare for a Poweredge and wanted to upgrade from a 920 to a X5650(cause i can't afford a 970 or 980x) so all i'm asking

Why do i freeze without warning? How do i fix it? Why does it occur randomly, why at idle(possibly cause it's idle more than heavily loaded, so it's possible it can happen under load)?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My x5650 is now stable finally..... kinda. I pass IBT and Prime and every bench mark at 1.35 v qpi and 2x uncore with a 191 blck and 15xx ram. i have a 70 gflops in IBT and good temps..... 1.34 somthing cpu volts and i'm getting awesome perf. However, if i leave it idle, at random(anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 days) it will just freeze. no bsod or anything, just freeze, what did i do wrong?


You did nothing wrong. Your cpu probably wants more voltage. Try dropping uncore down one spot, something like 1.875x I think it is or 1.9x (what ever the next lowest is, mine is 1.875x or 3066 mhz). Try IBT again and make note of gflops. If its the same, keep your new uncore speed. No reason to have it higher if you get nothing for it in return. Try ram at maximum of 1.65v if you have not already done so. If none of this works your chip just wants more voltage probably. I assume your at 22 multi right and trying to stabilize 4.2ghz?

EDIT: GENXLR, my above post was not directed at you, just directed into the thread as a whole. I didn't see any of your posts before I spoke about the Intel safety limits for Westmere. Your doing good so far... If 191 is not stable try 200x20, its nearly as fast, or just as fast and easier on the chip.


----------



## GENXLR

You assume correct my friend.

Will try a drop in uncore, but adding cpu voltage actually slows the CPU, not speeds it up.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My x5650 is now stable finally..... kinda. I pass IBT and Prime and every bench mark at 1.35 v qpi and 2x uncore with a 191 blck and 15xx ram. i have a 70 gflops in IBT and good temps..... 1.34 somthing cpu volts and i'm getting awesome perf. However, if i leave it idle, at random(anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 days) it will just freeze. no bsod or anything, just freeze, what did i do wrong?


Did you check if you have EIST or C-States Enabled. Idles freezing and BSOD is caused by low voltage to the VCore when some of the power saving modes are activated, increase the V-Core by a notch and see if it still freezes.


----------



## GENXLR

I have increased vcore, no help. Cstates are off, EIST? Should i keep on or have C1E off? I had C1E off and put it back on. nothing since C1E enabling but will keep you posted.

Enhanced intel Speed Step? It is indeed on, but i shouldn't "have" to disable it for stability right? I Have Load line Calibration on and it looks to be supplying more than ample voltage to the CPU under all load types. The Xeons are more fond of BSOD'ing not freezing. possibly i might need more IOH voltage? I'm at only 1.2, i've heard others say they use 1.3v

side question, what do the C-states actually even do? o.o


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I have increased vcore, no help. Cstates are off, EIST? Should i keep on or have C1E off? I had C1E off and put it back on. nothing since C1E enabling but will keep you posted.
> 
> Enhanced intel Speed Step? It is indeed on, but i shouldn't "have" to disable it for stability right? I Have Load line Calibration on and it looks to be supplying more than ample voltage to the CPU under all load types. The Xeons are more fond of BSOD'ing not freezing. possibly i might need more IOH voltage? I'm at only 1.2, i've heard others say they use 1.3v
> 
> side question, what do the C-states actually even do? o.o


Usually you can keep EIST on with no problems at all, I do this all the time, but try disabling it and see if solves the issue, it might be dropping the voltage below the level where the overclock needs to be stable, specially when LLC is enabled and voltages are on the threshold.

IOH voltage need not be increased.

C-States are power saving modes, they will either turn off certain parts of the cpu when idle, lower the voltages etc.


----------



## GENXLR

So for OC'ing should i avoid using C-States? It's possible EIST is the issue, it looks like my voltage at idle is 1.325 when it should be 1.335, under load i'll see 1.352 on probes.

Does it still downclock and everything properly including turbo without EIST? Also does C1E need to be on or off, and what it's it's real purpose?


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> So for OC'ing should i avoid using C-States? It's possible EIST is the issue, it looks like my voltage at idle is 1.325 when it should be 1.335, under load i'll see 1.352 on probes.
> 
> Does it still downclock and everything properly including turbo without EIST? Also does C1E need to be on or off, and what it's it's real purpose?


For now have the C-States disabled, when you enable LLC it will cause the voltage to spike under load (Vdroop is designed exactly to prevent this from happening), in your case the voltage spikes to a voltage where your overclock is stable, may I know the voltage you have set on the BIOS? Actual voltage will be a little higher with LLC enabled and will go higher still under load, you have to find the exact voltage that you have to set on bios to get a stable idle voltage.


----------



## GENXLR

1.33750

I typically always use LLC. The voltage is reported and measured significantly higher under loads and lower at idle. Since enabling C1E again, i haven't seen issues but again, it'll take time to find them.

My bad, i made the adjustment and bumped my IOH from 1.2 to 1.3 Not sure if that helps it or not. >.> I just am trying to get things working before i can fine tune it, but so far, this has been very helpful from all of you. I recall when i had pushed my 965 above the 4 ghz line, i did have to bump this boards IOH, it's a P6T, just a plain P6T.


----------



## nitrobg

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My x5650 is now stable finally..... kinda. I pass IBT and Prime and every bench mark at 1.35 v qpi and 2x uncore with a 191 blck and 15xx ram. i have a 70 gflops in IBT and good temps..... 1.34 somthing cpu volts and i'm getting awesome perf. However, if i leave it idle, at random(anywhere from 5 minutes to 4 days) it will just freeze. no bsod or anything, just freeze, what did i do wrong?


Don't rely solely on GFlops from LinX. There are better tools to bench the real speed of your CPU - Cinebench for example. LinX is too synthetic to give meaningful in real life results.

Do this:
1) Lower your CPU, Memory and set your Uncore to 1.5x the desired memory multiplier. Set QPI multiplier to 18x. Set memory timings to 11-11-11-31.
2) Find the max possible BCLK speed. Add 1 or 2MHz to PCI-E Frequency, this will help you stabilize the BCLK overclock or even go further. Control the voltage through IOH Vcore (only if necessary). You might have to bump the QPI voltage as well as the uncore increases along with the BCLK. Test, test, test.
3) Now when you've reached the desired BCLK, bump Uncore a few steps higher until you reach 3300MHz or so. Control the voltage through QPI Vcore / CPU VTT / etc, until you reach 1.35V. This is my limit with 6 sticks of RAM, yours might be different. Test, test, test.
4) Set your desired memory multiplier and its timigs for the needed frequency. Set the DRAM voltage to the rated one. Test, test, test.
5) Set your CPU to the desired multiplier. Control its stability through CPU Vcore. If needed - bump CPU PLL few steps higher or lower, but generally this is not needed. Test, test, test.

The freeze might be everything - this is why you separate everything and test each component for stability.

This is my best result so far:


----------



## OCmember

Hah! Just started using OBS software to record games and it made my decision on one of these Xeons all the better!









Able to record 120fps @ 1920x1080, 9k bit-rate with ease


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Anyone know if that new amazing Mizuchi Rendering Engine is targeted at the movie industry or is this something we can see in games someday? I almost can't tell its not real video footage. Was thinking about replacing my 5870 with a 280X, but now maybe I should spring for the 290X, or wait for the next generation cards 390X, lol... Or the new 880 Maxwell, assuming its going to be real...


----------



## brootalperry

Alright guys. It's now or never. Gonna try and hit 4.4Ghz on my X5650 today. Hopefully there will be no tears...only heat and a performance increase.


----------



## brootalperry

What a pain in the ass! BSOD after BSOD. I have it at 22x200, RAM at 1603 Mhz, Uncore at 2406 Mhz, vcore at 1.33125, QPI at 1.31250 and it just blue screened, froze, and restarted itself.
Didn't think it'd be this hard...but then again I've had trouble using the turbo multiplier in the past. Should I disable the C-states? I already have EIST and Speedstep disabled.

Edit: Made it to the desktop this time by bring up the vcore (1.34) and QPI (1.32) up a notch, but then it blue screened again.

Edit 2: Made it to the desktop once again with vcore at 1.35 and QPI at 1.34. No crashes as of yet. I'll be monitoring the temps and see if it's stable. C-states are still on and LLC is on full.

Edit 3: CPUz is telling me that the CPU is using the x23 multiplier and it's going between 4.6 and 4.4Ghz...why!? Also as I suspected, my temps have increased to the mid 30s on idle, when before they were mostly in the low 30s at 4.0Ghz. Will post screenshots. While I was saving the screenshot it blue screened...


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> What a pain in the ass! BSOD after BSOD. I have it at 22x200, RAM at 1603 Mhz, Uncore at 2406 Mhz, vcore at 1.33125, QPI at 1.31250 and it just blue screened, froze, and restarted itself.
> Didn't think it'd be this hard...but then again I've had trouble using the turbo multiplier in the past. Should I disable the C-states? I already have EIST and Speedstep disabled.
> 
> Edit: Made it to the desktop this time by bring up the vcore (1.34) and QPI (1.32) up a notch, but then it blue screened again.
> 
> Edit 2: Made it to the desktop once again with vcore at 1.35 and QPI at 1.34. No crashes as of yet. I'll be monitoring the temps and see if it's stable. C-states are still on and LLC is on full.


This sounds like an unstable CPU clock - bump the CPU Vcore a few steps further.
Try isolating each clocks to find out what's wrong.
If you lower the CPU multiplier, you can test uncore + BCLK + RAM clocks. If the computer doesn't crash after 30 minutes of prime95, you are stable.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> This sounds like an unstable CPU clock - bump the CPU Vcore a few steps further.
> Try isolating each clocks to find out what's wrong.
> If you lower the CPU multiplier, you can test uncore + BCLK + RAM clocks. If the computer doesn't crash after 30 minutes of prime95, you are stable.


Well the bclock is at the same as I did with 4.0Ghz. All I did was raise the multi to x22 since x21 and x23 are not available to me. I know that 20x200 is stable because it's what I've been using for the longest. Everything else is the same really. All I'm doing is changing the multiplier and the voltages to try and get it stable. It just BSOD again with a vcore of 1.35 and a QPI of 1.34.

Like I said CPUz was showing me the CPU is running on a x23 multi and at 4.6Ghz...it was going between 4.6 and 4.4...then it crashed.

Edit: I set the multi back to 20 and lowered my voltages to 1.25. Everything is running perfectly like before. Also my idle temps are back down to the low 30s


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Well the bclock is at the same as I did with 4.0Ghz. All I did was raise the multi to x22 since x21 and x23 are not available to me. I know that 20x200 is stable because it's what I've been using for the longest. Everything else is the same really. All I'm doing is changing the multiplier and the voltages to try and get it stable. It just BSOD again with a vcore of 1.35 and a QPI of 1.34.
> 
> Like I said CPUz was showing me the CPU is running on a x23 multi and at 4.6Ghz...it was going between 4.6 and 4.4...then it crashed.


Well, x22 is a turbo multiplier and is quite unreliable on some boards as they tend to throttle it to x21 or x20 whenever the CPU is on full load. Try manually forcing the x22 multiplier and disable the EIST. x23 would need much more voltage and this is sounds like the main reason your computer crashes.
Why don't you try upping the BCLK? Your motherboard should easily be able to reach 220x20 or more. That way you won't have to bother with the turbo multiplier.
Also, the QPI voltage is only needed if you want to increase the uncore. It won't bring you any stability - if you stay at 2600 uncore, you should reduce it to 1.25 or even less.


----------



## OCmember

I would open the timings up on the RAM


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Well, x22 is a turbo multiplier and is quite unreliable on some boards as they tend to throttle it to x21 or x20 whenever the CPU is on full load. Try manually forcing the x22 multiplier and disable the EIST. x23 would need much more voltage and this is sounds like the main reason your computer crashes.
> Why don't you try upping the BCLK? Your motherboard should easily be able to reach 220x20 or more. That way you won't have to bother with the turbo multiplier.
> Also, the QPI voltage is only needed if you want to increase the uncore. It won't bring you any stability - if you stay at 2600 uncore, you should reduce it to 1.25 or even less.


EIST is disabled. The C-states and C1E is on. A few months ago I found my maximum baseclock to be 215. So even if I stayed at the x20 multi, the highest I could go would be 4.3Ghz since 20*215 is 4300. So the only way for me to go higher than that is to use a higher multi...which would be x22.
I don't know how to manually force the x22 multiplier. When I got into Windows and loaded up CPU-Z, it was showing me a multi of x23 and 4.6Ghz. I was going to take a screenshot but it crashed again.

I don't know if I can go with 220 bclock...I guess I could try though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I would open the timings up on the RAM


What do you mean? Raise the timings a bit? Right now they are set to 9-9-9-24. Maybe 11-11-11-27 or something?


----------



## brootalperry

double post


----------



## OCmember

Yeah, I'd do that before raising the Vcore anymore. Just to see what happens. It's a harmless trouble-shoot. You can see what the JEDEC timings are with HWinfo64


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah, I'd do that before raising the Vcore anymore. Just to see what happens. It's a harmless trouble-shoot


I'm confused...
Should I loosen the timings on the RAM with 20x200 and vcore at 1.25 or raise it to 22x200 with a vcore of 1.35?
The first is my stable 4Ghz overclock. The second is 4.4Ghz that made it to the desktop and crashed about a minute and a half after.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> EIST is disabled. The C-states and C1E is on. A few months ago I found my maximum baseclock to be 215. So even if I stayed at the x20 multi, the highest I could go would be 4.3Ghz since 20*215 is 4300. So the only way for me to go higher than that is to use a higher multi...which would be x22.
> I don't know how to manually force the x22 multiplier. When I got into Windows and loaded up CPU-Z, it was showing me a multi of x23 and 4.6Ghz. I was going to take a screenshot but it crashed again.
> 
> I don't know if I can go with 220 bclock...I guess I could try though.
> What do you mean? Raise the timings a bit? Right now they are set to 9-9-9-24. Maybe 11-11-11-27 or something?


Bump the PCI-E clock to 101-103, it should help you increase the BCLK few steps higher.
You should check the settings, my motherboard has an option to disable the turbo and manually set x22 multiplier. That way I won't get single core x23 turbo. Not sure if yours has such option.
I think your RAM timings are fine. You can try to temporary remove the memory out of the equation by lowering the memory multiplier to 6x and manually setting 11-11-11-31.
Set a low CPU multiplier when you're testing the BCLK.


----------



## OCmember

Oh I was referring to trouble-shooting the BSOD @ 4.4GHz by opening up your timings as suggested again above. If you have HWinfo64, run that and see what the JEDEC timings say to give you a guide on what the ram is spec'd for.



Also I would lower your memory multiplier/divider


----------



## brootalperry

Okay I'll try your suggestions...and I don't have a memory multiplier. I can only select by frequency based on the base clock.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Okay I'll try your suggestions...and I don't have a memory multiplier. I an only select by frequency based on the base clock.


Yeah, just lower the memory speed


----------



## brootalperry

I lowered the memory speed to 1322Mhz and set the PCI-E frequency to 103 and set the baseclock to 220.
It booted up and hasn't crashed yet. Here's a screenshot of it now:



The speed isn't going back and forth between 4.6 and 4.4 now. Here is a screenshot of the memory tab in CPU-Z


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I lowered the memory speed to 1322Mhz and set the PCI-E frequency to 103 and set the baseclock to 220.
> It booted up and hasn't crashed yet. Here's a screenshot of it now:
> 
> 
> 
> The speed isn't going back and forth between 4.6 and 4.4 now. Here is a screenshot of the memory tab in CPU-Z


Good. No need to go that high on PCI-E if you can boot with 101. If you need more stability (once again - lower down the CPU multiplier and test only the BCLK for stability) - bump the IOH voltage. Don't go higher than 1.30V, but you shouldn't need more than 1.20.


----------



## brootalperry

Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate the help.
I'd like to say that I'm not really comfortable with the voltage at 1.35...at what point should I try to lower that?

Edit: After looking over some of the screenshots Kana posted...it seems 1.35 is a little normal for 4.4Ghz...


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate the help.
> I'd like to say that I'm not really comfortable with the voltage at 1.35...at what point should I try to lower that?


Well now you can start to lower it. Or bring it back down to the vcore from your first BSOD @ 4.4GHz and go up from there. What was it?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well now you can start to lower it. Or bring it back down to the vcore from your first BSOD @ 4.4GHz and go up from there. What was it?


1.34 at 22x200 made it to the desktop but crashed seconds later.

I lowered the PCI-E frequency to 101 and it boots to the desktop







I don't know if it's actually stable though. I suppose I'll have to go about using it over the weekend and see if anything happens.
But not before trying to lower the vcore a bit...


----------



## nitrobg

1.35V is quite low for 4.4GHz. You have a good chip, mine requires around 1.4V to get it stable to 4.4. You can go higher through BCLK if you can keep the CPU temperatures below 75C on prime95.


----------



## GENXLR

vcore is WAY to low. Remove c-states, you'll need almost 1.4 vcore for that speed. Only way i got it stable at 200 blck.


----------



## brootalperry

I guess I'll have to test it for stability then. 1.4 vcore seems more like 4.8Ghz territory to me. I'll use 10 passes of Intel Burn Test on very high settings.
From what I've heard it heats up the CPU a few more degrees than P95. If I'm happy with temps at full load and it's stable, I'll try 4.5Ghz.


----------



## nitrobg

If you want to heat your cpu by a lot - use OCCT's Linpack with 90% memory. This gives like 5-6 degrees more compared to P95.
1.35V is for 4.3, 1.42V is for 4.4, 1.53 is for 4.5 (water only), anything above that is a suicide.
I'm using C-states and EIST at the moment, everything is rock solid.


----------



## brootalperry

I'll get back to you guys after a few days. So far thanks for the help








I've gotta go to bed since I'm exhausted. I'll have to test the stability over the weekend and get back here with the results.


----------



## Born2rade

Are those the Vcore norms for those OC in this thread? because those seem pretty high to me.

When i was stable testing for 4.5ghz i had my vcore at 1.352 and qpi at 1.30+ and it kept failing in 5-8 hours every time but once i lowered it my qpi to 1.27 it passed 24 hours of p95. Than I lowered to 4.4ghz @ 1.32vcore and lowered my QPI one notch down to 1.26xx and it passed 24hours once again.

All my testing was done with Blend custom setting of Min FT 2048 - Max FT 4096 and with 10GB's of Ram out of 12GB's.


----------



## brootalperry

Before I go to sleep, I've run into a bit of a funny problem. When at 4.4Ghz, my audio would be distorted. But when I lower the clocks back to 4Ghz, the audio is fine.


----------



## GENXLR

I'm still having issues with my X5650. No lockups but i'm having random process crashes. I think i may have degraded my IMC


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

I can't get my 5670 anywhere past default settings, i've tried 20x 200 with 1.34 volts, and even 18x multi.. but i get errors every time i boot up, the only thing i've noticed is that i can either only select auto for QPI frequency or only 7000+ from there.. is this the problem?


----------



## Born2rade

Interesting about your QPI only being able to be set to AUTO. You have to watch out for that voltage as you don't want to go past 1.35 as stated previously in this thread.

What motherboard are you using and what bios version are you running?


----------



## OCmember

Just a reminder to new 6 core Xeon adventurists. Make sure you update your motherboard bios to the latest FIRST!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Before I go to sleep, I've run into a bit of a funny problem. When at 4.4Ghz, my audio would be distorted. But when I lower the clocks back to 4Ghz, the audio is fine.


Have you tried disabling Turbo mode? If your going to overclock anywhere in the 4ghz range having turbo enabled (or any of the fancy energy/performance features for that matter) makes little to no sense, unless of course your trying to capture a 23 turbo validation. Otherwise, you should have everything disabled, C-states, C1E, EIST (a.k.a speedstep) and Turbo. If it doesn't like 22x200 at 1.35v, then lower bclk until it is finally stable (or risk upping voltage more). It should stabilize eventually. There is also a chance that the cpu does not like the multiplier of 22, and in that case 200x20 is just fine. In fact, by the sounds of it I think you have already determined that your 5650 runs best at 200x20. Temps are lower, its stable, not much slower if at all, and the best part is its much safer at the lower voltages that the 20 multi buys you.

I was running 191x22 for a while, but I decided its just too risky. And that was at 1.3v, lol... I'm now at 200x20 again and using only 1.29v and my temps are lower. Performance lost is unperceivable for daily use, however according to IBT I lost 5-6 gflops... I'm ok with that.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Born2rade*
> 
> Interesting about your QPI only being able to be set to AUTO. You have to watch out for that voltage as you don't want to go past 1.35 as stated previously in this thread.
> 
> What motherboard are you using and what bios version are you running?


Asus P6T Deluxe, but i figured out the issue of it not booting above default settings.. i did update the bios but it wasn't the newest one, i updated to the newest (final) one and now i can boot up properly when changing settings. QPI still at auto though, i can select others but they would be too high above what it needs to be, at auto it says in CPU-Z that it's at 3600mhz anyway so i guess it's fine to leave it like that.

But, i got a bit lazy with the settings and i've altered some voltages.. currently i have it at 4.4ghz, 22x 200 and cpu voltage of 1.38v, i set a couple of other voltages a bit higher as well because i was getting bsod's shortly after getting in windows.

Should i lower the cpu voltage or will this cause bsod's again? I haven't done any proper testing yet


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Well crashed again but took 2 hours this time, maybe 4.4ghz is no good.. or i need to change something else.

Nope, won't do 4.4ghz even at 1.4v and with triple rad cooling.. i don't see how it's possible anyway because the temps reached the limit quickly.

Trying 4ghz at 3.8v, this is pretty disappointing for a 5670 i believe.


----------



## nitrobg

When you get a crash: boot back to Windows, open Event Viewer - Windows Logs - System, set a filter for Event ID 1001 and check the bugcheck code. This will tell you which component fails.

0x101 = increase vcore
0x124 = increase/decrease QPI/VTT first, if not increase/decrease vcore...have to test to see which one it is
0x0A = unstable RAM/IMC, increase QPI first, if that doesn't work increase vcore
0x1A = Memory management error. It usually means a bad stick of Ram. Test with Memtest or whatever you prefer. Try raising your Ram voltage
0x1E = increase vcore
0x3B = increase vcore
0x3D = increase vcore
0xD1 = QPI/VTT, increase/decrease as necessary, can also be unstable Ram, raise Ram voltage
0x9C = QPI/VTT most likely, but increasing vcore has helped in some instances
0x50 = RAM timings/Frequency or uncore multi unstable, increase RAM voltage or adjust QPI/VTT, or lower uncore if you're higher than 2x
0x109 = Not enough or too Much memory voltage
0x116 = Low IOH (NB) voltage, GPU issue (most common when running multi-GPU/overclocking GPU)
0x7E = Corrupted OS file, possibly from overclocking. Run sfc /scannow and chkdsk /r


----------



## fallenzeraphine

I got myself a X5650 too just because it was so cheap , I tried it on my system and found that the BIOS stopped detecting the XMP hence the RAM was running at standard SPD's. My motherboard is EVGA X58 SLI3, My X5660 works perfectly on it though. Just want to know if anyone else experienced something similar like this?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Have you tried disabling Turbo mode? If your going to overclock anywhere in the 4ghz range having turbo enabled (or any of the fancy energy/performance features for that matter) makes little to no sense, unless of course your trying to capture a 23 turbo validation. Otherwise, you should have everything disabled, C-states, C1E, EIST (a.k.a speedstep) and Turbo. If it doesn't like 22x200 at 1.35v, then lower bclk until it is finally stable (or risk upping voltage more). It should stabilize eventually. There is also a chance that the cpu does not like the multiplier of 22, and in that case 200x20 is just fine. In fact, by the sounds of it I think you have already determined that your 5650 runs best at 200x20. Temps are lower, its stable, not much slower if at all, and the best part is its much safer at the lower voltages that the 20 multi buys you.
> 
> I was running 191x22 for a while, but I decided its just too risky. And that was at 1.3v, lol... I'm now at 200x20 again and using only 1.29v and my temps are lower. Performance lost is unperceivable for daily use, however according to IBT I lost 5-6 gflops... I'm ok with that.


Yeah I've said that EIST is *disabled* in the BIOS. Even at 4.0Ghz I keep it disabled. And yes it's rock solid at 20x200 at 1.25 volts with idle temps in the low 30s. I keep the C-states and C1E *enabled* however. I don't think the CPU likes the x22 multi at all.

Like I said a few months ago I found my max bclk to be 215 by lowering everything else and isolating it, and then raising the bclk until the computer wouldn't boot anymore. But by raising the PCI-E frequency I was able to boot to Windows with a bclk of 220. I was having audio problems, and a few seconds into an IBT test crashed it. So I think I'm still back to square one unless I went past 1.35 on the vcore or found some way to get x22 stable.


----------



## GENXLR

i'm crashing with 0x124, but more vcore slows it down, and qpi is been through all values. Adjust Uncore?


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> So I think I'm still back to square one unless I went past 1.35 on the vcore or found some way to get x22 stable.


Why are you so afraid of going past 1.35? 1.42-3 is perfectly safe for 24/7. You can't reach 4.4 unless you go for 1.40+ vcore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> i'm crashing with 0x124, but more vcore slows it down, and qpi is been through all values. Adjust Uncore?


What do you mean by "slows it down"? Adding Vcore simply causes the processor to consume more power and generate more heat.
Try adjusting the QPI Vcore (don't go past 1.35) and lower down the uncore to 3200-3400MHz.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Why are you so afraid of going past 1.35? 1.42-3 is perfectly safe for 24/7. You can't reach 4.4 unless you go for 1.40+ vcore.


Because 1.42 seems way too high for 4.4Ghz. But I'll try going oveer 1.35 then


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Isn't the temperature limit just over 80c for these?

My 5670 got just over 80c when i tried 1.4v


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Because 1.42 seems way too high for 4.4Ghz. But I'll try going oveer 1.35 then


Well, this is the average Vcore to go for 4.4. The exact value depends on the chip, yours could go either slightly lower or higher. But be aware that the temperatures mustn't go above 75C on prime/LinX/OCCT Linpack. If your cooler can't handle this, you should go lower through BCLK (217-218x20) and reduce Vcore until the temperatures are comfortable in the lower 70s.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Isn't the temperature limit just over 80c for these?
> 
> My 5670 got just over 80c when i tried 1.4v


What cooler and thermal paste are you using? Perhaps yours isn't that good as well.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Well, this is the average Vcore to go for 4.4. The exact value depends on the chip, yours could go either slightly lower or higher. But be aware that the temperatures mustn't go above 75C on prime/LinX/OCCT Linpack. If your cooler can't handle this, you should go lower through BCLK (217-218x20) and reduce Vcore until the temperatures are comfortable in the lower 70s.
> What cooler and thermal paste are you using? Perhaps yours isn't that good as well.


Running an old Swiftech 360mm Drive radiator, 3 scythe GT fans at 1150rpm on an Apogee XT waterblock.. for thermal paste i used some MX3 i had years ago.


----------



## nitrobg

It should be a breeze to cool down the processor with this setup. Try cleaning up the whole cooling system. Perhaps the water block's surface isn't properly cleaned - clean it up and polish it with fine sandpaper (first start with 500 grit and finish with 2000). Afterwards, apply a thermal paste using the vertical line method (recommended for this CPU type).


----------



## GENXLR

uhhhhh, add vcore, it performs worse by far. I lose points in 3Dmark, IBT, Cinebench, and running renders. It performs even wrose under those conditions than my 920


----------



## nitrobg

Are you sure that it isn't throttling due to high heat? What are you temperatures?
Are you using a turbo multiplier to reach 4.4?
Are EIST and C-states enabled?
The performance shouldn't degrade unless you are being throttled by something.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Why are you so afraid of going past 1.35? 1.42-3 is perfectly safe for 24/7. You can't reach 4.4 unless you go for 1.40+ vcore.
> .


nitrobg, why are you telling people that going above 1.35v is OK on these Westmere's when Intel Engineers themselves say otherwise? Going above 1.35v is the #1 reason why these chips die or degrade. I worked for Intel for a very long time and I know they do not say things just to say them. Please, everyone here knows that it is NOT safe going above 1.35v on the Westmere IMC, especially if planning on overclocking uncore which most here will try and do. I'm going to say this as nicely as I can, please get your facts straight before you kill someones chip for them. If your thinking the i7 32nm Gulftowns are the same they are NOT. The i7- version of this Westmere had there IMC beefed up slightly to handle more vcore, which is why if you look at Intel documents you would see that the voltage limit is 1.375v, but the Westmere-EP (such as were talking about here) is only 1.35v. WHY? Because the Westmere is a workstation and server chip designed to handle in upwards of 288 GB of memory, and the Gulftown I7 hexa cores were designed to be pushed by Enthusiasts. BIG DIFFERENCE!

Intel says the MAXIMUM voltage that this Xeon chip can handle within its IMC path (QPI) is 1.35v. Unless you have extremely valid facts to prove otherwise, and or are a Intel Engineer yourself please do not say it is safe in this thread. IT IS NOT SAFE! Risky yes, and many chips can and will do it, but there are twice as many that CAN'T do it, and this thread has a LOT of proof of that. Most of these Xeon chips will degrade beyond Intel's max voltage spec. I do not mind you telling people to take the risk, or that their chip needs more vcore, however telling them it is safe when it is clearly NOT, is just plain wrong.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> nitrobg, why are you telling people that going above 1.35v is OK on these Westmere's when Intel Engineers themselves say otherwise? Going above 1.35v is the #1 reason why these chips die or degrade. I worked for Intel for a very long time and I know they do not say things just to say them. Please, everyone here knows that it is NOT safe going above 1.35v on the Westmere IMC, especially if planning on overclocking uncore which most here will try and do. I'm going to say this as nicely as I can, please get your facts straight before you kill someones chip for them. If your thinking the i7 32nm Gulftowns are the same they are NOT. The i7- version of this Westmere had there IMC beefed up slightly to handle more vcore, which is why if you look at Intel documents you would see that the voltage limit is 1.375v, but the Westmere-EP (such as were talking about here) is only 1.35v. WHY? Because the Westmere is a workstation and server chip designed to handle in upwards of 288 GB of memory, and the Gulftown I7 hexa cores were designed to be pushed by Enthusiasts. BIG DIFFERENCE!
> 
> Intel says the MAXIMUM voltage that this Xeon chip can handle within its IMC path (QPI) is 1.35v. Unless you have extremely valid facts to prove otherwise, and or are a Intel Engineer yourself please do not say it is safe in this thread. IT IS NOT SAFE! Risky yes, and many chips can and will do it, but there are twice as many that CAN'T do it, and this thread has a LOT of proof of that. Most of these Xeon chips will degrade beyond Intel's max voltage spec. I do not mind you telling people to take the risk, or that their chip needs more vcore, however telling them it is safe when it is clearly NOT, is just plain wrong.


I think that you misread my posts. We are talking about two different things: Main CPU voltage (CPU Vcore) and CPU Memory Controller voltage (motherboard manufacturers name it differently: QPI/DRAM Core, CPU VTT, CPU Uncore).
You are referring to the Memory controller (IMC) and it is a known fact that you *must never exceed 1.35V* for 24/7. I completely agree on all your points.
However, I am referring to the actual CPU Vcore, as in the voltage supplied to the cores. 1.42-1.43V *on Vcore* is considered a safe limit for overclocking, nobody has killed or degraded his chip for going 24/7 at this Vcore.
I've got my information solely from threads and guides about these particular Xeon CPUs. If I'm wrong - I'd be happy if you can correct me.

Edit: source.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> I think that you misread my posts. We are talking about two different things: Main CPU voltage (CPU Vcore) and CPU Memory Controller voltage (motherboard manufacturers name it differently: QPI/DRAM Core, CPU VTT, CPU Uncore).
> You are referring to the Memory controller (IMC) and it is a known fact that you *must never exceed 1.35V* for 24/7. I completely agree on all your points.
> However, I am referring to the actual CPU Vcore, as in the voltage supplied to the cores. 1.42-1.43V *on Vcore* is considered a safe limit for overclocking, nobody has killed or degraded his chip for going 24/7 at this Vcore.


Hmm, I could swear that you were telling him to take his QPI above 1.35v. OK, my bad my friend. I'm a private message friend of Zoson's (we have the exact same board) on several different forums and he obviously knows his stuff and taught me everything I know about my board. I somehow thought you were telling one of our x5650 users to go above 1.35v on his QPI, and I must disagree with that. However, for Vcore, I still have no proof that it is safe to go above Intel ARK specs. I can see doing so for a 130 watt part (x5677 and above) which by the way is what Zoson has first hand experience with, but for all the 95 watt chips (x5675 and below) I think its best to stay at 1.35v, especially since it is very obvious they drastically increase in temps, indicating the chip is having difficulties. Zoson has a 130 watt 1.375v i7-990X, it is not the same chip as these 95 watt 1.35v Xeons, close but no cookie.

EDIT: Oh and I apologize for misreading your earlier post. Sorry man


----------



## nitrobg

That's fine mate. It was just a minor misunderstanding








I have a theory that the higher TDP chips are simply rated at 130W because they are clocked higher with higher VID (thus generating more heat) and probably are slightly better binned. The difference in equal clocks between both chips should be either minor or none. Perhaps there could be some advantage in max clocks but for 24/7 it shouldn't matter as long as you can keep the CPU cool.


----------



## brootalperry

Thanks for the help. I've broken the barrier of 1.35 and i'm sitting here at 1.36. No crashes yet.

Here's a screenshot of it now:


Also there's this:



I guess I can go ahead and join the 5Ghz club?







Although it was just a spike. Pretty amazing that at least Core #0 went to 5.2Ghz at 1.36 vcore.


----------



## GENXLR

100% sure my IMC is degraded. At auto it was 1.3v, but at one point it tried using my 920's settings


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> 100% sure my IMC is degraded. At auto it was 1.3v, but at one point it tried using my 920's settings


Why did you use 2x uncore with 1.35 QPI? Do you actually gain any performance benefits from that?
I have mine at 1.5x uncore and 1.25 QPI...I don't see any reason myself to go as high as you did.

I don't mean to sound condenscneding, but I'm really curious


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> 100% sure my IMC is degraded. At auto it was 1.3v, but at one point it tried using my 920's settings


Never use auto settings when overclocking, not for QPI, not for CPU core, and not for RAM. You can NOT trust the board to stay within safety parameters, and if it dies, its always best that YOU killed it, not the board. The board can't learn from it's mistakes, however you can. Yeah, you really shouldn't run QPI at 1.35v if you have uncore at 2x, the closer you get to 2x uncore, the lower you should try dropping QPI voltage. Uncore at 1.5x and QPI at 1.34-1.35v would have been OK, but not both at their maximums at the same time. Besides, not many here have been seeing any real benefit from uncore higher than 1.8x or so. And QPI voltage IMO should really stay well into the 1.2-1.3v range and NEVER above 1.34v, especially if you plan on overclocking uncore like you did. You did both at the same time?

I run my uncore at 3006 mhz (RAM is 1603 mhz, so 1.875 x 1603 is 3006 mhz uncore) using only 1.25v (1.294v is set in my bios). I do not believe it is safe for me to go any higher than that, and gflops certainly doesn't rise any higher doing so.


----------



## GENXLR

I didn't intend to. I on my 920 never had to move the QPI so i didn't using it as well. I'll try lowering my QPI at 2x? Someone told me the IMC can throw errors over or under voltage. So at 2 x with 15xx mhz ram, you think the 1.33v range or 1.30v range should be okay to try?

I can't exactly afford another X5650, I pulled this one from a spare power edge R710 that had been in storage since the development team broke up.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I didn't intend to. I on my 920 never had to move the QPI so i didn't using it as well. I'll try lowering my QPI at 2x? Someone told me the IMC can throw errors over or under voltage. So at 2 x with 15xx mhz ram, you think the 1.33v range or 1.30v range should be okay to try?
> 
> I can't exactly afford another X5650, I pulled this one from a spare power edge R710 that had been in storage since the development team broke up.


Well on your 920, it is a 45nm CPU and its default uncore is 2x. However, this x5650 is a 32nm CPU, much thinner transistors in effect, so thus not as resilient to overvoltages. Which is why Intel lowered the Uncore to 1.5x to try and protect the IMC. My only advice is to drop your uncore to 1.5x and QPI vtt to about 1.25-1.30v. What exactly is your ram at? What exactly is your BCLK and CPU multiplier both at? Please tell...


----------



## GENXLR

blck 191, multi 22, ram 1528

lowering uncore slows the whole machine to the point it's slower than my 920 is. in every single benchmark.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> It should be a breeze to cool down the processor with this setup. Try cleaning up the whole cooling system. Perhaps the water block's surface isn't properly cleaned - clean it up and polish it with fine sandpaper (first start with 500 grit and finish with 2000). Afterwards, apply a thermal paste using the vertical line method (recommended for this CPU type).


Well i did wipe off all the old paste that was on the block first, i don't know if my temps are normal because i have no one elses to compare to. But at 1.38v under a little P95 testing my temps on the hottest core go to around 77c, lowest cores temp around 72c-73c.. i don't know the ambient temp in the room but it's about 15c outside at almost 7am.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> blck 191, multi 22, ram 1528
> 
> lowering uncore slows the whole machine to the point it's slower than my 920 is. in every single benchmark.


Are you sure that your turbo is not being throttled to 20x or 21x?
Don't run uncore higher than around 3000-3200MHz, it's a good enough value with reasonable voltages (requires about 1.30V). Bump your BCLK to 210-220 and use the 20x multiplier, the turbo can be a bit wonky.
In my case with a slow memory (~1800MHz 10-10-9-28), I get around 940 cb in cinebench R15, 220x20, uncore @ 3100MHz. Yours should perform similar.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Well i did wipe off all the old paste that was on the block first, i don't know if my temps are normal because i have no one elses to compare to. But at 1.38v under a little P95 testing my temps on the hottest core go to around 77c, lowest cores temp around 72c-73c.. i don't know the ambient temp in the room but it's about 15c outside at almost 7am.


Seidon 240M with push-pull fans keeps 4.2 at less than 60C in prime and probably around 25C ambient.
Something is wrong in your cooling setup. You should reach a similar performance with your huge rad.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Are you sure that your turbo is not being throttled to 20x or 21x?
> Don't run uncore higher than around 3000-3200MHz, it's a good enough value with reasonable voltages (requires about 1.30V). Bump your BCLK to 210-220 and use the 20x multiplier, the turbo can be a bit wonky.
> In my case with a slow memory (~1800MHz 10-10-9-28), I get around 940 cb in cinebench R15, 220x20, uncore @ 3100MHz. Yours should perform similar.
> Seidon 240M with push-pull fans keeps 4.2 at less than 60C in prime and probably around 25C ambient.
> Something is wrong in your cooling setup. You should reach a similar performance with your huge rad.


Odd.. i haven't long blown a lot of dust from the radiator with compressed air, i don't know what else to check unless it needs draining and refilling but it looks to be running fine looking at the tubes.. i really can't see how remounting the water block would make that much difference either.

Hmm..


----------



## Firehawk

When you wiped off the TIM last time, did you use a solvent like isopropyl alcohol, or Arctic Clean?

Just wiping can leave residue of the last application. I like to use a razor blade to remove the bulk of it and then clean it with Arctic Clean. Same method for the chip and the block.

How did you apply the new paste? What paste are you using?

This is all assuming you don't have a blockage or flow restriction in you loop. I agree with nitrobg that your temps are high for that setup. What temps were you getting at stock? Idle and Load.


----------



## GENXLR

My P6T no matter what with any CPU can't post above 195 BLCK. all the speeds look good right now. It's just that while idle, it's BSOD'ing with error 0x124. From what i'm hearing, i killed my IMC.


----------



## nitrobg

Uh, 195 BCLK limit is generally due to the high uncore frequency. Lower it down and it will post up to 220 with X5650. 221-224 requires 101MHz on PCI-E, 225+ requires 102 or higher. Personally tested with P6T Deluxe V2, which is the same (design-wise) as the regular P6T.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Hello guys.

Ummmmm........ _84 Unread Posts_. I'm lost.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Uh, 195 BCLK limit is generally due to the high uncore frequency. Lower it down and it will post up to 220 with X5650. 221-224 requires 101MHz on PCI-E, 225+ requires 102 or higher. Personally tested with P6T Deluxe V2, which is the same (design-wise) as the regular P6T.


No settings on any CPU i've ever used in this board has ever once posted over 195.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> No settings on any CPU i've ever used in this board has ever once posted over 195.


Let's first try something. Set uncore to the lowest multiplier. Load windows with any high bootable BCLK value. Open CPU-Z, select Memory tab and tell me what is *NB Frequency*'s value and what BCLK frequency are you using. I'll get back to you afterwards.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> No settings on any CPU i've ever used in this board has ever once posted over 195.


That is because the average overclocking board can only muster 205. Only 20% of Asus boards, including ROG series can go over that. Don't worry much, this x5650 has only been averaging 4ghz, 4.2ghz if you're lucky and 4.4ghz if you're very lucky. Look at the members list, everyone there has tried hard, and most everyone there has determined 4ghz is the sweet spot, or in the neighborhood of 4ghz is what this chip seems to be all about. You have a chip or board that is slightly below average.

Have you determined if the NB temps are OK? My Rampage III ran very hot at high bclk until I redid the crap Asus TIM. Now its just hot, lol... Dropped it from mid 70's to 50C.


----------



## OCmember

What is the average Vcore for 4GHz on these chips?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What is the average Vcore for 4GHz on these chips?


That's a very good question. Mine posted at 4ghz as low as 1.17v and still passed 24 hours of Prime95. It might have gone lower but I did not try going lower so I would not know if it could, lol. I'd say its around 1.26-1.3v or so for an average, if I had to guess off the top of my head. Apparently you can go as high as 1.42v and still be in the safe area.


----------



## brootalperry

Mine is solid at 1.25 vcore. Anything below that and it will most likely crash.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What is the average Vcore for 4GHz on these chips?


I've bought 3 X5650s for myself and 2 other forum buddies.
Mine needs about 1.28V for 4GHz, the 2nd CPU needs as low as 1.18V, the 3rd CPU needs around 1.20V. However all of them are able to hit 4.4GHz with almost the same Vcore - mine is 1.43V (stable), 2nd and 3rd are around 1.40-1.41V (not a clue about stability). 4.2GHz is also around 1.35V for all 3 chips.
CPU1 is batch B, CPU2 (sure) and 3 (not sure) are batch A.
I think that there is a slight difference at low frequencies but at the top (reasonable) frequencies the difference diminishes.

CPU1 uses ASUS P6T Deluxe V2.
CPU2 uses ASUS P6X58D Premium.
CPU3 uses Foxconn FlamingBlade GTI (needed a modded bios to fix the locked uncore multiplier).
All 3 motherboards can hit 220+ BCLK.

CPU-Z validation of my X5650 @ 4.0GHz


----------



## OCmember

Haven't tried lowering my vcore


----------



## Kana-Maru

I just seen the new X99 Motherboards + Hexa-Core or Octo-Core + DDR4 price and reviews. My goodness. The price to upgrade my system and get new GPUs would be way to much. Even though I can afford it I think it would ultimately become a waste. Unless I'm running benchmarks daily for bragging rights or running Cinebench R11.5 & R15 randomly throughout the day I don't think it'll be worth it. My X5660 @ 4.6Ghz - 5.0Ghz is more than enough for my high end needs. That's only if I need to do something that will take forever at lower speeds. Paired with my SSD and HDD sets in RAID-0 my PC is doing much more than I need now.

I think I'll put that "upgrade" money towards another pair of high-end GPUs. So far my GTX 670s in SLI are doing fine for gaming today. So even upgrading the GPUs might become a long shot.


----------



## brootalperry

I think the audio problems I was having at 20x220 was caused by the high bclk. There's a setting in my BIOS that may make the x22 multiplier stable, but it requires that I turn off all power saving options.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Knew i shouldn't have gone messing around with it too much, bit of water leaked from somewhere when i was getting the waterblock off and got the back of my gpu a bit damp.

What tubing should i get for 1/2" barbs which is snug and flexible but not a pain to get on? 7/16?

Also i didn't use any removal fluid to get the TIM off, don't have any.


----------



## Firehawk

A lot of people use 7/16" tubing with 1/2" barbs here. Rumor is you can use that combo without hose clamps, but I don't know if I'd want to risk it. Commonly recommended is Primoflex Advanced LRT.

You don't have rubbing alcohol? Ideally, isopropyl alcohol 99% is best, but the ~75% that you find more readily will do as well.

If you're draining your loop anyway, you may as well clean it. Pop open your cpu block and check for build up.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I just seen the new X99 Motherboards + Hexa-Core or Octo-Core + DDR4 price and reviews. My goodness. The price to upgrade my system and get new GPUs would be way to much. Even though I can afford it I think it would ultimately become a waste. Unless I'm running benchmarks daily for bragging rights or running Cinebench R11.5 & R15 randomly throughout the day I don't think it'll be worth it. My X5660 @ 4.6Ghz - 5.0Ghz is more than enough for my high end needs. That's only if I need to do something that will take forever at lower speeds. Paired with my SSD and HDD sets in RAID-0 my PC is doing much more than I need now.
> 
> I think I'll put that "upgrade" money towards another pair of high-end GPUs. So far my GTX 670s in SLI are doing fine for gaming today. So even upgrading the GPUs might become a long shot.


Yup totally agreed with you.
For the GPU, you may want to check out the AMD 295x2 as the price is reduced !


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Yup totally agreed with you.
> For the GPU, you may want to check out the AMD 295x2 as the price is reduced !


Yeah $1000 for a 295x2 is a pretty awesome deal. A $500 discount is huge...


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Yeah $1000 for a 295x2 is a pretty awesome deal. A $500 discount is huge...


This clever tactic from AMD is seriously hurting the NVIDIA Titan-Z sales.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

What I don't understand is what makes NVIDIA think their Titan Z is worth more than $1000? These video card companies have become seriously brain dead stupid and I am losing all my respect for them just because of their gouging. I don't care what technology they put in them unless they are made with gold, silver or some other precious metals that will never devalue, even when that technology becomes old school they can keep them. Just plain greedy stupid IMO.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Yup totally agreed with you.
> For the GPU, you may want to check out the AMD 295x2 as the price is reduced !


Wow. Great post. I knew nothing about this. I was planning on getting the 295X2 for $1000.00 when they first released. When I saw $1,499.99 that idea went out of the roof. Now I have to wait until I finish taking care of more important business. Maybe I can sell my GTX 670s to cut the price a bit from $1000.00. I am definitely eyeballing the 295X2 now.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Wow. Great post. I knew nothing about this. I was planning on getting the 295X2 for $1000.00 when they first released. When I saw $1,499.99 that idea went out of the roof. Now I have to wait until I finish taking care of more important business. Maybe I can sell my GTX 670s to cut the price a bit from $1000.00. I am definitely eyeballing the 295X2 now.


Do it! Haha I picked up my 670 just last month, got it local for $100









I think if you ever went quad fire on x58 with the 295x2 it might run into problems on x58.. But a hybrid setup, 295 and 290 is overkill but cool









Haha I hope x99 goes the way of x58, where its cheap years later hahaha







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> What I don't understand is what makes NVIDIA think their Titan Z is worth more than $1000? These video card companies have become seriously brain dead stupid and I am losing all my respect for them just because of their gouging. I don't care what technology they put in them unless they are made with gold, silver or some other precious metals that will never devalue, even when that technology becomes old school they can keep them. Just plain greedy stupid IMO.


Yeah, but anything new is really expensive, we do live in a consumer society.. I've seen release prices of old school cards, and they were ridiculous price as well.

But that's the price of tech, someone's has to make money. Its the same reason I think buying a brand new smartphone is a ripoff, I wouldn't pay $700 for a fancy whatever that's barely better than the phone that I currently have.. But you know people like buying shiny new things.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

When I purchased my 5870, just days after release nothing else on the market could touch it and I only paid $500 if that. My 8800 GTZ, or whatever it was, was also the absolute fastest at the time of release and my purchase, and I only paid $600 for it. Not hardly the same thing asking several grand for a video card. We can still buy motherboards for several hundred, still buy cpu's for several hundred, and fantastic 27" PLS or IPS monitors for just a few hundred. Nothing other than pure gouging greed explains why NVIDIA asks for $3k. If I had a million dollars I wouldn't purchase it for principle alone.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> When I purchased my 5870, just days after release nothing else on the market could touch it and I only paid $500 if that. My 8800 GTZ, or whatever it was, was also the absolute fastest at the time of release and my purchase, and I only paid $600 for it. Not hardly the same thing asking several grand for a video card. We can still buy motherboards for several hundred, still buy cpu's for several hundred, and fantastic 27" PLS or IPS monitors for just a few hundred. Nothing other than pure gouging greed explains why NVIDIA asks for $3k. If I had a million dollars I wouldn't purchase it for principle alone.


What's 3k?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What's 3k?


I think NVIDIA is asking for $3000 (a.k.a $3K) for their Titan-Z video card while AMD wants $1000 for the 295X2

NVIDIA Titan-Z Cost $3K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487038

AMD 295X2 WITH built in water cooling might I add. Cost $1K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202108

I find both of these stupidly expensive and completely unattainable by common everyday gamers who may live on minimum wage incomes. When a card was $500 it was already difficult to try and save up for it, but these cards seem to be made just for people who have deep pockets and six figure incomes, or no families that depend on you. My point is since the 1980's I have always purchased the absolute best Enthusiast level hardware, and I could always find a way to do so without going hungry. But now, with their extreme greed, I can no longer afford the very best and have to compromise by buying a used 290X or 290 from eBay. Someone like me has to get a risky cheap Korean made monitor and a second hand used video card because the very best cards have quadrupled or more in price (in less than 5 years) but our incomes have not. That is what I mean....


----------



## OCmember

It's insulting


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I think NVIDIA is asking for $3000 (a.k.a $3K) for their Titan-Z video card while AMD wants $1000 for the 295X2
> 
> NVIDIA Titan-Z Cost $3K
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487038
> 
> AMD 295X2 WITH built in water cooling might I add. Cost $1K
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202108
> 
> I find both of these stupidly expensive and completely unattainable by common everyday gamers who may live on minimum wage incomes. When a card was $500 it was already difficult to try and save up for it, but these cards seem to be made just for people who have deep pockets and six figure incomes, or no families that depend on you. My point is since the 1980's I have always purchased the absolute best Enthusiast level hardware, and I could always find a way to do so without going hungry. But now, with their extreme greed, I can no longer afford the very best and have to compromise by buying a used 290X or 290 from eBay. Someone like me has to get a risky cheap Korean made monitor and a second hand used video card because the very best cards have quadrupled or more in price (in less than 5 years) but our incomes have not. That is what I mean....


14 years ago the Geforce 3 64 MB card was released and cost $700. That was the top of the line at the time.

in 2005, Nvidia released the 7800 GTX.....also $700

With inflation the cost of these is effectively *decreasing*, but that doesn't stop people from complaining every time a new card is released. The top cards are always around $700 when they first come out and drop slowly after that.

Is Nvidia gouging with a $3k price. Undoubtedly, but its also a 2 chip card which also commands a premium. Right now, Nvidia's top card is the 780 TI, guess how much it costs.







Anything above that is for those with more money than brains.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I purchased a 7800 GTX the same week it was released and paid only $495, it was the 8800 GTX that came to $699. Or maybe I waited a while on a few of these and or got great deals, but I always managed to purchase brand new. Every few years in the 90's I would purchase the absolute top of the line and it never went above $500 for me, or at least I never once remember it going over $500. I do not even remember my 5870 costing me that. The 8800 GTX, was the only exception. I don't even remember paying that much for my 4870x2. Anyway, I am talking about mainly top-of-the-line stuff only. Most of the top of the line NVIDIA products are out of my reach these days as I draw the line at $500 to $700 area now. If I was still working, id probably get something around the $700, and that does not even buy the top of the line any more. Absolute top is now thousands of dollars.

By the way, true story. When I had my brother purchase his 7800, Newegg accidentally shipped three in new retail boxes. He purchased only one, and three came in the mail. Lucky bastard... lol


----------



## dpoverlord

You guys are forgetting that the Titan Z was aimed not at gamers but more at people with systems with only room for one card. It also was meant with its double precision for CGI / Artits. It was not aimed at gamers unless they had the $$. Its more of a corporate card for companies that are in need of a powerful card with Double Precision (its better than the X2 in this regard) but cant fit 2 into one station.

Now to be clear I think the price is ridiculous, but it is unique for what it is. I personally would never get it I would just take my regular titans and get 2 titan blacks. It's cheaper and it is faster than the Titan Z.

For a gamer 2 Titan blacks or the x2 would make the most sense. Unlike a lot of other people though I have a 4 30" monitors and play at 4800 x 2560, I contemplated 4k but it makes no sense, I contemplated the Asus 27" ROG but its a TN model and the side paneling is not good. However, that monitor has considerable less ghosting than the Dell 30" models.

To your point *Yes* the Titan Z is ludicrously expensive
*YES* its not meant for us gamers
*YES* you would have to be an idiot to buy it if you are a gamer.

*BUT* I did consider it until I saw it could not O/C as much and under performed then the choice was clear


P.S. Volt unlocked regular Titans > Titan Blacks with no volt unlockage


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> You guys are forgetting that the Titan Z was aimed not at gamers but more at people with systems with only room for one card. It also was meant with its double precision for CGI / Artits. It was not aimed at gamers unless they had the $$. Its more of a corporate card for companies that are in need of a powerful card with Double Precision (its better than the X2 in this regard) but cant fit 2 into one station.
> 
> Now to be clear I think the price is ridiculous, but it is unique for what it is. I personally would never get it I would just take my regular titans and get 2 titan blacks. It's cheaper and it is faster than the Titan Z.
> 
> For a gamer 2 Titan blacks or the x2 would make the most sense. Unlike a lot of other people though I have a 4 30" monitors and play at 4800 x 2560, I contemplated 4k but it makes no sense, I contemplated the Asus 27" ROG but its a TN model and the side paneling is not good. However, that monitor has considerable less ghosting than the Dell 30" models.
> 
> To your point *Yes* the Titan Z is ludicrously expensive
> *YES* its not meant for us gamers
> *YES* you would have to be an idiot to buy it if you are a gamer.
> 
> *BUT* I did consider it until I saw it could not O/C as much and under performed then the choice was clear
> 
> 
> P.S. Volt unlocked regular Titans > Titan Blacks with no volt unlockage


Yeah it is more appropriate for compute use, but to say its not aimed at gamers, you're forgetting the fact that they plastered the gaming and gamer junk all over the adverts for the Z! So yeah its a pretty cool compute card and would be a deal for the enterprise price tag, but to say that they didn't aim this card for gamers is simply incorrect.

EDIT: go and Google "titan z" and read the headline of the first result









Regardless, the 295x2 was announced after the Z released before it, and was half the price, and is now even cheaper. Not to mention it is more powerful than the Z. You could now buy two of them and it is still cheaper haha!

Competition is always good for the consumer haha









It drives down prices, makes for interesting things like this coming out and the price dropping. The industry needs more players to push innovation. The other reason I wish AMD was stronger on their CPU front, even with their lower R&D budget, and no control over their fab..

Sorry off topic, but in conclusion I don't care what the products are labeled for, as long as there is competition to make things interesting for the consumers!

EDIT: as for monitor choice that Asus 1440p gsync panel that's 144Hz is a really nice panel, I would buy it if I had money to throw! That along with the LG ultrawide


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I would be happy with two used 290's in CF. It will still be strong and probably cost less than $400 total.


----------



## JC Cutter

Hey guys I am new here, but I just wanted to stop by and share my experience with the X5660. I absolutely love this processor. I have not had this much fun overclocking a chip since the q6600 days.

I decided to stretch the legs of my X5660's and here is what I got. Mind you this is not what I run 24/7. This was strictly to see what they could do. My 24/7 clock is 4.6 Ghz @ 1.399 Vcore. Which nets 22 points in Cinebench. Dual 420 rads keep temps under control for me.
Idle temps are around 27 C and full load never exceeds 70 C.

I could probably push it further but don't want to risk burning my chips. This was done with a 24x multi that throttles to 23x. I have actually noticed a slight improvement by allowing the Intel turbo tech to do its thing. Still tweaking tho as the SR-2 gives me plenty to play with.

Current build (unfinished, waiting on 290x's) stands at $1500.

Thanks for the great thread!





~JC Cutter


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I wish they had made more of those SR-2's, like 5 times as many as there really are, lol... Id love to run another xeon just because.


----------



## GENXLR

My X5650 appears to have a degraded IMC, I guess i busted it







guess i'll see if the R710 has another X5650 in the other CPU slot


----------



## C-BuZz

Confirmed that the P6T Deluxe V2 running latest bios (1202) does not boot with Xeon X5670.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C-BuZz*
> 
> Confirmed that the P6T Deluxe V2 running latest bios (1202) does not boot with Xeon X5670.


Try using only 1 stick of ram.....


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Yeah it is more appropriate for compute use, but to say its not aimed at gamers, you're forgetting the fact that they plastered the gaming and gamer junk all over the adverts for the Z! So yeah its a pretty cool compute card and would be a deal for the enterprise price tag, but to say that they didn't aim this card for gamers is simply incorrect.
> 
> EDIT: go and Google "titan z" and read the headline of the first result
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless, the 295x2 was announced after the Z released before it, and was half the price, and is now even cheaper. Not to mention it is more powerful than the Z. You could now buy two of them and it is still cheaper haha!
> 
> Competition is always good for the consumer haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It drives down prices, makes for interesting things like this coming out and the price dropping. The industry needs more players to push innovation. The other reason I wish AMD was stronger on their CPU front, even with their lower R&D budget, and no control over their fab..
> 
> Sorry off topic, but in conclusion I don't care what the products are labeled for, as long as there is competition to make things interesting for the consumers!
> 
> EDIT: as for monitor choice that Asus 1440p gsync panel that's 144Hz is a really nice panel, I would buy it if I had money to throw! That along with the LG ultrawide


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Try using only 1 stick of ram.....


I agree they did position it that way via the Interweb there online releases attested otherwise. But regardless competition shows something else and nothing should ever be that expensive


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C-BuZz*
> 
> Confirmed that the P6T Deluxe V2 running latest bios (1202) does not boot with Xeon X5670.


It should. I'm using the same motherboard and X5650 boots fine. Try resetting the CMOS, reseating the RAM, reseating the CPU. Remember that you *must* use DIMM slots 2-4-6 first, otherwise the system won't boot.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> It should. I'm using the same motherboard and X5650 boots fine. Try resetting the CMOS, reseating the RAM, reseating the CPU. Remember that you *must* use DIMM slots 2-4-6 first, otherwise the system won't boot.


It should work, I have a rev 1 deluxe, it was finicky with booting up, I had to stick it on a cardboard box, and then you have to have the ram in 2-4-6 first, like nitro said.

Remove the CMOS battery, and let it sit, then try again. I had a whole night of no booting, and it was annoying but once I got it sorted, it works.


----------



## GENXLR

My P6T Delux V2 boots with the X5670


----------



## JC Cutter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I wish they had made more of those SR-2's, like 5 times as many as there really are, lol... Id love to run another xeon just because.


I agree they should have made more! Love these old boards. I got the X5660's for $100 each so when this board came up for sale I couldn't resist.
~JC Cutter


----------



## OCmember

How is the Asus WS board? Seen on for 200$ on eBay


----------



## JC Cutter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How is the Asus WS board? Seen on for 200$ on eBay


Do you mean the Dual socket board?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JC Cutter*
> 
> Do you mean the Dual socket board?


It was a single socket Asus P6T WS Professional


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

I emptied my loop, replaced tubing and refilled.. haven't checked inside waterblock yet but i am getting these temps at 4.4ghz and1.41v running small FFT's in P95 (max) on each core

80c
79c
74c
71c
78c
79c

Is that still too high with water cooling on a x5670?

I don't know what my ambient temp is, so i need to find that out as well.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I emptied my loop, replaced tubing and refilled.. haven't checked inside waterblock yet but i am getting these temps at 4.4ghz and1.41v running small FFT's in P95 (max) on each core
> 
> 80c
> 79c
> 74c
> 71c
> 78c
> 79c
> 
> Is that still too high with water cooling on a x5670?
> 
> I don't know what my ambient temp is, so i need to find that out as well.


Could be related to your vcore.

My X5660 is at 4.3GHz @ 1.28v and P95 blend is 78*c at the highest core, and 68*c at the lowest core. 82*F ambient, @ 52% humidity - old T.R.U.E

EDIT: not stable, soon as I posted this the computer froze, but none-the-less it still could be related to your vcore


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Could be related to your vcore.
> 
> My X5660 is at 4.3GHz @ 1.28v and P95 blend is 78*c at the highest core, and 68*c at the lowest core. 82*F ambient, @ 52% humidity - old T.R.U.E
> 
> EDIT: not stable, soon as I posted this the computer froze, but none-the-less it still could be related to your vcore


Even at that voltage it still wasn't stable, i bumped it slightly higher.

But it's getting a bit much voltage wise now and hitting 80+c i'm guessing is not good..


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Even at that voltage it still wasn't stable, i bumped it slightly higher.
> 
> But it's getting a bit much voltage wise now and hitting 80+c i'm guessing is not good..


Yeah, take care of that chip. Personally I don't push my chips past 1.3v If I am in a comfortable speed/vcore range


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Even at that voltage it still wasn't stable, i bumped it slightly higher.
> 
> But it's getting a bit much voltage wise now and hitting 80+c i'm guessing is not good..


I just ran the ran the same test on mine (X5670, 4.3 GHz @ 1.36v), my highest core hit 66*C on air....an old Noctua U12P. Your triple rad setup should completely obliterate that.

Did you remount your CPU block? You should have cleaned the block before refilling the loop.
Edit: Are you sure you fully bled the loop? Air in the block or elsewhere could adversely affect temps as well.

It's possible you have a crappy OCer, but those temps still seem high.


----------



## loop16

According to intel vcore up to 1.35v is in cores factory specs i believe and 1.4 24/7 is absolutely safe, i wrote i think before some time ago i m setting up pcs from 1995 and clocking them from 2000, I have NEVER EVER burn any cpu espesially from intel, once i return an amd fx-60 back to 2006 because it has some problem that the whole system was unstable, on the other side i have burn lots of mobo of course i can not tell the number for a lot of different reasons

At the friend with high temps in his watercooling rig, from my experience i believe
-Air trapped in the loop somewhere maybe in the radiator so its difficult to spot it
-Radiator that is clogged due to alge or maybe from putting parafloo in the watercooling loop ( you can clean it with vinegar in 2 ways, first you can put vienegar in your loop only and run r cooling setup fr a few minutes and the replase vinegar with sistilled water run r coolind rig again and replace distilled water with a cooling liquid e.x i use licuid from ek, 2nd way is to take out yor radiator and clean it with vinegar and distilled water, its easier and less messy because vinegar bubbling into the loop, and you have to use a lot of distilled water to clean it)
-Corossion to the waterblock due to is in the end of its life or it is clogged too
-Tubes you changed so.......skip this
-Last maybe your pump is not working properly and not pushing the cooling liquid with enough speed

P.s. English is not my first language so is very difficult to me not making some mistakes


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I would be happy with two used 290's in CF. It will still be strong and probably cost less than $400 total.


So would I







I just dont have the cash to spend especially since I dont really game... but isnt there issues with the bridgeless CFX on x58? or was that something that I misread?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> So would I
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just dont have the cash to spend especially since I dont really game... but isnt there issues with the bridgeless CFX on x58? or was that something that I misread?


I have no clue and it sounds like you know more than I do, haha. I have put zero effort into any research on CrossFire (I didnt know it had anything to do with the chipset). About a year ago I saw a review on CF showing how far it had come over the years and how much smoother and better it is these days at scaling, however that is the ONLY thing that ever made me want to try it. Otherwise, I am a single vga card kind of guy. I rarely game either, but every now and then I like to fire up something new, like Battlefield 4. Anyways, before about 2006 I always considered myself a gamer (I even entered a few local contests and was entered into the Seattle WinHEC 2005 gaming event), but games seemed to take a back seat to story quality and only seemed to concentrate on eye candy. That led me to losing interest, that or the older I get the less interest I have, lol...

With that said, I do know that gaming is a good measure of ones processing power as a whole and I am highly interested in having the best benchmarks I can afford. With my soon to be 2560x1440 PLS monitor it just seems like the right time to finally retire the 5870.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I have no clue and it sounds like you know more than I do, haha. I have put zero effort into any research on CrossFire (I didnt know it had anything to do with the chipset). About a year ago I saw a review on CF showing how far it had come over the years and how much smoother and better it is these days at scaling, however that is the ONLY thing that ever made me want to try it. Otherwise, I am a single vga card kind of guy. I rarely game either, but every now and then I like to fire up something new, like Battlefield 4. Anyways, before about 2006 I always considered myself a gamer (I even entered a few local contests and was entered into the Seattle WinHEC 2005 gaming event), but games seemed to take a back seat to story quality and only seemed to concentrate on eye candy. That led me to losing interest, that or the older I get the less interest I have, lol...
> 
> With that said, I do know that gaming is a good measure of ones processing power as a whole and I am highly interested in having the best benchmarks I can afford. With my soon to be 2560x1440 PLS monitor it just seems like the right time to finally retire the 5870.


I got a sweet deal on my 1gb 7850s last year, and honestly running dual gpus wasnt a hassle at all, with ever driver update it seemed to make the process smoother and smoother. I ran the dual cards on four different boards, an Asus 890 board, a 990FX board, the ex58-ud3r, and the p6t deluxe.

The raw power of the cards was well worth the $120 that I spent for both of them, and with all of that being said, this single gtx 670 I have running has been a lot smoother and Nvidia does have some cool features in their drivers.

And I am also with you, I dont have money to be buying every game that comes out and I dont have a collection of older titles. So I only have BF3 which was free in June, and Planetside 2. And games are lacking in a good story, games that are truly deep and immerse with rich lore and character development, its rare, but then again its not just games, its the whole entertainment industry, theres nothing with substance.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I got a sweet deal on my 1gb 7850s last year, and honestly running dual gpus wasnt a hassle at all, with ever driver update it seemed to make the process smoother and smoother. I ran the dual cards on four different boards, an Asus 890 board, a 990FX board, the ex58-ud3r, and the p6t deluxe.
> 
> The raw power of the cards was well worth the $120 that I spent for both of them, and with all of that being said, this single gtx 670 I have running has been a lot smoother and Nvidia does have some cool features in their drivers.
> 
> And I am also with you, I dont have money to be buying every game that comes out and I dont have a collection of older titles. So I only have BF3 which was free in June, and Planetside 2. And games are lacking in a good story, games that are truly deep and immerse with rich lore and character development, its rare, but then again its not just games, its the whole entertainment industry, theres nothing with substance.


Yeah I agree, nothing like when they first started making them. Although I bet it will be very difficult to do, I am hopeful the new Alien game may bright back a good story, and give me some sheer adrenaline as a side candy. I could not finish BF3, and I tried three times, but something just was not there for me. Same with the new Crysis 3, and Crysis 2 for that matter. The original Crysis however I think I have finished three or four times, haha. What is that? The original Half Life, the original Far Cry, the original COD, the Original Battlefield, the original Splinter Cell, the original MOH, the original Aliens vs Predator, the original Thief, Counter Strike, the original Ghost Recon, etc etc the list goes on, all of them were much better than what they put out now as sequels... I keep wondering if its me, or if its something missing in the games? I sure hope its not me, lol


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> So would I
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just dont have the cash to spend especially since I dont really game... but isnt there issues with the bridgeless CFX on x58? or was that something that I misread?


I haven't heard of any specific problems with it, but I can see that there might be issues. Essentially the R9 290 series manages bridgeless CFX by using the PCIe bus to communicate between the cards in lieu of the bridge connector. It becomes a bandwidth issue.

Since X58 only has PCIe 2 capabilities, you'd probably see bottlenecking if running more than 2 cards, or if one of those cards is on a x8 slot. If both are on full x16 slots, it's probably ok.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> I haven't heard of any specific problems with it, but I can see that there might be issues. Essentially the R9 290 series manages bridgeless CFX by using the PCIe bus to communicate between the cards in lieu of the bridge connector. It becomes a bandwidth issue.
> 
> Since X58 only has PCIe 2 capabilities, you'd probably see bottlenecking if running more than 2 cards, or if one of those cards is on a x8 slot. If both are on full x16 slots, it's probably ok.


So you think my Rampage III Extreme with its 4 PCIe x16 slots would be OK with two cards? I think two slots are full x16, but the other two are only x8, or drop down to x8? I forget how that works? I have no other cards in the computer.


----------



## GENXLR

it's x16 i thought on 3 of your lanes, otherwise it's 2. when the x8 lane is used, they all drop down to x8. Thats how the X58 northbridge works


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> it's x16 i thought on 3 of your lanes, otherwise it's 2. when the x8 lane is used, they all drop down to x8. Thats how the X58 northbridge works


I found this at the Asus website under the specs section. I was too lazy to go hunting for my manual, lol.

4 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16, or x16 x8 x8, or quad x8)

So, I guess I only have two full speed x16 slots to work with. It doesn't seem to mention if it matters what slots are used. However, after reading everything on the 290/x and x58 I am not the least bit interested in giving it a try, lol. It seems like a nightmare for many x58 users.


----------



## killerhz

blindly dude to cash monies not being what it was had to sell off some things and had $200 to try to upgrade my PC best i could. got me a 7950 for my GPU and grabbed a X5650. This is an upgrade to me coming from a i7 920 (yes i still rock this) and my EVGA Classified x58 759.
needless to say, i was disappointed when i installed my new sexy chip and got the instant FF code.

Called EVGA and with the lifetime warranty they will do the mod for me. Best for me to have them do it seeing as i would bork something and poof no PC.

I am so glad to find this thread and others like it with the info on Xeon on x58


----------



## zzss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> 2000 Mhz is not worth the large voltage increases across the entire system honestly but I ran it for years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I've since dropped down to 1600 Mhz with CL8 timings and lower voltage.
> 
> ---EDIT--- Kana, what was the highest you were able to comfortably get on the DRAM? 2200Mhz? Seems like I was able to get 2200-2300Mhz but I can't remember exactly. I just remembered that it was basically identical to what you ran.
> 
> ZZSS i need more info on what you are actually running to help.
> 
> Can you post your some of your BIOS settings?
> 
> BCLK = ?
> Memory Multiplier (i.e. 2:8, 2:10 etc.) = ?
> 
> Remember, you should use an UnCORE frequency 1.5x the DRAM clock for the Westmere Xeons
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . You CAN use the 2x like Nehlam but the Westmeres were designed for 1.5x. There is a performance increase with a higher UnCORE but at the cost of higher QPI/VTT/Heat and other voltages.


Tested again,BCLK 150,memory multiplier 2:10 or 2:8 or 2:6,uncore multiplier 19X or 21x no problem,but 20X no post,it's really a bios bug.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

I got the hex keys and opened up my water block, i don't know if this is considered a blockage that would certainly raise temps a lot. But i don't know where the crap in this came from because the water was looking quite clear.

I think this gunk was there from when i first had it


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I got the hex keys and opened up my water block, i don't know if this is considered a blockage that would certainly raise temps a lot. But i don't know where the crap in this came from because the water was looking quite clear.
> 
> I think this gunk was there from when i first had it


Just soak it in lemon juice over night, thats what I did for my Apogee GTZ and it worked fine. I then took a tooth brush, lemon juice and a metal polisher paste to it the next day. Cleaned that baby right up.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Just soak it in lemon juice over night, thats what I did for my Apogee GTZ and it worked fine. I then took a tooth brush, lemon juice and a metal polisher paste to it the next day. Cleaned that baby right up.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I got the hex keys and opened up my water block, i don't know if this is considered a blockage that would certainly raise temps a lot. But i don't know where the crap in this came from because the water was looking quite clear.
> 
> I think this gunk was there from when i first had it


@Perfect_Chaos lemon juice works good, but here are some other methods if you dont have any at home and dont want to go to the store.

http://www.wikihow.com/Clean-Copper


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> lemon juice works good, but here are some other methods if you dont have any at home and dont want to go to the store.
> 
> http://www.wikihow.com/Clean-Copper


Actually, I did use the vinegar and salt method as well, lol. I tried them all on my full cover EK GPU block which came used from ebay and was black in the grooves. Took me two full days to get it looking like copper, using various methods of cleaning. But I think it was the lemon-juice-polishing-paste-tooth-brush-elbow-grease combo that finally got me back to copper, lol.


----------



## C-BuZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Try using only 1 stick of ram.....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> It should. I'm using the same motherboard and X5650 boots fine. Try resetting the CMOS, reseating the RAM, reseating the CPU. Remember that you *must* use DIMM slots 2-4-6 first, otherwise the system won't boot.


Thanks guy's, CPU was DOA wasn't the mobo


----------



## OCmember

What's the highest safest Uncore frequency we can go to without damaging anything?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What's the highest safest Uncore frequency we can go to without damaging anything?


Well general consensus is 2x of memory speed and no more than 1.34v QPI. If either is surpassed the IMC starts to degrade according to Intel, and if both is surpassed its almost guaranteed. Uncore at 1.875x (or something like that) seems to be the sweet spot for many here.

At least that is how I have read into it over the last 9 months, and it seems to be true on my chip.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Well general consensus is 2x of memory speed and no more than 1.34v QPI. If either is surpassed the IMC starts to degrade according to Intel, and if both is surpassed its almost guaranteed. Uncore at 1.875x (or something like that) seems to be the sweet spot for many here.
> 
> At least that is how I have read into it over the last 9 months, and it seems to be true on my chip.


I have the option to run my Uncore at the 23 multi which would give me the same speed as my Overclock of 4.2. I'm currently running my Uncore at 22x183=4029MHz. I don't understand what 1.875x means.

My Memory speed is at 549MHz for an effective 1098MHz

My QPI Link is running at 3296MHz

EDIT: bumping up my Uncore gave me a better score in Cinebench 11.5. My best was 10.79 When I bumped it up and ran it again I scored a 10.85


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I have the option to run my Uncore at the 23 multi which would give me the same speed as my Overclock of 4.2. I'm currently running my Uncore at 22x183=4029MHz. I don't understand what 1.875x means.
> 
> My Memory speed is at 549MHz for an effective 1098MHz
> 
> My QPI Link is running at 3296MHz
> 
> EDIT: bumping up my Uncore gave me a better score in Cinebench 11.5. My best was 10.79 When I bumped it up and ran it again I scored a 10.85


Uncore is everything OTHER THAN THE CORE. It is the setting in BIOS that either says Uncore, or UCLK and is measured in Frequencies just like the RAM and CPU. Some people like to use 1.5x or 2x or in my case 1.875x, lol because that is what the math breaks down to in regards to my memory speed (I'm running Uncore at 3066 mhz, which is 1.875x (times) my RAM speed of 1603 mhz). On Asus boards it is UCLK, and it gives us a drop down of frequency numbers. 3200 mhz Uncore is 2x when running memory at 1600mhz ( 2 x 1600 = 3200 uncore). So if RAM is at 1600 mhz then 1600 x 2 = 3200 mhz Uncore (2x). Umm, did I just say this twice?? LOL

You said you have your memory running at only 1100 mhz, so running your uncore over 2200 mhz is *in fact running it OVER Intels maximum 2x safety zone*. More people have killed their chips doing that than I care to count. However, if your QPI voltage is still under 1.35v, then you may be OK.

When you say you ran Uncore at 22x183, no you did not. the 22 is a CPU mulitplier, NOT the Uncore. The 183 is your boards base clock BCLK, NOT your Uncore. Uncore is everything else OTHER THAN the multiplier and base clock.

Now with all that said, I want to see camera pics of your BIOS screen pages please. 183x22 is 4ghz. If you can push up your 183 (BCLK) to 200 and stay below 1.35v on the CPU vcore, then you have a winner. If you can't push it that high, try lowering multi to 20 and see what happens. Just remember to keep QPI voltages below 1.35v, because that is THE #1 killer of this chips memory controller, going over 1.35v on QPI (according to Intel).


----------



## OCmember

It's always confusing when talking about motherboard settings. The terms aren't universal or displayed that way. Anyways here are 4 screen shots. 2 of HWinfo64 showing the uncore mulit. The 22 was set by me. The 20 was set automatically by the bios. The Bios screen shots show the lingo and the options.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> It's always confusing when talking about motherboard settings. The terms aren't universal or displayed that way. Anyways here are 4 screen shots. 2 of HWinfo64 showing the uncore mulit. The 22 was set by me. The 20 was set automatically by the bios. The Bios screen shots show the lingo and the options.


Yes agreed, and its compounded by the fact that many people have favorites they stick to, for me that is Asus. For my Father its Gigabyte and for many of my friends its also Gigabyte. However, your bios screens were not confusing, but the HWinfo64 were indeed, lol.

As you change BCLK Frequncy, your RAM and Uncore and all that also changes accordingly. May I ask why your RAM is at 1098 mhz? What speed rating is it? The reason your Uncore Frequency setting has a lowest setting of 2196 (1098 ram times 2 = 2196) is because your board is not giving you the proper Xeon Uncore settings, which should go as low as 1.5x of RAM. In fact, stock Uncore for that chip is 1.5x uncore. Just take your RAM speed (not the three digit number, lol) 1098 and times that by 1.5x, that is what the stock Uncore is for the x5600 series. I suspect you need to take everything OFF AUTO.

Do this.
Set CPU Ratio to 18 (put CPU vcore to 1.35v)
Set BCLK to 180 (it should boot since it booted at 183 already)
Set PCIE to 101
Set QPI Freq to 3600 or what ever around that it has (JUST NOT AUTO)(Put QPI voltage to 1.34v)
Set Uncore Freq to lowest possible setting (JUST NOT AUTO)
Set DRAM to Auto (for now, because it changes accordingly when the BCLK changes)

See if you can find something called Load Line Calibration set it to maximum or aggressive.

Boot into Windows and run IBT v2.54 on Very High for 10 runs. If it passes, go back into bios and set BCLK to 185, then run 10 more runs of IBT. Make notes of Gflops and temps for every run. If it passes, try 190 BCLK and IBT again, make notes. Then try 191, 192, 193, 194 BCLK and so forth and so on. Keep going until it fails to boot or until it fails IBT, OR until it gets too hot. *You now know the most important number to know, your board and chips maximum Base Clock on a Intel verified safe voltage.* Without knowing your base clock everything else is moot.

NOW, back off the BCLK about 5 spots down. If you managed to go above 205 just put it at or on 200 BCLK preferably. This (200 BCLK) number gives your entire system proper rounded numbers to work with AND the sweet spot for your RAM, which is 1600 mhz, or abouts.

NOW, lol, start raising your CPU's Ratio, again testing with each boot up. You want at LEAST 20, but may be able to go to 22 or 23 (I doubt it, since 23 is only 2 cores and only works with turbo enabled). Make sure all your power saving features, C-States, EIST a.k.a SpeedStep, Turbo etc are all disabled while doing these tests. The goal is to KNOW YOUR CHIP AND BOARDS LIMITS. Then overclock accordingly, and add what ever power savings features once you have the overclock you plan on settling on.

IMO, 200x20 or 191x22, or what ever puts you in the neighborhood of 3.8ghz to 4.4ghz is absolutely fine. I like 200 BCLK because it makes all the number rounded off beautifully, and my chip runs super cool and with low voltages at the 20 multiplier.

Good luck and keep us informed....


----------



## OCmember

I used the lowest multiplier the motherboard offered with the ram kit. It's an Elpida Hyper ic chipset. G.Skill Perfect Storm DDR3 2000 kit: although I've never been able to run them stable at that speed. I've always found my RAM to be the culprit to most of my BSOD crashes so I've mainly stuck with taking it easy on whatever kit I use. Plus if I can keep the volts down on the RAM it'll help the VTT.

Why would my motherboard not factor in an Uncore multiplier and instead use CPU style multipiers? I can manually set my Uncore to 1600MHz and set my RAM to 1066MHz which is basically 1.5x (1.5 x 1066 = 1599MHz)

I don't see QPI frequency, nor the QPI voltage? I'm assuming the QPI voltage is the same as VTT, right?

With this system I am not tyring to push things to the max whether it's volts, RAM speed, or Core MHz. I just don't want to infect the system with corrupt files. I normally don't do long stability tests either. Gaming will usualy find an error. I do run memory tests like Memtest HCI but other than that I'll do a little bit of Prime95 or IBT for a short period of time.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I used the lowest multiplier the motherboard offered with the ram kit. It's an Elpida Hyper ic chipset. G.Skill Perfect Storm DDR3 2000 kit: although I've never been able to run them stable at that speed. I've always found my RAM to be the culprit to most of my BSOD crashes so I've mainly stuck with taking it easy on whatever kit I use. Plus if I can keep the volts down on the RAM it'll help the VTT.


Fair enough but surely it runs at 1600mhz perfectly? You can always turn down voltages once you know it runs at a proper speed. In fact Intel says its perfectly safe up to 1.65, so do not worry about that. Set it high, find your boards wonderful limits, then back it down to where you want to run 24/7. THEN lower your RAM voltage to what ever you want. I run 1.5v on RAM and my sticks are cold to the touch. LOL
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Why would my motherboard not factor in an Uncore multiplier and instead use CPU style multipiers? I can manually set my Uncore to 1600MHz and set my RAM to 1066MHz which is basically 1.5x (1.5 x 1066 = 1599MHz)


It is using base clock speed as the basis for the Uncore multiplier ratio number, instead of the more common RAM speed. That is fine (its all simple math anyway), the drop down for Uncore in your bios still shows the normal frequency numbers, so your ok there. Just have a calculator handy, lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> *I don't see QPI frequency*, nor the QPI voltage? I'm assuming the QPI voltage is the same as VTT, right?


Well in your bios shot it is clearly showing "QPI Frequency". And yes, on EVGA and ASRock, I think QPI/Uncore voltage is listed as VTT. (I could be wrong)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> With this system I am not trying to push things to the max whether it's volts, RAM speed, or Core MHz. I just don't want to infect the system with corrupt files. I normally don't do long stability tests either. Gaming will usually find an error. I do run memory tests like Memtest HCI but other than that I'll do a little bit of Prime95 or IBT for a short period of time.


Well I'm not asking you to push your system to its max, just trying to show you how we find 4ghz for your Xeon. You dont really need 10 runs of IBT, its just recommended. What you need is overnight Prime95 runs though to make sure its stable. You mention you don't want corrupt files, well how is that possible if you do not find the sweet spot numbers for your board and chip?

I know no other way to do this. Unless you want an automatic button to do it for you, lol. I am sure you have a Auto Overclock feature on that board? I was just trying to help you find a safe 4ghz for a 24/7 daily, but there is no other way to surefire do it, that I know of, or recommend.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I used the lowest multiplier the motherboard offered with the ram kit. It's an Elpida Hyper ic chipset. G.Skill Perfect Storm DDR3 2000 kit: although I've never been able to run them stable at that speed. I've always found my RAM to be the culprit to most of my BSOD crashes so I've mainly stuck with taking it easy on whatever kit I use. .


RAM is usually the cause of BSODs with my PC as RAM. Setting the Uncore to high or low could be the culprit as well. Other times it could be the DRAM voltage or QPI Frequency. RAM will make your head spin sometimes.

Quote:


> Why would my motherboard not factor in an Uncore multiplier and instead use CPU style multipiers? I can manually set my Uncore to 1600MHz and set my RAM to 1066MHz which is basically 1.5x (1.5 x 1066 = 1599MHz)


As you change the Base Clock of the CPU the DRAM+Uncore will change as well and not vice versa. 1.5? Where you people constantly get this from? The Uncore Frequency should be two times the RAM Frequency for stability purposes........X2. If your RAM Frequency is 1066Mhz then your Uncore should 2 times higher = 2132Mhz. 1066 x 2 = 2132Mhz. Another example: if your RAM frequency is 1600Mhz the Uncore should be 3200Mhz. It'll definitely help with the BSODs when overclocking. You can push the uncore higher, but you'll more than likely have instability issues and would have to push more voltage through your CPU.

Quote:


> With this system I am not tyring to push things to the max whether it's volts, RAM speed, or Core MHz. I just don't want to infect the system with corrupt files. I normally don't do long stability tests either. Gaming will usualy find an error. I do run memory tests like Memtest HCI but other than that I'll do a little bit of Prime95 or IBT for a short period of time


You'll probably have to start slow to get to were you want. What is your target CPU speed?


----------



## OCmember

I'm not so sure about "perfectly" but I wish. Still testing the ram stability at that speed. I was able to boot a 200 BCLK and run a nice 1600MHz with a prefect 2400MHz Uncore. RAM voltage at 1.669v and VTT at 1.27v It auto'd a 9.9.9.24 for 800MHz. I might look into a 1.2v 1600MHz kit from New Egg.

Seems I got the Uncore under control. Didn't know it shouldn't be that high. I did see consistent improvements in Cinebench 11.5 @ 4.2GHz I scored a 10.85 when I ran my Uncore at 4GHz, Cores @ 4.2GHz, & 183 BCLK. Now that I have things set properly my scores have gone waay down. 4.2GHz even with 200 BCLK gives me 10.01 - 10.04 on average where it use to be 10.74 - 10.79 while using 183 BCLK and fiddling with some RAM timings with the Uncore set on Auto. None the less I'd rather run things within the specs.

I see the QPI Frequency but I don't see it displayed as MHz it shows up as GT ???

Now that I'm hip to the Uncore frequency guidlines I'm back to gettting a sweet overclock. Speed is my secondrary concern. My main concern is the max vcore I'm comfortable with. Right now I'd like to keep it under 1.3v So whatever GHz I can reach within that scale that should hold me over for a while. I did push the system last night a little. I used the 23x at 200 BCLK. 4.6GHz booted up at 1.36v but crashed within 10 seconds of IBT.


----------



## OCmember

1.5x is the lowest a Xeon can go with this X58 platoform. I think Bloomfield couldn't do 1.5x last I recall.

Well for heavens sakes. I think you meant stability issues. Lord forbid if my instability is having issues! Haha







J/K!









I hope to possibly reach 4.4GHz under 1.3v but I don't think it's going to happen. Maybe I'll try later on tonight when I get a little more free time


----------



## gradis

Hi

Been lurking reading this thread and I bit the bullet and got the x5650 recently.

Im using a msi x58 pro. Chip works fine but I could not access the uncore ratio as it was greyed out. I contacted msi support and they gave us a bios that wasnt listed on the support page but this did nothing to give me access to the uncore setting. My mb is defaulting to a x2 ratio with my memory and I cant change it. Can change memory but this leads to a auto x2 of uncore.

Now I was worried about this and reading the last page im a bit more worried. My blk is at 180 mem ratio 3 for 1088 or so memory. In hwinfo my uncore is at 3611. With this board it doesn't give you any info what the voltages are. You can change them but monitor them nope. So my qpi voltage is on auto and no idea what it is. Should I get a new pair of pants? Or change the qpi manually so it doesn't crap the bed so to speak.

Cheers


----------



## OCmember

Manually set it.


----------



## gradis

just did 1.30 with the same settings. time to test :/ If it goes ok il start to lower it


----------



## smartdroid

So are those cpu's pretty much limited to 1600MHz memory?


----------



## OCmember

No. I think I am the one limited with the kits I ended up with. The Elpida Hyper IC chips were very likely to die within a month or two from the reports I was reading when they first came out. Maybe 2009? The kit I have is a DDR3 2000 kit by G.Skill = Perfect Storm.

If the QPI voltage is what some people call the VTT then that just has to be within .500v of the memory voltage. The two X58 boards I own default the VTT/QPI to 1.2v That's why Intel stated the max voltage to use on a ram kit is 1.65v = .050 under the .500 spread which i assume allows for fluctuations.


----------



## gradis

well I never got started on the ram settings because of the above but they are 1.5 and 1.65 on xmp. as for the qpi volts 1.30 was fine 1.25 bsod and 1.27 ran intel burn mark ok.

this is a bit of a bummer tbh is it even safe to oc with the uncore unavailable to change? my 920 I could change it but not the 5650, so must be a quirk of the board.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Over 1.65v is what Intel says could seriously damage the CPU, but it is a normal voltage for overclocked RAM. Most dimms these days use 1.5v for 1600 mhz memory. The higher the RAM mhz the higher the voltage needed, usually, just like overclocking anything it usually needs more voltage to do it. The closer you run RAM voltage to CPU vcore voltage, the more stable it is and if your surpass more than 1/2 a volt in difference you run the risk of permanent cpu damage.

No one has seen or proven any benefit of running RAM higher than 18xx mhz or so, but it has been done. 1600 (give or take a few hundred mhz) just seems like the Westmere sweet spot. And try and remember Westmere's IMC was designed with 1333mhz RAM in the labs. I've ran 1866 (or something like that) and seen NOTHING in the way of improvement. What I did see was a need to raise voltages, so imo I'd rather use less voltage, have a cooler running system, and still have the same performance. Some RAM absolutely must have the higher voltage of 1.65v just to be stable. But if you do that just remember you can NOT drop CPU voltages below 1.15v, in fact I would stay above 1.25v, lol. Just to be safe...


----------



## gradis

is there any link between vcore and qpi volts?


----------



## smartdroid

So with higher binned RAM, like 2400 [email protected] one could expect a bit higher frequency than 1600?


----------



## gradis

well past a certain point you wont see any gains. When the higher clocked memory back in the day was about it was not worth it compared to say 1333 with good timings. Now fast memory is everywhere but thex58 chips cant use it so not worth it.


----------



## OCmember

There is a DDR3 1.25v 1600MHz kit on new egg. 134$ er something. was considering it

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231466


----------



## smartdroid

i've bought one X5650, and i have a 2400 cl10 dual channel memory kit laying arround, need to decide if i should sell it to buy a triple channel kit...our buy another one Like that and use only 3 sticks.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gradis*
> 
> is there any link between vcore and qpi volts?


Not really, but both voltages go to the chip, the vcore supplies the cpu's cores, and the qpi supplies the voltage to the memory controller, or at least that is what I currently believe. lol

I have always tried to keep both as close to each other as possible. I have no reason for this though, I just got into the habit and do not remember why.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> So with higher binned RAM, like 2400 [email protected] one could expect a bit higher frequency than 1600?


I have not seen anyone get past the 2000 mhz mark yet, but I could be wrong. The cpu still has to be willing to work with the higher ram frequency. Only your personal tests can answer the question though. On my RipJaws, I do not see any benefits from about 1500 to 1700 (or what ever the numbers translate to), which all of those give me my highest scores. Once I go below 1500 or so I start to see a drop in performance, and when I got above 1700 or so I start to see no gains. It does not post for me beyond 1866? (the last two numbers are a guess, as I do not remember the exact figure).

as usual YMMV


----------



## OCmember

I think to achieve 2000MHz DDR speeds you need to set the BCLK to 250. I'm just guessing though


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I think to achieve 2000MHz DDR speeds you need to set the BCLK to 250. I'm just guessing though


Yeah LOL, or push 2v and hope it don't smoke... or both?


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I think to achieve 2000MHz DDR speeds you need to set the BCLK to 250. I'm just guessing though


What? No, this is completely wrong.
The memory has multipliers, starting from 6x up to 20x AFAIK. These multipliers are linked to the BCLK speed. Therefore with BCLK of 200MHz, you'd need 10x multiplier to get a 2000MHz RAM and 8x multiplier for 1800MHz. With BCLK of 180-190MHz, you'd go for 10x memory multiplier and tighten the timings a bit.
Remember that uncore multiplier has to be at least 1.5x the memory multiplier. So if you put a 10x multiplier (2000MHz), you'd have to raise the uncore to at least 15x (3000MHz).
However, if you choose a higher memory multiplier, you might have to bump the uncore voltage to get things stable.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> The memory has multipliers


Yes. I understand that. Every-time I've tried to boot at 2000MHz XMP profile it will default to 667MHz - this is with everything on auto. The only way I've been able to see 700 or 800MHz was through overclocking the BCLK.


----------



## nitrobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yes. I understand that. Every-time I've tried to boot at 2000MHz XMP profile it will default to 667MHz - this is with everything on auto. The only way I've been able to see 700 or 800MHz was through overclocking the BCLK.


XMP profiles work properly on the systems past Sandy Bridge. Anything before that needs manual adjustments for the timings, speeds, voltages and multipliers. You cannot ever rely on Auto settings in your motherboard's BIOS. Always set fixed values in there. Otherwise the motherboard might decide to put in ridiculously high voltages through a bus that is not designed to handle them. For example - I've read somewhere that after the user entered 200 BCLK, the motherboard decided to run IOH at 1.40V and Uncore at 1.45V. Needless to say, the chip was permanently damaged and simply stopped working in the following days.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> XMP profiles work properly on the systems past Sandy Bridge. Anything before that needs manual adjustments for the timings, speeds, voltages and multipliers. You cannot ever rely on Auto settings in your motherboard's BIOS. Always set fixed values in there. Otherwise the motherboard might decide to put in ridiculously high voltages through a bus that is not designed to handle them. For example - I've read somewhere that after the user entered 200 BCLK, the motherboard decided to run IOH at 1.40V and Uncore at 1.45V. Needless to say, the chip was permanently damaged and simply stopped working in the following days.


Manually setting the frequency to 1000MHz, 8.8.8.21 @ 1.65v doesn't work. The top ratio for the kit is a 5


----------



## nitrobg

Try loosening the timings to 11-11-11-31 and see if it posts. Afterwards start tightening them. If it doesn't post even with 11s - you've got a problem with something else, perhaps the uncore voltage - try raising it a few steps higher.


----------



## OCmember

Doesn't work. It changes the Ratio.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Over 1.65v is what Intel says could seriously damage the CPU, but it is a normal voltage for overclocked RAM. Most dimms these days use 1.5v for 1600 mhz memory. The higher the RAM mhz the higher the voltage needed, usually, just like overclocking anything it usually needs more voltage to do it. The closer you run RAM voltage to CPU vcore voltage, the more stable it is and if your surpass more than 1/2 a volt in difference you run the risk of permanent cpu damage.


Over 1.65v will only damage your chip if it is more than 0.5v higher than your *QPI/Vtt* voltage, not vcore. Memory has nothing to do with vcore, so you can set them completely independently. This is why most motherboards default QPI/Vtt at 1.2v, it allows you to run your RAM at 1.65v without risking you IMC.

@OCmember, first off are you running the latest version of your BIOS? Have you checked on Biosmods if there's a modded version of the latest release?

Secondly, QPI voltage will affect the stability of a memory overclock. For X58, that includes anything above 1066MHz. Basically if the IMC doesn't get enough voltage, it won't matter how much you crank up the DRAM volts, it still won't be stable.

When you say it changes the ratio, do you mean it doesn't save the ratio, or does it try to POST and then reset to something lower when it fails?


----------



## OCmember

I checked before I installed an L5639 Xeon and today it's still the same bios. Just searched for 'Asrock bios Mod X58' and it turned up nothing.

I can basically use only a few options. I'll set it to the XMP profile and it doesn't reboot at 2000MHz, it'll be at some 666MHz ratio. I'll take a screen shot and edit the post


----------



## OCmember

I set the BLCK back to 133 just to show what it offers and I choose the 933MHz options (1866MHz):



rebooted and this is what I got:



5:1 max supported ratio - per HWinfo64:


----------



## DividebyZERO

So my x5650 is pushing quadfire 290x nicely however i am having an issue with turbo. I know evga boards had options to force turbo on constantly. i am not getting turbo multi on mine when OC, so right now im limited 210x20... any suggestions or info?


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Well crap, after cleaning my block and putting it back together i now have an issue.. One of the 6 screws won't really tighten enough, it just goes around and around through the copper part of the block.. i guess that means my block is now useless as it could potentially leak?

Looks like it's screwed if that's the case.. i just ordered a pump controller as well to quieten this old noisy MCR 320 Drive, now i don't know whether to just get a quiet air cooler or get the H220x if it works with the backplate for my Apogee XT block, i was looking at moving away from water because of the extra noise from the pump.. now i don't know what to do.


----------



## alancsalt

If that's an EK block you may find that there are two different screw lengths, and you are trying to put a micron short one into a nanoteenth deeper hole..?


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> If that's an EK block you may find that there are two different screw lengths, and you are trying to put a micron short one into a nanoteenth deeper hole..?


It's a Swiftech block, all the screws look the same length each side to me.


----------



## alancsalt

I haven't used those, but with my EK and a spinning screw I discovered a tiny difference in length. If not then you might salvage with a tiny thread tap and new screw?


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> I haven't used those, but with my EK and a spinning screw I discovered a tiny difference in length. If not then you might salvage with a tiny thread tap and new screw?


Don't think it's possible to tap a different screw in, this is the block  it's one of the 3 screws on each side, a middle one.


----------



## alancsalt

Ouch...If the thread is deeper than the screw length you might get away with a slightly longer one, but matching the existing screw head could be really tough.


----------



## buttface420

i know this sounds ghetto but you might be able to wrap a little teflon tape around the screw,it would be water proof and shoukd tighten a little more....i dunno i never use watercooling so if totally stupid please disregard.


----------



## DividebyZERO

I am on a custom waterlook and cpu WB is heatkiller 3.0...

How are these temps and gflops for the current OC on my x5650?




I posted this in the x58 thread but its probably more relevant here. Also, wondering if anyone knows what the limit is usually for this cpu on bclk?


----------



## OCmember

Wow, how are you getting 88-90GFlops ??


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wow, how are you getting 88-90GFlops ??


not sure I did anything special, I did turn off HT though. I also thought that was the normal gflops? Whats the normal range?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wow, how are you getting 88-90GFlops ??


Maybe you use a different version of LinX, or a different program all together?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Maybe you use a different version of LinX, or a different program all together?


Makes sense. I was using IBT 2.54


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> not sure I did anything special, I did turn off HT though. I also thought that was the normal gflops? Whats the normal range?


Was using IBT 2.54. Don't know what's normal. I guess the best baseline would start by coming from the same app, lol


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Makes sense. I was using IBT 2.54


Yeah that would do it. My friend and I were getting different results with pretty much the same settings, but on different boards. Finally after a few hours of scratching our heads he asked me what version of IBT I was using, which was the latest version. He was still using a 3 or 4 year old version and on Windows 7 when I'm on 8.1 using the newest IBT version. He then upgraded to the same version and bam we were getting the same scores. lol


----------



## Agenesis

I don't suppose having too low of a ram voltage (1.3~1.5) will hurt these processors? I remember 1.65v was the norm for x58 but then sb hit and it's suddenly 1.5, now we've got modules using 1.4 and 1.3.

Been tweaking my L5639 again (after an entire year of rock solid 4ghz) and found that by adjusting the pll voltage allows me to lower the vcore and vtt by a significant amount.


----------



## GENXLR

wait what? what PLL settings? if i bump mine at all, it's a BSOD


----------



## Agenesis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> wait what? what PLL settings? if i bump mine at all, it's a BSOD


Maybe mine is a different beast since I'm forced to use 18x multi and 221 blck. The stock pll voltage is 1.8 for most boards and I'm using 1.925.

Vcore might look a little high but I'm still tweaking the ram and don't want cpu instability throwing me off.


----------



## alancsalt

Maybe your xeons are different, but with my 950/970/980 I ran lower pll. I never needed to go over 1.8v ... ran 1.5v from 4.2GHz to 4.6GHz ...??


----------



## GENXLR

my P6T won't allow under a 1.8 PLL, at 1.88PLL, I BSOD immediatly.

With 191blck at 22 multi, i need so far 1.36 vcore and i get 76Gflops


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Maybe your xeons are different, but with my 950/970/980 I ran lower pll. I never needed to go over 1.8v ... ran 1.5v from 4.2GHz to 4.6GHz ...??


Same here. I never had to go above 1.8v PLL for high overclocks with low CPU usage. CPU PLL is known to kill CPUs. Also I believe 1.8v is Intel stock I haven't heard of anyone going under 1.8v. Even at my 4.8Ghz + OC's I didn't need to mess around with the PLL. The moment I did mess with the CPU PLL my CPU made some weird noises and didn't want to post. Never touched it again although I had been warned for many years prior. I never mess around with PCI-E, CPU PLL and few other options that much.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agenesis*
> 
> Been tweaking my L5639 again (after an entire year of rock solid 4ghz) and found that by adjusting the pll voltage allows me to lower the vcore and vtt by a significant amount.


Yeah it must be your CPU or something. Be careful with PLL voltage.

I only needed 1.31vCore for 3974.4Mhz - 220BCLK - x18. My CPU PLL was 1.8v.

For 4.1Ghz my PLL was still default at 1.8v. The vCore went slightly over Intel recommendation 1.36vCore. 4.1Ghz was solely for a few benchmarks.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Would my x5670 at about 4ghz bottleneck a gtx 970 much if at all, and would it bottleneck 2?

Is it enough to keep up until Skylake comes out, or should i upgrade now?


----------



## GENXLR

You should be fine, but we have distrubing reports of a memory issues causing SLI'ed 900's to not boot(correct me if it's posting as well) into windows.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Memory low gap is on my evga board bios. Here is what it says


----------



## GENXLR

Yes, but my P6T doesn't have such an option.... does it?


----------



## DividebyZERO

Doesn't appear so, i looked in the manual for your board. Guess not sorry :-(


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

I have an Asus board as well, what is this problem? Won't work with sli but will work with one card?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I have an Asus board as well, what is this problem? Won't work with sli but will work with one card?


might want to email Asus and see what setting is the same thing in the Asus boards.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> might want to email Asus and see what setting is the same thing in the Asus boards.


Sorry i didn't explain well enough, what i meant to ask was what is the issue that people are having? Is it that 970's won't boot with Asus boards? Or that they won't boot in sli?


----------



## GENXLR

They don't boot in SLI into windows. it appears to be something stupid with windows.

Reallocating hardware memory seems to solve the issue


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> They don't boot in SLI into windows. it appears to be something stupid with windows.
> 
> Reallocating hardware memory seems to solve the issue


Hmm i see, that could be a problem.. i think i will be happy with just 1 card for a while since i run at 1080p. Guess that means our old Asus boards are screwed if we want to run 2 then?


----------



## GENXLR

no, there is a way around it, I will have to keep looking, but i think we can utilize adjusting some settings to fix it


----------



## loop16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Would my x5670 at about 4ghz bottleneck a gtx 970 much if at all, and would it bottleneck 2?
> 
> Is it enough to keep up until Skylake comes out, or should i upgrade now?


Let's forget about those xeons, Has a core i5 750 (lynnfield) oced enough power to handle ANY dual vga setup (SLI or Crossfire) now and future let's say at Full HD resolution?
THE answer is definitely YES OF COURSE!!!!!!
I can not tell exactly since when the marketing section from intel and amd convince customers THAT cpu is So critical component in terms of gaming
The first and the main critical component in ALL Scenario worst cases, IS YOUR GPU, Some years before to tell the difference between cpus in 3d performance tests were lowering the resolution so much e.x. 800*600 to see which cpu is faster, Now have convience their customers that 3-10% is improvement Really since when, if you have a ge force770 at fullhd and play crysis 3 at 70fps a faster cpu how will improve this 2-3 fps will you understand this, offcourse NO, but you will start to try to convience r self that r upgrade worth the extra money, Of cource to be correct i dont mean to pair a radeon 290 with a celeron e 1500 But saying if my i7 990x isnt enough for 3 way sli and with i7 5960x it will be its just idiotic, In other words in a 4k setup if your game is unplayable with i7 900, it will be unplayable with your 5960 too, Better change gpus, power supply or drivers, But not cpu

I ll give you an example from my experience First xeon x5650 clocked @ 4.4 Ghz pair with gtx 660 (not mine) and a fresh windows install (7 sp1) dont remember drivers ver, crysis 3 at 1920x1080 (high, very high settings) fraps gives at first level which is the most heavy in terms of graphics 45-100 fps
Now with my 2nd pc core 2 duo [email protected] 4.0Ghz the same vga fraps gives 36-90 fps no lags no nothing, The test above happens only for fun , But it is more than obviou that if we had an hd 5450 or geforce 9400 in our rigs xeon Has nothing to offer, So i dont understand COMPANYS MARKETING


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> Let's forget about those xeons, Has a core i5 750 (lynnfield) oced enough power to handle ANY dual vga setup (SLI or Crossfire) now and future let's say at Full HD resolution?
> THE answer is definitely YES OF COURSE!!!!!!
> I can not tell exactly since when the marketing section from intel and amd convince customers THAT cpu is So critical component in terms of gaming
> The first and the main critical component in ALL Scenario worst cases, IS YOUR GPU, Some years before to tell the difference between cpus in 3d performance tests were lowering the resolution so much e.x. 800*600 to see which cpu is faster, Now have convience their customers that 3-10% is improvement Really since when, if you have a ge force770 at fullhd and play crysis 3 at 70fps a faster cpu how will improve this 2-3 fps will you understand this, offcourse NO, but you will start to try to convience r self that r upgrade worth the extra money, Of cource to be correct i dont mean to pair a radeon 290 with a celeron e 1500 But saying if my i7 990x isnt enough for 3 way sli and with i7 5960x it will be its just idiotic, In other words in a 4k setup if your game is unplayable with i7 900, it will be unplayable with your 5960 too, Better change gpus, power supply or drivers, But not cpu
> 
> I ll give you an example from my experience First xeon x5650 clocked @ 4.4 Ghz pair with gtx 660 (not mine) and a fresh windows install (7 sp1) dont remember drivers ver, crysis 3 at 1920x1080 (high, very high settings) fraps gives at first level which is the most heavy in terms of graphics 45-100 fps
> Now with my 2nd pc core 2 duo [email protected] 4.0Ghz the same vga fraps gives 36-90 fps no lags no nothing, The test above happens only for fun , But it is more than obviou that if we had an hd 5450 or geforce 9400 in our rigs xeon Has nothing to offer, So i dont understand COMPANYS MARKETING


I agree with most of this except software plays a big role. Some games are terribly coded and thus a faster cpu can help by sheer clock speed. Others are multi threaded heavily and benefit from more cores. So its harder to make a complete blanket statement but over all is mostly accurate


----------



## nitrobg

I'm using 2 crossfired 7950s on P6T Deluxe V2 and everything is completely fine. Not a clue about SLI but it should work as well.
All P6T series boards can be crossflashed to one another. I believe that P6T SE can be crossflashed to P6T Deluxe to enable SLI.


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

Anyone running SLI on a X58 platform? My Rampage III Formula supports PCIE 2.0 x16 in slots 1 and 3 for full x16 / x16 configuration. GPU-Z reports card in slot 1 running at PCIE 2.0 x16 but card in slot 3 running at PCIE 2.0 x8 during full screen 3D applications. I have not been able to resolve this, been browsing google like a mad man









Not sure if its a GPU-Z, driver, or MB issue. I feel like PCIE 2.0 @ x8 is causing a decent bottleneck with this beast. GPU utilization is not always pegged in benchmarks. BTW CPU is a X5660 @ 4.6 GHz.


----------



## Agenesis

Try another program that shows pcie speed and check again. Maybe occt or something in windowed mode so you can catch it switching back and forth. I know for a fact pcie downclocks itself to 1x if you're idling. Also make sure your power mode is set to performance.


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

I do not know of any other program that shows PCIE speed real time other than GPUZ. I have dual monitors and can see the switch while running 2 instances of GPUZ one for each card and then executing a full screen 3D applications such as Valley. Both cards idle at PCIE 1.1 x16 / x8 and then jump to PCIE 2.0 x16 / x8. I just cannot force PCIE 2.0 x16 / x16 for both GPU's.


----------



## DividebyZERO

I know 9xx series is new and all, but if you are running [email protected] i doubt its bottle necking if at all. However yeah if its supposed to be x16 that kinda sucks. Maybe check and see if anything else enabled takes lanes away like extra SATA controller or anything? It's good to know you can drop 2 970's in it and have it working out the gate. Others are having issues with SLI apparently.

I am rather happy with my X58/ x5650 for now. I am really surprised at how strong a 74$ cpu is ...i ran more FSE and still need more tweaking but i will have to add another psu since mine is capped now.


----------



## loop16

We re lucky as users this time that having these levels of performance for so little money, but remember xeon is selling now for 80 usd, its price was 1000usd for x5650 and 1200 for x5660


----------



## DividebyZERO

Whats the recommended uncore speed and whats the top end avg for most of these xeons? I've been looking to see if it helps at all with benching?


----------



## loop16

For me with xeon x5650 my cpu maximizes its performance in beches with 1.8 ratio between dram;uncore frequency, other than that its becoming slower unless cpu frequency


----------



## starxstar

Hi everyone.

I have just installed my new x5660 into my Asus P6T SE MB. everything is fine except that the ram shows only 4gb out of 12gb.
anyone know the reason and the way to fix it.

THX...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Whats the recommended uncore speed and whats the top end avg for most of these xeons? I've been looking to see if it helps at all with benching?


I have to agree with loop16 as it seems to be around 1.8 or so after reading the entire thread. I set mine at something like 1.875 or whatever it was lol. I got zero benefit going any higher than that.

Calculation is 1.8 x Ram speed. So for me this is 1.875 x 1600 = 30xx mhz uncore. These are not exact numbers as I'm just drawing from memory.


----------



## starxstar

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> Hi everyone.
> 
> I have just installed my new x5660 into my Asus P6T SE MB. everything is fine except that the ram shows only 4gb out of 12gb.
> anyone know the reason and the way to fix it.
> 
> THX...


just to clarify my issue

http://www.gulfup.com/?HeRGYt

I need ur support guys


----------



## bill1024

I had to clear the bios with the battery removed to get my memory back a couple times on my P6T deluxe V2.
Did you try that yet?


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I had to clear the bios with the battery removed to get my memory back a couple times on my P6T deluxe V2.
> Did you try that yet?


I'll try it and feed you back


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I had to clear the bios with the battery removed to get my memory back a couple times on my P6T deluxe V2.
> Did you try that yet?


I did it 4 times and still 4gb. thank you anyway


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> I did it 4 times and still 4gb. thank you anyway


Try moving your sticks around. Maybe there isn't good contact. Sounds like a memory controller problem to me though.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mAnBrEaTh*
> 
> Anyone running SLI on a X58 platform? My Rampage III Formula supports PCIE 2.0 x16 in slots 1 and 3 for full x16 / x16 configuration. GPU-Z reports card in slot 1 running at PCIE 2.0 x16 but card in slot 3 running at PCIE 2.0 x8 during full screen 3D applications. I have not been able to resolve this, been browsing google like a mad man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if its a GPU-Z, driver, or MB issue. I feel like PCIE 2.0 @ x8 is causing a decent bottleneck with this beast. GPU utilization is not always pegged in benchmarks. BTW CPU is a X5660 @ 4.6 GHz.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I'm running SLI on the X58 platform. My Sabertooth X58 supports two full dual x16. In *GPU-Z BOTH* cards are running @x16 2.0.

I doubt if [x8] is causing a bottleneck. X79 had PCI-E slots running @ x8 2.0 and no one complained. There were test conducted and x8 performed just fine with some of the higher end GPUs back in 2012-2013. X79 also has CPUs with the PCI lanes directly on the CPU, unlike the X58. I'm sure that matters a lot.

I completely understand that you want full @ x16\x16. You can try re-seating your cards and checking the manual to ensure you are using the correct PCI-E slots. I can't really speak much on the Rampage III.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> I did it 4 times and still 4gb. thank you anyway


You might want to also try one stick at a time, in each slot (yes I know that is time consuming). Just to make sure each stick is seen and in each slot. Then you know nothing is wrong with the memory or the motherboard slots. In that case its either a BIOS bug or a CPU IMC problem, or an improperly seated CPU..


----------



## Starbomba

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> I did it 4 times and still 4gb. thank you anyway
> 
> 
> 
> You might want to also try one stick at a time, in each slot (yes I know that is time consuming). Just to make sure each stick is seen and in each slot. Then you know nothing is wrong with the memory or the motherboard slots. In that case its either a BIOS bug or a CPU IMC problem, or an improperly seated CPU..
Click to expand...

I would also check the pins on the socket. That is exactly how i killed my RIIIE, after damaging some pins.

I also see Windows can see 4 GB, but CPU-Z can see 12. You might wanna follow the steps on this guide (it'd for W7, but W8 isn't that much different) to remove any limitations windows is imposing on itself.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> I did it 4 times and still 4gb. thank you anyway


Did you change anything else besides swapping the processor? Anything, however small, might be the cause of this.

My guess though is a faulty IMC.


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

I've tried everything I can imagine to get the 2nd PCIE slot to run at x16 without any luck. Running a single card in the 3rd PCIE slot still vendors PCEI 2.0 @ x8. Either its a defective MB, bios, or driver issue


----------



## starxstar

HELL YEAH!!! My problem fixed and the memory same as before 12gb. I tired everything with no luck finally I just reseated the CPU and BAAAM everything is gd so far. NOW OVERCLOCKING.....


----------



## mAnBrEaTh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> HELL YEAH!!! My problem fixed and the memory same as before 12gb. I tired everything with no luck finally I just reseated the CPU and BAAAM everything is gd so far. NOW OVERCLOCKING.....


Maybe I will try and reseat my CPU then pray for PCIE 2.0 x16 / x16


----------



## starxstar

First I would like to thanks all guys here especially Kane for this awesome thread.

After I fixed my ram problem I started overclocking my CPU. but it looks like there is a small problem.

I overclocked my CPU to 4.7ghz with 23 multiplier but once I start cine-bench test the multiplier drops to 21 and once the test finish it goes back to 23 or 24 if c-state enabled.

http://www.gulfup.com/?0wyOdI
http://www.gulfup.com/?sKuTxj

I think that my Motherboard ASUS P6T SE is limited to 21 when it comes to multi-core tasks. I don't know So I'll leave it for experts.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Awesome @starxstar!!!

I am working with a x5650 here, so my multi is limited to 20 because for whatever reason turbo doesn't seem to be working. Mine is not an ES so maybe it's an EVGA issue?

i'm currently at 4.5ish @ 1.36vcore so far so good.


http://valid.x86.fr/1ez8fl

290x single gpu FS 12172 on14.9 drivers
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4238679?

4x290x FSE 16802 on 13.12 drivers
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2869960
Made 49th place on HOF list i don't see any x58 around in there. Anyways will be pushing for more there as well.

Gonna keep pushing! i have a feeling bclk is running out very soon so i may not get much further. However i am more than happy with what i have so far.


----------



## nitrobg

P6T Deluxe V2's BCLK is always 2-4MHz below the value set in the BIOS. If I set it to 210MHz, CPU-Z reads it as 206-208MHz.
What could be the reason of this?
It started happening recently. Before that the clock was just fine within 0.2MHz of the set value.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mAnBrEaTh*
> 
> Maybe I will try and reseat my CPU then pray for PCIE 2.0 x16 / x16


I honestly don't think that would help, but I've seen stranger things. Go for it.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> First I would like to thanks all guys here especially Kane for this awesome thread.


So who is Kane? j/k. Thanks man. This thread does have a lot of awesome people in it. Friendly and helpful overall.

Quote:


> I overclocked my CPU to 4.7ghz with 23 multiplier but once I start cine-bench test the multiplier drops to 21 and once the test finish it goes back to 23 or 24 if c-state enabled.


That's actually normal. I usually disable EIST+Turbo along with all C-State settings for a constant clock when benchmarking or performing certain task. The CPU will downclock no matter what anyways, but as long as my constant clock is waiting for me that's all I need.

@DividebyZERO

If you are trying to join the club then http://valid.x86.fr/1ez8fl won't get you in. Remember your "Submitted by" field must contain your OCN username. If you weren't trying to join the club then nevermind







.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> P6T Deluxe V2's BCLK is always 2-4MHz below the value set in the BIOS. If I set it to 210MHz, CPU-Z reads it as 206-208MHz.
> What could be the reason of this?
> It started happening recently. Before that the clock was just fine within 0.2MHz of the set value.


I have no idea, but I have the opposite. My BCLK is usually a bit higher than what is set in the BIOS. I guess it varies per board manufacture.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My BCLK is usually a bit higher than what is set in the BIOS. I guess it varies per board manufacture.


Same here, it always seems to be about .5 higher than what is set in BIOS. According to CPU-Z anyway...


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I honestly don't think that would help, but I've seen stranger things. Go for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So who is Kane? j/k. Thanks man. This thread does have a lot of awesome people in it. Friendly and helpful overall.
> That's actually normal. I usually disable EIST+Turbo along with all C-State settings for a constant clock when benchmarking or performing certain task. The CPU will downclock no matter what anyways, but as long as my constant clock is waiting for me that's all I need.
> 
> @DividebyZERO
> 
> If you are trying to join the club then http://valid.x86.fr/1ez8fl won't get you in. Remember your "Submitted by" field must contain your OCN username. If you weren't trying to join the club then nevermind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> I have no idea, but I have the opposite. My BCLK is usually a bit higher than what is set in the BIOS. I guess it varies per board manufacture.


Thanks "Kana"

Actually turbo & C-states are all already disabled. I think it kind of tempreture limite or power limite. It runs great till Temp reaches 60 then the multiplier start dropping to 22 then 21 and stey there. I tried lower BULK where temps stey below 60 and the multiplier didn't change at all even when cinebench or any heavy load is working. I'll post the solution once I get to it.

THX again "Kana"


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Same here, it always seems to be about .5 higher than what is set in BIOS. According to CPU-Z anyway...


Yeah I was going by CPU-z as well. Actually I've noticed that other monitoring software reports nearly the samething.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> Thanks "Kana"
> 
> Actually turbo & C-states are all already disabled. I think it kind of tempreture limite or power limite. It runs great till Temp reaches 60 then the multiplier start dropping to 22 then 21 and stey there. I tried lower BULK where temps stey below 60 and the multiplier didn't change at all even when cinebench or any heavy load is working. I'll post the solution once I get to it.
> 
> THX again "Kana"


Who is this Kana guy? Yeah I think you need to use RealTemp and take a look at your temperatures. Your CPU is more than likely overheating. On my MB I have a function named "CPU TM function". Basically if enabled the CPU will throttle in order to cool down and prevent damage. If Disabled [be careful] the temperature monitoring will be ignored and the CPU won't throttle at all even if the temperature exceeds the threshold. I think it could also be named "CPU Thermal something" as well. I'm not sure if all motherboards have this feature, but some do.

That could be your issue. If it is the issue you might want to re-apply your TIM.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> @DividebyZERO
> 
> If you are trying to join the club then http://valid.x86.fr/1ez8fl won't get you in. Remember your "Submitted by" field must contain your OCN username. If you weren't trying to join the club then nevermind biggrin.gif.


http://valid.x86.fr/sxv60v

I am still working this thing, but i stopped temporarily to do some game benches.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/sxv60v
> 
> I am still working this thing, but i stopped temporarily to do some game benches.


I'll get you added with the next update. Just check the topic [ http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club ] for the update. Wait for the approval post before placing the code in your signature please. I think there might be a few more people I need to check out before updating the list tomorrow.


----------



## Rangerscott

Anyone put their X56xx against a 980X?


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> First I would like to thanks all guys here especially Kane for this awesome thread.
> 
> After I fixed my ram problem I started overclocking my CPU. but it looks like there is a small problem.
> 
> I overclocked my CPU to 4.7ghz with 23 multiplier but once I start cine-bench test the multiplier drops to 21 and once the test finish it goes back to 23 or 24 if c-state enabled.
> 
> http://www.gulfup.com/?0wyOdI
> http://www.gulfup.com/?sKuTxj
> 
> I think that my Motherboard ASUS P6T SE is limited to 21 when it comes to multi-core tasks. I don't know So I'll leave it for experts.


I believe its x23 for 1 core, x22 for 2 cores and x21 for 4 cores when active.


----------



## Agenesis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Awesome @starxstar!!!
> 
> I am working with a x5650 here, so my multi is limited to 20 because for whatever reason turbo doesn't seem to be working. Mine is not an ES so maybe it's an EVGA issue?
> 
> i'm currently at 4.5ish @ 1.36vcore so far so good.
> 
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/1ez8fl
> 
> 290x single gpu FS 12172 on14.9 drivers
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4238679?
> 
> 4x290x FSE 16802 on 13.12 drivers
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2869960
> Made 49th place on HOF list i don't see any x58 around in there. Anyways will be pushing for more there as well.
> 
> Gonna keep pushing! i have a feeling bclk is running out very soon so i may not get much further. However i am more than happy with what i have so far.


Mind sharing your settings? I have a 5650 on my way as well for a evga e760 rig and it would be a tremendous help if I can get a quick template of that amazing oc


----------



## smartdroid

Do you guys think that 2ghz cl9 1t memory it's slightly above average?

http://valid.x86.fr/u1ru4k









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Anyone put their X56xx against a 980X?


They have the same architecture, so they should be the same clock per clock.


----------



## WoKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> Do you guys think that 2ghz cl9 1t memory it's slightly above average?
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/u1ru4k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have the same architecture, so they should be the same clock per clock.


What about x5670 vs e5-2665?

And, I keep forgetting but all 1366 or dual 1366 mobos don't have sata 3 right?


----------



## Rangerscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> Do you guys think that 2ghz cl9 1t memory it's slightly above average?
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/u1ru4k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have the same architecture, so they should be the same clock per clock.


Talking about real world performance battle.


----------



## smartdroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> What about x5670 vs e5-2665?
> 
> And, I keep forgetting but all 1366 or dual 1366 mobos don't have sata 3 right?


Well that's an lga 2011, 8 core 16 thread cpu..so it's superior in every single way, but it's a locked cpu.

X58 it's a very old chipset and doesn't have native sata 3 support...there are some motherboards with add on sata 3 controllers but they are still a far cry from the real thing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Talking about real world performance battle.


Real world they are the same clock per clock









It all goes on how far you can push those chips...990X it's better binned and should clock higher on average.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> Do you guys think that 2ghz cl9 1t memory it's slightly above average?


Maybe, but going about 2000Mhz isn't really worth it on the X58 platform. You'll usually see less than 1 percent increase during many test. Other times you'll see higher clocked memory [with lower CL around 9] performance worse. DDR3-1660Mhz also allows for tighter timings. Some users can get their system down CAS7. This "limit" is all Intel fault which I believe relates to their marketing schemes in the end. They already gave us X58 users to much "bang for our buck". Well the buck stops at Intel.

Also if you want to see my RAM test go back to the first page and check the section:
_"DDR3- 1600Mhz vs 1900Mhz vs 2000Mhz Performance % Comparisons"_

It's at the very bottom of my review and relates to gaming. Even during my synthetic benchmarks I didn't notice much of a difference in the scores. Not only that but my 1600Mhz was capable of getting the same scores as the higher clocked memory in some circumstances.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rangerscott*
> 
> Anyone put their X56xx against a 980X?


I know haven't. I believe I did include a little i7-980X in my review somewhere. I was mainly going for Sandy-E and Ivy-E high=end\Hexa Core "K" series for comparisons. I thought that would be better for X58 users in the end rather than comparing my X58 Hexa core [Xeon] with another X58 Hexa core [980X] when there is plenty of 980X data out there on the net for comparisons. On average, from what I can remember, the 980X's and 990X's scores weren't that much different clock from clock. They were about the same in terms of performance. It all depended on the overclock, RAM and other settings. Usually the i7-980X\990X had to use to pretty EXTREME overclocking to get scores much higher than my scores.


----------



## smartdroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Maybe, but going about 1600Mhz isn't really worth it on the X58 platform. You'll usually see less than 1 percent increase during many test. Other times you'll see higher clocked memory [with lower CL around 9] performance worse. DDR-3-1660Mhz also allows for tighter timings. Some users can get their system down CAS7. This "limit" is all Intel fault which I believe relates to their marketing schemes in the end. They already gave us X58 users to much "bang for our buck". Well the buck stops at Intel.


I've done my testing and this was by far the setting that gives me better bandwidth and latency.

1600mhz



2000mhz



I agree that isn't worth it, i just happen to have this memory laying around, i can get 1600 cl7 no problem but 2000 cl9 gives me better bandwith...the limit it's the IMC on the CPU not marketing










See ivy-e with lower binned memory


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> I've done my testing and this was by far the setting that gives me better bandwidth and latency.


I just noticed that I posted "going about *1600Mhz* isn't really worth it on the X58 platform". I meant to say that *2000Mhz* wasn't worth it in the end, or really anything higher than 1866Mhz. I edited my previous post.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*


I see, but I with my flat 1600Mhz I got better results than my test with DDR3-2000Mhz: Here are my results with 1600Mhz:

*X5660 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz*










I am running 4.6Ghz. I guess I should run 4Ghz for a better comparison.


----------



## smartdroid

Yes mate, it does make a diference and if you can set your uncore frequency to 3 GHz...if i could i would run 4.6


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> Yes mate, it does make a diference and if you can set your uncore frequency to 3 GHz...if i could i would run 4.6


I simply don't see it. Other than a few extremely slightly better scores the performance was the same. The X58 needed one more revision to get us the extra horsepower we desire, but Intel calls that revision X79 lol. Synthetic and gaming showed little to no difference with everything on my board highly overclocked. It some cases I could get the same scores with 1600Mhz as well as 2000+Mhz.

Edit:

Ok so here are my 4Ghz + 1600Mhz results:










For the X58 platform 1600Mhz is really all you need for several reasons.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor [Very High + Medium Texture Quality] - 2560x1600p*
*- Note: Unofficial SLI Support -*



GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [344.11 WHQL Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 41 minutes 17 seconds
Captured 393,643 frames
FPS Avg: 41fps
FPS Max: 97fps
FPS Min: 15fps
*FPS Min Caliber ™*: 29fps
Frame time Avg: 22.5ms

*-FPS Min Caliber?-*
_You'll notice that I added something named "FPS Min Caliber", well that is if anyone even look at these charts nowadays. Basically FPS Min Caliber is something I came up to differentiate between FPS absolute minimum which could simply be a data loading point during gameplay etc. The FPS Min Caliber ™ is basically my way of letting you know lowest FPS average you'll see during gameplay. The minimum fps [FPS min] can be very misleading. I plan to continue using this in the future as well._

Now to the results, this is much better in terms of playability. There was no button lag or stuttering and the game was smooth. Very High + Medium Texture Quality still looks amazing. No complaints from a 2GB GPU user. Also remember that this game doesn't officially support SLI just yet, but I have managed to get it working on my PC.

*Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor [Ultra Settings + HD Texture Pack] - 2560x1440p*
*- Note: Unofficial SLI Support -*



GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI @ 988Mhz [344.11 WHQL Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1600Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 33 minutes 29 seconds
Captured 49,095 frames
FPS Avg: 25fps [24.58fps]
FPS Max: 65fps
FPS Min: 6fps
*FPS Min Caliber ™*: 12fps
Frame time Avg: 40.5ms

*-FPS Min Caliber?-*
You'll notice that I added something named "FPS Min Caliber", well that is if anyone even look at these charts nowadays. Basically FPS Min Caliber is something I came up to differentiate between FPS absolute minimum which could simply be a data loading point during gameplay etc. The FPS Min Caliber ™ is basically my way of letting you know lowest FPS average you'll see during gameplay. The minimum fps [FPS min] can be very misleading. I plan to continue using this in the future as well. [/I]

In order to run this game with the HD Texture Pack you need at least a 6GB GPU. Obviously I have a 2GB GPU, but hell I ran the test anyways. Also SLI isn't currently supported in this game. I did find a away to get it to work with both GTX 670 cards. As you can see above the cards just can't handle this game at 1400p + Ultra. I'll run another test at 1080p, but being that the texture pack requires a 6GB card I'm not sure how much more I'll gain.

The Ultra settings won't help my cause much either. GTX 670 users will need to stick to "Medium Texture" settings and "Very High" Graphic Quality settings. The game still looks really good regardless. As far as Ultra Settings & HD Content goes, it's playable, but the experience is pretty bad. There's plenty of button lag, random micro lag, stutter, and the random low FPS doesn't help either. 40.5ms frame time is simply unforgiving. 2GB users should stick with Very High and Medium Texture settings for sure.

I will eventually get around to testing 1080p Ultra and Very High settings as well.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agenesis*
> 
> Mind sharing your settings? I have a 5650 on my way as well for a evga e760 rig and it would be a tremendous help if I can get a quick template of that amazing oc


I will try to snap some pics tomorrow, wish we could screenshot like the new BIOS on most new boards.


----------



## DanStp

Hi Folks,

I am getting back onto Xeon thing with a X5670, and a MSI Big Bang motherboard. I should have them this week. My old L5639 system died when my son spilled a drink down thru the radiator on top

So after all that boring info. What is the best way to run or add on SATA III to the X58A platform? I would like to use trim, for 2 or later more SSD's. I will not be running raid.
My old Gigabyte X58A OC motherboard had the better Marvell 9182 controller, but the MSI has the crappy 9128.

I have been looking at the Apricorn Solo X2. Has anyone here used that on a X58/LGA 1366 system?

Or has anyone put in one of the M.2 PCIE cards with the Plextor or Samsung M.2 drives?

Thanks in Advance,
Dan


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DanStp*
> 
> I have been looking at the Apricorn Solo X2. Has anyone here used that on a X58/LGA 1366 system?
> 
> Or has anyone put in one of the M.2 PCIE cards with the Plextor or Samsung M.2 drives?
> 
> Thanks in Advance,
> Dan


Dan, I have spent several years contemplating SATAIII on my Rampage, but nothing seems to really stick out for me. 4K is more important for a boot drive, and the fact that I want my next SSD setup to break 100K in randoms, but I also want full speeds out of about 4 SSD's in total, so I need at least an x4 card myself. So, I am waiting to see if Samsung or someone releases a PCIe 2.0 x4 card that will accept at least two, preferably 4 (two on each side) M.2 drives. I would be happy with 1000-1500 MB/s but I really want to start seeing 150+K or more, 200K? random reads/writes. And I want to see this for the consumer sector with prices we can afford.

I like the x4 M.2 PCIe SSD Samsung has, but I can't seem to find a x4 card to mate it with, unless they come bundled with them and I just have not found that info yet. lol, in any event 2015 is the year for PCIe SSD, so I would wait to see what happens when every manufacturer jumps in. Should be interesting...


----------



## loop16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> What about x5670 vs e5-2665?
> 
> And, I keep forgetting but all 1366 or dual 1366 mobos don't have sata 3 right?


xeon x5650, 60, 70 are far superior to e5 2665 in terms of performance over and out
Of course i think we re not talking about stock speeds as i posted some time ago look at the benchies




e5 2665 at stock speeds scores at super pi 16 sec http://hwbot.org/submission/2452983_gurkspad_superpi___1m_xeon_e5_2665_16sec_95ms/
x5650 @ 4.38Ghz scoes 9.44 secs
There is no way to overclock a Xeon from lga 2011 the last overclokable Xeons were for lga 1366 socket look this http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/processors/intel-xeon-e5-2687w-1074013/review/2


----------



## WoKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> xeon x5650, 60, 70 are far superior to e5 2665 in terms of performance over and out
> Of course i think we re not talking about stock speeds as i posted some time ago look at the benchies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> e5 2665 at stock speeds scores at super pi 16 sec http://hwbot.org/submission/2452983_gurkspad_superpi___1m_xeon_e5_2665_16sec_95ms/
> x5650 @ 4.38Ghz scoes 9.44 secs
> There is no way to overclock a Xeon from lga 2011 the last overclokable Xeons were for lga 1366 socket look this http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/processors/intel-xeon-e5-2687w-1074013/review/2


what about a stock dual 5670 vs stock dual e5-2665? or just single I guess


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> First I would like to thanks all guys here especially Kane for this awesome thread.
> 
> After I fixed my ram problem I started overclocking my CPU. but it looks like there is a small problem.
> 
> I overclocked my CPU to 4.7ghz with 23 multiplier but once I start cine-bench test the multiplier drops to 21 and once the test finish it goes back to 23 or 24 if c-state enabled.
> 
> http://www.gulfup.com/?0wyOdI
> http://www.gulfup.com/?sKuTxj
> 
> I think that my Motherboard ASUS P6T SE is limited to 21 when it comes to multi-core tasks. I don't know So I'll leave it for experts.


I have that board as well and it's a power limit for the board and once you go over that it throttles down. The only way I've seen to get around that is using a different bios if you are comfortable with trying but you could mess up your board if you do it wrong. I am using the P6T WS Pro bios on my P6T SE and don't have it throttle at all


----------



## smartdroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Ok so here are my 4Ghz + 1600Mhz results:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the X58 platform 1600Mhz is really all you need for several reasons.


Not bad for 1600 but still...



http://imgur.com/inNUTHU


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Just wondering if something like this would work on X58?
http://www.amazon.com/Apricorn-Velocity-Extreme-Performance-VEL-SOLO-X2/dp/B0090IA3GY/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Would you be able to get TRIM? SATA III? can anyone chime in?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Just wondering if something like this would work on X58?
> http://www.amazon.com/Apricorn-Velocity-Extreme-Performance-VEL-SOLO-X2/dp/B0090IA3GY/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
> 
> Would you be able to get TRIM? SATA III? can anyone chime in?


That is what they claim. TRIM works and it is SATA III. But looking at reviews it is hit and miss on motherboard compatibility, especially if you have a Marvel already onboard. Other than reading the same info you are I have no idea if its worth trying or not. Its sure affordable though, so not much risk involved.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smartdroid*
> 
> Not bad for 1600 but still...
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/inNUTHU


Lets see [using my 4GHz results vs your results]:

Read: -5% for me
Write: +36% for me [DANG







]
Copy: -21%
Latency: -2.8%

Now as I said. Very negligible results as far the Latency and Read percentages is to small to mean anything. Plus my Read and your Copy counters each other [a difference of 15% in my favor]. Now post some real world test and see how far your 2000Mhz gets you. You know we have things like WinRar 4.20, CinebenchR11.5 & R15, Processor Power [or whatever it's called] and so on. On the X58 platform you'll be limited regardless unless you can do some heavy overclocking. In 3Dmark11 and Fire Strike benchmarks I gained some extra points as well. Guess what at the end of the day the percentage difference wasn't actually worth it. I'm talking video editing, rendering, high end music programs and banks etc. I can't say that 2000Mhz was any different than 1600Mhz-1866Mhz from all of the test I've performed thus far. Even some benchmarks showed WORSE performance.


----------



## meganerd

I have added SATA and SAS cards to my X58 systems without issue.

TRIM is dependant on the controller, specific drive and OS, but it does not matter at all anymore. Seriously, if you think TRIM matters then your SSD is too old. Anything decent made in the past couple of years does garbage collection internally.

TRIM is a blocking non-queueable operation so just forget about it. It was a nice idea but the implementation was completely screwed up. Just buy a modern drive (the 850 pro has a 10 year warranty and has fire breathing performance) and be done with it.


----------



## dpoverlord

So I looked through this thread and never could find my settings for my Overclock, thought I would share them. This should be what I have now. I downclocked to 4.4ghz, if anyone has any recommendations (_li,e can I do 1T on 6 dimms or not worth it for increase? I also am going to put a new custom modified bios on my board, not so this should help my backup)_as to how I can lower that electric bill on this when I am only running at 4.4 let me know 


Spoiler: DPOverLord 4.4ghz Settings



Code:



Code:


Advanced CPU Features:               
        CPU Clock Ratio 21
        CPU Frequency   4413.72GHZ
Advanced Frequency Settings             
        Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech       Disabled
        CPU Cores Enabled       ALL
        CPU Multi Threading     Enabled
        CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) Disabled
        C3/C6/C7 State Support  Disabled
        CPU Thermal Monitor     Auto
        CPU EIST Function       Disabled
        Bi-Directional Prochot  Auto
Uncore & QPI Features               
        QPI Clock Ratio X36
        QPI Link Speed  7.56GT
        Uncore Clock Ratio      X16
        Uncore Frequency        3780MHZ
Standard Clock Control          
        Base Clock (BCLK) Control       
        BCLK Frequency (MHz)    210 
        PCI Express Frequency (MHz)     101
        C.I.A.2 
Advanced Clock Control          
        CPU Clock Drive 800
        PCI Express Clock Drive 900
        CPU Clock Skew  0
        IOH Clock Skew  0
Advanced Ram Features           
        Performance Enhance     Standard
        Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)    Disabled
        System Memory Multiplier (SPD)  8
        DRAM Timing Selectable  Quick
        Channel Interleaving    6
        Rank Interleaving       4
Channel A + B + C               
Channel A Timing Settings               
[B]DRAM Frequency is 840MHZ FSB:DRAM = 2:8   Memory is @ 1680MHZ[/B]
        Channel A Standard Timing Control       
        CAS Latency Time        10
        tRCD    10
        tRD     9
        tRAS    24
        Channel A Advanced Timing Control       20
        tRC     Auto
        tRRD    Auto
        tWTR    Auto
        tWR     Auto
        tWTP    Auto
        tWL     Auto
        tRFC    Auto
        tRTP    Auto
        tFAW    Auto
        Command Rate    2T
        Channel A Miscellaneous Timing Control  Auto
        Round Trip Latency      Auto
        B2B CAS Delay   Auto
Advanced Voltage Control                
CPU             
        Load Line Calibration   Level 2
        CPU Vcore 1.16250v      1.34375
        Dynamic Vcore (DVID)    
        QPI/VTT Voltage 1.335
        CPU PLL 1.8v    Auto
MCH/ICH         
        PCIE 1.5v       Auto
        QPI PLL 1.1v    Auto
        IOH Core 1.1v    1.12V
        ICH I/O 1.5v    Auto
        ICH Core 1.1v   Auto
DRAM            
        DRAM Voltage 1.5v       1.56V
        DRAM Termination .75v   Auto
        CH-A Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-B Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-C Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-A Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-B Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-C Address Vref .75v  Auto
Miscellaneous Settings          
        Virtualization Technology       Disabled
        Isonchronous Frequency  Enabled







Spoiler: DPOverLord Xeon X5660 Overclock to 4.566ghz



Code:



Code:


Current settings
Advanced CPU Features:          
        CPU Clock Ratio 21
        CPU Frequency   4566GHZ
Advanced Frequency Settings             
        Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech       Disabled
        CPU Cores Enabled       ALL
        CPU Multi Threading     Enabled
        CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) Disabled
        C3/C6/C7 State Support  Disabled
        CPU Thermal Monitor     Auto
        CPU EIST Function       Disabled
        Bi-Directional Prochot  Auto
Uncore & QPI Features               
        QPI Clock Ratio X36
        QPI Link Speed  7.56GT
        Uncore Clock Ratio      X16
        Uncore Frequency        3780MHZ
Standard Clock Control          
        Base Clock (BCLK) Control       
        BCLK Frequency (MHz)    215(210 Works as well and is less heat intensive
        PCI Express Frequency (MHz)     101
        C.I.A.2 
Advanced Clock Control          
        CPU Clock Drive 800
        PCI Express Clock Drive 900
        CPU Clock Skew  0
        IOH Clock Skew  0
Advanced Ram Features           
        Performance Enhance     Standard
        Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)    Disabled
        System Memory Multiplier (SPD)  8
        DRAM Timing Selectable  Quick
        Channel Interleaving    6
        Rank Interleaving       4
Channel A + B + C               
Channel A Timing Settings               
        Channel A Standard Timing Control       These can all be changed below I had it once set to 9 9 9  -24 3 dimms did 7-8-7-22
        CAS Latency Time        9
        tRCD    9
        tRD     9
        tRAS    24
        Channel A Advanced Timing Control       Auto
        tRC     Auto
        tRRD    Auto
        tWTR    Auto
        tWR     Auto
        tWTP    Auto
        tWL     Auto
        tRFC    Auto
        tRTP    Auto
        tFAW    Auto
        Command Rate    1
        Channel A Miscellaneous Timing Control  Auto
        Round Trip Latency      Auto
        B2B CAS Delay   Auto
Advanced Voltage Control                
CPU             
        Load Line Calibration   Level 2
        CPU Vcore 1.16250v      1.4
        Dynamic Vcore (DVID)    
        QPI/VTT Voltage 1.335
        CPU PLL 1.8v    Auto
MCH/ICH         
        PCIE 1.5v       Auto
        QPI PLL 1.1v    Auto
        IOH Core 1.1v   Auto
        ICH I/O 1.5v    Auto
        ICH Core 1.1v   Auto
DRAM            
        DRAM Voltage 1.5v       1.5
        DRAM Termination .75v   Auto
        CH-A Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-B Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-C Data Vref .75v     Auto
        CH-A Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-B Address Vref .75v  Auto
        CH-C Address Vref .75v  Auto
Miscellaneous Settings          
        Virtualization Technology       Disabled
        Isonchronous Frequency  Enabled







Spoiler: 4.67GHZ Overclock



All I do is raise the BCLK clock and I raise the vcore slightly. I dont want to reboot at the moment but thats all I have done utilizing the 4.5ghz settings



Bios: Gigabyte Custom Modified bios X58A-ud5 rev 2 mod 10_17_12.f3 if you need the bios I use with custom roms. Otherwise go here:
http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/48085-gigabyte-modified-bios-101.html


----------



## nitrobg

Your settings look pretty much average, there is nothing special to them. That's how you overclock the CPU.
You're getting this high results simply because you won the sillicon lottery







Your CPU is a beast and uses ridiculously low voltages for the desired frequencies, including the Uncore one. 1.40V for 4.55GHz is amazing. Hell, mine needs this voltage to go stable to 4.3.
Congratulations man. Take a good care of it and don't push it to the dangerous levels. You are very lucky to have such good chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Your CPU is a beast and uses ridiculously low voltages for the desired frequencies, including the Uncore one.


I seem to be missing something. Where are the "ridiculously low voltages". 1.34375vCore is quite high for 4.4Ghz, but it is normal in most cases I suppose. I can't remember the 4.67Ghz or the Vcore......OR the stability test passes.

Nonetheless some decent settings.


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I seem to be missing something. Where are the "ridiculously low voltages". 1.34375vCore is quite high for 4.4Ghz, but it is normal in most cases I suppose. I can't remember the 4.67Ghz or the Vcore......OR the stability test passes.
> 
> Nonetheless some decent settings.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Your settings look pretty much average, there is nothing special to them. That's how you overclock the CPU.
> You're getting this high results simply because you won the sillicon lottery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your CPU is a beast and uses ridiculously low voltages for the desired frequencies, including the Uncore one. 1.40V for 4.55GHz is amazing. Hell, mine needs this voltage to go stable to 4.3.
> Congratulations man. Take a good care of it and don't push it to the dangerous levels. You are very lucky to have such good chip.


Well I started O/C with Kana Maru starting this thread, but I am curious on 2T vs 1T what I can do to make more out of it. I am using Custom rom bios's and am looking to upgrade it to the latest rom drivers so its possible that my bios is more stable than other people. The Gigabyte X58A-Ud5 rev 2 is IMO the best board for this series.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Well I started O/C with Kana Maru starting this thread, but I am curious on 2T vs 1T what I can do to make more out of it.


You are talking about RAM correct? Here' a basic overview: "1T" is faster, "2T" is a bit slower, but adds the benefit of better stability, "3T" is similar to 2T. 2T and 3T are the most stable settings. AUTO is probably your best bet if you can net good timings while OC.


----------



## Agenesis

Jesus these things don't mess around. Currently testing a x5650 @ 4.5ghz and it's drawing 430w out of the wall only running prime. For the record my old 4ghz L5639 drew about 280~320w.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well that's what happens when you overclock







. The performance gains aren't "free". Plus it's much older tech.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agenesis*
> 
> Jesus these things don't mess around. Currently testing a x5650 @ 4.5ghz and it's drawing 430w out of the wall only running prime. For the record my old 4ghz L5639 drew about 280~320w.


Interesting. Both my rigs running stock speeds take about 333-350w combined from the wall. I'll have to check now, that one is clocked to 4GHz


----------



## OCmember

Check the draw when you game. That's more practical.


----------



## Agenesis

Look like my upper limit is 4.55ghz....4.6 dream only 50hz away....but also unstable as hell. It's been running at 4.55 for several hours like a champ though. Anybody tips to refine or perhaps allow me to push out a few extra clocks?

cpu: 1.45
ram: 1.6
pll: 1.9
vtt: 1.34
ioh: 1.4
ich. 1.1

x20 w/turbo = 22 x 207.5 blck = 4.56ghz

ram set at x8 with uncore at x12.


----------



## OCmember

Have you tried lowering your CPU VTT? Looks a little high for 1.6 vDimm


----------



## GENXLR

Your PLL is to high. Pull that back to 1.8V

Drop your IOH .2 V and move the ICH to 1.4

Try the VTT at 1.35


----------



## Agenesis

I had to actually bump the vtt from +100mw to +125mw to stabilize at 208blck. I think 4.8 might be possible for this chip if I bump the vtt to around 1.4v but that's dangerously high for me since I'm only looking for 24/7 clocks.


----------



## OCmember

I'd bump up my vDIMM a notch or two just to make sure it was stable. You will have room with the CPU VTT AT 1.34.


----------



## Agenesis

Thanks guys, I'll try out the settings later when I reach for 4.6.

Also anybody tried messing around with the uncore? I've always left it at 1.5x but I wonder if bumping it will allow me to reach higher.


----------



## DividebyZERO

I am still fighting with Bclk wall on mine, i am considering a thumb boot drive or pcie card with sata to see if my raid controller is holding me up past 230. A quick test with new ram and a decent bclk for now.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







any suggestions for shooting over 230 bclk?

Guess i will work on uncore next, just going up a notch got me better scores, is this the norm for uncore would it help any in say gaming?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!








sorry i dont have full version so i know this is kind of useless.


----------



## GENXLR

Bumping my Uncore to x2 made a huge perf jump. from 50 to 75Gflops


----------



## DividebyZERO

what about FS physics, is getting over 15k good or just average? I am at 15.6k now, but thinking of pushing a little more.


Edit: NM i see there is a FS score on the primary page of this thread, its 400mhz higher and about 1k more. Not sure what that means in terms of clockspeed over performance. Im guessing its about right on avg at these clocks.


----------



## mistax

been lurking around here look at these bench and they look impressive, i wonder if it would benefit me to change from a 970 to one of these for better overclocking due to lower watt/heat output. Might hold me back from picking up a haswell until new chip come out that are 30%+ increase


----------



## OCmember

What is your current overclock?

EDIT: ah, just checked, 4.2GHz with an i7 970. Well depending what volts you're at it may or may not be a good decision. My X5660 on an Asrock X58 Extreme will do 4.26 @ 1.29v. It booted up and I got a screen shot of 4.6GHz @ 1.36v but it was totally unstable. I've since then put it at default settings. Currently I have my i7 970 at 4GHz at 1.27v (multimeter) So as you can see these chips generally do the same speeds around the same vcore. If you want to punish a chip and find out go for an X5650. Everyone seems to hammering them.


----------



## dpoverlord

It's funny, I considered upping my bios to a more updated tom...

Then my sixth sense said..... Don't fix what's not broke. But a part of me wants to update my rooms.... Maybe USB 3.0 would finally work...

Sigh I don't think I should mess with anything thoughts?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Bumping my Uncore to x2 made a huge perf jump. from 50 to 75Gflops


Yup, the Uncore can make a substantial impact. My Cinebench 11.5 scores went up 6-8 points


----------



## spdaimon

Uncore I thought was suppose to be 2 x your memory speed. Is this what you mean?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Bumping my Uncore to x2 made a huge perf jump. from 50 to 75Gflops


Mine has no performance increase over x1.8, so I leave it at that. Only a voltage bump increases my Gflops. At 1.8 uncore and 1.3v I get 76 Gflops, and at 1.35v I get 81 gflops while still using 1.8 uncore. But if I raise my uncore to x2 I still get the same 81 gflops. I backed mine off of x2 and 1.35v down to 1.8x and 1.3v and lost 5 gflops, but I did so for safety reasons and concerns of my IMC health. Surely 76 gflops is enough for me. lol


----------



## JagZed32

@ Kana-Maru

Hello,

I recently bought a Xeon 5660 after I discovered your thread.To upgrade my Rampage III Extreme.
Right now the CPU is running at 4.51 Ghz with a Vcore of 1.375.
I have a really good custom made Water Colling for my System.
But sadly I cant achieve more Ghz.
So my Question is : Could you please post your BIOS Settings for 4.8 Ghz and 5 Ghz??

Best Regards Jag


----------



## OCmember

Testing my i7 970. What tools are the best? I have P95v285, Memtest HCI, IBT 2.54. Are these the best versions?


----------



## starxstar

So I got a Sabertooth for 120$ + x5675 for 140$. I am stable at 4.6 now and I couldn't get it to 5.0 or at least 4.8 So any tips here


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> So I got a Sabertooth for 120$ + x5675 for 140$. I am stable at 4.6 now and I couldn't get it to 5.0 or at least 4.8 So any tips here


Is the board brand new?


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JagZed32*
> 
> @ Kana-Maru
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I recently bought a Xeon 5660 after I discovered your thread.To upgrade my Rampage III Extreme.
> Right now the CPU is running at 4.51 Ghz with a Vcore of 1.375.
> I have a really good custom made Water Colling for my System.
> But sadly I cant achieve more Ghz.
> So my Question is : Could you please post your BIOS Settings for 4.8 Ghz and 5 Ghz??
> 
> Best Regards Jag


yea same here except I have x5675 with x26 multi + sabertooth


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is the board brand new?


It is Used. Noway you get it new for 120$.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is the board brand new?


Where did you find a x5675 for $140? And I thought the max multiplier was 23 for that chip?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Where did you find a x5675 for $140?


lol I know, right


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Where did you find a x5675 for $140? And I thought the max multiplier was 23 for that chip?


Used from ebay US seller. x25 and x26 with post I can attach pic for the bios if you like


----------



## DividebyZERO

After seeing some of these posts i guess i will stick with my x5650


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> lol I know, right


LOL, that was the only part of his post that stuck out at me big time. I have no clue if he said anything else, lol...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> Used from ebay US seller. x25 and x26 with post I can attach pic for the bios if you like


Does that ebay seller have more for sale at that price?


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> LOL, that was the only part of his post that stuck out at me big time. I have no clue if he said anything else, lol...


in fact it is 139$ +10$ shipping and I will post a pic from my ebay account once I get home.


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Does that ebay seller have more for sale at that price?


here it is

http://www.ebay.com/itm/201182173399?_trksid=p2059210.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

just make best offer for 139 and he will accept


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> in fact it is 139$ +10$ shipping and I will post a pic from my ebay account once I get home.


Cool, no pic needed though, just the item number or a link to the item please. I would like to ask the seller if they have more or plan on having more at that cost. And thank you...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> here it is
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/201182173399?_trksid=p2059210.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT
> 
> just make best offer for 139 and he will accept


Thanks, you posted that when I was requesting that. lol


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> LOL, that was the only part of his post that stuck out at me big time. I have no clue if he said anything else, lol...


I will also post my bios to show you the multi.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/201182173399?_trksid=p2059210.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


ES model


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> ES model


what does that mean ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> what does that mean ?


Engineering sample. Not allowed for sale afaik, and they usually aren't ready for release but you might have a decent one


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *starxstar*
> 
> I will also post my bios to show you the multi.


Actually they are all ES models, but they do not look like used CPU's. I wonder what the down side is to Engineering Sample CPU's? The title claims they are B1 though. Hmm, only one left in stock...


----------



## starxstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Actually they are all ES models, but they do not look like used CPU's. I wonder what the down side is to Engineering Sample CPU's? The title claims they are B1 though. Hmm, only one left in stock...


Didn't notice any difference between my older x5660 and this one excep the plus x2 multi actually this one seems to have better temps.


----------



## OCmember

I think they have more Errata er something with the ES chips. I could be totally wrong though


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Never mind, I just read that if you buy a ES it is still not yours, and always belongs to Intel. I also read that Intel may be willing to send you a brand new equivalent in trade for the ES version that legally still belongs to them.

Quoted from Intels website: SOURCE
Quote:


> What are Intel engineering sample processors?
> 
> Intel Engineering Sample Processors ("Intel ES Processors"), also known as Intel Qualification Sample Processors, are pre-production processors loaned to Intel's Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), Original Device Manufacturers (ODMs), and Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design cycle prior to product launch.
> 
> These processors often include additional features that production processors do not include for customer pre-production evaluation and test purposes. The following conditions apply to Intel ES Processors:
> 
> *Intel ES Processors are the sole property of Intel*
> Intel ES Processors are Intel Confidential
> Intel ES Processors are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and use
> *Intel ES Processors are not for sale or re-sale*
> Intel ES Processors may not have passed commercial regulatory requirements
> ES Processors are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported by Intel
> How do I identify Intel ES processors?
> 
> The easiest way to tell if you have an Intel ES Processor is to look at the processor topside markings. *If you have a 4 or 5 digit Q spec listed* like the one pictured below, you have an engineering sample. A production processor will have a 5 digit sSpec, usually beginning with S, such as SLB9L on the topside markings.
> 
> If no ink or laser markings are found, the processor may be an "unmarked" Intel ES Processor. *Contact Intel if you are in possession of an unmarked Intel ES Processor.*
> 
> The Intel® Processor Identification Utility can also be used to help identify whether a particular processor is an Intel ES processor.
> 
> Once you install and run Processor ID on an Intel ES Processor, the following message will appear in the text box:
> 
> "The following Intel processor appears to be an engineering sample, not a production processor. The utility is designed to support Intel production processors only. Sample processors are not warranted by Intel and are not intended for resale."
> 
> Can I get Intel ES processors from Intel?
> 
> Due to the pre-production nature of Intel ES Processors, they are generally only loaned by Intel to Intel's Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), Original Device Manufacturers (ODMs), and Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) for pre-production test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions that assure the protection of Intel's assets and confidential information.
> 
> Intel ES Processors are not made available to the general public by Intel.
> 
> Contact your vendor or place of purchase if you have received an Intel ES Processor in place of a production processor.
> 
> If you have additional questions or concerns, please contact Intel Customer Support, using one of the methods below:
> 
> Contact Intel Customer Support
> e-mail Intel Technical Support: supportmail.intel.com
> Intel Corporate Security Investigations - [email protected]
> 
> This applies to:
> 
> Intel® Atom™ Processor
> Intel® Core™ Duo Processor
> Intel® Core™ i3 Desktop Processor
> Intel® Core™ i3 Mobile Processor
> Intel® Core™ i5 Desktop Processor
> Intel® Core™ i5 Mobile Processor
> Intel® Core™ i7 Desktop Processor
> Intel® Core™ i7 Processor Extreme Edition
> Intel® Core™ M Processors
> Intel® Core™ Solo Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Duo Desktop Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Duo Mobile Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Extreme Mobile Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Extreme Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Quad Mobile Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor
> Intel® Core™2 Solo Processor
> Intel® Itanium® Processors
> Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor Extreme Edition
> Intel® Pentium® 4 Processors
> Intel® Pentium® D Processor
> Intel® Pentium® M Processor
> Intel® Pentium® Processor Extreme Edition
> Intel® Pentium® Processor for Desktop
> Intel® Pentium® Processor for Mobile
> Intel® Xeon® Processor
> Intel® Xeon® Processor 3000 Sequence
> *Intel® Xeon® Processor 5000 Sequence*
> Intel® Xeon® Processor 6000 Sequence
> Intel® Xeon® Processor 7000 Sequence
> Intel® Xeon® Processor E3-1200 Product Family
> Mobile Intel® Celeron® Processors
> Mobile Intel® Pentium® 4 Processors - M


So, now my interest has completely dissolved, lol... But I wonder if I was to purchase it if Intel would trade it for a new x5675? double hmmm

Anyway, the way I read this is, that it is stolen property and must be returned to Intel? Is that what this means?

Here is an interesting thread over at the Intel forums about reporting such illegal sales of their property.
https://communities.intel.com/thread/26542
It does not look like they take it very seriously, LOL...


----------



## Urikain

Hello everybody,

I just received my new x5650 on my sabertooth x58 and i have few questions (sorry for my bad english) :

When i go to the bios, in the cpu ratio setting, the max is only x22 and no x23 like cpu-z show me.
Moreever, the multiplicateur jump of 20x to 22x. i have no 21x, is it normal ?

Thx for you help.
I wish you a good day.

Urik


----------



## GENXLR

Yes, it's normal

EDIT:

To the above note of Es cpu's i owned a lot of ES cpu's. My ES 990X..... was the scariest CPU i ever owned. I obtained it via ebay, and found out that when i started OC'ing..... it just laid into high overclocks. My last OC on that chip was somewhere in the 6GHZ range using direct phasechange cooling with a 50amp 220v airconditioner compressor... I will see if i can find my validation for it. I later damaged it going for 6.5 ghz.


----------



## Urikain

Hello all,

What are the max Vcore, Max QPI and the recommanded uncore (x1,8 or x2 ?) for a x5650 ?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urikain*
> 
> Hello everybody,
> I just received my new x5650 on my sabertooth x58 and i have few questions (sorry for my bad english) :
> When i go to the bios, in the cpu ratio setting, the max is only x22 and no x23 like cpu-z show me.


That's because the x23 is only for 2 cores @ Idle or when only 2 cores are being used with C-states enabled. The max you can set is 22x in the BIOS for the X5650.
Quote:


> Moreever, the multiplicateur jump of 20x to 22x. i have no 21x, is it normal ?


Yes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urikain*
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> What are the max Vcore, Max QPI and the recommanded uncore (x1,8 or x2 ?) for a x5650 ?


Max Vcore = 1.35v
Max QPI voltage = anything less than 1.4v. Preferably less than 1.35v
Max QPI freq = Auto is just fine. You'll have to test some different settings to check performance and stability.
Uncore= 2x for stability in my test, but these Xeons are 1.8x by default. You can't go wrong with either in all of my testing and overclocks. So 1.8x - 2x is safe and stable.


----------



## starxstar

So 5.0GHz all cores seems to be impossible to get stable at .Maybe I have a chance with 4.8 but I need proper Bios settings but I am not good enough with OCing.So Anyone got stable @ 4.8 all cores ? if yes please share your BIOS settings. My CPU is x5675 with x25 multiplier for all cores.


----------



## Urikain

Thx Kana-Maru for the precicions.

Other question : tweaking IOH/ICH voltages and clock is useful ? if yes when to tweak this values ?


----------



## Agenesis

From what I've found the uncore multiplier doesn't matter as long as you stay around 3800 for stability. Anything higher will depend on your motherboard.

IOH is the NB voltage and might increase your stability if you're running multiple gpus. At 4.6ghz I left my IOH at stock 1.1v. ICH controls your peripherals and sata controllers. Increasing it might help if you're running a high oc or high blck. On my L5639 4GHz I had it on stock but for my 4.6ghz 5650 I needed 1.2v for stability.


----------



## Urikain

Thx a lot Agenesis.

I have a x5650 also and im running SLI. I have stability issue for 4.4 ghz with 220 BCLK.

Maybe increase IOH and ICH voltage help me.

Can you share your bios setting for 4.6ghz ? My mother board is a sabertooth x58.


----------



## Agenesis

1.45v vcore, 1.35 vtt, 1.4 qpi, 1.37 pll, 1.1 ioh, 1.2v ich. Also 1.63v for the ram running at 2100mhz.

The vcore is fine as long as you can keep your temps in check. The max I've reached after 24 hours of prime is 81c but they generally hover around 55c when gaming. These chips can run 4ghz at a relatively low vcore around 1.25~1.3 but past a certain point, say 4.2 or 4.3 you'll need to go into the 1.4 areas.


----------



## Urikain

THX !

How you decide to increase the PPL ?


----------



## Chaert

Very nice thread!

I would like to replace my i7 920 with one of these six-cores Xeons, but my very expensive EVGA X58 SLI Classified (E759) doesn't support Westmere CPU's.








Wish I kept my Asus P6T.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chaert*
> 
> Very nice thread!
> 
> I would like to replace my i7 920 with one of these six-cores Xeons, but my very expensive EVGA X58 SLI Classified (E759) doesn't support Westmere CPU's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wish I kept my Asus P6T.


The mod is fairly easy. Basically have to create a jumper on the QPI terminals.

What board revision is it? My EVGA 760 A1 is a Rev.1.0 - Rev 1.1 is needed for the Xeons but like I said it's a simple solder and that's it. EVGA might charge you around 35$ to do it if you contact their support


----------



## Chaert

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The mod is fairly easy. Basically have to create a jumper on the QPI terminals.
> 
> What board revision is it? My EVGA 760 A1 is a Rev.1.0 - Rev 1.1 is needed for the Xeons but like I said it's a simple solder and that's it. EVGA might charge you around 35$ to do it if you contact their support


They are still doing that for this quite old board? It's revision 1.0, Limited Edition so it wasn't produced for a very long time.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chaert*
> 
> They are still doing that for this quite old board? It's revision 1.0, Limited Edition so it wasn't produced for a very long time.


Last I read.


----------



## NBrock

Hey I was wondering if you ever had a chance to test [email protected] performance on an overclocked x56xx chip.
I have an x5650 and a board that should be here tomorrow. I wanna get this bad boy set up and folding and was just wondering about numbers.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NBrock*
> 
> Hey I was wondering if you ever had a chance to test [email protected] performance on an overclocked x56xx chip.
> I have an x5650 and a board that should be here tomorrow. I wanna get this bad boy set up and folding and was just wondering about numbers.


I would say 30,000 PPD + or - 5,000 depending on WU This is SMP with 12 threads around 4ghz


----------



## Chaert

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Last I read.


Contacted EVGA about this mod and they said it's not available for my E759 Classified. No Xeon I guess.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chaert*
> 
> Contacted EVGA about this mod and they said it's not available for my E759 Classified. No Xeon I guess.


Them sons of biscuits!! :T

Sorry to hear that


----------



## Konkistadori

Msi Big bang+x5650 new owner here







.. Im clad i didint pay extra for newer tech.. Got this plus rams+akasa venom cooler for 250euros. Im aiming for 3.8ghz-4ghz, if anyone have tips for settings for that OC let me know.









Ive read somewhere that x58 might have problems with ram voltages under 1,65v i just got new ripjaw z set, but stock voltage is 1.5v, going to test em today.


----------



## Urikain

My ram voltage is 1,5V and no issue.


----------



## kckyle

my ram voltage is 1.28v for the last 4 months now


----------



## Konkistadori

Thanks!


----------



## levontraut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> what about some gaming? i7 lga1155/1150 vs Xeons
> 
> I really need that info


Have a look at my sig.

I can post some benches for you at stock setting? Just tell me what you want me to run.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *levontraut*
> 
> Have a look at my sig.
> 
> I can post some benches for you at stock setting? Just tell me what you want me to run.


You are nearly 10 months late. That post was from "1/23/14". However, I did compare my scores and fps to other websites that benchmarks GPUs and my GTX 670 SLI matches their fps on newer builds. My i7-960 couldn't handle high end games like Crysis 3 100% maxed.


----------



## bigpoppapump

Are there any reasonably good boards for overclocking a x5650 that don't cost like $150 or more?


----------



## kckyle

you can look around for a asus p6t, they are the most common i think, that or a gigabyte ud5 board


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigpoppapump*
> 
> Are there any reasonably good boards for overclocking a x5650 that don't cost like $150 or more?


Try and snipe this

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASUS-P6T-SE-Socket-1366-ATX-MotherBoard-with-i7-920-D0-and-6gb-kit-ram-/271644902650?pt=Motherboards&hash=item3f3f4c44fa

OR this, and then sell what you do not need from the bundle

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Asus-P6T-Deluxe-V2-Intel-LGA-1366-core-i7-920-and-12GB-Mushkin-PC3-12800-RAM-/131325460903?pt=Motherboards&hash=item1e939b81a7


----------



## bill1024

Check your local Craigslist, I picked up an Evga FTW3 for 60$


----------



## mistax

man so tempted to pick up a xenon, just to extend the life of my system as i feel like the 290 i have and the 970 will still hold out for a long time. The only logical upgrade i could come up with was either z97 or x79 due to the fact i want to move my samsung miracle ram over and OC and i would save a massive amount from buying ddr4


----------



## OCmember

xenon and 290 ?


----------



## Konkistadori

I think he/she meant Xeon /AMD R290


----------



## mistax

oh haha woops i just reread what i wrote and was confusing. Was wondering if i should just grab a xeon from ebay and tinker with that. My i7 970 is sitting @ 4.0 right now and i could probably go the route of upgrading the cooling to try to squeeze a bit more out of the system.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mistax*
> 
> oh haha woops i just reread what i wrote and was confusing. Was wondering if i should just grab a xeon from ebay and tinker with that. My i7 970 is sitting @ 4.0 right now and i could probably go the route of upgrading the cooling to try to squeeze a bit more out of the system.


I would just overclock the i7 970 a little more. The max vcore for an i7 970 is 1.375v vs the Xeon (1.350v)

I'm just about stable with my i7 970 at 4.5GHz 1.375v Personally I think my EVGA 760 A1. Rev1.0 is holding me back.


----------



## dpoverlord

WHy wo
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I would just overclock the i7 970 a little more. The max vcore for an i7 970 is 1.375v vs the Xeon (1.350v)
> 
> I'm just about stable with my i7 970 at 4.5GHz 1.375v Personally I think my EVGA 760 A1. Rev1.0 is holding me back.


Your GPU should not influence your O/C really, unless your O/C the PCI express bus. I got my xeon to 4.65ghz but throttled it down to 4.4 since it produced a lot of heat. he should def stay with the 970 isnt it hex core as well?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dpoverlord*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I would just overclock the i7 970 a little more. The max vcore for an i7 970 is 1.375v vs the Xeon (1.350v)
> 
> I'm just about stable with my i7 970 at 4.5GHz 1.375v Personally I think my EVGA 760 A1. Rev1.0 is holding me back.
> 
> 
> 
> Your GPU should not influence your O/C really, unless your O/C the PCI express bus. I got my xeon to 4.65ghz but throttled it down to 4.4 since it produced a lot of heat. he should def stay with the 970 isnt it hex core as well?
Click to expand...

lol. That's the trouble these days. All these different part numbers and we try n short hand certain things and they come out confusing. I'm going to assume you briefed over my statement as I didn't mention a GPU at all in my post. But the 970 part can be confusing if you did in-fact brief over my post. That's why I try n to include the i7 part. Just like I got confused with the 290, and xenon (thought i was reading xerox - lol) The 290 part I thought was meant to be an i7 920 for a sec.

Or you may have quoted the wrong person, hah


----------



## dpoverlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> lol. That's the trouble these days. All these different part numbers and we try n short hand certain things and they come out confusing. I'm going to assume you briefed over my statement as I didn't mention a GPU at all in my post. But the 970 part can be confusing if you did in-fact brief over my post. That's why I try n to include the i7 part. Just like I got confused with the 290, and xenon (thought i was reading xerox - lol) The 290 part I thought was meant to be an i7 920 for a sec.
> 
> Or you may have quoted the wrong person, hah










Wow I am an idiot was a late night.


----------



## bill1024

Now I am totally confused.


----------



## Sart

Just ordered an EVGA FTW3 for $100 yesterday, and I'll be getting an X5650 within the next week. I honestly can't wait, as I've wanted to upgrade from my i5 750 for years and my motherboard ended up dying last week. Was torn between the X5650 and a Pentium G3258/Z97 board for an i5 or i7 upgrade down the road, but after looking at this X5660 review as well as some OCed performance numbers I've seen on other sites, I decided to take the plunge.

Any idea what kind of temps or OCs to expect with a Hyper 212+? My i5 750 ran rather hot and I'm kinda worried, as I do want to OC this chip. I'd like to hold on to the money for a different upgrade, but if it comes down to it I'll throw in a cheap H100 or Seidon.


----------



## NBrock

Hey guys,

I was wondering if I could get some help with overclocking.
My rig;
Evga x58 Sli3
x5650
6GB of OCZ 1600 DDR3
HD 7970
Coolermaster 1200 pro gold.
Lots of liquid cooling biggrin.gif

So I just got the rig together last night and got everything setup/installed. This is going to be a 24/7 dedicated Folding rig for the Team Competitions.
I currently am running at 4GHz and ram is at [email protected] volts. It does not seem to want to boot any higher then that. I come from overclocking AMD CPUs and there are some different things here that aren't something I am 100% familiar with. Anything I need to check or try to see if I can get it higher?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Any idea what kind of temps or OCs to expect with a Hyper 212+? My i5 750 ran rather hot and I'm kinda worried, as I do want to OC this chip. I'd like to hold on to the money for a different upgrade, but if it comes down to it I'll throw in a cheap H100 or Seidon.


4GHz @ ~ 1.29v will get into the mid 70's Celsius in 70 ambient temps for me (p95 blend) with a Prolimatech Megahalem. This 6 core is a different animal when it comes to heat. Atleast for me. I can't really run a full p95 test at my current clock and vcore. It will rocket into the 100s within 5 minutes. I just use the test ran by RealTempGT - the sensor test. It can pass that but barely. If my game is running fine then I consider it ok. If it were my main rig then I would back off on the clocks, but this is just a gaming rig. 1 game currently installed. That's all it does for me and i'm happy with it. For the future I just plan on upgrading the GPU

It's the rig called 'Back in Action' in my sig thingy below.


----------



## intelchief

hello guys!

i've got a question. Actually im running two X5550 @4Ghz (185 x 20) on 1.35 Vcore. In the next month i will be changing my CPU's for the last time.
Right now i'm looking at two CPU's. x5660 and x5670. In my country i can get both of them with 24 month guarantee. X5660 cost ~160$, X5670 ~210 $. What do you think. Is it worth to pay 50$ more for +1 multiplier?

I'm planning to OC my CPU's MAX on 4,5Ghz already with turbo. No more.


----------



## Urikain

Hello guys,

I share my oc with you for my x5650. i use a watercooling.

Actually im running the x5650 @4.4Ghz (200x22) on 1.42 Vcore and 1.35 QPI.
My temp are average 65°c after 1 hour with occt stress.

My computer is running about 4 or 5 hours a day
What do you think? Is it correct ?

Thx a lot


----------



## Konkistadori

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urikain*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I share my oc with you for my x5650. i use a watercooling.
> 
> Actually im running the x5650 @4.4Ghz (200x22) on 1.42 Vcore and 1.35 QPI.
> My temp are average 65°c after 1 hour with occt stress.
> 
> My computer is running about 4 or 5 hours a day
> What do you think? Is it correct ?
> 
> Thx a lot


Can u share ur settings?


----------



## Urikain

What settings ? Of the bios ?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Can u share ur settings?


Umm, didn't he just post them? in fact you quoted the settings he used... lol


----------



## Riktar54

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urikain*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I share my oc with you for my x5650. i use a watercooling.
> 
> Actually im running the x5650 @4.4Ghz (200x22) on 1.42 Vcore and 1.35 QPI.
> My temp are average 65°c after 1 hour with occt stress.
> 
> My computer is running about 4 or 5 hours a day
> What do you think? Is it correct ?
> 
> Thx a lot


What water cooling setup? AIO, custom loop, etc,,,,,,,,,,,


----------



## Urikain

Hello Riktar54,

I have a custom watercooling :

- XSPC - WaterBlock CPU Raystorm Acetal Intel
- Laing - Pump DDC-3.2 PWM 12 Volts
- EK Water Blocks - Tank EK-XRES 100 DDC - Acetal (Top+tank)
- Alphacool - Radiator NexXxoS XT45 Full Cuivre 240

Why this question ?


----------



## Sart

Alright, so my motherboard should be coming in tomorrow but I'm kind of skeptical about these X5650 sellers.

Which ones would you guys recommend? I've seen some feedback about a seller about sending defective chips, while another one from a different seller looked terribly beat up. Hell, some just have a picture of the Xeon logo for their description.

I know it's probably best to avoid the Chinese ones, but a lot of these seem to be shipping from California and the like.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Just buy from a bulk reseller. You don't want individual sellers or people selling 2 or 3 of them. If you buy from a seller with a ton of them there's a thin chance that some overclocker tried to cherry pick them while looking for the golden chip [ & possibly abusing the, in the process].

The weirdest thing happened to me recently. I put my PC to sleep and later when I tried to wake up the PC it stalled on a black screen, but the fans and lights came on as normal. I couldn't reset the PC or anything so I performed a hard reset. After the POST the SSDs didn't boot, they went DIRECTLY to the login screen. No splash screen or anything. So I logged in and the PC resumed from where it was when I put it to sleep. Afterwards Windows wanted to check my C: drive for errors and found none. It did delete a temp file.

Has this ever happened to anyone?


----------



## MapRef41N93W

So what is the justification of this cpu being $50ish more than the x5650? Isn't it just binned slightly higher? I've heard people getting 4.7+GHz on x5650s. I ask because I just bought two x5650s over this CPU.


----------



## GENXLR

just a higher multi which means better oc's. only higher by 1 though XD


----------



## bigpoppapump

Anyone know if the EVGA X58 SLI Micro is compatible with a x5650?


----------



## Riktar54

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urikain*
> 
> Hello Riktar54,
> 
> I have a custom watercooling :
> 
> - XSPC - WaterBlock CPU Raystorm Acetal Intel
> - Laing - Pump DDC-3.2 PWM 12 Volts
> - EK Water Blocks - Tank EK-XRES 100 DDC - Acetal (Top+tank)
> - Alphacool - Radiator NexXxoS XT45 Full Cuivre 240
> 
> Why this question ?


I have a x5650 and am considering going to water since I hit a thermal jump of 8 degrees going from 3.5 to 3.7Ghz and am considering AIO vs custom,,,,,,,,,,


----------



## Sart

Well my board finally came in.



Unfortunately the CPU socket sits too close to the top of my board for me to fit a 240mm radiator at the top of my case. Clearance with my Hyper 212+ is very tight as well, to the point where I can only fit it by taking off one of the fans and installing it vertically.

Ah well, I guess i'll go with a cheap Seidon 120m or H80i or something. Maybe a Kuhler like yours Kana.

Anyway, does anyone here have any experience using these Xeons with this board?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Well my board finally came in.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately the CPU socket sits too close to the top of my board for me to fit a 240mm radiator at the top of my case. Clearance with my Hyper 212+ is very tight as well, to the point where I can only fit it by taking off one of the fans and installing it vertically.
> 
> Ah well, I guess i'll go with a cheap Seidon 120m or H80i or something. Maybe a Kuhler like yours Kana.
> 
> Anyway, does anyone here have any experience using these Xeons with this board?


Which EVGA board is it? 759?


----------



## Sart

It's an EVGA FTW3


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> It's an EVGA FTW3


It's a 768


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Regardless of the exact model, it really should be called the "EVGA OMG Its Beautiful FTW3"


----------



## Sart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> It's a 768


Oh, I was just going by the name and not the number afterwards. Didn't realize it was more important.

I've never had an EVGA board before and didn't really research their other offerings' numbers (this was just the cheapest not-broken X58 board at the time), so I don't exactly know the nomenclature and everything.

I'm gonna be doing some more reading on these things, I guess.


----------



## bill1024

I have a FTW3 running a X5660 @ 4ghz 175 x 23 cpu 1.29V,, VVT is +150, that is 1.35V , 1.6v ram.
Also I have it set no v-droop for the cpu.
It is a good running board. I have the all in one Antec H70 cooler and it keeps it nice ad cool running BOINC work units 24/7 Temps in the mid to high 40s

Make sure you update the BIOS, I could not change the uncore setting from 2x with the older BIOS that it had when I bought it. Ialso found it did not run stable with an uncore 1.5 x ram speed.
If I go more than two clicks less than two x ram, it gets unstable. So I just run it 2x ram.

And the big heat sink gets hot if there is no air flow over it from the CPU cooler. The board got unstble from that too when I added the H70 cooler. I had to add a fan to cool the heat sink dowm.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Oh, I was just going by the name and not the number afterwards. Didn't realize it was more important.
> 
> I've never had an EVGA board before and didn't really research their other offerings' numbers (this was just the cheapest not-broken X58 board at the time), so I don't exactly know the nomenclature and everything.
> 
> I'm gonna be doing some more reading on these things, I guess.


I'm sorry. I've had my board for a while which is an EVGA 760 A1, Rev.1.0 so I thought you were a little bit hip to the way EVGA does things. If you search for a bios for that board make SURE it's for the specific 768 model. Last I seen there are two different 768 boards. There might be a difference between the two and there might not be so be careful when updating the bios.

Cool, good luck with it!


----------



## Xoriam

Woot! Just ordered my x5660!
Can't wait!


----------



## MCCSolutions

Just a friendly reminder to submit your data for stable OC's here:

[OFFICIAL] XEON OC Database Thread

Thank you!


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's two topics now. Those are more than enough reminders.

I will be posting my benchmarks for "The Evil Within" @ 2560x1600p soon. it's a pretty decent title. I still want to upgrade my GPUs, but the 670's are still surprising me since I've started using the Xeons. Chances are I'm going to upgrade my GPU next year. I'm hoping to start using a full custom loop setup.


----------



## MCCSolutions

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's two topics now. Those are more than enough reminders.
> 
> I will be posting my benchmarks for "The Evil Within" @ 2560x1600p soon. it's a pretty decent title. I still want to upgrade my GPUs, but the 670's are still surprising me since I've started using the Xeons. Chances are I'm going to upgrade my GPU next year. I'm hoping to start using a full custom loop setup.


lol


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's two topics now. Those are more than enough reminders.


Yeah I figured she was along this path. I honestly don't see a need for her thread with this one. I think she even bumped her thread saying that it was updated and when I asked her what she updated I got this response "Noob lol. Welcome to OCN, if you have a submission to add to the database please feel free to post it instead of trolling....."

Seems to me she is trolling here for people to post in her thread.

Very frowned upon. Oh well.

lol


----------



## MCCSolutions

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah I figured she was along this path. I honestly don't see a need for her thread with this one. I think she even bumped her thread saying that it was updated and when I asked her what she updated I got this response "Noob lol. Welcome to OCN, if you have a submission to add to the database please feel free to post it instead of trolling....."
> 
> Seems to me she is trolling here for people to post in her thread.
> 
> Very frowned upon. Oh well.
> 
> lol


Lol I "HE" was messing with you, you will find that I am very kind lol. Anyway when someone has a information thread and they post "Updated" most forum users understand that it means the thread head(Beginning of first page) has been updated. As far as the purpose of the thread its quite obvious, naturally their are threads about Overclocking on a website named *Overclock.Net* lol

Oh and all the threads are related and quite useful, if you dont think so then you have the freedom to not view them at all, it is at your discretion. No one will force you to view a thread that you dont want to......


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MCCSolutions*
> 
> Lol I "HE" was messing with you, you will find that I am very kind lol. Anyway when someone has a information thread and they post "Updated" most forum users understand that it means the thread head(Beginning of first page) has been updated. As far as the purpose of the thread its quite obvious, naturally their are threads about Overclocking on a website named *Overclock.Net* lol
> 
> Oh and all the threads are related and quite useful, if you dont think so then you have the freedom to not view them at all, it is at your discretion. No one will force you to view a thread that you dont want to......


Alright then. Fair enough


----------



## Xoriam

Isn't that other thread Xeons in general? so whats the issue?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah I figured she was along this path. I honestly don't see a need for her thread with this one. I think she even bumped her thread saying that it was updated and when I asked her what she updated I got this response "Noob lol. Welcome to OCN, if you have a submission to add to the database please feel free to post it instead of trolling....."
> 
> Seems to me she is trolling here for people to post in her thread.
> 
> Very frowned upon. Oh well.
> 
> lol


Yup.


----------



## MCCSolutions

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Alright then. Fair enough












I would actually love to have your OC info for the chart as well, what were you able to get?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Isn't that other thread Xeons in general? so whats the issue?


I kinda see what they are talking about now because the Xeon Club Thread has some of the same info listed but not very thorough, I only want stable OC Clocks and info, and that thread just uses CPU-Z Validation.

I do like @Kana-Maru's threads though and im not trying to copy them, I just want one place to view the info I look for when referencing overclocks. The concept is pretty simple to me but I guess its a matter of opinion.

But when I post a info thread I always state that I encourage suggestions for improvement of the thread via PM's because the thread is for the community not just for me. I feel thats the way informative threads should operate... .


----------



## gringopig

I thought I would join up and post my experience with my X5670, as I was inspired to upgrade my I7-950 due to this thread.

I was running an I7-950 @4.2GHz on an Asus Sabertooth X58 board with BIOS 1402. It was originally bought as a bundle from Scan in the UK and I upgraded the memory from 6GB of Corsair Dominator to 12GB quite recently. The overclock had been very stable but I became intrigued by the possibility of getting one of these ex-server chips and putting off a decsion about X99 until that platform became a wee bit more mature.
So I purchased a X5670 from eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/computer-sales?_trksid=p2060778.m2749.l2754 and it duly arrived from the U.S. very well packaged and cleaned.

I noted the information about the differences between the 45nm and 32nm chips with regard to UCLK frequency and the QPI/DRAM voltages and reset CMOS before re-applying an overclock manually. I was running at a UCLK/Uncore of 2X memory frequency (1600MHz) i.e. 3200MHz and a QPI/DRAM voltage of 1.35V, so immediately after booting I set these to 2400MHz UCLK (1.5X memory frequency) and a QPI/DRAM voltage of 1.25V just for safety until I got an idea about the CPU Vcore which was going to be required for the X5670. The I7-950 ran at 4.2GHz with a BIOS voltage set at 1.28V, so I started off at a slightly lower voltage of 1.27V. It got stable at 1.32V with repeated 0x1E stop codes until this voltage was set. Slightly lower and it would run stability tests without issue but would suddenly bsod in general Windows use quite quickly.
I then upped UCLK to 3200MHz and the QPI/DRAM to 1.30V which I believe to be a safe margin whilst retaining as much performance as possible

BCLK at 200MHz
CPU Multiplier at 21
Memory 1600MHz at 1.65V 9,9,9,24,2T
UCLK 3200MHz
QPI/DRAM 1.30V
QPI Link data rate 7218MT/s
Vcore 1.32V

All power saving and spread spectrum settings disabled and copied over from my I7-950 overclock.

I tried for 4.4GHz but I was hitting a limit I think, with 1.35V still giving me 0x1E stop codes in Windows, so I stopped at 4.2GHz.

So, in short, I have an overclock equivalent to my I7-950 except a hexacore processor for a total of £114!

Quite pleased and I have to thank your many contributors for the impetus to give this a try.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MCCSolutions*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would actually love to have your OC info for the chart as well, what were you able to get?
> I kinda see what they are talking about now because the Xeon Club Thread has some of the same info listed but not very thorough, I only want stable OC Clocks and info, and that thread just uses CPU-Z Validation.
> 
> I do like @Kana-Maru's threads though and im not trying to copy them, I just want one place to view the info I look for when referencing overclocks. The concept is pretty simple to me but I guess its a matter of opinion.
> 
> But when I post a info thread I always state that I encourage suggestions for improvement of the thread via PM's because the thread is for the community not just for me. I feel thats the way informative threads should operate... .


Probably best to add stable, or a GHZ requirement to the thread title to avoid future problems then.


----------



## MCCSolutions

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Probably best to add stable, or a GHZ requirement to the thread title to avoid future problems then.


Its already their, its in bold in the description and the title is OC lol


----------



## dieanotherday

u guys need to move on , x58 is outdated and the motherboards are expensive.

newer xeons are better and similarly price.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> u guys need to move on , x58 is outdated and the motherboards are expensive.
> 
> newer xeons are better and similarly price.


Coming from a 2500k user, I wonder what is better. x5660 or 2500k...
We have access to all the things that are available apart from DDR4 and we can have 6 cores and 12threads.
and it OCs to 5ghz.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MCCSolutions*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would actually love to have your OC info for the chart as well, what were you able to get?
> I kinda see what they are talking about now because the Xeon Club Thread has some of the same info listed but not very thorough, I only want stable OC Clocks and info, and that thread just uses CPU-Z Validation.
> 
> I do like @Kana-Maru's threads though and im not trying to copy them, I just want one place to view the info I look for when referencing overclocks. The concept is pretty simple to me but I guess its a matter of opinion.
> 
> But when I post a info thread I always state that I encourage suggestions for improvement of the thread via PM's because the thread is for the community not just for me. I feel thats the way informative threads should operate... .


I want to admit that when I originally seen your thread had been updated I thought _this_ thread was being updated. I clicked the link from my local email saying [Official] ... thread had been updated. The titles are so similar and I didn't take a second to take a closer look through the thread to realize it was your thread, so I apologize for that. I thought to my self *what is the person updating* lol.

My Xeon is now back to stock but before my i7 970 machine returned to action I vaguely recall it was hitting 4.2GHz @ 1.28v I did boot at 4.8GHz at 1.35v but it was totally unstable. Sorry I can't help you with any info right at this moment but I will revisit what I use to have for my overclock on this machine and make a post for the database. I don't generally do more than 4-10 minutes of stability testing. Seen the electric bill one month and decided, that's enough of that - lol.

I'm currently just toying with m i7 970 rig. I've hit some pretty good Cinebench 11.5 numbers at 4.61Ghz = 11.63 but at some increasingly high volts (1.40v) I am finding that I need a little more vcore for that speed. I've been able to lock the memory to the lowest divider 2:6 to keep the pressure off of the memory sticks and IMC.


----------



## MCCSolutions

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> u guys need to move on , x58 is outdated and the motherboards are expensive.
> 
> newer xeons are better and similarly price.












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Coming from a 2500k user, I wonder what is better. x5660 or 2500k...
> We have access to all the things that are available apart from DDR4 and we can have 6 cores and 12threads.
> and it OCs to 5ghz.


Tru lol, like the comparison he did, x58 clearly has a price to performance advantage.....


----------



## GENXLR

The inaccuracy of your statement frightens me. We have benchmarks and results to justify our points. Would you care to give us results as well then?


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MCCSolutions*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tru lol, like the comparison he did, x58 clearly has a price to performance advantage.....


Yeah lets just list a few advantages..
6cores vs 4
12mb l3 cache vs 6
hyperthreading
nearly half the power consumption.
able to use 2 xeons in a double CPU motherboard
300gb of ram allowed vs 32gb, but hey who is going to put that much in a non server setup
higher l2 cache
6.4 vs 5 Gt/s


----------



## Sart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> And the big heat sink gets hot if there is no air flow over it from the CPU cooler. The board got unstable from that too when I added the H70 cooler. I had to add a fan to cool the heat sink down.


I was afraid of that. I was going to get 120mm CLC since my Hyper 212+ can't fit properly in my Spec-01 and larger air coolers won't be able to fit either, but now I'm worried that my airflow won't be good enough.

I'll have to look into setting up some more fans and the like. _Was kinda thinking of upgrading to an Air 540 or something down the road, or some other case with better potential airflow._


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> I thought I would join up and post my experience with my X5670, as I was inspired to upgrade my I7-950 due to this thread.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I was running an I7-950 @4.2GHz on an Asus Sabertooth X58 board with BIOS 1402. It was originally bought as a bundle from Scan in the UK and I upgraded the memory from 6GB of Corsair Dominator to 12GB quite recently. The overclock had been very stable but I became intrigued by the possibility of getting one of these ex-server chips and putting off a decsion about X99 until that platform became a wee bit more mature.
> So I purchased a X5670 from eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/computer-sales?_trksid=p2060778.m2749.l2754 and it duly arrived from the U.S. very well packaged and cleaned.
> 
> I noted the information about the differences between the 45nm and 32nm chips with regard to UCLK frequency and the QPI/DRAM voltages and reset CMOS before re-applying an overclock manually. I was running at a UCLK/Uncore of 2X memory frequency (1600MHz) i.e. 3200MHz and a QPI/DRAM voltage of 1.35V, so immediately after booting I set these to 2400MHz UCLK (1.5X memory frequency) and a QPI/DRAM voltage of 1.25V just for safety until I got an idea about the CPU Vcore which was going to be required for the X5670. The I7-950 ran at 4.2GHz with a BIOS voltage set at 1.28V, so I started off at a slightly lower voltage of 1.27V. It got stable at 1.32V with repeated 0x1E stop codes until this voltage was set. Slightly lower and it would run stability tests without issue but would suddenly bsod in general Windows use quite quickly.
> I then upped UCLK to 3200MHz and the QPI/DRAM to 1.30V which I believe to be a safe margin whilst retaining as much performance as possible
> 
> BCLK at 200MHz
> CPU Multiplier at 21
> Memory 1600MHz at 1.65V 9,9,9,24,2T
> UCLK 3200MHz
> QPI/DRAM 1.30V
> QPI Link data rate 7218MT/s
> Vcore 1.32V
> 
> All power saving and spread spectrum settings disabled and copied over from my I7-950 overclock.
> 
> I tried for 4.4GHz but I was hitting a limit I think, with 1.35V still giving me 0x1E stop codes in Windows, so I stopped at 4.2GHz.
> 
> So, in short, I have an overclock equivalent to my I7-950 except a hexacore processor for a total of £114!
> 
> Quite pleased and I have to thank your many contributors for the impetus to give this a try.


I love when X58 users share stories. 4.2Ghz is a solid OC with the 32nm. The performance jump is well worth it IMO. Be sure to post your CPU-Z validation link along with your OCN username so I can add you to the X58 Xeon Club.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> u guys need to move on , x58 is outdated and the motherboards are expensive.
> 
> newer xeons are better and similarly price.


Whoa.....those are fighting words. There's absolutely no reason to move on if you still consider the X58 your "main" rig. It's on par with a X79 by coming within 9% of performance. There's very little difference when it comes to gaming. The motherboards were cheap before people started going nuts over these lovely Xeon CPUs. Of course when there's a big demand the prices will skyrocket. Performance wise I don't see why X58 users should shell out $1000-$1500 for a brand new build. At least that's how much I would spent on my X79 build. Only for a 9% increase.


----------



## Agonist

I currently have an I7 950 @ 4.1 with hyperthreading on. I have the MSI x58a-gd45 motherboard. Latest bios installed.
I can run my 950 at 4.4 but not having 4 fans on my H100 it will hit 80-83c to be stable in BF4 with HT on.


Im really hoping that Xeon X5650 will work with this mobo. I found one on craigslist that is only $60
This thread is exactly what I was looking for and hoping for.
Thanks for all the benches and info.


----------



## gringopig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I love when X58 users share stories. 4.2Ghz is a solid OC with the 32nm. The performance jump is well worth it IMO. Be sure to post your CPU-Z validation link along with your OCN username so I can add you to the X58 Xeon Club.


I would be honoured to be included!

http://valid.x86.fr/ckchsd


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> I would be honoured to be included!
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/ckchsd


Done







. I have added you in the other topic: http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club

Copy the code from the first post and paste it in your sig.







Welcome.


----------



## gringopig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I have added you in the other topic: http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club
> 
> Copy the code from the first post and paste it in your sig.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome.


Proud to wear the badge!

and thank you...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> Proud to wear the badge!
> 
> and thank you...


You are welcome and welcome to the club. These Asus Sabertooth are pretty damn good boards aren't they. 5 year warranty is simply win for owners.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, howcome my P6T under full load with an X5650 causes mouse/graphical stutter, even my i7 920 does it too stutter


----------



## gringopig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You are welcome and welcome to the club. These Asus Sabertooth are pretty damn good boards aren't they. 5 year warranty is simply win for owners.


I think my board must still be in warranty! I never realised it was a 5 year cover. In all my time using it, it has never let me down and the only time I had issues was with the Marvell controller with an older BIOS. After an update, even the Marvell controller has worked flawlessly for me with my Samsung SSD. Not 6Gb/s of course, running from a PCI-e x1 lane and that was a bit cheeky of Asus but it's a great board. Here's a wee pic of my PC:



I'm very happy with the new CPU and have recommended the upgrade to a workmate with a Rampage III Extreme. He's got his coming from the same seller and I'm going to direct him here for info!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana, howcome my P6T under full load with an X5650 causes mouse/graphical stutter, even my i7 920 does it too stutter


Sounds like you may have some DPC issues. I can recommend you a link and program if you would like. I had sound and graphical stuttering with my Xeon L5639 and changing a few settings resolved my programs. I had to change my QPI and some other settings I believe. I'll try to dig up what I had to do. With my X5660 I had 0 lDPC issues. In the meantime if you want a link and a program let me know.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> I think my board must still be in warranty! I never realised it was a 5 year cover. In all my time using it, it has never let me down and the only time I had issues was with the Marvell controller with an older BIOS. After an update, even the Marvell controller has worked flawlessly for me with my Samsung SSD. Not 6Gb/s of course, running from a PCI-e x1 lane and that was a bit cheeky of Asus but it's a great board. Here's a wee pic of my PC:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm very happy with the new CPU and have recommended the upgrade to a workmate with a Rampage III Extreme. He's got his coming from the same seller and I'm going to direct him here for info!


Your case and setup looks great! Here is a few pictures of my build:

http://cdn.overclock.net/9/91/913cd776_Inside_1.jpeg

http://cdn.overclock.net/6/61/61661d2e_Inside_2.jpeg

I have many more HDDs and SDDs now.

If you are using 1 SSD then the Marvell Controller will work just fine. If you are using more than one SSD then you will more than likely want to use the SATA II ports. Also the 5 year warranty is good. All you need is a Serial Number. At one point I was going to replace my board, but I fixed my own "minor" issue since I didn't want to risk losing such a great overclocker with high BCLK. Customer service was top notch. I still have a few years left on my MB warranty. So far so good.

If your friend needs help there's more than enough people, including myself, that will help him here. Especially for overclocks.


----------



## GENXLR

DPC? Help me as much as you can Kana, and ill owe ya one









odd part is, people say DPC makes audio cut-outs. Mine has video stutter and lag like old P3 machines trying to run XP, but the audio NEVER pops or lags. even when streaming it

even weirder, did a DPC latency check under IBT loads. It's perfectly normal.....?


----------



## DKMB

Can I join ?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> I would be honoured to be included!
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/ckchsd


I Would be honoured too....

http://valid.canardpc.com/7gkrci


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> DPC? Help me as much as you can Kana, and ill owe ya one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> odd part is, people say DPC makes audio cut-outs. Mine has video stutter and lag like old P3 machines trying to run XP, but the audio NEVER pops or lags. even when streaming it
> 
> even weirder, did a DPC latency check under IBT loads. It's perfectly normal.....?


That's not true. DPC affects audio and video and it's freaking annoying. I use my PC for a lot of things and creating music is a big reason. Also I could see video stutter especially for HD vids. Sorry for the late reply. I was pretty busy yesterday. There's a link that you can read and various test you can perform. Sometimes the DCP issue can be driver related or hardware related. The problem is that it can be "any" driver that causes the conflict. You might have to mess around in the Device Manager as well. Another issue is that overclocking or messing around with the PCIE *frequency* and\or CPU PLL voltage can cause major issues as well.

Something else you can try is slightly increasing one of the following options in the BIOS:
IOH Voltage
IOH PCIE Voltage
ICH Voltage
ICH PCIE Voltage

Go to this web-site:
http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml

Download the "DCP Latency Checker" tool in the link above. Run it and if you are getting a high DCP latency it will aid you as you try to narrow down the issue.

Here is a picture from my rig:










You definitely want to be in the green. Yellow could be manageable, but another higher will cause some serious issues. Read the info in the link above and be sure to report back if you fixed the problem or need more help\tips to resolving the issue.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DKMB*
> 
> Can I join ?
> I Would be honoured too....
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/7gkrci


Done.







You have been approved and added to the X58 Xeon Club Membership List. You can view my post here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/2310#post_23085077

The list is on the first page of course. That page also has the code you'll need to add to your signature. Welcome to the club man.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> clip


It's kind of strange, I've messed with all these options.
Turned off some onboard stuff in my bios. turned on an off everything in device manager.
But my latency remains around 1000

Not quite sure whats causing it tbh,,, Going to try Linux probably and see if it goes away.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, thats my point. I'm NOT stuttering unless under 90% or greater cpu cycle loads. And even then, my highest latency is 280 us. I'm telling you, it's not my DPC.

On this machine though, every 5-10 minutes i get one Time of 3000us caused by the microsoft USB 1.1-2.0 drivers?

and when the video stutter occurs, it's like windows gui and anything on my monitors. It just very slowly renders, and windows flicker and refresh slowly almost pixle by pixle, but i can stream audio while it lags and the audio won't click or pop. Hence, i'm telling you, something else is wrong

PCI-E is stock at 100 and PLL is the lowest setting, 1.8

o.o, CPU PLL AUTO time?


----------



## gringopig

I'll certainly point him here! Love the look of your PC by the way...


----------



## Xoriam

Kana, we have the exact same ram.

What settings did you use to get them running at 2000mhz +

Timings and voltage. and I'm guessing it was a 2:10 ratio


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> It's kind of strange, I've messed with all these options.
> Turned off some onboard stuff in my bios. turned on an off everything in device manager.
> But my latency remains around 1000
> 
> Not quite sure whats causing it tbh,,, Going to try Linux probably and see if it goes away.


I didn't know you where having the same issues. As I said it can be either hardware or software related. I increased several settings in the BIOS to fix my issue with my Xeon L5639.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Kana, we have the exact same ram.
> 
> What settings did you use to get them running at 2000mhz +
> 
> Timings and voltage. and I'm guessing it was a 2:10 ratio


I used different RAM modules to run those 2000Mhz+ test. I think the highest I went was 2200Mhz. Even when I used higher voltage the X58 still couldn't use the benefits of highly overclocked RAM. I honestly can't remember the settings since I no longer have the RAM.

I only have and use 1600Mhz RAM on a daily basis.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gringopig*
> 
> I'll certainly point him here! Love the look of your PC by the way...


Thanks. I'm planning on a making a few changes to my PC next year.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana, thats my point. I'm NOT stuttering unless under 90% or greater cpu cycle loads. And even then, my highest latency is 280 us. I'm telling you, it's not my DPC.
> 
> On this machine though, every 5-10 minutes i get one Time of 3000us caused by the microsoft USB 1.1-2.0 drivers?
> 
> and when the video stutter occurs, it's like windows gui and anything on my monitors. It just very slowly renders, and windows flicker and refresh slowly almost pixle by pixle, but i can stream audio while it lags and the audio won't click or pop. Hence, i'm telling you, something else is wrong
> 
> PCI-E is stock at 100 and PLL is the lowest setting, 1.8
> 
> o.o, CPU PLL AUTO time?


I don't know what to say man. Maybe you can re-install your CPU. RAM and GPU. Set everything to default settings and give it a go. I'm not sure what your issue is caused by, but are you saying you know that the MS USB 1.1-2.0 drivers are causing your issue?

If you have another HDD\SDD laying around you can try a fresh OS install just to eliminate a potential driver issue. Some users reported that their GPU drivers or some other peripheral driver was cause that issue. Also getting lag under 90% is indeed weird. With issues you like this you will have to take it one step at a time and make a checklist of some sort.


----------



## GENXLR

I've tried mutiple installations.... No difference, my 920 and my x5650 generate this, gonna try running stock, but is it possible for my X58 chip or ICH10R to be degraded from being almost 6 years old?


----------



## Kana-Maru

I guess anything is possible........especially at 6 years. High overclocks gave me issues. Now I just take it easy and enjoy the benefits of 6 cores + HT instead of breaking records.


----------



## GENXLR

hmmm, I want a Rampage iii anyways.....


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Some pics of my X58 Xeon RIG, X5660 @ 4.4Ghz


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Some pics of my X58 Xeon RIG, X5660 @ 4.4Ghz


Bro, i see you have a fan blowing on to the MB chipset?
What MB you are using and how do you manage to attach that fan?
I am thinking to attach a fan to blow on to my Asus Sabertooth chipset, because the chipset is hot to touch when gaming.
Can you take some more pictures especially on that fan? I am trying to figure out a way to do that myself, and it would be easier by referring to your method


----------



## OCmember

I think the fan is resting on the GPU.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

I'm getting this error with my X5670 in Event Viewer after a BSOD:

A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor ID: 20

The details view of this entry contains further information.

What does this mean? I'm trying to OC this chip to just 4ghz and it seems quite a dud.. and a waste, plus it takes too much voltage, i don't recall getting this error with my 920 even at just 3.6ghz.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I'm getting this error with my X5670 in Event Viewer after a BSOD:
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor ID: 20
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> What does this mean? I'm trying to OC this chip to just 4ghz and it seems quite a dud.. and a waste, plus it takes too much voltage, i don't recall getting this error with my 920 even at just 3.6ghz.


Make sure your ram is at it's stated voltage. Sounds like something isn't getting enough somewhere. I'm not sure it's vcore related but some other volt possibly. Are you using all 6 memory slots?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Some pics of my X58 Xeon RIG, X5660 @ 4.4Ghz


Nice build and pictures man. It looks like you are all set.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Bro, i see you have a fan blowing on to the MB chipset?
> What MB you are using and how do you manage to attach that fan?
> I am thinking to attach a fan to blow on to my Asus Sabertooth chipset, because the chipset is hot to touch when gaming.


I had the same problem with my Sabertooth X58 X58 chipset. It would get very hot during benchmarks and gaming [especially in the summer!]. I placed one of my Delta fans inside of my case and now the heat doesn't stand a chance with my latest setup. The heatsink design is great and really moves the heat even while my fan is blowing at low RPMs. I can't remember the name of the fan, but there is a flexible fan that will allow you to screw it down within the case. I have one, but it's somewhere in a box I haven't used it since I've upgraded my case. You can aim the fan where it needs to push air. If I can remember the name I'll let you know.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Hi It's resting on the GPU, no way to attach it to the heatsink, I'm using a EVGA X58 SLI3, and the chipset get's really hot if the fan is not there (over 70C) but with the fan it never exceeds 50C. I have used this board for almost 4 years this way no issues at all


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Thanks Kana, yeah I think I can use this for the foreseeable future


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I think the fan is resting on the GPU.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fallenzeraphine*
> 
> Hi It's resting on the GPU, no way to attach it to the heatsink, I'm using a EVGA X58 SLI3, and the chipset get's really hot if the fan is not there (over 70C) but with the fan it never exceeds 50C. I have used this board for almost 4 years this way no issues at all


Thanks for the info.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice build and pictures man. It looks like you are all set.
> I had the same problem with my Sabertooth X58 X58 chipset. It would get very hot during benchmarks and gaming [especially in the summer!]. I placed one of my Delta fans inside of my case and now the heat doesn't stand a chance with my latest setup. The heatsink design is great and really moves the heat even while my fan is blowing at low RPMs. I can't remember the name of the fan, but there is a flexible fan that will allow you to screw it down within the case. I have one, but it's somewhere in a box I haven't used it since I've upgraded my case. You can aim the fan where it needs to push air. If I can remember the name I'll let you know.


Is it this little thing here?


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Make sure your ram is at it's stated voltage. Sounds like something isn't getting enough somewhere. I'm not sure it's vcore related but some other volt possibly. Are you using all 6 memory slots?


I'm just using 2 in dual channel, 8gb which is enough for me. I did see when it started in windows that i got a 124 code error, for some reason though that code is not showing up in event viewer, i guess if it's not Vcore it is some other voltage.. or i've just got a bad chip. I'll try 3.8ghz for now.

I thought 1.37 odd vcore would do it no problem for 4.


----------



## OCmember

Are you using a multi meter to get your readings?

Did you buy the chip from a private owner or a whole-saler that had many chips?

It's possible someone abused the chip and caused an issue with it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Is it this little thing here?


Yes. That's exactly what I have. It has 3 speed settings.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes. That's exactly what I have. It has 3 speed settings.


Alright, thanks for the information.
That looks like a simple setup, i think i can try to DIY it, hopefully it won't turn up to be an ugly build


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I have to use the Antec SpotCool over my chipset or my x58 gets super hot. With the spotcool it stays around 54C, but without it it is something like 80C just to maintain 200 bclk. I hate being forced to have that fan there.

I've done everything I could to try and hide its electrical cable, including gluing it to the post and painting it black and I still hate it. Just not the kind of clean build I was looking for.


----------



## Eebobb

The chipset gets that hot on your MB skorp ? I have to test my MB and see how hot mine gets. Nice TJ07 btw did you do the cutouts yourself I know mine didn't come that way I'll post some pics of mine in a few


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eebobb*
> 
> The chipset gets that hot on your MB skorp ? I have to test my MB and see how hot mine gets. Nice TJ07 btw did you do the cutouts yourself I know mine didn't come that way I'll post some pics of mine in a few


Yeah I spent months with a Dremel, Drill, files and sand paper and about 100 cutting disks, lol. I should have gotten the diamond cutting wheel sooner as that thing seems to never shrink on me. I've got modifications to my TJ07 in every corner of it, top, bottom and all sides, mostly for cable management. I also had every piece powder coated, even though I had planned on painting it myself. Just figured the powder coating had no chance of failure.

This TJ07 has gone through at least three major rebuilds, then one day in 2012 I just got sick of not having it just right. So, that day I took it apart, set all my hardware to the side and lived off a laptop. That one day ended up being three months of cutting, planning, cutting and powder coating. Every mod I did had one goal in mind and that was to hide as much cabling as possible. I even put the SSD's on the back side of the mobo tray. NO MORE HDD's will ever come remotely close to this case ever again. I even "hung" the water pump down below instead of trying to mount it to the floor of the case as that just seemed like a much cleaner mod to me, plus it gave me a reason to have beautiful chrome hardware directly visible through the window, lol.

Before


And After


And this cut was made at the rear near the I/O plate, just because I cant stand seeing USB cables, so any cables for extra USB/eSATA ports immediately go below deck between the PSU and the shelf. The way it should be. You can see the result in the image above.

This may be hard to believe, but the screws that are holding the SSD brackets in place are actually brass PCB standoff's. I used my dremel and cut 8 of them in half until none of the male threads was showing, then I sanded and polished them to make them shine, essentially turning them into a fancy nut. Then I used nice chromed screws through the tray and into the brass nuts I just created. This mod required me to install the SSD's brackets before the motherboard, and I used a tiny bit of thread locker just in case. When you look at it in person it almost looks like I had them gold plated. Turned out very nice.

Before

After

Before

After









Anyway, so long future motherboard styles can be mounted, even if I have to modify something, lol I will never desire a new case. I just hope ATX is around for a long time.


----------



## GENXLR

So is there anything wrong with me using C-STATES while having an OC? I love the performance I'm getting and it has awesome low temps while idle and great low powerdraw


----------



## Eebobb

Nice Job







I want to get a caselabs case but dont want to spend $500+ on it lol


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Thanks, and nice job to you to. I redid my post a little bit to show before/afters.

I like Blacks, Whites and Greens, but I just do not like reds and blues. Every time I seen a green build something just made me jealous, so I finally did it. Sadly, my R3E is black and red themed and I just can not do anything about it. Anyway, that SpotCool fan just sticks out like a sore thumb, but I have to have it.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> So is there anything wrong with me using C-STATES while having an OC? I love the performance I'm getting and it has awesome low temps while idle and great low powerdraw


If its working for you, then use it. Yeah, the CPU runs cool for me to, 10C cooler then my 930 did...


----------



## GENXLR

with C-STATES, i Idle at 20C vs 34C on all but 2 cores. it's amazing.

My build is blue, I personally like Blue Builds. Red is not my thing. Green is okay, I used to have an original Alienware Area 51 that was green, so I can feel ya, my only machine with a custom water loop too XD.


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Thanks, and nice job to you to. I redid my post a little bit to show before/afters.
> 
> I like Blacks, Whites and Greens, but I just do not like reds and blues. Every time I seen a green build something just made me jealous, so I finally did it. Sadly, my R3E is black and red themed and I just can not do anything about it. Anyway, that SpotCool fan just sticks out like a sore thumb, but I have to have it.


I can't believe it gets that hot







I was gonna pick up that board too but ended up getting something else. Have you tried reapplying the heatsink ? My Xeon runs about 5 to 7c cooler and 220mhz faster than my 930 with 2 more cores


----------



## GENXLR

I want a X5660 or help getting 200BLCK stable, but eveyrtime i hit 200blck, mem errors everywhere


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Anyone have settings for a P6T D board? Still trying to get my x5670 stable and i'm up to 1.37v vcore, it's not stable even at 3.8ghz. I've altered some other voltages a bit as well and it doesn't make a difference. And that voltage is just stupid to get these speeds that aren't even stable, it's already too hot.

Really wasted my money on this, i could've stuck with my 920 at 3.6 and kept the money i spent on the x5670 for a new z97 board and cpu.. so disappointed.

I think i got a dud chip unless anyone can recommend something i can do.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Anyone have settings for a P6T D board? Still trying to get my x5670 stable and i'm up to 1.37v vcore, it's not stable even at 3.8ghz. I've altered some other voltages a bit as well and it doesn't make a difference. And that voltage is just stupid to get these speeds that aren't even stable, it's already too hot.
> 
> Really wasted my money on this, i could've stuck with my 920 at 3.6 and kept the money i spent on the x5670 for a new z97 board and cpu.. so disappointed.
> 
> I think i got a dud chip unless anyone can recommend something i can do.


can you screenshot or post your current setting, also whats ahppening when you say its not stable? BSOD?


----------



## Konkistadori

Initial tests with new ram.. Should i lower memory ratio from 5 to something else? i dont need OCd ram..

*v.core 1.35
QPI/VTT 1.32 ,
HT OFF,
C-State enabled,
C1E disable,
Turbo enabled.
cpu ratio 20
*


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> So is there anything wrong with me using C-STATES while having an OC? I love the performance I'm getting and it has awesome low temps while idle and great low powerdraw


There's nothing wrong with C-States while overclocking. The only downside is that some users "might" have to use a bit more Vcore. I run 4.2Ghz with C-states and it's great.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I want a X5660 or help getting 200BLCK stable, but eveyrtime i hit 200blck, mem errors everywhere


What CPU ratio are you shooting for with 200 BCLK. For your memory errors you can try these settings: Uncore is x2 the mem frequency, 1.64v DRAM voltage, slightly increase the Vcore and check the QPI\vtt voltage. I'd also make sure your RAM was running default timings if possible with 2T or 3T.

Memory errors can be a pain in the *insert word here so that mods won't PM me.*


----------



## GENXLR

Hi Kana, So i need more voltage for my c-states, cause it uses the 23 multi now instead of the 22, so it BSOD's every now and then at idle.

I'm shooting for my 22/20 multi at 200 blkc, but even 1600mhz ram and 1.5x uncore still causes memory issues. at 1.4Vcore and 1.66 dram bus and 1.35 uncore.


----------



## EvilMonk

Whats up guys







I'm back


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hi Kana, So i need more voltage for my c-states, cause it uses the 23 multi now instead of the 22, so it BSOD's every now and then at idle.


Yeah that's the tricky part about using C-states. It can sometimes require a bit more voltage for stability [Vcore--QPI\vtt etc]. For me C-states give me issues at high load%. BSODs during idle is weird, but it happens more often than none while overclocking. Especially if you are using dynamic\offset voltage instead of AUTO or manual.
Quote:


> I'm shooting for my 22/20 multi at 200 blkc, but even 1600mhz ram and 1.5x uncore still causes memory issues. at 1.4Vcore and 1.66 dram bus and 1.35 uncore.


You'll probably need more Vcore than 1.4v for sure. Especially if you are using C-states. DRAM should be fine @ 1.64v-1.65v.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Whats up guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm back


I knew I smelt evil in the air. Welcome back Monk.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah that's the tricky part about using C-states. It can sometimes require a bit more voltage for stability [Vcore--QPI\vtt etc]. For me C-states give me issues at high load%. BSODs during idle is weird, but it happens more often than none while overclocking. Especially if you are using dynamic\offset voltage instead of AUTO or manual.
> You'll probably need more Vcore than 1.4v for sure. Especially if you are using C-states. DRAM should be fine @ 1.64v-1.65v.
> I knew I smelt evil in the air. Welcome back Monk.


Thank you Kanu-Maru!


----------



## GENXLR

Yeah, idk, I'd like to break the 200Blck, but it gets to hot for me. I guess I just have to deal with it









C-States wise, yeah it's only a BSOD at idle, under 10 8gb IBT runs i passed.


----------



## DividebyZERO

1.4vcore seems really high is this on boards with vdroop issues? i use 1.36v for 225 bclk and has been rocking. I haven't ran IBT for long periods though. I just game and recently handbrake. MY temps are really decnt but im on water not air.


----------



## GENXLR

Whats is your multi at that blck?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Thank you Kanu-Maru!


No problem man. Do you mind telling me\us why you disappeared all of a sudden?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Yeah, idk, I'd like to break the 200Blck, but it gets to hot for me. I guess I just have to deal with it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C-States wise, yeah it's only a BSOD at idle, under 10 8gb IBT runs i passed.


Yeah heat can be another pain in the *insert any word here*. If you can't keep your temps below 75c then there's no use for shooting towards a high overclock. My personal limit is below 70c-72c. You'll definitely need water cooling [looped or custom]. My looped cooling has done wonders for overclocking.

I think that when the CPU gets the higher frequency [2 cores = Idle: 23x] it expects more voltage. I noticed that if I run C-states with previous overclocks I have to add vCore. Depending on the OC the CPU could require a lot of vCore to compensate for the Idle frequency. Therefore, if I go higher than 4Ghz I usually turn all C-states off. This allows me to run lower vCore and generate much less heat with a stable CPU ratio [23x for my X5660]. Offset Voltage only adds to the list of benefits since my average Vcore with a 4.6Ghz [No C-states] OC will only be around 0.9vCore - 1.12Vcore with an Idle as low as 21c-22c average [Load 62c - 64c]. Of course that all depends on what I'm doing that day.

Also remember that even if you don't use C-states your Frequency will drop no matter what. So even if you are running 4.8Ghz - 5Ghz your frequency will still have a massive drop although CPU-Z will read the max. Under the hood the cores will Idle regardless. C-States still have their benefits nonetheless.

Here is my 3.9Ghz in HWinfo [3981Mhz] OC with C-States disabled.










Notice that the Xeon frequency drops while Idle. These Xeons are lovely.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Whats is your multi at that blck?


Multi is 20, for some reason my board doesnt seem to like turbo. I had stability issues with it on, thus i turned it off and been smooth sailing. I just had to use a really high bclk to help the X5650 along.


----------



## intelchief

Hi Kana-Maru!

I want to thank you for this thread. For more than one year i was running two Xeons X5550 @ 4ghz on my SR2. It was so hot, that i was very upset with Xeons. Last month i found your thread about x5660 and decided to try them I found two x5670 for ~ 300$ with 24 months of guarantee.

my spec:
2x X5670 cooled with air ( Megahalems)
Evga SR2
12Gb ram
Antec HCP 1000W
GTX 670

And this is the result:

2 x x5670 @ 4,2 Ghz with 1,29V, whats more VTT is set to only 1,3V. Memory divider is set to: 2:10 which result in 1750mhz memory frequency
1.During small data set tests i cant reach 70 C degrees. My max was 68.
2. Large data test - 55 C
3. Normal using/ gaming, 50-55 with 23-29 IDLE
All test was done with Case closed and no additional cooling

And finally i've got two questions for you:
1. I've read in some posts on different forums about uncore frequency (uncore frequency shouldn't be higher than 1.5x of memory frequency - is it true?)
2.What do you think - is is worth to OC them higher? i was planning to use them for a longer time and i dont want to damage them.

sry for my language - still learning english


----------



## OCmember

Have you tried your VTT at 1.2v??? With a high multi from the 5670 one would think that high BCLK isn't required thus leaving VTT volts out of the equation. I think with my i7 970 I don't even break 201 BCLK, even then that gives me 4.8GHz which is unatainable for my chip.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Whats up guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm back


Nice to have you back bro!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Hi Kana-Maru!
> I want to thank you for this thread.


Thanks for reading and you are welcome. It looks like you are getting great temps @ 4.2Ghz as well.

Quote:


> 1. I've read in some posts on different forums about uncore frequency (uncore frequency shouldn't be higher than 1.5x of memory frequency - is it true?)


Well the default Uncore for Gulftown \ Westmere-EP is 1.8x [slightly varies with the different MB manufactures]. For stability the uncore should be around 2x the memory multiplier. [DDR3-1600 = Uncore 3200Mhz]. You should have no issues with 1.8x - 2x. I personally use 2x since I'm so used to the i7 Bloomfield's.

Quote:


> 2.What do you think - is is worth to OC them higher?n i was planning to use them for a longer time ad i dont want to damage them.


Well the max recommendation from Intel is 1.35vCore and you're only at 1.29vCore. I'm sure you've tested for stability. Since you are getting GREAT temps with the 4.2Ghz and running dual CPUs.......uhhh....hmm.... you have more than enough horsepower. I would be happy with dual X5670's @ 4.2Ghz. The more you overclock the CPU the more heat you'll generate and the more voltage you'll have to pump through your CPU. You still have some breathing room to shoot for 4.4Ghz., however, that will be your decision.

Quote:


> sry for my language - still learning english


No worries man. Your English is pretty good.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Everyone was posting pics of their rig! So I thought I would join in, sorry for the potato pic, it was a last second thing









I recently put my SIG rig in a new S340, I wanted a more plain case, I also got the Phanteks cooler (I have 1mm of clearance on the side panel) and I am replaced the fans with AP15s and have another pair running as exhausts on the back and top, both of which have resistors to slow them down. I want to get the NZXT Grid+, but I will hold off on that until I can get some cash. I need to buy winter clothes, its getting cold and I don't any winter clothes, as I am from Hawaii haha









I used the 140mm phanteks fans as intake, since they wouldn't work on the cooler, as it would be 10mm too high. Anyways, notice my ziptie work on the white fans? Well that's cause they have 120mm mounting holes and i wouldn't be able to screw both into the case without modding the case, so I joined the fans and just screwed in the top fan.

The case is pretty awesome for the price, just note, the HDDs are hard mounted, and vibrate, I took out my 3tb just because it was noisy, I replaced it with a WD Green.

Overall, its an awesome case, and excellent for the price. I only paid $83, as it cost me $13 to get it shipped to me.


----------



## OCmember

Debating on whether to setup my custom loop on my i7 970 or not. total pita


----------



## GENXLR

I'll take some pictures soon enough of my Rig, and if anyone is intrested, the younger Dual X5450 rig(socket 771, the pioneer for 1366)


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone was posting pics of their rig! So I thought I would join in, sorry for the potato pic, it was a last second thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recently put my SIG rig in a new S340, I wanted a more plain case, I also got the Phanteks cooler (I have 1mm of clearance on the side panel) and I am replaced the fans with AP15s and have another pair running as exhausts on the back and top, both of which have resistors to slow them down. I want to get the NZXT Grid+, but I will hold off on that until I can get some cash. I need to buy winter clothes, its getting cold and I don't any winter clothes, as I am from Hawaii haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I used the 140mm phanteks fans as intake, since they wouldn't work on the cooler, as it would be 10mm too high. Anyways, notice my ziptie work on the white fans? Well that's cause they have 120mm mounting holes and i wouldn't be able to screw both into the case without modding the case, so I joined the fans and just screwed in the top fan.
> 
> The case is pretty awesome for the price, just note, the HDDs are hard mounted, and vibrate, I took out my 3tb just because it was noisy, I replaced it with a WD Green.
> 
> Overall, its an awesome case, and excellent for the price. I only paid $83, as it cost me $13 to get it shipped to me.


Epic Heatsink







That thing is awesome !


----------



## intelchief

Unfortunately, everything bellow VTT=1.3V is unstable.

Well today i decided to try OC my CPU's a liitle more. My limitation was 1,32V(i didnt wan't more voltage). Funny thing is that my temps are lower. Its because i lowered memory voltage from 1.63 to 1.6
Whats more i didn't need higher VTT. So my voltages looks like this:

CPU1:
Vcore: 1.317V
VTT: 1.3V

CPU2
Vcore: 1.305V
VTT: 1.27V

Memory:1.6V
IOH. 1.35V

this is the result of IBT set at maximum stress level


and here is Cinebench


Do you think that i can keep this settings for 24/7 use? Are they safe?


----------



## OCmember

Max Vcore is 1.35v for the Xeons

Intel X5670


----------



## GENXLR

Only 58 Gflops? at 3.8Ghz, I'm seeing 70Gflops....


----------



## intelchief

i was also surpised with this number. On my previous x5550 i had 65-70.

Found solution:

threads cannot be set on AUTO. in my case i have to set manually 24 threads


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Unfortunately, everything bellow VTT=1.3V is unstable.
> 
> Well today i decided to try OC my CPU's a liitle more. My limitation was 1,32V(i didnt wan't more voltage). Funny thing is that my temps are lower. Its because i lowered memory voltage from 1.63 to 1.6
> Whats more i didn't need higher VTT. So my voltages looks like this:
> 
> CPU1:
> Vcore: 1.317V
> VTT: 1.3V
> 
> CPU2
> Vcore: 1.305V
> VTT: 1.27V
> 
> Memory:1.6V
> IOH. 1.35V
> 
> this is the result of IBT set at maximum stress level
> 
> 
> and here is Cinebench
> 
> 
> Do you think that i can keep this settings for 24/7 use? Are they safe?


The vcore is all safe on that setting for both Xeons if they are stable keep it like that








I just find the Gflops low as well... should be lot more than that...


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> The vcore is all safe on that setting for both Xeons if they are stable keep it like that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just find the Gflops low as well... should be lot more than that...


already finished IBT again but this time with threads set manually to 24. Average Gflops is around 92. Is it correct now?


----------



## Banedox

I love my X5660!

I still have no real reason to upgrade with 12gb of magic samsung ram and a x 780 ti Classified


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> already finished IBT again but this time with threads set manually to 24. Average Gflops is around 92. Is it correct now?


For 24 threads? with an SR-2 I think its really low for 24 threads since I get around 147Gflops with my 12 cores/24Threads X5670 Mac Pro on Windows 7 with IBT with turbo @ 3.2 Ghz...
Are you sure you got everything setup correctly? maybe there is a problem with the process priority of IBT or something... I know it took me a couple of runs to extract some extra Gflops by tweaking affinity and priorities of the process in Windows


----------



## OCmember

Are you guys both using the same IBT test? The one I use is v2.54


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> already finished IBT again but this time with threads set manually to 24. Average Gflops is around 92. Is it correct now?


I think something is wrong. What program are you using to measure Gflops? If its the latest IBT, you should be seeing 140-150 using "Very High" settings I would think. We have single Xeons here almost doing 90 Gflops.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I think something is wrong. What program are you using to measure Gflops? If its the latest IBT, you should be seeing 140-150 using "Very High" settings I would think. We have single Xeons here almost doing 90 Gflops.


Yeah thats why I was thinking its somewhat kinda low for a dual Xeon setup SR2 to have only 92 Gflops... I get 147 with my Mac Pro...
And yes its with version 2.54, its been around for like 2 and a half years lol


----------



## GENXLR

Thats very low, What is your Uncore? If you are at 1.5 thats why, move to 1.8-2.0 and possibly bump your vcore. may sound silly but these xeons speed up when the voltage is in the sweet spot. for mine its 1.3625v

check your VTT voltage, thats safe upto 1.35, that can help as well, as you move up the uncore.

You should se at least 140 Gflops, as with a single x5650 at 3.8ghz, i see 70gflops. You can probably easily score 140 once properly tuned. Fun fact, you are scoring less than my D5400XS which is twin X5450 harpertown cpu's(double quads, so 8 cores, 8 threads) which scores 96Gflops.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Thats very low, What is your Uncore? If you are at 1.5 thats why, move to 1.8-2.0 and possibly bump your vcore. may sound silly but these xeons speed up when the voltage is in the sweet spot. for mine its 1.3625v
> 
> check your VTT voltage, thats safe upto 1.35, that can help as well, as you move up the uncore.
> 
> You should se at least 140 Gflops, as with a single x5650 at 3.8ghz, i see 70gflops. You can probably easily score 140 once properly tuned. Fun fact, you are scoring less than my D5400XS which is twin X5450 harpertown cpu's(double quads, so 8 cores, 8 threads) which scores 96Gflops.


Well properly tweaked he should score more than a stock Mac Pro 2010 with dual X5670 2.93Ghz that have turbo locked @ 3.2Ghz... they get 147 Gflops average with a 10 times runs at very high so I guess he could expect to score upward of 150 when his system is properly tuned...







if his ram is overclocked as well I'm sure it will. Mine is just 6x8Gb registered ecc samsung DDR3 1333 sticks... nothing out of the ordinary and its all stock settings. its not possible to overclock it.


----------



## Eebobb

Try running IBT on very high settings not maximum


----------



## intelchief

well problem(probably) solved. I lowered bus speed from 179 to 177 Mhz (4250mhz) and right know ITB is running with this kind of settings:

i also running at lower voltage (CPU1 1.305 CPU2 1.294)

stressl level custom 9000MB
threads auto (not all - this was not working properly)

roght know in linpack output i have something like this:

time 148.396
speed Gflops 173.2902

well i think that OC was to high, even though PC was fully stable

Thank you all for your help and the answers!


----------



## OCmember

try 1.31v on both chips. and how are you measuring the volts anyways? are you using a multimeter on the motherboard terminals?


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> try 1.31v on both chips. and how are you measuring the volts anyways? are you using a multimeter on the motherboard terminals?


well funny fact about Evga SR2 is that one CPU always needs higher voltage and another lower. same with temps, one is warmer









look at this:


Sadly i dont have multimeter, voltages are from Bios/evga eleet

one more question:
what do you think- is it worth to enable c-state?


----------



## Xoriam

Just got my X5660.

LOL WHAT IDLE AT 16C?????????????? with HT On!
(slightly worried about those 2 cores that are idling at 20c, i'm guessing the 0.7% load might be on those cores. just hoping the tim is spread well)



the display built in on my MB reads 14c
vcore 0.8 default. I might have a golden chip!


----------



## GENXLR

You need more vcore at that blck to go faster







thats why lowering it worked


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Just got my X5660.
> 
> LOL WHAT IDLE AT 16C?????????????? with HT On!
> (slightly worried about those 2 cores that are idling at 20c, i'm guessing the 0.7% load might be on those cores. just hoping the tim is spread well)
> 
> 
> 
> the display built in on my MB reads 14c
> vcore 0.8 default. I might have a golden chip!


Welcome to the world of Westmere.

Those readings are normal


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone was posting pics of their rig! So I thought I would join in, sorry for the potato pic, it was a last second thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Nice rig man. I love that case. I have a few of those Galaxy cards. They look nice.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Banedox*
> 
> I love my X5660!
> 
> I still have no real reason to upgrade with 12gb of magic samsung ram and a x 780 ti Classified


Same here man. There's no real need to upgrade right now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Just got my X5660.
> 
> LOL WHAT IDLE AT 16C?????????????? with HT On!
> (slightly worried about those 2 cores that are idling at 20c, i'm guessing the 0.7% load might be on those cores. just hoping the tim is spread well)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the display built in on my MB reads 14c
> vcore 0.8 default. I might have a golden chip!


Yup that's not normal....time to send it back to the seller. JOKING. Your readings are correct. You can also count on at least 2 cores being a but warmer while the CPU idles. With C-states enabled 2 cores will run at a higher frequency [generating a bit more heat]. Even during 100% loads there will be 1 or 2 cores that are much cooler than the rest. I was surprised at how cool a few of the cores ran during benchmarks and during IDLE periods. Congrats on your CPU & temps. You'll love X58 more now.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice rig man. I love that case. I have a few of those Galaxy cards. They look nice.
> Same here man. There's no real need to upgrade right now.
> Yup that's not normal....time to send it back to the seller. JOKING. Your readings are correct. You can also count on at least 2 cores being a but warmer while the CPU idles. With C-states enabled 2 cores will run at a higher frequency [generating a bit more heat]. Even during 100% loads there will be 1 or 2 cores that are much cooler than the rest. I was surprised at how cool a few of the cores ran during benchmarks and during IDLE periods. Congrats on your CPU & temps. You'll love X58 more now.


I hope you're happy to know you made my heart skip a beat for the frist line of that comment!









Well it's better than my i7 950 core temp diffrential for now. that thing had 10c diffrence between coldest and warmest core even lapped.
(not saying it was bad since my temps were amazing on that chip, I hit voltage limit way before temp limit.)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> I hope you're happy to know you made my heart skip a beat for the frist line of that comment!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \


LMAO! Yes I"m very happy about that haha. I've posted about your temperatures in the X58 club topic. Something isn't adding up with your numbers or how you are getting your numbers. I can believe 17c- 19c before I can believe 14c. The built in readers on a lot of MB aren't that great anyways.


----------



## Xoriam

First problem encountered.

I can boot at 163blck with 1.1vtt
Anything beyond with increased voltage on vtt still won't boot.... hm....


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> First problem encountered.
> 
> I can boot at 163blck with 1.1vtt
> Anything beyond with increased voltage on vtt still won't boot.... hm....


1.2v should of been standard as most DDR3 ram was between 1.5v-1.65v and there was a rule to keep your VTT within .50v of your ram volts e.g. 1.65v (ram) cannot have a lower VTT of 1.15v


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 1.2v should of been standard as most DDR3 ram was between 1.5v-1.65v and there was a rule to keep your VTT within .50v of your ram volts e.g. 1.65v (ram) cannot have a lower VTT of 1.15v


yeah i know

ram is currently 1.5 which is 0.4 diffrence.
like i said, even increasing vtt does not solve boot issue, even 1.3-1.35. nothing


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> yeah i know
> 
> ram is currently 1.5 which is 0.4 diffrence.
> like i said, even increasing vtt does not solve boot issue, even 1.3-1.35. nothing


How is that motherboard?


----------



## EvilMonk

Oh and I lowered my PLL to 1.84v and its all good on my P6T


----------



## GENXLR

Odd, my P6T if i set the PLL even to 1.82, immediate BSOD from a clock generator failure failing to receive a secondary clock from another Core.


----------



## autoshot

Hey guys!

I stumbled over this thread when I was looking for a solution to my current problem:

I just replaced my aging i7 920 as well as 3x 2GB (OCZ3P1333LV6GK) with a second-hand Xeon X5650 and 3x 4GB (PGV38G1600ELK) on my ASUS P6T Deluxe v1. Unfortunately, I am not able to get the RAM working properly, i.e., even though I can boot into Windows without any problems a BSOD appears from time to time, for example while surfing the web or listening to iTunes. An overnight Memtest86+ run confirmed that the memory in fact causes the issues. So far, I have tried the following things to resolve this:

- complete BIOS reset (by removing the battery), followed by leaving all settings in the AI Tweaker untouched except for the DRAM Bus Voltage, which was set to 1.64v. The resulting automatically defined settings were DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, which still caused Memtest-errors.
- removing from and carefully re-inserting each DIMM into the orange memory (A1, B1, C1) slots while keeping the settings from above constant. Still Memtest-errors.
- increasing the QPI/ DRAM Core Voltage to 1.325v while keeping the remaining settings constant (DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, 1.64v). Still Memtest-errors.
- inserting the DIMMs in the black memory slots (A2, B2, C2) instead of the orange ones. Not even a picture on the monitor (fans turning).
- removing the third DIMM to run the system in a Dual-Channel configuration (settings unchanged at DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, 1.64v, 1.325v) with the exact same modules that have been running without a glitch for more than 3 years in my AMD-rig (Phenom II X4 965, ASUS M5A97Pro). Still Memtest-errors

I am currently testing a single module at the same settings as before and, if this still causes errors, plan to make another run with DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-*110-2T*.

Aside from the stability issues with the Patriot memory there is another problem I encountered: The system will not even post (just fans turning) if I set the memory frequency higher than 1333 (true for both the OCZ and the Patriot modules). At first I thought this would be due to the Xeon only supporting non-OCed memory frequencies. But since a lot of you guys are running those Xeons well above DDR3-1333 I started to get a little worried.

Do you have any idea what else I could try to get my system stable (and above 1333MHz)?

Best regards,

autoshot


----------



## OCmember

why are your guys cpu pll even changed at all? mine is at 1.80v ??? and that's for any GHz setting


----------



## GENXLR

Thats what i've been asking

To the above, increase your DRAM bus voltage?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Thats what i've been asking
> 
> To the above, increase your DRAM bus voltage?


I've never seen the CPU PLL voltage setting effect any of my overclocking. It's always been at 1.80v and never has effected overclocking stability


----------



## autoshot

I already set it to 1.64v (the next possible step would be 1.66v, which might damage the CPU according to intel)


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I already set it to 1.64v (the next possible step would be 1.66v, which might damage the CPU according to intel)


what are you talking about? your DRAM volts? I'm gonna say yes. If your CPU VTT is above 1.20v it'll be ok. Apparently CPU VTT is safe all the way up to 1.35v. Just keep your CPU VTT within .50v of your DRAM volts


----------



## autoshot

yes, the 1.64v are the DRAM Bus Voltage I used during all the tests. this was in response to what GENXLR wrote. are you saying I should increase the CPU VTT voltage in order to get it stable?

EDIT

I just realized CPU VTT is the same as QPI/DRAM Core Voltage. I already tried increasing that from "Auto" to 1.325v without any improvement.


----------



## Scorpii

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I already set it to 1.64v (the next possible step would be 1.66v, which might damage the CPU according to intel)


Set your RAM voltage to 1.66v. It will be fine, lots of boards don't do 1.65v (the 'rated' voltage) so 1.66 is next, and it works fine. Many people running this for a long time and never had any issues. If I go down to 1.64V it doesn't work, and that might be the case with you also


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> If I go down to 1.64V it doesn't work, and that might be the case with you also


you think 1.64v might be too low at DDR3-1066 CL7? because cpu-z says this memory should do that even at 1.5v


----------



## Scorpii

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> you think 1.64v might be too low at DDR3-1066 CL7? because cpu-z says this memory should do that even at 1.5v


Maybe not, but it can't hurt to try! My RAM probably wouldn't let me boot at those speeds, so it's worth trying at 1.66v at least to rule it out as an issue.


----------



## autoshot

I will try it then


----------



## Xoriam

X5660 @ 4,632mhz
http://valid.x86.fr/1utp1m

Raised my ambient to 17c today. Don't want to go higher because we have an old heating system and it cost alot to keep going.
Pump/fan setting medium


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> Hey guys!
> 
> I stumbled over this thread when I was looking for a solution to my current problem:
> 
> I just replaced my aging i7 920 as well as 3x 2GB (OCZ3P1333LV6GK) with a second-hand Xeon X5650 and 3x 4GB (PGV38G1600ELK) on my ASUS P6T Deluxe v1. Unfortunately, I am not able to get the RAM working properly, i.e., even though I can boot into Windows without any problems a BSOD appears from time to time, for example while surfing the web or listening to iTunes. An overnight Memtest86+ run confirmed that the memory in fact causes the issues. So far, I have tried the following things to resolve this:
> 
> - complete BIOS reset (by removing the battery), followed by leaving all settings in the AI Tweaker untouched except for the DRAM Bus Voltage, which was set to 1.64v. The resulting automatically defined settings were DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, which still caused Memtest-errors.
> - removing from and carefully re-inserting each DIMM into the orange memory (A1, B1, C1) slots while keeping the settings from above constant. Still Memtest-errors.
> - increasing the QPI/ DRAM Core Voltage to 1.325v while keeping the remaining settings constant (DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, 1.64v). Still Memtest-errors.
> - inserting the DIMMs in the black memory slots (A2, B2, C2) instead of the orange ones. Not even a picture on the monitor (fans turning).
> - removing the third DIMM to run the system in a Dual-Channel configuration (settings unchanged at DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, 1.64v, 1.325v) with the exact same modules that have been running without a glitch for more than 3 years in my AMD-rig (Phenom II X4 965, ASUS M5A97Pro). Still Memtest-errors
> 
> I am currently testing a single module at the same settings as before and, if this still causes errors, plan to make another run with DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-*110-2T*.
> 
> Aside from the stability issues with the Patriot memory there is another problem I encountered: The system will not even post (just fans turning) if I set the memory frequency higher than 1333 (true for both the OCZ and the Patriot modules). At first I thought this would be due to the Xeon only supporting non-OCed memory frequencies. But since a lot of you guys are running those Xeons well above DDR3-1333 I started to get a little worried.
> 
> Do you have any idea what else I could try to get my system stable (and above 1333MHz)?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> autoshot


I would try setting the timing at 9-9-9-24 2T @ 1.64v sett vvt to 1.3 speed at 1333 or close to it and try one stick at a time in slot A1 and see if it boots. If it does add more sticks one at a time.

These boards seem to be a bit picky or I just got 2 bad sets in a row. g-skill 2gb 1600 cl-9 red sticks will not even post.
I RMA first set and the replacement did the same, no post.
I have 2 sets of g-skill cl-7 that are blue, they work fine.
Thinking the boards don't like red sticks but some HyperX-red stick work fine


----------



## autoshot

ok so when I came home about an hour ago memtest showed no errors after 10 passes (again: only one module was installed in A1 running at DDR3-1066, CL7-7-7-20-107-1T, 1.64v DRAM Bus Voltage, 1.325v QPI/ DRAM Core Voltage):


however, as soon as I installed all three DIMMs memtest started showing errors again (settings this time: DDR3-1066, CL8-8-8-24-110-2T, 1.64v, 1.325v).

I will now test the other memory modules to be sure the error is not with them.


----------



## GENXLR

increase VTT to 1.35? Drop uncore to 1.5-1.8?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> X5660 @ 4,632mhz
> http://valid.x86.fr/1utp1m
> 
> Raised my ambient to 17c today. Don't want to go higher because we have an old heating system and it cost alot to keep going.
> Pump/fan setting medium


4.6GHz at 0.792 vcore

there is no frickin way. is that a dynamic vcore?

my vcore is constant as well as my GHz speed, no single turbo, no C states etc.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 4.6GHz at 0.792 vcore
> 
> there is no frickin way. is that a dynamic vcore?
> 
> my vcore is constant as well as my GHz speed, no single turbo, no C states etc.


Vcore is 1.1
0.792 is a Cstate

1v 4.4

http://valid.x86.fr/v3jj19


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Vcore is 1.1
> 0.792 is a Cstate


Well then i gotta ask, did you photoshop the 4.6GHz @ 0.792v cause this is very outlandish for this chip to run at 4.6GHz @ 1.1 vcore


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well then i gotta ask, did you photoshop the 4.6GHz @ 0.792v cause this is very outlandish for this chip to run at 4.6GHz @ 1.1 vcore


How do you photshop a validation on the website if I might ask?
it's called a Cstate, it was not under load.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> How do you photshop a validation on the website if I might ask?
> it's called a Cstate, it was not under load.


I don't know I have never done it nor ever would. But there are people who do so that's why I'm asking you because of the extremely low vcore for 4.6GHz. I'm sure you understand that. What I mean by dynamic is does it jump up to a different vcore at 4.6GHz or does 4.6GHz only require,,,, 1.1 vcore LOL


----------



## GENXLR

it's C-States. if he is in C-6, 4 of the 6 cores will stop and "park" then the other 2 cores jump a multi above turbo and handle all the tasks at a reduced voltage because it becomes a dual core CPU. Welcome to C6


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> it's C-States. if he is in C-6, 4 of the 6 cores will stop and "park" then the other 2 cores jump a multi above turbo and handle all the tasks at a reduced voltage because it becomes a dual core CPU. Welcome to C6


thank you for that explanation, that makes a little more sense now


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Vcore is 1.1
> 0.792 is a Cstate
> 1v 4.4
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/v3jj19


Whoa whoa whoa......you are getting 4.4Ghz with only 1.00vCore which is only 0.308 higher than minimum. LMAO I gotta call BS on that. Is that stable 1.1v stable? If you are running 1v Core then you are running below stock voltages which I highly disbelieve. First you are below ambient....... then you are within 1c of the ambient temp, now you are running 4.4Ghz below stock maximum voltage. I'm dying over here. I just don't see how that is possible.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 4.6GHz at 0.792 vcore
> 
> there is no frickin way. is that a dynamic vcore?


It's obviously set to AUTO, dynamic or offset voltage. I can catch my 4.6 and 4.8Ghz between 0.xxx - 1.14v during Idle.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, my X5650 has the exact same effects you are seeing during C6

he took his validation during C6


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana, my X5650 has the exact same effects you are seeing during C6
> 
> he took his validation during C6


No I understand that completely because when I use C-states during my OC I see my voltages dip. Well my voltages dip with or without C-states, but I understand exactly what's going on. I was simply stating that he wasn't running manual voltage. It's either dynamic, offset or auto Vcore. I also find it hard to believe that C-states or any option will allow him to run a Hexa core with 1.0-1.1vCore @ 4.4Ghz. It's hard to believe that the PC would even boot with that voltage.


----------



## GENXLR

As i said above, it only works because in C6, it parks 4 Cores and becomes a dualcore. It can lower the voltage during idle like that. Mine drops the voltage and mine is manually set(only droops in C-States). My X5650 hits the same voltage.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I see where you are going. I also see that he has HT off as well.

I read Vcore was 1.1vCore.


----------



## Xoriam

oops ht was off because i was gaming just before i took that.

I might finaly break 200blck


----------



## Kana-Maru

Even with HT off there's no way you set your voltage to 1.1vCore in the BIOS and running 4.4Ghz on 6 cores. Unless you were referring to something else when you stated vCore is 1.1. Offset maybe?


----------



## autoshot

the second memory module, which was tested at DDR3-1333 CL9-9-9-24-107-2T 1.64v DRAM Bus Voltage (all other Timing- and Voltage-settings left at Auto) did not show any errors either:


EDIT:
Quote:


> increase VTT to 1.35? Drop uncore to 1.5-1.8?


1.35v is the maximum Intel allows right? If so, I will try it then. But why drop the uncore voltage?

Aside from that, I'm still not really sure why I cannot get my machine to boot with DDR3 speeds higher than 1333MHz







Any ideas?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> EDIT:1.35v is the maximum Intel allows right? If so, I will try it then. But why drop the uncore voltage?
> 
> Aside from that, I'm still not really sure why I cannot get my machine to boot with DDR3 speeds higher than 1333MHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any ideas?


1.35v is the recommended max for the CPU voltage not Vtt. Going above vtt=1.35v is pushing it, but most will tell you that 1.4v and below is safe for vtt. I've went well into the 1.4x and 1.5x, but it wasn't worth it. Also remember that the vtt must be within 0.5v of the DRAM voltage.

I'm not sure what your issue is exactly since I haven't been following your issues, but are you overclocking[?] or are you trying to run stock settings with higher RAM frequency.


----------



## autoshot

I wish I was having the issues due to overclocking, but so far I couldn't even start since I first need to get the memory stable @ stock settings (actually, even below stock since the Patriots are able to run DDR3-1600 CL9). As for the VTT, I already tried 1.325v without any luck so I don't think it would be any better at 1.35v...


----------



## Kana-Maru

So you sure it isn't the RAM. It looks like they are passing the Memtest with flying colors. Well lets just try something different all together then. Try this:

Set your: [all of this is solely for testing purposes]
-C-states=Enabled
-CPU Ratio = AUTO
-BCLK to166Mhz
-CPU voltage \ vCore = 1.33v [if you can't post or boot try AUTO as well]
-CPU PLL 1.8v or AUTO
-PCI-E Frequency = 100Mhz \ AUTO
-QPI\Vtt = AUTO...... [or 1.3v if you can't POST or boot properly]
-DRAM Frequency 1600Mhz [9-9-9-24-2T]
-DRAM voltage 1.65v
-Uncore = 2880Mhz or 3200Mhz
-LLC = AUTO

Try to leave everything else set to stock\default settings unless you must change them. Then come back and let me know what happens.


----------



## autoshot

is this still to test the ram or to test the CPU? aside from that, how many memory-modules should I install before I do what you just suggested?


----------



## Kana-Maru

It is to test both of them actually. Install all of your memory or 3 modules if you choose.


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Whoa whoa whoa......you are getting 4.4Ghz with only 1.00vCore which is only 0.308 higher than minimum. LMAO I gotta call BS on that. Is that stable 1.1v stable? If you are running 1v Core then you are running below stock voltages which I highly disbelieve. First you are below ambient....... then you are within 1c of the ambient temp, now you are running 4.4Ghz below stock maximum voltage. I'm dying over here. I just don't see how that is possible.
> It's obviously set to AUTO, dynamic or offset voltage. I can catch my 4.6 and 4.8Ghz between 0.xxx - 1.14v during Idle.


Im with you on that Kana it just doesn't seem possible.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eebobb*
> 
> Im with you on that Kana it just doesn't seem possible.


And I back you up on that guys... I never saw that... Don't even think it would be possible close to stock clocks... I mean come on 4.4?!?


----------



## Xoriam

Most of you guys in this thread are newish at overclocking / Have just started getting experience on the x58 system.
Don't know what cstates and speedstep is.
only use vcore, vtt, and dram voltage, and don't even touch the other voltages which matter alot more on the 32nm than the 45.
Or have never seen a golden chip before...
So I really don't need to be told what is or isn't possible, since I'm actually doing it right now.
And it's working fantasticly, if an official validation from the CPU-Z website isn't enough. Oh well keep thinking what you want.

Anyways, have fun.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Most of you guys in this thread are newish at overclocking / Have just started getting experience on the x58 system.


A lot of people I've talked to in both topics seem to be very good at overclocking. Just because someone needs a little help getting over a hump or has a different abbreviation for the MB manufacture [QPI - VTT etc] doesn't mean they have no OC experience. Now personally I've been overclocking for a very long time. Since we are talking about the X58 I've overclocked my CPUs higher than most people an& d users I know with lower speeds. Trust me getting to 4.2Ghz with a L5639 or a stable 4.1Ghz is no easy task. 5+ years overclocking on the platform. [my fav is still Bloomfield's since they were a pain and the hard work paid off]

I don't brag on my certifications, but I actually work in the IT field. I have a big *** dual CPU HP server and a big *** MFP sitting on my bench right now that I have to repair. PC's aren't anything new to me. Overclocking isn't a new phenomenon either. I liked it better when it was less mainstream.
Quote:


> Don't know what cstates and speedstep is.


C-states and Speedstep is old as dirt. Everyone knows what they are. Some people might not the latest implementations, but seriously who gives a ****. Do you even know how c-states work? Do you know what controls the states and how they are requested? Also who cares about EIST when we have these lovely Xeons. Do you understand how the Xeons work and how EIST or C-states can be used, but is really not needed if you know what you are doing? C-states have their benefits don't get me wrong, but it itsn't life or death whether you use the settings or not.

Quote:


> only use vcore, vtt, and dram voltage, and don't even touch the other voltages which matter alot more on the 32nm than the 45.


The 32nm are easy as hell to overclock compared to a i7 45nm. I literally hit 4Ghz by changing my BCLK to 166 - EVERYTHING ELSE STOCK. AUTO vCore set itsefl to only 1.20v-1.21v Please stop while you are ahead. Yes there are other settings, but seriously you don't even need to use all of them in order to gain mild to high OC's. That has been proven.

Quote:


> Or have never seen a golden chip before...


I've been told I have 3 of them. However, I've helped people on this site reach 4.2Ghz -4.4Ghz in less than an hour during chat sessions. Nah I think it's more skill than golden chips.

Quote:


> So I really don't need to be told what is or isn't possible, since I'm actually doing it right now.
> And it's working fantasticly, if an official validation from the CPU-Z website isn't enough. Oh well keep thinking what you want.


Just like your bogus ambient temperatures and bogus CPU cores going BELOW ambient temps......I don't care what a CPU-Z link shows since people have apparently faked those in the pass on other forums. Setting your 4.4Ghz overclocked CPU below stock maximum voltages simply isn't believable with out some definite proof. A validation picture isn't proof. Where is the stability test, the 24\48+ hour test and other obvious things? it's obviously you have some buggy software. You posted results from one software. There's plenty of software you can use. Faulty is faulty.

Don't switch it up like you did with the CPU temps going below ambient and then magically within .5 - 2c of ambient.
Quote:


> Anyways, have fun.


X58 users always have fun. We will continue to overclock and chat about our system and help others with their settings. Don't get uptight because some people, well except one, won't buy the "I set my vCore to 1.1v and I'm running 4.4Ghz on 6 cores......see dat validation". Faulty readings are still faulty.


----------



## Kana-Maru

The last people was long so I'll make another.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I ran 1.1v stable at 4.2ghz for the first month or so, and then all of a sudden lost stability. It has lost stability slowly until I finally hit 1.3v and 4ghz. Now it feels like it may keep its stability permanently I hope.
> 
> I've been Overclocking since 1994


You did? I don't remember every reading or seeing this. 1.1vCore for the first month @ 4.2Ghz then all of a sudden 1.3v is required for 4Ghz because it lost stability. I'm sorry, but I have to call BS on that statement as well. Forget the golden chip and all of that stuff. Did you ever post the proof of that 1.1v STABLE? I might have missed it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eebobb*
> 
> Im with you on that Kana it just doesn't seem possible.


I thought maybe I was the only one who felt that way lol. Intel needs to stop trying to work on performance and power consumption and take notes from SkOrPn and Xoriam. those guys have the potion. 1.1v @ 4.4Ghz. Intel would have a field day with everyone pockets.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> but come on 1.0v at 4.4.... is it the holly grail of chips? pope benedict blessed it?


I will admit I laughed out load. That's exactly what I'm saying. Holy grail??? More like they skipped right over gold and went straight to platinum. Blessed platinum at that.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> but come on 1.0v at 4.4.... is it the holly grail of chips? pope benedict blessed it?


just want to clear up that
the 4.4ghz at 1.0 was just for show. I have no idea if it's stable.

However, the 1.1vcore 4,4/4,6turbo OC is my stable setting.
http://valid.x86.fr/wy2rya


----------



## EvilMonk

I have to say I did some experiments 2 years ago with some rags under the basement door openings to block the cold in while I opened the windows during a -35 celsius storm to overclock the PC sitting next to the window and achieved some amazing results but nothing even close to what you guys are talking about... and -35 is freaking cold...

Edit: Cold to the point I had to wear my snowboard gear inside my own basement!!!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You did? I don't remember every reading or seeing this. 1.1vCore for the first month @ 4.2Ghz then all of a sudden 1.3v is required for 4Ghz because it lost stability. I'm sorry, but I have to call BS on that statement as well. Forget the golden chip and all of that stuff. Did you ever post the proof of that 1.1v STABLE? I might have missed it.


Come on Kana-Maru, of course I did, you even told me what a wonderful chip I had dude. Hell that was the CPU-Z I sent you showing 4.2ghz at 1.1 back in like May when you entered me into the Xeon club. LOL, then you guys told me that I have a great chip, then a month later I had to drop it to 1.2, then 1.26, then 1.28, then 1.29, then 1.3, all over about a 5 month period. There has never once been an all of a sudden option for me, it just been over time I lost stability, and only in Windows. I always ran IBT and Prime without fail. I just lost stability in Windows it seems, or I think I have. All I know is that weird things have occurred in Windows and I got rid of it simply by adding voltage.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I have to say I did some experiments 2 years ago with some rags under the basement door openings to block the cold in while I opened the windows during a -35 celsius storm to overclock the PC sitting next to the window and achieved some amazing results but nothing even close to what you guys are talking about... and -35 is freaking cold...


Damn -35c. Also you must remember that their CPUs were blessed by the PC master race gods.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Come on Kana-Maru, of course I did, you even told me what a wonderful chip I had dude. Hell that was the CPU-Z I sent you showing 4.2ghz at 1.1 back in like May when you entered me into the Xeon club.


Man I get tons of emails, PM's and Steam\Origin Messages from users and people not registered here about these Xeons. I have no idea what you are talking about. I generally don't pay attention to vCore settings in the validation links. Just like I missed his results until someone said something about it.

Quote:


> then a month later I had to drop it to 1.2, then 1.26, then 1.28, then 1.29, then 1.3, all over about a 5 month period.


You have no idea about all of things I do in 5 months. I simply do not remember your running 1.1vCore. Send me a link or something when I acknowledged it. I don't see myself learning about a decent to high OC below stock voltages and believing it.

Sorry I don't remember or missed it. I called it just iike I called his results.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

OK, I take what I said back. I can't find any evidence that I had 1.1v at 4.2ghz, even though I can clearly see it in my brain memory cells, LOL. I found a bunch of screenshots though, all at 4.4ghz and 4.2ghz and ALL of them show 1.33v-1.35v.

So not sure where the 1.1v that I clearly see in my head is coming from. I bet that must be stock settings or something. Stuff gets lost when your constantly trying hundreds of different settings and taking tons of screenshots and tons of benches. I am positive I ran 1.1v stable, but now I am not sure what the speed was when doing so, sorry. MY BAD!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Check out the Gflops on the last image at only 4ghz, wow. Hmm, lol maybe I should go back to 182 BCLK, LOL






I wish I could remember why I didn't keep these settings. Almost 83 Gflops?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> OK, I take what I said back. I can't find any evidence that I had 1.1v at 4.2ghz, even though I can clearly see it in my brain memory cells, LOL. I found a bunch of screenshots though, all at 4.4ghz and 4.2ghz and ALL of them show 1.33v-1.35v.
> 
> So not sure where the 1.1v that I clearly see in my head is coming from. I bet that must be stock settings or something. Stuff gets lost when your constantly trying hundreds of different settings and taking tons of screenshots and tons of benches. I am positive I ran 1.1v stable, but now I am not sure what the speed was when doing so, sorry. MY BAD!


It could have easily been dynamic vCore or stock settings. Who knows. It's no issue. At least you didn't resort to throwing dirt about others overclocking abilities and age old technologies.

Ok fine I will eliminate you from the "Blessed by Pope Benedict XVI" list. LMAO good one Evilmonk

}SkOrPn--'
Xoriam

Now there's one who has only posted a validation link, but nothing else to validate the claims.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Blessed be the holy }SkOrPn-- his soul his now at peace for providing validation to the brotherhood












}SkOrPn--' knows he's cool. I don't know what I'd do without him lol.


----------



## PhilWrir

Cleaned

I dont care if you don't believe someone or if you feel like you don't have to prove things to other people

Rude and disrespectful behavior is not acceptable on OCN

Keep discussion civil or keep it off OCN


----------



## GENXLR

Woah woah woah........ I don't recall seeing THAT out of line behavior.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah, that was strange. What did the moderator remove? The mod didn't even quote who he was moderating, so it is completely unknown as to what post #2060 is in reference to.

Was someone here not playing nice? Lol, I always miss all the good stuff.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> So you sure it isn't the RAM. It looks like they are passing the Memtest with flying colors. Well lets just try something different all together then. Try this: [...]


wow, it works







I was able to boot with a BCLK of 166 and DDR3-1664 CL9-9-9-24-107-2T. so what does that tell you?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> wow, it works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was able to boot with a BCLK of 166 and DDR3-1664 CL9-9-9-24-107-2T.


You are welcome.







Good luck and hopefully those settings I provided will get you started. Just continue to set your BCLK and your CPU ratio as you continue to OC. Once you get to the speed that you want simply reduce the voltages until you become unstable. If you want to go higher then you'll probably need to increase some settings, but not all. I'm sure you'll get the hang of things quickly.

The most important thing to find right now is your max BCLK and CPU voltage. From there you can start adjusting the vtt and other things.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Woah, cool I found evidence that I was in fact running 4ghz and 1.1v, however not 4.2. An unedited post at another forum where I was being helped dated 8-20.
Quote:


> Use Intel Burn Test to test load.
> 
> Mine also runs great at 4.2 but I had to increase voltage past 1.35 in order to go above 4.4. *At 4ghz (200x20) it only uses 1.1v but does not feel as fast as 190x22.* However, this CPU loves 4ghz to 4.2 at low voltages using all 6 cores and all 12 threads. I can't believe how much more Folding it does over my 930 at the same clocks. I'm only running 190x22 and its nothing short of a new computer. Feels no different then my Dads X79 i7-3930K, but he spent MUCH MUCH more then I did, haha. In fact, since he is not overclocking his Sandy chip I suspect my 4.2ghz Westmere is faster. Both Windows and Linux are noticeably snappier, and games run much smoother.
> 
> Best CPU upgrade to date.


So, I must have ran this 1.1v voltage for a while in order for it to stick in my head like it did, I just got the freq wrong of course. That's what happens when your an old man, lol. I think I started to increase voltage just to try and increase Gflops per DaveLT's recommendation and it worked a charm. So thanks for that tip Dave









http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1041038726&highlight=#post1041038726

EDIT: Wow, so now I just tried my old settings that ran for a month at 1.1v 4ghz and it will NOT even boot. So, these chips do in fact degrade over time?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Faulty sensors are still faulty.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah, that was strange. What did the moderator remove? The mod didn't even quote who he was moderating, so it is completely unknown as to what post #2060 is in reference to.
> 
> Was someone here not playing nice? Lol, I always miss all the good stuff.


You smack dab in the middle of it. Well maybe it was a few pages and you missed out. The mod has cleaned the topic, but it was nothing major. I know that some of my post are gone for sure.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Faulty sensors are still faulty.
> You smack dab in the middle of it. Well maybe it was a few pages and you missed out. The mod has cleaned the topic, but it was nothing major. I know that some of my post are gone for sure.


Aww that sucks, lol. I was working hard at building my custom 1440p monitor in another thread Im working on.

Oh, check this out Kana-Maru I just tried running 4.6ghz and its not even booting using the same exact voltages I used in screenshots from just three months ago. Do these 32nm chips somehow degrade ever so slightly over time? Is that why I have had to slowly add voltage over the last 4 months? Maybe I should lower the clocks to 3.8ghz? I was running 1.1v when I first got this Xeon and now it wont even boot at that.

What the heck is that??? AND not to mention I had 83 Gflops, and now can't find that either, HAHAHA.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yes they will degrade like any other CPU however these are only 32nm. They can't take a beating like the i7's did. I have a feeling a lot of people will be having similar issues since they are trying to break records and get the highest benchmarks etc. I almost killed my CPU, but never again will I do those crazy suicide runs. CPU PLL high Vcore and a few other settings will more than likely degrade these much quicker than 45nm and I've seen some 45nm bite the dust. I can only imagine these Xeons will do the same sooner. They were made for servers and not to be overclocked to death. the performance is great, but it will come at a cost.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes they will degrade like any other CPU however these are only 32nm. They can't take a beating like the i7's did. I have a feeling a lot of people will be having similar issues since they are trying to break records and get the highest benchmarks etc. I almost killed my CPU, but never again will I do those crazy suicide runs. CPU PLL high Vcore and a few other settings will more than likely degrade these much quicker than 45nm and I've seen some 45nm bite the dust. I can only imagine these Xeons will do the same sooner. They were made for servers and not to be overclocked to death. the performance is great, but it will come at a cost.


Yeah, I guess I played around too much, much more than I did with my 930. I just set my 930 at 200x20 and left it alone at 1.26v for 4 years or more. This one however, has been slowly changing over time.

The very first week I ran this 5650 though was the best week so far, and just in the first few days it refused to fail on me. Now 5 months later it seems almost no different then the settings I had on my 930. However, it is still running nice and cool and better gflops of course. So, Im still very happy with it. Glad you started this thread or I would have never known about this wonderful chip.


----------



## EvilMonk

Damn I just found out Newegg shipped the GTX 970 Superclock ACX 2.0 from freaking california... I'm in MONTREAL!!! ITS LIKE the 2 opposites of North America... usually when they ship from the US its always from New Jersey... Its going to take forever to get here


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> wow, it works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was able to boot with a BCLK of 166 and DDR3-1664 CL9-9-9-24-107-2T. so what does that tell you?


Has anyone asked you if your bios is the latest up to date bios?


----------



## Eebobb

And with cstate enabled and all power saving options enabled with Vcore at 1.55






I'll squeeze a bit more out of it if I can post lol Ok enough before I kill it

http://valid.canardpc.com/lsnqjk


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eebobb*
> 
> 
> 
> And with cstate enabled and all power saving options enabled with Vcore at 1.55
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll squeeze a bit more out of it if I can post lol Ok enough before I kill it
> 
> http://valid.canardpc.com/lsnqjk


Interesting temps with your custom h20 kit. I have some spare h20 parts laying around that I was getting ready to figure out how to route for a loop.

I have:

MCR355 pump
MCR320 Rad
EK Supreme LT
XSPC res top for Laing DDC
7/16 ID & 5/8 OD MasterKleer PVC tubing
other various parts for tubing connection.

I also have an MCP655 pump I never used. Along with a small res that I couldn't figure out how to install.

I think for this time around I'd like to use a 5 1/4 bay res with a pump. I don't want to drill into my D800.


----------



## OCmember

Why would my motherboard set the Uncore frequency multi to 20x ? I thought Bloomfield was 2x the ram speed and Gulftown/Westmere was 1.5x the ram speed? My ram is at 1066MHz, and the Uncore on 'Auto' is at 2666MHz (2.5x the ram speed)

Is this safe to run it that way?


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Why would my motherboard set the Uncore frequency multi to 20x ? I thought Bloomfield was 2x the ram speed and Gulftown/Westmere was 1.5x the ram speed? My ram is at 1066MHz, and the Uncore on 'Auto' is at 2666MHz (2.5x the ram speed)
> 
> Is this safe to run it that way?


It should be fine as long as you're not going over 1.35 vtt.
32nm imc has been known to burn up when using 2x+ multi and more than 1.35 vtt
If you're using more, keep it closer to 1.5


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> It should be fine as long as you're not going over 1.35 vtt.
> 32nm imc has been known to burn up when using 2x+ multi and more than 1.35 vtt
> If you're using more, keep it closer to 1.5


Thank you


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Why would my motherboard set the Uncore frequency multi to 20x ? I thought Bloomfield was 2x the ram speed and Gulftown/Westmere was 1.5x the ram speed? My ram is at 1066MHz, and the Uncore on 'Auto' is at 2666MHz (2.5x the ram speed)
> 
> Is this safe to run it that way?


You can set the Uncore to 1.5 X to 2 X the ram speed with the Xeon. I am running 2x with my chip and wouldn't run more than 2 X. What couldn't you figure out to get your loop going ? It shouldn't be too hard to get the loop together and you should get some good temps from it I know I was using up to 1.6v and it still was in a safe range for temps. I'm running a dual loop with a 480 rad for my gpu's and a 240 for the cpu.


----------



## shaolin95

This is one fantastic thread!!!!!!!!

So in what has to be longest time I have ever taken to upgrade a system...the legendary i7 920 at a bit over 4Ghz is still a nice performer but I just feel the need to finally upgrade.

Of course I will have to change all my stuff so I was wondering if the 4790K will be a good path to follow..but now after seeing this thread, I am changing my mind! I am hunting for a X5670 instead.

I do a LOT of DXO Pro Optics and Photoshop CC editing. A bit of video editing and plan to do a lot of gaming when Oculus Rift finally gets released.

So thanks a ton for this thread (and confirming my thoughts that CPUs have not been progressing that much in a long time), and saving me time and money upgrading. I just hope I find a decent overclocker.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> This is one fantastic thread!!!!!!!!
> 
> So in what has to be longest time I have ever taken to upgrade a system...the legendary i7 920 at a bit over 4Ghz is still a nice performer but I just feel the need to finally upgrade.
> 
> Of course I will have to change all my stuff so I was wondering if the 4790K will be a good path to follow..but now after seeing this thread, I am changing my mind! I am hunting for a X5670 instead.
> 
> I do a LOT of DXO Pro Optics and Photoshop CC editing. A bit of video editing and plan to do a lot of gaming when Oculus Rift finally gets released.
> 
> So thanks a ton for this thread (and confirming my thoughts that CPUs have not been progressing that much in a long time), and saving me time and money upgrading. I just hope I find a decent overclocker.


I'd reccomend not getting an x5670, and get an x5660. The only thing that chip does is create more heat.
(someone else might have a diffrent opinion, but thats all i've seen out of it anywhere i've looked)

or you can get an x5680 for the 25multi.. just be aware higher TDP could result in more heat.


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> I'd reccomend not getting an x5670, and get an x5660. The only thing that chip does is create more heat.
> (someone else might have a diffrent opinion, but thats all i've seen out of it anywhere i've looked)
> 
> or you can get an x5680 for the 25multi.. just be aware higher TDP could result in more heat.


So you think the 5660 will overclock as good as the 5670 or even better due to heat? So either the 5660 or 5680 are my better options then? Looks like the 5680 gets pricier fast but if its worth it, I can go for that one since I will still be saving a lot compared to upgrading my full system..so I am hoping to find a nice clocker.
Thanks for the quick reply!


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> So you think the 5660 will overclock as good as the 5670 or even better due to heat? So either the 5660 or 5680 are my better options then? Looks like the 5680 gets pricier fast but if its worth it, I can go for that one since I will still be saving a lot compared to upgrading my full system..so I am hoping to find a nice clocker.
> Thanks for the quick reply!


Yeah honestly either x5660 or x5680 (or if you only want to spend 70$ you can get an x5650 they overclock nice as well, nearly the same actually)


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Yeah honestly either x5660 or x5680 (or if you only want to spend 70$ you can get an x5650 they overclock nice as well, nearly the same actually)


Last question..if I could get the 5670 as the same price as the 5660 you would still go with the 5660, correct?
If so, I am hunting for it right away. Thanks again for the help!


----------



## bill1024

I like the 5660 it has an odd high multiplier of 23 and they are around 95$ on ebay right now
Running three x58 systems and all are 5660 at 175x23 for a 4ghz. I have had them higher but the gains were now all that much running BOINC
Figure I want these to last a while, they run 100% load 24/7. I like the x5660 I do have 2 x5650s in a workstation MB but can't overclock it.
The x5650 are good, does your board like high BLCK, it will have to be higher with the lower multiplier.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> Last question..if I could get the 5670 as the same price as the 5660 you would still go with the 5660, correct?
> If so, I am hunting for it right away. Thanks again for the help!


if you don't plan on using turbo for OC maybe yes.
(I've personally only heard stories about them producing more heat, some websites actually have it rated lower than the x5660. But if someone disagrees please speak up)

here is one example, maybe something in there can help you out.
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-X5670-vs-Intel-Xeon-X5660

x5670 would be a good option if you're going to OC on air
x5660 if you're going to oc on water


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> Last question..if I could get the 5670 as the same price as the 5660 you would still go with the 5660, correct?
> If so, I am hunting for it right away. Thanks again for the help!


Around the same price I would go with the X5670. You'll get all of the benefits that the X5660 has including low TDP. You'll also gain an extra multiplier.


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I like the 5660 it has an odd high multiplier of 23 and they are around 95$ on ebay right now
> Running three x58 systems and all are 5660 at 175x23 for a 4ghz. I have had them higher but the gains were now all that much running BOINC
> Figure I want these to last a while, they run 100% load 24/7. I like the x5660 I do have 2 x5650s in a workstation MB but can't overclock it.
> The x5650 are good, does your board like high BLCK, it will have to be higher with the lower multiplier.


Right now I am doing 191 BLCK. Not sure if its my CPU or Mobo but going too high (shooting for 200) never seem to work for me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> if you don't plan on using turbo for OC maybe yes.
> (I've personally only heard stories about them producing more heat, some websites actually have it rated lower than the x5660. But if someone disagrees please speak up)
> 
> here is one example, maybe something in there can help you out.
> http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-X5670-vs-Intel-Xeon-X5660
> 
> x5670 would be a good option if you're going to OC on air
> x5660 if you're going to oc on water


Interesting how the 5660s at least on that report do better in water than air indeed.
Well, I have a thermal take water (ish) cooler which is not going to be like a full WC system but definitely better than Air like my previous Noctua D14 with triple fans.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Around the same price I would go with the X5670. You'll get all of the benefits that the X5660 has including low TDP. You'll also gain an extra multiplier.


That makes sense although for some reason the history being reported in some links seem to have conflicting reports...looks like the usual luck of the draw maybe.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> That makes sense although for some reason the history being reported in some links seem to have conflicting reports...looks like the usual luck of the draw maybe.


Pretty much. Every CPU is different and a good overclocker will get the most out of the CPU anyway. You will usually find conflicting reports since you don't see a lot of users going for the more expensive CPUs. The statistics will be in favor of the cheaper CPUs for a while since they have the larger enthusiast user base. My X5660 was around $220 - $280 when I first purchased it. I had no reports and had to bite the bullet. Best decision I've made on my X58 platform to date. Now the X5660's are much cheaper, but so are CPUs that were already cheaper at the time. Now it's your turn to play the lottery. Good luck and I hope you win & get a good CPU.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> This is one fantastic thread!!!!!!!!
> 
> So in what has to be longest time I have ever taken to upgrade a system...the legendary i7 920 at a bit over 4Ghz is still a nice performer but I just feel the need to finally upgrade.
> 
> Of course I will have to change all my stuff so I was wondering if the 4790K will be a good path to follow..but now after seeing this thread, I am changing my mind! I am hunting for a X5670 instead.
> 
> I do a LOT of DXO Pro Optics and Photoshop CC editing. A bit of video editing and plan to do a lot of gaming when Oculus Rift finally gets released.
> 
> So thanks a ton for this thread (and confirming my thoughts that CPUs have not been progressing that much in a long time), and saving me time and money upgrading. I just hope I find a decent overclocker.


Does your motherboard support a Xeon? My EVGA 760 A1 rev1.0 unfortunately doesn't without a motherboard mod

And I think the Xeon 5675 has the highest multi at 95w, not sure, don't quote me on that


----------



## DividebyZERO

Well, tinkered around and while its just for fun here is my validations of high Bclk.

Bclk 250:
http://valid.x86.fr/7lb575



vcore,multi/HT and various settings off/turned down(just to boot without issuesATM) until i get more time to play with it. Like i said so far just for fun.


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Does your motherboard support a Xeon? My EVGA 760 A1 rev1.0 unfortunately doesn't without a motherboard mod
> 
> And I think the Xeon 5675 has the highest multi at 95w, not sure, don't quote me on that


Well looks to be compatible. CPU-Z shows as 132-BL-E758 Rev 13 which seems to mean REv 1.3 and from what I read 1.2 and higher are compatible. At least I saw some validation shots of CPU-Z showing the same so I am hoping I am right


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Has anyone asked you if your bios is the latest up to date bios?


I'm not sure actually, but the up-tp-dateness of my BIOS was the first thing I checked before I even installed the Xeon. It's v2209 in case anyone is interested.

Anyway, since this damn Patriot memory caused me more trouble than I ever thought it would I just bought 3x 8GB G.Skill DDR1333 CL9 (the same ones the guy with the 48GB in his P6T Deluxe is running) and what can I say: so far there has not been ONE issue with my system (knock on woods) as opposed to before. I have now started a final memtest-session, which is yet to reach 6 passes, but it's looking good







Also, I was able to run Prime95 for more than 4 hrs without any instability (I had to stop the tests after 4hrs, however, due to time constraints).

In case everything goes as planned, I will start to OC next weekend.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Damn I just found out Newegg shipped the GTX 970 Superclock ACX 2.0 from freaking california... I'm in MONTREAL!!! ITS LIKE the 2 opposites of North America... usually when they ship from the US its always from New Jersey... Its going to take forever to get here


Be patient grasshopper...

As long as it arrives undamaged









Now that I live in Germany, on average it takes a month for my orders to come in... So a few extra days is nothing


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> It should be fine as long as you're not going over 1.35 vtt.
> 32nm imc has been known to burn up when using 2x+ multi and more than 1.35 vtt
> If you're using more, keep it closer to 1.5


When I was testing the Patriot DIMMs I sometimes left CPU VTT on "Auto", which - depending on the installed memory - might result in even higher than 1.35v VTT according to another guy I was talking to on Friday. Also, I temporarily set the DRAM Bus Voltage to up to 1.68v in the BIOS. I never exceeded 2x uncore-multi, however.

Do I need to worry that my IMC might be damaged?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> Well looks to be compatible. CPU-Z shows as 132-BL-E758 Rev 13 which seems to mean REv 1.3 and from what I read 1.2 and higher are compatible. At least I saw some validation shots of CPU-Z showing the same so I am hoping I am right


When I open up CPUz with my EVGA 760 A1 it also shows Rev 13. The board is Rev1.0 - You have to look on the board to see the revision number, CPUz won't tell you


----------



## OCmember

The Sabertooth supports these Xeons, right? Looking at one. Has the latest 1304 bios.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> It should be fine as long as you're not going over 1.35 vtt.
> 32nm imc has been known to burn up when using 2x+ multi and more than 1.35 vtt
> If you're using more, keep it closer to 1.5
> 
> 
> 
> When I was testing the Patriot DIMMs I sometimes left CPU VTT on "Auto", which - depending on the installed memory - might result in even higher than 1.35v VTT according to another guy I was talking to on Friday.
Click to expand...

*Good lord* why do people keep listening to him. The guy literally just got a 6 core processor recently. No your IMC will not "burn up" if you go above 2x the memory frequency or if you go above 1.35vtt. Vtt needs to be within .5 of the DRAM voltage to prevent damage. Anything below 1.4v - vtt is perfectly fine if your memory requires the voltage to perform properly. You might not see much performance going higher than 2x - 2.5x on the Uncore, but that will depend on several things. Chances are that most people have adequate cooling on these forums anyways so heat shouldn't be a big issue. Things will begin to heat up above 1.4v, but that doesn't mean that you'll damage anything. Most RAM I've used [up to 2200Mhz] will operate just fine with the vtt below 1.4v.

Quote:


> Also, I temporarily set the DRAM Bus Voltage to up to 1.68v in the BIOS. I never exceeded 2x uncore-multi, however.
> 
> Do I need to worry that my IMC might be damaged?


DRAM voltage should be no higher than 1.65v, however there have been Quad 45nm users who have ran 1.66v with no issues for years. Some people still suggest 1.66v for some users using the 32nm, but that depends on certain RAM situations. What voltage is your RAM rated to use? Set your Uncore anywhere between 1.6x - 2.3x the DRAM frequency. I would personally set it to 2x for testing then adjust it once you have everything setup the way you want it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The Sabertooth supports these Xeons, right? Looking at one. Has the latest 1304 bios.


Nope. Sadly these Sabertooth's don't support these Xeons. JOKING. Of course the Sabertooth X58 supports 6-core processors [including Xeons]. The latest BIOS isn't 1304 btw, it is 1402. Also make sure you test the board good just to make sure someone didn't abuse the board.


----------



## OCmember

How do could I test the board?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How do could I test the board?


Set all settings to default in the BIOS. Go ahead and update the BIOS via USB. From that point test the heck out of that bad boy outside of the OS and inside. Check to make sure the previous user didn't damage components on the MB and I don't mean only visually either. I mean check and make sure the audio, ethernet and other features on the board work fine within the OS. I'd just check it out to make sure everything is fine. I've seen some pretty screwed up Sabertooth X58 boards over the years. Especially on Ebay and CL.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Set all settings to default in the BIOS. Go ahead and update the BIOS via USB. From that point test the heck out of that bad boy outside of the OS and inside. Check to make sure the previous user didn't damage components on the MB and I don't mean only visually either. I mean check and make sure the audio, ethernet and other features on the board work fine within the OS. I'd just check it out to make sure everything is fine. I've seen some pretty screwed up Sabertooth X58 boards over the years. Especially on Ebay and CL.


Hmm. Interesting. With the prices of X58 boards lately I might just turn around and sell off my EVGA X58 and upgrade the platform


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What voltage is your RAM rated to use? Set your Uncore anywhere between 1.6x - 2.3x the DRAM frequency. I would personally set it to 2x for testing then adjust it once you have everything setup the way you want it.


The Patriots I initially used were rated at 1.65v. I just set the DRAM bus voltage to 1.68v for less than half an hour on Friday to see if it made any difference. I tested at 1.66v a little longer but no more than one day. All this was due to everyone saying I should go higher with the DRAM bus voltage and see what happens in terms of stability... On Saturday I installed 3x 8GB 1.5v G.Skil F3-10666CL9S-8GBXL and haven't encountered any problems so far with stock settings (knock on woods).

Regarding the uncore-multiplier, I've always set it to "Auto" or 2x since my BIOS says it should be at least double the DRAM-Frequency.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *Good lord* why do people keep listening to him. The guy literally just got a 6 core processor recently. No your IMC will not "burn up" if you go above 2x the memory frequency or if you go above 1.35vtt. Vtt needs to be within .5 of the DRAM voltage to prevent damage.


I know a few people who have had instant death on their i7 980x and x5650 from 2x uncore and 1.4vtt.
Not even degradation, just POOF smoke and death.
32nm IMC is delicate...

But it's your guys chips in the end, and there is no gaurantee it will happen.
Wouldn't be very fun having someone lose their chip though.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> I know a few people who have had instant death on their i7 980x and x5650 from 2x uncore and 1.4vtt.
> Not even degradation, just POOF smoke and death.
> 32nm IMC is delicate...
> 
> But it's your guys chips in the end, and there is no gaurantee it will happen.
> Wouldn't be very fun having someone lose their chip though.


I think you just exaggerate a lot of things you say here... I ran lots of chips with VTT at 1.4+ (L5639, L5640, e5645 and e5649) at 2x uncore at the beginning when I was inexperienced with overclocking on westmere and I NEVER blew up or destroyed a chip... they are still working great and are used in my HP Proliant servers in dual socket configs running 24/7 with ECC ram either folding or doing server tasks and they never crash...


----------



## Xoriam

you're kidding about the exageration thing right? westmere/gulftown are pretty well known for dying....


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> you're kidding about the exageration thing right? westmere is pretty well known for dying....


I'm not talking only about this post you might be right about this one but they don't spontaneously combust either come on ... theres something about the posts you create in general that turn toward exaggeration...


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm not talking only about this post you might be right about this one but they don't spontaneously combust either come on ... theres something about the posts you create in general that turn toward exaggeration...


Really? apart from my chip running at lower voltage than normal and refusing to believe it even with official online CPUZ validation, what?
(oh yeah my chip running super low temps on idle, then you guys realized cstates and speedstep is the reason)

p.s. they do go up in a poof of smoke when the imc straight up fails.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Really? apart from my chip running at lower voltage than normal and refusing to believe it even with official online CPUZ validation, what?
> (oh yeah my chip running super low temps on idle, then you guys realized cstates and speedstep is the reason)


X5670 being hotter and worst chips than X5650, X5660 and X5680... you said that like 2 days ago I don't know where you heard that but thats bull****...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Really? apart from my chip running at lower voltage than normal and refusing to believe it even with official online CPUZ validation, what?
> *(oh yeah my chip running super low temps on idle, then you guys realized cstates and speedstep is the reason)*
> 
> p.s. they do go up in a poof of smoke when the imc straight up fails.


And yeah you forgot to mention you use cstates and speedstep thats the reason why you are able to run 4.4ghz on 1.0v...

Trust me I can run subzero temps on my cpu as well...

I'll just forget to mention its shoved in the snow...


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> X5670 being hotter and worst chips than X5650, X5660 and X5680... you said that like 2 days ago I don't know where you heard that but thats bull****...


x5660 has better performance per watt ratio, overclocks higher on water due to this fact.
Also x5670 has a 22 multi, well know that even multis require more voltage, resulting in? more heat.
So you'll end up using a 21 multi, and you just spent more money for nothing.

here is a chart comparing the 2
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-X5670-vs-Intel-Xeon-X5660

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> And yeah you forgot to mention you use cstates and speedstep thats the reason why you are able to run 4.4ghz on 1.0v...
> 
> Trust me I can run subzero temps on my cpu as well...
> 
> I'll just forget to mention its shoved in the snow...


Powersaving settings quit being an issue for most users after LGA 775, so It's kind of obvious they were on.
Especially on stock settings, so pointing out that my chip has powersaving options turned on with stock settings, the point of that?

1.1v


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> x5660 has better performance per watt ratio, overclocks higher on water due to this fact.
> Also x5670 has a 22 multi, well know that even multis require more voltage, resulting in? more heat.
> So you'll end up using a 21 multi, and you just spent more money for nothing.
> 
> here is a chart comparing the 2
> http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-X5670-vs-Intel-Xeon-X5660
> Powersaving settings quit being an issue for most users after LGA 775, so It's kind of obvious they were on.
> Especially on stock settings, so pointing out that my chip has powersaving options turned on with stock settings, the point of that?
> 
> 1.1v


Look that is just pure speculation... you can strike pure luck with either chips... the fact is they are both 95w chips and you can get a chip thats bad with the X5660 and the X5670...
As far as I'm concerned... the X5670 as been proven to strike better clocks and I have 2 in my Mac Pro that I could get above 4.6 ghz without too much efforts and tweaking... but the fact is I am not going to mess up chips that came in a machine I paid more than 7k$ for. The fact is you can get these CPU of eBay for a low price now... so the $ aspect is just out of the question now... if you look hard enough you can get a good deal on either one of them... Most of us here don't use C-States to overclock btw... since its just a bias on overclocking and don't show real values of voltage and clock...


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Look that is just pure speculation... you can strike pure luck with either chips... the fact is they are both 95w chips and you can get a chip thats bad with the X5660 and the X5670...
> As far as I'm concerned... the X5670 as been proven to strike better clocks and I have 2 in my Mac Pro that I could get above 4.6 ghz without too much efforts and tweaking... but the fact is I am not going to mess up chips that came in a machine I paid more than 7k$ for. The fact is you can get these CPU of eBay for a low price now... so the $ aspect is just out of the question now... if you look hard enough you can get a good deal on either one of them... Most of us here don't use C-States to overclock btw... since its just a bias on overclocking and don't show real values of voltage and clock...


Both of us have seen different results, this make neither of us wrong or exagerated...
I've seen more x5660s perform better, you've seen more x5670s perform better.

infact I saw an x5670 for 20€ more than what i spent on my x5660, but my friends running the x5670 all used the 21x multi anyways, so that seemed an obvious option to me.


----------



## GENXLR

Ran a spare X5650 at 2x uncore at 1.45V on the VTT a while back. Chip survived. Actually even made it to 1.5V without a smokeshow or damage. Also the IMC's don't smoke when they die. The system stops just like when a GPU shorts out. Very boring show.


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Ran a spare X5650 at 2x uncore at 1.45V on the VTT a while back. Chip survived. Actually even made it to 1.5V without a smokeshow or damage. Also the IMC's don't smoke when they die. The system stops just like when a GPU shorts out. Very boring show.


Obviously not every chip is not going to die from it. (i did even say that before)

They do smoke when the IMC burns up btw. looks something like this (you probably had your case closed, weren't paying atention or had a small short.)



not an insane amount, and if you get critical instant pop failure it will be a small poof.


----------



## GENXLR

...... That doesn't happen on Chips ever since the P4 Era.....


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Obviously not every chip is not going to die from it. (i did even say that before)
> 
> They do smoke when the IMC burns up btw. looks something like this (you probably had your case closed, weren't paying atention or had a small short.)
> 
> 
> 
> not an insane amount, and if you get critical instant pop failure it will be a small poof.


Nice westmere-ep








Didn't know AMD was manufacturing them btw


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> ...... That doesn't happen on Chips ever since the P4 Era.....


Saw a northwood blow up because of overclocking







it was awesome... when I mean blow up I mean really blow up







took the motherboard socket to hell with it







I think it was then that my friends and I realized how expensive it really was to build PC and upgrade every generation or so


----------



## Xoriam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> ...... That doesn't happen on Chips ever since the P4 Era.....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Nice westmere-ep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't know AMD was manufacturing them btw


Too many weird ideas going on in this thread.



I'm out. Hope you eventually break 4ghz Genxlr.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Too many weird ideas going on in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm out. Hope you eventually break 4ghz Genxlr.


He did break the 4Ghz the other day... I helped him to tweak out his P6T with the 200 BCLK without using turbo (20 multi)... he could boot windows with turbo but not stable if I recall


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Hmm. Interesting. With the prices of X58 boards lately I might just turn around and sell off my EVGA X58 and upgrade the platform


I can respect that move. After the Xeons started to get more recognition late last year _all of the X58 boards have skyrocketed. ESPECIALLY the Sabertooth X58. Sabertooth's were $119.99 all day for years. Now people are going back to MSRP rates and higher. I understand your pain and frustration. Just be ready to pay Intel a premium price. What platform were you going to upgrade to?

_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> I know a few people who have had instant death on their i7 980x and x5650 from 2x uncore and 1.4vtt.
> Not even degradation, just POOF smoke and death.
> 32nm IMC is delicate...


Obviously you must treat the 32nm a little differently than the 45nm,, but the Xeons can still take a really good beating. I think that "instant death" is pretty far out there [exaggeration] and I think there were some other factors that had to have caused a "instant" death of the CPU. High uncore speed is not going to kill i CPU instantly nor will vtt. I haven't seen a smoking CPU since the late 90s \ early 2000s.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> they are still working great and are used in my HP Proliant servers in dual socket configs running 24/7 with ECC ram either folding or doing server tasks and they never crash...


Man I was working on one of those dual socket HP Proliant servers today. The backup battery died inside of it. Those can be a pain to replace some times.







I installed and configured another server today as well. I can't remember the exact model, but it was definitely dual socket Ivy-Bridge.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> you're kidding about the exageration thing right? westmere/gulftown are pretty well known for dying....


You must be joking right? OF COURSE they, or any, CPU will be known to die. Anytime you overclock what do you think will happen over time? I haven't seen any Westmere's die unless someone overclocked them to high & didn't know what they were doing [user error] or they were purchased with issues [defective].

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Really? apart from my chip running at lower voltage than normal and refusing to believe it even with official online CPUZ validation, what?
> (oh yeah my chip running super low temps on idle, then you guys realized cstates and speedstep is the reason)


Yeah I see what type of person you are now. You specifically said that you set the vCore to 1.1v in the BIOS. Trust me no one believed that you ran 1.1v @ 4.4Ghz except }SkOrPn--' for a short while so calm down. I already knew you were full of it when you claimed to be running 1.1v. I asked if you ran manual or dynamic vCore. No response. Easy.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Too many weird ideas going on in this thread.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Could you do me a favor and leave my X58 Xeon topic as well. Thanks. You have been nothing, but trouble since you recently received your Xeon and started posting in my topics. I have never considered removing anyone from the X58 membership list, but I'm seriously thinking about it. I understand having differences and debating, but straight up posting false statements after the fact & contradicting yourself it pretty low.

@EvilMonk it's time to stop falling for bait from this guy. It's obvious he knows nearly nothing about what he talks about and is usually wrong on every point. Now it appears he's purposely trying to start mess.


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> x5660 has better performance per watt ratio, overclocks higher on water due to this fact.
> Also x5670 has a 22 multi, *well know that even multis require more voltage*, resulting in? more heat.
> So you'll end up using a 21 multi, and you just spent more money for nothing.


So if I change my OC to my x5650 from (20x 218 = 4360 v1.39) to (19x 230 = 4370) will no longer need 1.39 vcore? That doesn't even make sense. right?


----------



## GENXLR

Hey, EvilMonk, I'm gonna try your new settings, Can you list them once more plz, Its hard to find posts on my Phone.

I remember drop uncore to 1.8x, raise VTT to 1.35, raise Vcore to 1.3825? x22 multi?

Did i miss or mess up anything?

Should i turn speedstep back of, i renabled it for down clocking so i can stop idling at 50C, it was bad o-o


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> So if I change my OC to my x5650 from (20x 218 = 4360 v1.39) to (19x 230 = 4370) will no longer need 1.39 vcore? That doesn't even make sense. right?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hey, EvilMonk, I'm gonna try your new settings, Can you list them once more plz, Its hard to find posts on my Phone.
> 
> I remember drop uncore to 1.8x, raise VTT to 1.35, raise Vcore to 1.3825? x22 multi?
> 
> Did i miss or mess up anything?
> 
> Should i turn speedstep back of, i renabled it for down clocking so i can stop idling at 50C, it was bad o-o


Drop uncore 1.8x
turn speedstep ON. to test your temperature and report back
VTT 1.35
VCore 1.3825
Multi 22
BCLK 200
Report after!!


----------



## bill1024

All 3 of my x5660 are running 175x23 all 12 threads running 24/7 why would a x5670 run 22x and not 23 or 24?
An Asus P6T Deluxe V2 an Evga FTW3 an Asus Rampage3 gene all run the 23x multiplier.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Drop uncore 1.8x
> turn speedstep ON. to test your temperature and report back
> VTT 1.35
> VCore 1.3825
> Multi 22
> BCLK 200
> Report after!!


Tested on mine and all working but with vcore 1.3625 GENXLR


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I can respect that move. After the Xeons started to get more recognition late last year _all of the X58 boards have skyrocketed. ESPECIALLY the Sabertooth X58. Sabertooth's were $119.99 all day for years. Now people are going back to MSRP rates and higher. I understand your pain and frustration. Just be ready to pay Intel a premium price. What platform were you going to upgrade to?
> _


Sorry, that was just a thought that crossed my mind. The board is 249$ hence my second thought; and change of thought to sell mine off. The real kicker is the cinebench 11.5 scoring. I hit an 11.70 at 4.6GHz with the 970, so I see in one respect how much things won't change with an upgrade. I think what frustrates me is the poor work with the latest bios for my EVGA 760 A1 board. I'm thinking about doing the mod to make the Xeons work on it.

What kills me is when i bought this i7 970 it was a full platform, mb, cpu, and ram, and i turned around and sold off the board and ram for ~ 100$







lol sigh


----------



## bigpoppapump

Wow that's a lot of posts something cool must have- oh. Oh.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sorry, that was just a thought that crossed my mind. The board is 249$ hence my second thought; and change of thought to sell mine off. The real kicker is the cinebench 11.5 scoring. I hit an 11.70 at 4.6GHz with the 970, so I see in one respect how much things won't change with an upgrade. I think what frustrates me is the poor work with the latest bios for my EVGA 760 A1 board. I'm thinking about doing the mod to make the Xeons work on it.
> 
> What kills me is when i bought this i7 970 it was a full platform, mb, cpu, and ram, and i turned around and sold off the board and ram for ~ 100$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol sigh


If I already had a i7-9xx EE I wouldn't even bother to think about upgrading to a Xeon. $249 for a first gen board would seriously make me think as well. I miss when X58 boards were reasonably priced.


----------



## OCmember

Here is an example of some of the things wrong with this bios.

The uncore set to auto. The Ram speed is 400x2 or 800MHz. 1.5x800 should be 1200MHz for 1.5 times the Ram speed. Uncore Frequency at auto sets it to 2.5x (Ram speed) Manually setting the Uncore Frequency to 2 times the Ram speed, which is still 800MHz btw, should allow 1600MHz Uncore frequency. There is a bug in the bios that doesn't accept manually setting the ratio for 2x the Ram speed. It reverts back to Auto speeds. The lowest that will work is 2.1825 x 800 = 1746 Uncore Frequency. I guess it's the little things that aggrevate me. The board was between 3-400$ when i bought it new.

Turbo? Doesn't work


----------



## GENXLR

EvilMonk, Succeeded 10 4096MB burns at 73Gflops with those settings... my temps however... I was throttling, I was tapping 96C on 3 Cores. A wee Bit hot. But it worked, So with that and Speedstep off >.<, What should we start doing to optimize this setup? Besides ordering a new cooler x.x

Better question, I'll move the way of water cooling if someone can help me fabricate a bracket from my old solid copper swiftech waterblock. I still have the CPU block Pump, resivor and 120MM radiator. I could try and reuse it, otherwise I'll just find one of my Prolimatech Megahalems and strap a Sayno or Delta to it


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> EvilMonk, Succeeded 10 4096MB burns at 73Gflops with those settings... my temps however... I was throttling, I was tapping 96C on 3 Cores. A wee Bit hot. But it worked, So with that and Speedstep off >.<, What should we start doing to optimize this setup? Besides ordering a new cooler x.x
> 
> Better question, I'll move the way of water cooling if someone can help me fabricate a bracket from my old solid copper swiftech waterblock. I still have the CPU block Pump, resivor and 120MM radiator. I could try and reuse it, otherwise I'll just find one of my Prolimatech Megahalems and strap a Sayno or Delta to it


Cooler is probably the first thing that come to mind. but the temps are dangerously high... try to get some thermal compound as well bud. so which multi * bclk & voltage are you at now?


----------



## GENXLR

I was wrong, crashed the moment i hit the enter button. BSOD 0x1E


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I was wrong, crashed the moment i hit the enter button. BSOD 0x1E


With which settings?


----------



## GENXLR

1.3825Vcore
1.35VTT
1.8X Uncore
22X Multi
200Blck
No Speedstep
No C1E
No CStates
1.66 Vdram Bus

More Vcore?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> 1.3825Vcore
> 1.35VTT
> 1.8X Uncore
> 22X Multi
> 200Blck
> No Speedstep
> No C1E
> No CStates
> 1.66 Vdram Bus


Damn those were quite high... I am scared to make you push anything higher...









Whats your ram? I don't remember

**edit**
Nah more vcore will just be superficial at this point... it was stable enough to get you to boot but I think we would be to get above 1.40v VCore to get it stable and with your cooling not in its best condition for now it won't be the best solution to go up that road and stress test it taking a chance to damage the chip...


----------



## bill1024

Is that the EVGA board?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Is that the EVGA board?


EVGA, 760 A1, rev 1.0


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Is that the EVGA board?


Was the question for GENXLR and me? If so P6T

**Edit** sorry went back to previous page and figured out what you were talking about... don't mind me...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Here is an example of some of the things wrong with this bios.
> 
> The uncore set to auto. The Ram speed is 400x2 or 800MHz. 1.5x800 should be 1200MHz for 1.5 times the Ram speed. Uncore Frequency at auto sets it to 2.5x (Ram speed) Manually setting the Uncore Frequency to 2 times the Ram speed, which is still 800MHz btw, should allow 1600MHz Uncore frequency. There is a bug in the bios that doesn't accept manually setting the ratio for 2x the Ram speed. It reverts back to Auto speeds. The lowest that will work is 2.1825 x 800 = 1746 Uncore Frequency. I guess it's the little things that aggrevate me. The board was between 3-400$ when i bought it new.
> 
> Turbo? Doesn't work


That sucks big time. Never heard of that happening until now. I'm sure you have the latest BIOS. I'm not really sure what's going on with your MB. I guess it doesn't want to play correctly with the Xeon.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I was throttling, I was tapping 96C on 3 Cores. A wee Bit hot.


A WEE BIT???? DUDE that's pretty dangerous temps. I hope they weren't above 80c for a very long time and\or crashed the PC. I'd address that issue first if I were and shoot for a lower OC + lower voltage.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That sucks big time. Never heard of that happening until now. I'm sure you have the latest BIOS. I'm not really sure what's going on with your MB. I guess it doesn't want to play correctly with the Xeon.


That's happening with the i7 970 & EVGA 760.

My Asrock X58 likes the Xeon. The EVGA won't accept a Xeon.

Sucks


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry I got you confused while I was multi-tasking. That's right you were on the fence or thinking. Replace Xeon with i7 in that case. That's still pretty weird though.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry I got you confused while I was multi-tasking. That's right you were on the fence or thinking. Replace Xeon with i7 in that case. That's still pretty weird though.


I'm stuck with the Xeon in the Asrock and the i7 970 in the EVGA, unless I mod the EVGA board to accept a Xeon.

There are a few more things wrong with the EVGA bios that I can't even think of atm.

If there were a bios that worked properly for this EVGA board I'd be a little happier.

It is what it is. I should just stop fooling with it and be happy


----------



## Kana-Maru

I can only suggest being happy and maybe checking out if there is a modded BIOS or something? Otherwise sell and upgrade. You can't go wrong whether you stay with the platform or leave..


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I can only suggest being happy and maybe checking out if there is a modded BIOS or something? Otherwise sell and upgrade. You can't go wrong whether you stay with the platform or leave..


I think I'm just gonna run the i7 970 at stock for a while and look for another board, or tinker with putting this chip under custom water.

I don't think there is a bios although I've asked in the EVGA forums, no replies, not surprised as 4-5yrs have passed by. I might try an older one and see how that works. I'd like to hold on to this till the next gen Intel processors come out. No game I play is too taxing or that wouldn't benefit from a simple GPU upgrade.


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Drop uncore 1.8x
> turn speedstep ON. to test your temperature and report back
> VTT 1.35
> VCore 1.3825
> Multi 22
> BCLK 200
> Report after!!


not sure if this answer my question. It will require less vcore going from (20x 218 = 4360) to (19x 230 = 4370)? and also why something like this can be true? it doesn't make any sense to begin with.


----------



## GENXLR

I need a new chip


----------



## Konkistadori

ATM ive found game stable settings @ 189BCLK (4158mhz) vCore 1.304 HT OFF, QPI/VTT 1.31 , Ram stock settings with 2T Ram v 1.56. CPU PLL AUTO

Is that OK or Bad vCore for that clock? And should i manuallly put Voltage for PLL?
I tried bclk 191 but crashed with that Vcore, im not sure if i should tinker some other voltages... And im using AUTO C-States.

And i got earlier 0124 error, so i think i needed higher VTT/QPI for that 4.2ghz

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4675750? 3dmark run, with HD7950 @ 1100mhz. With HT i got 3000 points more on physics score.


----------



## shaolin95

Sad news! Just saw that my mobo is Rev 1.1 so it needs to be modded and I contacted EVGA and they want ME to pay $50 for "repairs" like my mobo is broken!


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



We have gone ahead and set up a request for your MB to be taken in for the westmere modification. Since the product is out of warranty there will be a 50$ service fee that will need to be applied to have the modification done. Also we would require for you to ship the product to our address the following will need to be written on the package itself. We highly recommend applying 2 inchs of support for the motherboard to keep the product from moving around during transit. If you have any further questions or concerns feel free to contact our 24/7 Technical Support.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> Sad news! Just saw that my mobo is Rev 1.1 so it needs to be modded and I contacted EVGA and they want ME to pay $50 for "repairs" like my mobo is broken!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> We have gone ahead and set up a request for your MB to be taken in for the westmere modification. Since the product is out of warranty there will be a 50$ service fee that will need to be applied to have the modification done. Also we would require for you to ship the product to our address the following will need to be written on the package itself. We highly recommend applying 2 inchs of support for the motherboard to keep the product from moving around during transit. If you have any further questions or concerns feel free to contact our 24/7 Technical Support.


Ah dang that sucks about the Rev1.1. I believe there were a few people here performing that mod. Then again it could have been something else completely. I can't remember the exact users. Someone might be able to do it for you in this [or the other] topic. Well you need service and you know EVGA will not perform the service for free.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ATM ive found game stable settings @ 189BCLK (4158mhz) vCore 1.304 HT OFF, QPI/VTT 1.31 , Ram stock settings with 2T Ram v 1.56. CPU PLL AUTO
> 
> Is that OK or Bad vCore for that clock? And should i manuallly put Voltage for PLL?
> I tried bclk 191 but crashed with that Vcore, im not sure if i should tinker some other voltages... And im using AUTO C-States.
> 
> And i got earlier 0124 error, so i think i needed higher VTT/QPI for that 4.2ghz
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/4675750? 3dmark run, with HD7950 @ 1100mhz. With HT i got 3000 points more on physics score.[/SPOILER


Check here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/2720#post_23129641


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I need a new chip


Yeah I think so bud...








Your cooling is probably a big part of the problem as well... you should take care of it asap... might not be only the chip


----------



## Konkistadori

Thanks Kana-Maru! Ill test that today,but first i need to make some coffee







...

Edit: First try it gave 0124 error while browsing, so i upped VTT to 1.27 and vcore is 1.25.









And i had to set EIST to AUTO so i could use that 22x multi.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Thanks Kana-Maru! Ill test that today,but first i need to make some coffee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> Edit: First try it gave 0124 error while browsing, so i upped VTT to 1.27 and vcore is 1.25.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Perfect







. Now we are getting somewhere and I already have you under 1.31v. Running the Vtt = 1.27v is perfectly fine so let's leave it there for now. Your temps are a big warm. I'm sure the Silver Arrow can do better than what I'm seeing. I'm guessing your ambient temp is high. Still nothing to worry about right now. Have you ran any stability programs and passed the tests yet?
Quote:


> And i had to set EIST to AUTO so i could use that 22x multi.


So you are forced to use EIST? You can't disable it and set the the multi? If you can't disable that's fine.

At this point let's run some stability test. As you continue to pass the stability tests, try to reduce the vCore until you are no longer stable\failing the tests.


----------



## Konkistadori

Ive been quick testing with IBT, and i dont have silver arrow no more.. Akasa Venom ATM







..
But it passed 3dmark with 189 bclk, but freezed with IBT.

So far i have bsodded few times already, i upped vcore to 1.256 and have been lowering BCLK and it seems to be most stable so far at 182.

Temps are bit high, but in games it wont get this high.
Ambient temp is around 23-26celsius

Ill go now test BF4 and post temps after playing while.
After 15mins temps were 57-64celsius.

And im not sure, but maybe disabling turbo and C-states gave more stable fps on BF4 no more spikes.



Ninja Edit:









I Could get lapped Corator DS for under 30euros







... But i can settle to lower clocks if temps are too high


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sounds good. You are gonna have to work with it to find your vCore + BCLK. Your voltage already looks much better and you'll have to continue to run test to ensure it's stable one you get everything the way you want it.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Ive been quick testing with IBT, and i dont have silver arrow no more.. Akasa Venom ATM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..
> But it passed 3dmark with 189 bclk, but freezed with IBT.
> 
> So far i have bsodded few times already, i upped vcore to 1.256 and have been lowering BCLK and it seems to be most stable so far at 182.
> 
> Temps are bit high, but in games it wont get this high.
> Ambient temp is around 23-26celsius
> 
> Ill go now test BF4 and post temps after playing while.
> 
> Ninja Edit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Could get lapped Corator DS for under 30euros
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... But i can settle to lower clocks if temps are too high


I really think a lapped cooler surface is a great positive addition to a cooling system. are you going to do the lapping yourself?
I did a lot of coolers and IHS lapping myself with in order 400, 800 then 1500 grit sandpaper for the long finishing process, the 400 and 800 being for the surface preparation and 1500 for the precision job.


----------



## Konkistadori

On my Sleeper Project I lapped my i7 950 and Silver Arrow SB-E, difference was noticeable when i used higher clocks.

Corator DS is already lapped by the seller, finished with 2000grit. Stock corator fans are quite crummy... But i will use 1850rpm Gentle typhoon with it







Or 2xTY140s.


----------



## GENXLR

i used to lap my CPU's with a CNC machine. I wish i still had it


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Ah dang that sucks about the Rev1.1. I believe there were a few people here performing that mod. Then again it could have been something else completely. I can't remember the exact users. Someone might be able to do it for you in this [or the other] topic. Well you need service and you know EVGA will not perform the service for free.
> Check here:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/2720#post_23129641


Well instead of paying for that and suffering the downtime, I am just going to sell it and get the Asus Rampage III Formula. From what I have read it should be compatible.








What you think?


----------



## Konkistadori

Hee, canceled that Corator DS deal.. Ordered Swiftech h220-X instead







.. Bummer, i cant get suitable backplate for it...


----------



## GENXLR

Well Monk, I guess my CPU is just a potato......

Should I pull the other X5650 from the R710 in storage or Would it be worth it to swap the X5650's from the R710 into another that has twin X5660's and use an X5660? it's not easy to do on production machines, I just have to be quiet about it like i was with my first X5650 o.o

First R710 has a dead Backplane, hence it's not a big deal, I can get the X5660's, just need to be more careful. Is the performance jump worth much? thats the real question.


----------



## autoshot

The 3x 8GB G.Skills have successfully passed 6 consecutive Memtest-runs. I am now running the AIDA64 Stress Test and if it hasn't aborted after 24h I think I can finally start tweaking my system


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> The 3x 8GB G.Skills have successfully passed 6 consecutive Memtest-runs. I am now running the AIDA64 Stress Test and if it hasn't aborted after 24h I think I can finally start tweaking my system


Hopefully everything works out for you. I'm glad that I was able to help you. Just post back if you run into any issues.


----------



## u3b3rg33k

Speaking of ram, I recently put in 6x 8GB Crucial ram (BLE8G3D1869DE1TX0.16FED 8GB ELITE DDR3-1866 (PC3-14900) CL9 @ 1.5V W/XMP /TS) ordered as 6 individual sticks. I'm running the memory faster than I ever have before (1660MHz) with XMP timings, and my rig has never been this stable before. 4.14GHz i7-970. I'd go faster, but right now I'm using it as a VM host (hence the memory upgrade), so I'm figuring don't fix what ain't broke. CPU is under custom water, and sits in the 40-50C range at full load, depending on ambient.


Spoiler: Pics (out of date)






The ram cooler is gone now, no need with the big bay fan. FYI that bay fan drops the rear of the CPU socket temp by 10C, and the ram and VRMs are barely warm to the touch, so it's totally worth it.


----------



## EvilMonk

Bought 2 sets of dual channel 8 Gb (2x4Gb kits) of G.Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 CL10 on Newegg yesterday evening since it was on sale for the same price as the DDR3 1600 CL8 I was looking to buy. And I might buy an ES Xeon E5 on eBay with an LGA 2011 motherboard just for a small test rig so I'll see if the DDR3 2400 is good for anything when I get it...

Its this one...
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231587


----------



## Dotachin

Bought 3 8gb sticks as well (they were $74 each 2 days ago and they are CL9 at 1866 not CL7):

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EP0C8K6/ref=pe_385040_121528360_TE_dp_2

Hope they work.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Bought 3 8gb sticks as well (they were $74 each 2 days ago and they are CL9 at 1866 not CL7):
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EP0C8K6/ref=pe_385040_121528360_TE_dp_2
> 
> Hope they work.


Love crucial products, always a good performance and safe investment so I wouldn't worry about those


----------



## u3b3rg33k

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Love crucial products, always a good performance and safe investment so I wouldn't worry about those


+1. as mentioned above I went full ******. they say never to go full ******, but I did, and I'm happy I did.


----------



## autoshot

I have to say it is quite incredible what this 6 year old platform is still capable of. I mean, for certain usage scenarios I'm pretty sure a mildly OCed 6-core Westmere at 4.0GHz isn't that much slower than the latest and greatest Haswell-E Hexacores @ stock. Of course, you loose the native SATA III and USB3.0 functionality as well as a couple of other convenient things, but when it comes to pure computing power and expandability X58 is still quite competitive in my opinion.

EDIT:

The AIDA64 stresstest did run without a glitch for more than 24 hours. I am now considering my system stable


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I have to say it is quite incredible what this 6 year old platform is still capable of. I mean, for certain usage scenarios I'm pretty sure a mildly OCed 6-core Westmere at 4.0GHz isn't that much slower than the latest and greatest Haswell-E Hexacores @ stock. Of course, you loose the native SATA III and USB3.0 functionality as well as a couple of other convenient things, but when it comes to pure computing power and expandability X58 is still quite competitive in my opinion.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> The AIDA64 stresstest did run without a glitch for more than 24 hours. I am now considering my system stable


You ran the stress test @ stock or overclocked? because on the screenshots I don't really know what to see since they show stock clocks with memtest and aida64... did you upload the wrong screens by mistake or am I missing something?


----------



## autoshot

I ran memtest and the AIDA stress test @ stock settings since I wanted to get my system 100% stable before I start overclocking so those screenshots are the correct ones. As I said, I will begin OCing my system on the coming weekend.


----------



## Konkistadori

Done some adjusting, dropped avg. 6celsius per core from earlier clocks.
From *vCore 1.256 4Ghz* To *vCore 1.128 3.8Ghz*

NEW


OLD


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Done some adjusting, dropped avg. 6celsius per core from earlier clocks.
> From *vCore 1.256 4Ghz* To *vCore 1.128 3.8Ghz*


76 Gflops on 3.8ghz is actually really good. I'd keep that too. I have 76 Gflops at 4ghz, so congrats on the fine tuning...


----------



## Konkistadori

Sticked with this for now, IBT didint want to run anymore when i went vCore 1.118 @ 3.8ghz.
Now I go run 3d Mark and BF4, ill update results here







.

And i have HT OFF, gives more stable fps on BF4.


Link to Fire Strike 3dMark results 3.8ghz vs 4ghz (with higher clocked HD7950)
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/3228005/fs/3225639



And temps after 3dMark Run Akasa Venom + Gentle Typhoon 1800rpm.
Now i go play some BF4 i still have some trial left










After Some BF4 64p map.
VRM seems to get bit hot... Maybe ill change paste from VRM heatsinks...


----------



## OCmember

Which version of IBT are you using?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Which version of IBT are you using?


2.54... latest version I think... usually on google its the first for me that pop in search for intel burn test download.
Its the first link at majorgeeks


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> 2.54... latest version I think... usually on google its the first for me that pop in search for intel burn test download.
> Its the first link at majorgeeks


Ok, thanks, that's what I was using.. I'll have to boot it back up n see what my GFlops are at.


----------



## Konkistadori

Yeah, its 2.54 as it can be seen from the picture








. I guess it wont make much difference tough... Since this does not support AVX etc..
But yeah, for medicore cpu cooler @3.8ghz seems to be sweetspot IMO.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Done some adjusting, dropped avg. 6celsius per core from earlier clocks.
> From *vCore 1.256 4Ghz* To *vCore 1.128 3.8Ghz*
> 
> NEW
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OLD
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


You are welcome. I'm glad I was able to help you lower the voltages and temps. I couldn't just let you keep running your rig like that man







. Your voltage is really low. In the past that actually caused issues outside of IBT. I would run Prime95 for many hours to ensure your CPU won't require more voltage. Those are really nice Gflop scores. I've been meaning to run my 3.8Ghz settings to get my Gflops from IBT.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Ok so I finished my 3.8Ghz IBT v2.54 test\benchmark. This is the highest frequency I can hit with the lowest voltage [1.168v] The results are in the picture below. I didn't feel the need to record any Idle CPU temps so I only recorded the load temps during the IBT test. I would run the voltage lower, but I'm happy were I am.

3.8Ghz
*Vcore* = 1.168v
*DRAM Freq*. = 1600Mhz
*No C-states or EIST*\SpeedStep+Turbo for this test.
All other settings were *AUTO* [-QPI\VTT: 1.15v, CPU PLL 1.80v etc. I can't remember all the settings I saw-]

*Ambient Temp* = 18.5c
*CPU Avg Temp* [-During IntelBurnTest v2.54-] = 40.5c
*X58\Northbridge Temp* [-During IntelBurnTest v2.54-] = 42.3c



80 Glops. I'm still leaning towards running 4Ghz since 3.8Ghz is so close, but 3.8Ghz uses little to no vCore. Decisions decisions. Then again it's going to be very cool for the next 5 months so I guess I could run 4.6Ghz 24/7. My average vCore after testing was around 1.12voltage or something like that awhile back. Of course the 4.6Ghz voltage cranks up under a load.


----------



## OCmember

What's the electricity drawl at 4.6GHz vs 3.8Ghz?


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, I'm swapping an X5660 from the R710 to try inplace of thise X5650. Can you help me with tuning it?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What's the electricity drawl at 4.6GHz vs 3.8Ghz?


I was wondering the same thing. Give me about a week or so to get back to you on that. I'm gonna have to get the voltage from the wall [or something] with my current setup and give you a rough estimate.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana, I'm swapping an X5660 from the R710 to try inplace of thise X5650. Can you help me with tuning it?


I remember those R710 racks. Been awhile since I've worked on one. I'll help you tune it. Just let me know when you are ready.


----------



## OCmember

Cool


----------



## Konkistadori

Tried 200bclk 19x multi, did not work at all... Changed only that bclk and multi, and checked that ram works at 1600mhz.

Now im Prime95 testing my earlier settings.


----------



## Konkistadori

So far prime stable, had to up vCore to 1.16 and QPI/VTT 1.2.
1x GENTLE 1800rpm


2x TY140S 1300rpm
12celsius lower VRM temps.



Changed 1xGentle 1800rpm to 2x TY140s, nice temp drop with 2x1300rpm fans








And MOBO VRM seems to be bit cooler now







..
Im hearing some sort of coil whine from MOBO when prime testing...

*TY140s*


Gentle


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> So far prime stable, had to up vCore to 1.16 and QPI/VTT 1.2.
> 1x GENTLE 1800rpm
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2x TY140S 1300rpm
> 12celsius lower VRM temps.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changed 1xGentle 1800rpm to 2x TY140s, nice temp drop with 2x1300rpm fans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And MOBO VRM seems to be bit cooler now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..
> Im hearing some sort of coil whine from MOBO when prime testing...
> *TY140s*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gentle
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Congrats. Well you'll need to run Prime95 for 24 to 48 hours straight. Not a few minutes \ hours then stop and restart. Also after that you'll have to hit the CPU hard with IBT v.254 [Maximum] for around 15 runs ensure stability. Then OCCT for awhile. Show proof as well.

For the coil whine you probably need to increase your vCore if the sound is near the CPU. That will probably resolve the issue. If it doesn't try to pinpoint the area.


----------



## Konkistadori

Well i had no more time to test that, ill do longer tests later. Thanks for the coil whine tip!


----------



## nievz

I have an ecs x58b-a3 motherboard. It supports c0, b1, d0 steppings. It only specifically indicates support i7 and i7 extreme (i7 97x CPU's) on their website which was posted in 5/2010. with x5670 a B1 stepping, do you think my mobo will run the x5670? I have a chance to get a great deal on this CPU and i want to know if i can run it on my mobo. Please advise. thank you!

Great review!!!


----------



## EvilMonk

After all the action you got lately what do you guys think about my new Xeon E3-1246V3 3.5 Ghz Quad / 3.9 @ Turbo, Z97 MSI motherboard and 32 Gb of G.Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 CL10 I got?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I have an ecs x58b-a3 motherboard. It supports c0, b1, d0 steppings. It only specifically indicates support i7 and i7 extreme (i7 97x CPU's) on their website which was posted in 5/2010. with x5670 a B1 stepping, do you think my mobo will run the x5670? I have a chance to get a great deal on this CPU and i want to know if i can run it on my mobo. Please advise. thank you!
> 
> Great review!!!


Thanks and thanks for reading. I'm going to be posting an extended review on my blog with more info regarding the X58 platform and the Xeons. I "think" it will work. I haven't seen any users running that board. It does support the 6-core i7-9xx EE so you'll have to take a gamble and let us know. I'm going to be updating the first post with a motherboard list of known working Xeons.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> After all the action you got lately what do you guys think about my new Xeon E3-1246V3 3.5 Ghz Quad / 3.9 @ Turbo, Z97 MSI motherboard and 32 Gb of G.Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 CL10 I got?


I like it. I'm personally never going back to Quad-Cores though.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks and thanks for reading. I'm going to be posting an extended review on my blog with more info regarding the X58 platform and the Xeons. I "think" it will work. I haven't seen any users running that board. It does support the 6-core i7-9xx EE so you'll have to take a gamble and let us know. I'm going to be updating the first post with a motherboard list of known working Xeons.
> 
> I like it. I'm personally never going back to Quad-Cores though.


I was thinking the same but that quad core is hella fast bud...


----------



## nievz

It worked
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks and thanks for reading. I'm going to be posting an extended review on my blog with more info regarding the X58 platform and the Xeons. I "think" it will work. I haven't seen any users running that board. It does support the 6-core i7-9xx EE so you'll have to take a gamble and let us know. I'm going to be updating the first post with a motherboard list of known working Xeons.


It worked on the mobo! I'm currently Prime testing with the following settings:

4.07 Ghz
1.280 vcore
vdimm 1.6v
cpu vtt 1.392

It's not stable unless I up the vtt that much. and this motherboard is pretty basic when it comes to overclocking features. it took me a few hours for it to even booth at that speed. i had to reset the BIOS several times.

One question though, I see people say set the uncore to 16x or 18x, however, my mobo shows uncore in Mhz, like 2133mhz, 2400mhz, etc. How is the uncore computed?


----------



## bill1024

Try 2x the ram speed, or one click under two x the ram speed.
1400mhz = 2800mhz and so on.


----------



## Sart

My X5650 finally came in, and I finally got my H80i installed. It was an absolute nightmare because of my case and mobo, but I'm hoping OCing this thing will be worth it as the temps are great with this cooler.

Here's my validation link for that X58 Xeon owner's club. Don't exactly know if it's the proper place to post it but still.

http://valid.x86.fr/8dmzv3

Now I'm just gonna scour previous posts throughout the thread for some OCing tips/guidelines for this chip.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Try 2x the ram speed, or one click under two x the ram speed.
> 1400mhz = 2800mhz and so on.


You can also probably be fine with the setting 2 steps bellow 2x the ram speed, I used that one when I was pushing 2000 mhz on the IMC


----------



## nievz

It seems i'm running stable with these settings 30 minutes in prime when i captured this picture. I'm running QPI at 4.6GT/s in the bios. Is there benefit to set it at 6.4? vroop on my board is high, when on Prime, it show 1.296v using AIDA monitor OSD but in the bios I actually have it set to 1.375v.

By the way mine is an x5670. How come I see posts where your 5660's have 24x multi's. Mine's only up to 22x...


----------



## GENXLR

the X5650 is 20 multi 22 turbo, 23 C-state, the X5660 is 21 Multi, 23 turbo, 24 C-state, yours is supposed to be 22 multi, 24 turbo, 25 C-state


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Is there benefit to set it at 6.4?


Yes Run 6.4GT. 6.4 GT is what it is rated to use.
Quote:


> vroop on my board is high, when on Prime, it show 1.296v using AIDA monitor OSD but in the bios I actually have it set to 1.375v.


Vdroop is doing it's job. People who mess around with Vdroop will probably damage their CPUs quicker anyways. Seeing 1.296v is normal if you didn't mess with Vdroop settings. The question is what's the vCore when your PC is Idle? Does it jump back up to 1.375v? Also 1.375v is to high for a 4Ghz overclock.
.
Quote:


> By the way mine is an x5670. How come I see posts where your 5660's have 24x multi's. Mine's only up to 22x...


My X5660 does go up to 24x. Make sure your BIOS has the latest updates. If you want the Turbo multiplier you'll need to enabled C-states or simply set then to "auto". It could also be a restriction on your MB or something. Your X5670 highest multiplier "should be" 25x with C-states enabled.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> the X5650 is 20 multi 22 turbo, 23 C-state, the X5660 is 21 Multi, 23 turbo, 24 C-state, yours is supposed to be 22 multi, 24 turbo, 25 C-state


Please keep it simple. There's already enough bad information going around about the X58 platform and the Xeons anyways.

C-States [will allow the highest multiplier to be used]
X5650 = 23x
X5660 = 24x
X5670 = 25x
Period.

C-states disabled & Manual CPU Ratio \ multiplier [depending on MB manufacturer]
X5650 = 22x
X5660 = 23x
X5670 = 24x


----------



## GENXLR

Kana..... thats what i just said ;_;

i will admit yours is neater


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana..... thats what i just said ;_;
> 
> i will admit yours is neater


Exactly. I understood what you said, but some users will get that info and run with it. Then debate all day and night about simply things. I try to keep it simple so everyone can understand it. Also "Turbo" will hit 2 cores with C-states enabled. So C-states = the highest multiplier = Turbo Multiplier.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*REVIEW UPDATE!!!!*

Here are my power usage test for the X5660 + my rig. I originally planned to run Triple or Quad GPUs, but never got around to it. It is still a possibility, but 2 GPUs have been more than enough for now. A user asked me about the voltages from 3.8Ghz to 4.6Ghz. I haven't gotten around to running the entire tests just yet so please stay tuned for more updates as the days & weeks pass. I tried my best to give you guys a good estimate. I also recorded the max voltage as well.

Let's not forget that I'm running a fairly fully loaded system, oh and I'm planning to upgrade & add more. I'm planning for a custom water cooled system with newer [water cooled] GPUs. My 4,000rpm Delta's can pull up to 17.4 watts a piece. Let's not forget about my four Scythe Gentle Typhoon AP-31's [5,400rpm] that can easily pull 13.68watts each and that's the good news. The bad news is that I need 32.28watts just to start up 1 AP-31 fan!!!!! I tried to mix it up a little bit while running various test. As I said above I'll continue to update my charts and info throughout the weeks.

*My PC Specs:*
*Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58
CPU: Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz
CPU Cooler: Antec Kuhler 620 - Pull
GPU: GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI - Reference Model
RAM: 12GB DDR3-1600Mhz [6x2GB]
SSD: x2 128GB RAID 0
HDD: x4 Seagate Barracuda 7,200rpm High Performance Drives [x2 RAID 0 setup]
PSU: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 1300W 80+ GOLD
Monitor: Dual - Res- 1080p, 1400p, 1600p
x2 Delta FFB1212EH-F00 Fan 4,000rpm
x4 Scythe Gentle Typhoon D1225C12BBAP-31 Fan 5400rpm
OS: Windows 7 64-bit*

-Dark Grey = Average wattage
-Light Grey =Max \ Peak wattage

Stock









Overclocked @ 4.6Ghz









Sorry if I didn't run enough test. It takes a long time to perform a lot of the benchmarks in this topic and I get paid nothing to do it. However, I love to do what I do. I work with computers, servers, routers, switches, UPS's, printers and so many different types of technology on a regular basis. So if I'm ever a little slow with updating just bear with me. I'll continue to mix up the test as well.

I'm no Electrician or power saving expert [although I have to learn a good amount in my field], but I would suggest unplugging your PC if the power switch is easily accessible. My PC uses around 8.7watts while the PC is powered off. Very minor and I'm still unplugging the PC since those watts add up in 30-31 days.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes Run 6.4GT. 6.4 GT is what it is rated to use.
> 
> Vdroop is doing it's job. People who mess around with Vdroop will probably damage their CPUs quicker anyways. Seeing 1.296v is normal if you didn't mess with Vdroop settings. The question is what's the vCore when your PC is Idle? Does it jump back up to 1.375v? Also 1.375v is to high for a 4Ghz overclock.
> .
> My X5660 does go up to 24x. Make sure your BIOS has the latest updates. If you want the Turbo multiplier you'll need to enabled C-states or simply set then to "auto". It could also be a restriction on your MB or something. Your X5670 highest multiplier "should be" 25x with C-states enabled.




I can't seem to find a setting to turn on C-state. Is that 'C1E'? Note in the screenshot I have HT disabled but I have it actually ON now.



I'm on 1.344v on idle. If i set bios to 1.35v i BSOD within a few minutes after running Prime, isn't what's important the actual volts I see in Aida and as long as my idle doesn't go above 1.4 or something? I really think this cheap motherboard is limiting my overclock. And I hope it boots at 6.4GT I'll try.


----------



## nievz

So I've set my qpi to 6.4gt and it won't boot anymore.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> So I've set my qpi to 6.4gt and it won't boot anymore.


Yeah its normal...
6.4 GT is for your 133 BCLK at stock frequency/multiplier stepping for the stock CPU
You are at 185 BCLK from what I see in your screenshot...
A simple math (I don't know how that math equation is called in english but in french its called une règle de 3) will show that in fact the 6.4 GT would turn out to be 6.4 x 185 / 133 = 8.9022 GT which is quite a lot and I don't think your system would be able to boot that frequency...


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Yeah its normal...
> 6.4 GT is for your 133 BCLK at stock frequency/multiplier stepping for the stock CPU
> You are at 185 BCLK from what I see in your screenshot...
> A simple math (I don't know how that math equation is called in english but in french its called une règle de 3) will show that in fact the 6.4 GT would turn out to be 6.4 x 185 / 133 = 8.9022 GT which is quite a lot and I don't think your system would be able to boot that frequency...


I think the word you're looking for is multiply and multiplied, it is called the multiplier.

4 multiplied by 2 = 8

You can multiply 4 by 2 and get 8 for an answer.

I always have had to set it to the lowest to boot too.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I think the word you're looking for is multiply and multiplied, it is called the multiplier.
> 
> 4 multiplied by 2 = 8
> 
> You can multiply 4 by 2 and get 8 for an answer.
> 
> I always have had to set it to the lowest to boot too.


I don't think so, The equation I'm talking about is the one thats describing the formula in which you do the triangle to find the 4th number missing with the 3 you have already (sorry I'm describing it since I only know it in french) by doing the multiply then divide to obtain the missing value.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> 4 multiplied by 2 = 8
> 
> You can multiply 4 by 2 and get 8 for an answer.
> 
> I always have had to set it to the lowest to boot too.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I think the word you're looking for is multiply and multiplied, it is called the multiplier.


I actually understands @EvilMonk's explanation more clearly..


----------



## intelchief

Kana you've said that:
"Vdroop is doing it's job. People who mess around with Vdroop will probably damage their CPUs quicker anyways. Seeing 1.296v is normal if you didn't mess with Vdroop settings. The question is what's the vCore when your PC is Idle? Does it jump back up to 1.375v? Also 1.375v is to high for a 4Ghz overclock. "

On my motherboard i have option Vdrop[disable/enable] and right now its disbaled (continuosly 1.33V). You're saying that its bad for CPU's?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well I'm saying that it's there for a reason [a good reason]. The only reason you have the ability to modify or completely remove the function is due to overclocking enthusiast. My board uses has an option named "LLC" instead of Vdroop and I run with it set to AUTO or Disabled depending on the overclock situation. Since your MB actually says "Vdroop" I would probably leave that enabled. However, we love to abuse CPUs for performance so technically you can use whatever settings you want. Also Vdroop is good for CPUs. The last thing you want is your voltage spiking and it will between idle and loads. There are a few ways to attempt to counter disabled Vdroop. Some people use Dynamic Vcore \ Offset to counter this, but it won't resolve the obvious problem. I don't think you want your CPU to run continuously @ 1.33v during Idle and\or load. That's were vdroop and dynamic vCore kicks in in.

If you give me sometime I'll try to run some personal test on my rig later this week to explain the reasoning even better. In your case I would leave Vdroop on, but you will more than likely get a BSOD. That's completely up to you.


----------



## intelchief

so with 1.33 i was able to hit 4,3Ghz and complete intel burn test with 15 runs. Temps, as u can see are pretty high(on the warmer CPU) but it was on AC with case closed and no others "cooling devices". In IDLE 15-31, in games i see around max 50 degrees. VTT-1.325 VDIMM - 1.6V
Those settings are safe for 24/7 use?

What is more important lets go back to the Vdroop topic:

1.
Bios settings -
without Vdroop
CPU0 Vcore -1.33125
CPU1 Vcore - 1.35625
Bios/eleet readings for both CPU's vcore - 1.329V (during IDLE and stress)

2.
Bios settings - i tried to find voltage for 4.3 but i will not risk and i will give u maximum voltages i've tried:
with Vdroop
CPU0 Vcore -1.35125
CPU1 Vcore - 1.38755
Bios/eleet readings for vcore - 1.36(IDLE)/1.29(STRESS)
and computer crashed with these settings

Maybe i'm thinking wrong but isn't the first option safer?
found that sentece:
"Alternatively what's good about this, is that under idle or low load, your core voltage is lower, generating less heat and using less power, and ramps up nicely to enable high load overclocks to be more stable."

in my case voltage is not jumping under load.


----------



## Kana-Maru

It would be easier if you post your PC specs as well. So you are running 2 processors. The first option is completely wrong if you go by Intel specs, but we are overclockers and this is what we want to do. I wouldn't feel comfortable running 1.33v & 1.36v through my CPU[-s-] 24/7, but you would. There's nothing wrong with how "you" want to run your gaming rig. I'm just saying that Idle + Load shouldn't be the same voltage. Load voltage is generally lower and sometimes much lower than the Idle voltage. Thanks to Dynamic vCore, it will definitely help keep temps and voltage down [as well as Vdroop]. C-states adds to the mix even more.

If option 1 is what you ned to run your rig then go with option 1







. Overclocking with Vdroop + dynamic vCore can be tricky, but will be worth it in the long run. Since it can be difficult the manufactures gave us what we wanted & added LLC\Vdroop options [plus a ton of other options as well].


----------



## intelchief

Actually i've reached 4320Mhz with Vdropp disabled (1.329V on Both CPUs, VTT - 1.325 and ram 1.6V) I tried to reach this with Vdroop Enabled and it was impossible. I needed to set in bios more than 1.4V(compared to 1.33125 with Vdroop disabled) which still was not enough(i stopped because i dont want to dmg my CPU's)

my spec:
2x. X5670 (BCLK 180Mhz with Turbo, speedstep and C1E)
Evga SR2
12Gb ram
GTX670
Antec HCP 1000W

And i dont have different voltage on those CPUs (my motherboard require higher value in bios to give the same voltage on the second CPU)

Both CPU's are running with 1.329V
Vtt1.325
IOH 1.35


----------



## Kana-Maru

This is why I stated "Since it can be difficult the manufactures gave us what we wanted & added LLC\Vdroop options". Overclocking with Vdroop can be difficult and rather confusing. I see where you are coming from and you aren't the first to that focus solely on voltage. Anything below 1.35v "is good" and you'll probably never see the spikes, but the CPU will handle the voltage differently depending on your settings. 1.329v is what you see, but that doesn't mean that's the end of the story. I personally still wouldn't run 1.33v [1.329v] 24/7 through my CPU. Just know that vdroop is there for a good reason. If you choose to use it or not I can't argue with that.

Edit:
Also as I stated above. I will attempt to run some test throughout the week and post proof behind my reasoning. I live a fairly busy life so I try to do as much as I can whenever I can.

Another Edit:
I just saw all of the edits you made as well. I guess I might now have to run test or anything like that. Also I don't get along with that website you posted lol.


----------



## u3b3rg33k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Actually i've reached 4320Mhz with Vdropp disabled (1.329V on Both CPUs, VTT - 1.325 and ram 1.6V) I tried to reach this with Vdroop Enabled and it was impossible. I needed to set in bios more than 1.4V(compared to 1.33125 with Vdroop disabled) which still was not enough(i stopped because i dont want to dmg my CPU's)
> 
> my spec:
> 2x. X5670 (BCLK 180Mhz with Turbo, speedstep and C1E)
> Evga SR2
> 12Gb ram
> GTX670
> Antec HCP 1000W
> 
> And i dont have different voltage on those CPUs (my motherboard require higher value in bios to give the same voltage on the second CPU)
> 
> Both CPU's are running with 1.329V
> Vtt1.325
> IOH 1.35


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Vdroop really just what naturally happens when you draw current in any electrical system, ever (causing voltage to fall)? And "disabling" vdroop actually causes the VRMs to increase voltage as current draw increases in order to maintain a more constant voltage?


----------



## intelchief

so it looks like i have to spend the night to find stable settings with Vdroop on. But when i want to have ~1.3V under load, in IDLE voltage will reach probably 1.4V - its not safe i think.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, So is LLC bad then? I use it all the time on all my rigs because it counter Vdroop. I know it's there for a reason but i thought it's better to counter it so that the voltage doesn't drop. Without it, any OC i run seems to fail UNLESS i set it close to 1.4V

Is this a sign of degradation?(I hope thats the right word x.x)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Please stop posting anandtech stuff in my topics. I had something short of a scuffle with that sites administrators and moderators. So if you guys could just edit those links it would be greatly appreciated.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> lil off topic, perfect example of
> 
> Other than that XD
> 
> Kana, So is LLC bad then? I use it all the time on all my rigs because it counter Vdroop. I know it's there for a reason but i thought it's better to counter it so that the voltage doesn't drop. Without it, any OC i run seems to fail UNLESS i set it close to 1.4V
> 
> Is this a sign of degradation?(I hope thats the right word x.x)


YES!!!! Joking lmao. It might not be a sign of degradation and then again it could be. We have plenty of headroom, but some users want unrealistic results. Especially users who doesn't really need "that" much performance. In so many words you could argue that LLC is bad, however, an overclocker might think otherwise. There are a few tricks and counters though. LLC is there solely for overclocking. I think it takes much more skill to OC with Vdroop than it does without it. I guess I'm taking OC to a sports level or something lol.


----------



## intelchief

just one more question Kana-Maru. What maximum voltage in IDLE u think is safe for longer period of time? 1.35? (I've seen your voltage for 4.6Ghz - 1.45 for me looks like -







)


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> just one more question Kana-Maru. What maximum voltage in IDLE u think is safe for longer period of time? 1.35? (I've seen your voltage for 4.6Ghz - 1.45 for me looks like -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


1.45 is possible to use for short periods of time... Its a chip burner in the long term... I'd stay away from that voltage at all cost if possible... .135v as a 24/7 voltage is reasonable


----------



## Kana-Maru

What monk said







. I'll elaborate a bit more.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> just one more question Kana-Maru. What maximum voltage in IDLE u think is safe for longer period of time? 1.35? (I've seen your voltage for 4.6Ghz - 1.45 for me looks like -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


First of all I think you meant "4.8Ghz"







. My 4.6Ghz OC runs at 1.34v - 1.358v 4.8Ghz runs at 1.456v. Also the voltage isn't constant. I'm not running max voltages during Idle and loads. Even with minor loads [10% - 40%] my CPU doesn't run at the maximum voltage.

I believe my 4.6Ghz Idle voltage averaged around 1.1v something. My 4.8Ghz Idle was 1.1 something as well. I honestly would have to either test again or find my old post. So the Idle voltages are perfectly fine. Whenever I run 4.8Ghz @ 1.45v it is solely for benchmarks or gaming [1.45v is not the idle].

So the maximum idle voltage that I feel is safe is anything under 1.15v. I think that's a safe number for high overclocks. Minor OCs [3.6Ghz - 4Ghz] will probably be closer to 0.09v - 1.0v


----------



## intelchief

aft
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What monk said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I'll elaborate a bit more.
> First of all I think you meant "4.8Ghz"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . My 4.6Ghz OC runs at 1.34v - 1.358v 4.8Ghz runs at 1.456v. Also the voltage isn't constant. I'm not running max voltages during Idle and loads. Even with minor loads [10% - 40%] my CPU doesn't run at the maximum voltage.
> 
> I believe my 4.6Ghz Idle voltage averaged around 1.1v something. My 4.8Ghz Idle was 1.1 something as well. I honestly would have to either test again or find my old post. So the Idle voltages are perfectly fine. Whenever I run 4.8Ghz @ 1.45v it is solely for benchmarks or gaming.
> 
> So the maximum idle voltage that I feel is safe is anything under 1.15v. I think that's a safe number for high overclocks. Minor OCs [3.6Ghz - 4Ghz] will probably be closer to 0.09v - 1.0v


yep







my fault -4.8Ghz

Idecided to turn on Vdroop and started from the beginning.

How it's possible that your IDLE voltages are so low?!







Can u tell me what vaules in BIOS are choosed for CPu voltages?
My IDLE Voltages according to Bios/eleet/cpu'z are 1.37 but during stress voltage is droping down to 1.31V - that gives me stable(for now - still testing) 4.2Ghz. Did you turn on some options in Bios(i mean for example c1e?)


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What monk said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I'll elaborate a bit more.
> First of all I think you meant "4.8Ghz"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . My 4.6Ghz OC runs at 1.34v - 1.358v 4.8Ghz runs at 1.456v. Also the voltage isn't constant. I'm not running max voltages during Idle and loads. Even with minor loads [10% - 40%] my CPU doesn't run at the maximum voltage.
> 
> I believe my 4.6Ghz Idle voltage averaged around 1.1v something. My 4.8Ghz Idle was 1.1 something as well. I honestly would have to either test again or find my old post. So the Idle voltages are perfectly fine. Whenever I run 4.8Ghz @ 1.45v it is solely for benchmarks or gaming [1.45v is not the idle].
> 
> So the maximum idle voltage that I feel is safe is anything under 1.15v. I think that's a safe number for high overclocks. Minor OCs [3.6Ghz - 4Ghz] will probably be closer to 0.09v - 1.0v


Basically I can only give a simple explanation since all I learned here came from you... I can cover the basic stuff but the deeper explanations you have to take care of that since you know a lot more than I do since you and the guys here are the one that I learned everything I know from









**Edit**
I should get the haswell Xeon E3-1246V3 and the motherboard tomorrow both cleared customs in Montreal around 5PM so they should get delivered around noon tomorrow... I received the 32Gb of G.Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 CL10 today and I just feel like I won't have lots of overclocking room with that thing since its locked and they don't really overclock with the bclk...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> aft
> yep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my fault -4.8Ghz
> 
> Idecided to turn on Vdroop and started from the beginning.
> 
> How it's possible that your IDLE voltages are so low?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can u tell me what vaules in BIOS are choosed for CPu voltages?
> My IDLE Voltages according to Bios/eleet/cpu'z are 1.37 but during stress voltage is droping down to 1.31V - that gives me stable(for now - still testing) 4.2Ghz. Did you turn on some options in Bios(i mean for example c-state?)


Good luck man. I turned C-states and EIST off. Once you change the AUTO vCore you'll have to use dynamic vCore or offset voltage.
Quote:


> Basically I can only give a simple explanation since all I learned here came from you... I can cover the basic stuff but the deeper explanations you have to take care of that since you know a lot more than I do since you and the guys here are the one that I learned everything I know from thumb.gif


Hey I never knew man. You're like my protege or something







.

Quote:


> Edit**
> I should get the haswell Xeon E3-1246V3 and the motherboard tomorrow both cleared customs in Montreal around 5PM so they should get delivered around noon tomorrow... I received the 32Gb of G.Skill Trident X DDR3 2400 CL10 today and I just feel like I won't have lots of overclocking room with that thing since its locked and they don't really overclock with the bclk..


Nice. No BCLK overclocking sucks. Intel needs to sell i7-EE \ E. I believe the Haswell-E allows BCLK overclocking. Then again I haven't paid much attention to Haswell-E though.


----------



## intelchief

well probably (i dont know why) C1E is not working properly (this featrue is reducing only multiplier) and that's why my IDLE voltages are so high. I can dream about 1.1V in IDLE, instead i have 1.36 in idle and 1.3 during stress.

in that case Vdroop off wasnt better option? there was constat 1.33V for 4,3.

Probablyi would have to set ~1.39V in IDLE to be close to 4.3Ghz.

Im testing 4.2Ghz (1.36V in IDLE/ 1.29-1.31 during IBT )


----------



## Kana-Maru

Start with a low OC. sOMETHING LIKE 3.6Ghz then 3.8Ghz then 4.0Ghz and so on. Set C-states to AUTO and find your voltage. Then use dynamic vCore.


----------



## Sart

Alright, I'm stumped when it comes to OCing this damn X5650.

For starters, 20x was the highest I could get the multi to, even after disabling speedstep/cstates/turbo/etc. I can't seem to get any kind of stable OC unless I start increasing voltages by quite a bit. I couldn't even do 3.2ghz with 1.2v, and I needed 1.35v to get 3.6ghz stable. It stopped booting altogether when I tried 3.8ghz. Couldn't even really get higher than that without fear of frying my board, and I eventually just ended up dropping back down to stock settings.

Damn thing uses a huge passive heatsink for the northbridge and it gets rather hot easily. I'm running stock now and even then it's at ~55C idle. Apparently the northbridge temps were an issue for other people in the past as well if google is to be believed, and I'm worried that's gonna be a serious hurdle for me while OCing this chip.

Did I just lose out on the silicon lottery with this chip? Is my board the main culprit? Should I look into a different board later on, or a different Xeon? I've only had the chip and board for less than two weeks and I'm already concerned one of them is gonna fry from doing so much as blowing on it.

I'm gonna do some more reading on the matter and try to *slowly* work my clocks back up as high as I can get over the next week or so when I have spare time. I'll admit I'm rather new to x58 overclocking, but I'm getting more and more disheartened as time goes by.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Alright, I'm stumped when it comes to OCing this damn X5650.
> 
> For starters, 20x was the highest I could get the multi to, even after disabling speedstep/cstates/turbo/etc. I can't seem to get any kind of stable OC unless I start increasing voltages by quite a bit. I couldn't even do 3.2ghz with 1.2v, and I needed 1.35v to get 3.6ghz stable. It stopped booting altogether when I tried 3.8ghz. Couldn't even really get higher than that without fear of frying my board, and I eventually just ended up dropping back down to stock settings.
> 
> Damn thing uses a huge passive heatsink for the northbridge and it gets rather hot easily. I'm running stock now and even then it's at ~55C idle. Apparently the northbridge temps were an issue for other people in the past as well if google is to be believed, and I'm worried that's gonna be a serious hurdle for me while OCing this chip.
> 
> Did I just lose out on the silicon lottery with this chip? Is my board the main culprit? Should I look into a different board later on, or a different Xeon? I've only had the chip and board for less than two weeks and I'm already concerned one of them is gonna fry from doing so much as blowing on it.
> 
> I'm gonna do some more reading on the matter and try to *slowly* work my clocks back up as high as I can get over the next week or so when I have spare time. I'll admit I'm rather new to x58 overclocking, but I'm getting more and more disheartened as time goes by.


What motherboard and what cpu cooler what memory, tell us what your voltages are set at.
CPU , VVT, .... and so on.
What ram latency is it running, and rated for?


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Alright, I'm stumped when it comes to OCing this damn X5650.
> 
> For starters, 20x was the highest I could get the multi to, even after disabling speedstep/cstates/turbo/etc.


20x is the max multiplier of the x5650 - you need turbo to get to 22x - it depends on the motherboard manufacturer if you are able to select this. 23x is the max "C-state" multiplier - normally only activated with only 1-2 cores under load.

This was discussed a couple of posts back: http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-discussion-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/2190#post_23154832


----------



## kckyle

haha and the lowest i can get my vcore down was 1.3v for a 4.4ghz stable run, i don't know how you guys are even booting with a 1.1v


----------



## GENXLR

Ik right Kckyle? I can post at 1.26V with my x5650 at 191x20(22 turbo) and get into windows, but it blue screens within an hour or any stress test.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Start with a low OC. sOMETHING LIKE 3.6Ghz then 3.8Ghz then 4.0Ghz and so on. Set C-states to AUTO and find your voltage. Then use dynamic vCore.


sadly my motherboard is turning off C1E when i'm starting to OC(even when those options are turned on in BIOS)

on defaults everything is working but when i change bus speed C1E voltage in idle is not reduced, only multi
In that case u still think is better to have Vdroop On? With Vdroop off i can have "continously" 1.29-1.3 to reach 4.2 compared to 1.37(IDLE)/1.29(STRESS)

and on my motehrboard ther's no such thing as dynamic Vcore those all are settings i have(this picture is from the internet , i just wanted to show u whan i can change in Bios)



In bios - C1E, SpeedStep and C-states enabled. It looks like this - as u can see voltages are not going down in IDLE, and they are lower in stress than in IDLE.


----------



## Sart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> What motherboard and what cpu cooler what memory, tell us what your voltages are set at.
> CPU , VVT, .... and so on.
> What ram latency is it running, and rated for?


Motherboard, CPU cooler, and memory are all in my signature. An EVGA X58 FTW3, H80i, and a 4GB stick of Corsair XMS along with two 2GB sticks of Kingston Value. Timings were, for some reason, automatically set to 11-11-11-29, though both the XMS stick and both Kingston sticks were rated at CAS 9. I didn't mess with the timings, though I did set the memory ratio to 2x8 for ~1400mhz. 1500-1600mhz wouldn't boot.

I'm back at stock/auto settings right now, but at 3.6ghz I was running with:

BCLK 180
Multi 20x
Speedstep, C1E, Turbo Boost all disabled

Vcore was at 1.35
VTT was ~1.42
PLL and so forth were left at auto
Uncore at 19x, so ~3400
QPI left on auto

When I restarted to get some info from the BIOS, it failed to boot even at stock settings until I cleared CMOS again. I really think I screwed something up.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> sadly my motherboard is turning off C1E when i'm starting to OC(even when those options are turned on in BIOS)
> 
> on defaults everything is working but when i change bus speed C1E voltage in idle is not reduced, only multi
> In that case u still think is better to have Vdroop On? With Vdroop off i can have "continously" 1.29-1.3 to reach 4.2 compared to 1.37(IDLE)/1.29(STRESS)
> 
> and on my motehrboard ther's no such thing as dynamic Vcore those all are settings i have(this picture is from the internet , i just wanted to show u whan i can change in Bios)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In bios - C1E, SpeedStep and C-states enabled. It looks like this - as u can see voltages are not going down in IDLE, and they are lower in stress than in IDLE.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Well you are running the SR-2 which isn't X58 to begin with. I'm not all that familiar with OC'ing on that platform with dual Xeons. Dynamic Vcore is also called offset on some MBs. Unless you set the voltage to AUTO or use dynamic vCore I don't see how you will be able to drop the voltage. Using a manual voltage will simply keep the voltage the same. Your Xeon will downclock, but the MB will still feed the CPU the same amount of voltage. I would disable C-states for the time being. As I stated previously, it's your rig so if you want to run with vdroop off then be my guest. You'll have the same amount of voltage no matter what. Overtime this may or may not become an issue. Just know that the CPUs were designed to use vdroop. Voltage spiking will surely lead to degradation overtime, but that time might be years. Who knows it might be months.

C1E turning off automatically is pretty weird. You can still use EIST\SpredStep regardless [right?]. Also it appears there are more settings in your BIOS as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Motherboard, CPU cooler, and memory are all in my signature. An EVGA X58 FTW3, H80i, and a 4GB stick of Corsair XMS along with two 2GB sticks of Kingston Value. Timings were, for some reason, automatically set to 11-11-11-29, though both the XMS stick and both Kingston sticks were rated at CAS 9. I didn't mess with the timings, though I did set the memory ratio to 2x8 for ~1400mhz. 1500-1600mhz wouldn't boot.
> 
> I'm back at stock/auto settings right now, but at 3.6ghz I was running with:
> 
> BCLK 180
> Multi 20x
> Speedstep, C1E, Turbo Boost all disabled
> 
> Vcore was at 1.35
> VTT was ~1.42
> PLL and so forth were left at auto
> Uncore at 19x, so ~3400
> QPI left on auto
> 
> When I restarted to get some info from the BIOS, it failed to boot even at stock settings until I cleared CMOS again. I really think I screwed something up.


So I take it you have vdroop enabled or LLC set to AUTO or disabled?

-Enable C1E.
-Decrease the VTT voltage for sure.
-Decrease Vcore voltage to 1.24v
-Try Vtt = 1.32v.
-Set the Uncore from 1.8x - 2x the DRAM Frequency. [Example: DRAM -1500Mhz x1.8 = Uncore Freq. -2700Mhz]
-Set RAM timings to 9-9-9-24-2T
-Try to set the QPI manually or use "slow mode" is possible.

Try those settings and get back to me.


----------



## intelchief

unfortunatelly
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well you are running the SR-2 which isn't X58 to begin with. I'm not all that familiar with OC'ing on that platform with dual Xeons. Dynamic Vcore is also called offset on some MBs. Unless you set the voltage to AUTO or use dynamic vCore I don't see how you will be able to drop the voltage. Using a manual voltage will simply keep the voltage the same. Your Xeon will downclock, but the MB will still feed the CPU the same amount of voltage. I would disable C-states for the time being. As I stated previously, it's your rig so if you want to run with vdroop off then be my guest. You'll have the same amount of voltage no matter what. Overtime this may or may not become an issue. Just know that the CPUs were designed to use vdroop. Voltage spiking will surely lead to degradation overtime, but that time might be years. Who knows it might be months.
> 
> C1E turning off automatically is pretty weird. You can still use EIST\SpredStep regardless [right?]. Also it appears there are more settings in your BIOS as well.
> So I take it you have vdroop enabled or LLC set to AUTO or disabled?


Yes, i can still use EIST/SpredStep - clock is going down in IDLE voltage doesnt

well funny thing is that even on AUTO voltage isnt droping (of course when all setings are on auto - i mean stock, voltage is droping)

those are all settings connected with voltage - as u can see ther's no dynamic/offset :/



I'm just worried when Vdroop is enabled about IDLE voltage - 1.3675 - isn't it to high?


----------



## Kana-Maru

You are slightly out of the recommended voltage from Intel. It's not that major, but the only thing I would worry about is pumping 1.367v through the CPU 24/7 no matter what the condition is. I'm not sure if your MB supports dynamic vCore or not. I never go around to purchasing a SR-2. I did get close late last year though before the prices skyrocketed.


----------



## nievz

From what I've been reading here, it seems your vcore lowers automatically when your PC is idled probably in conjunction with speedstep? My motherboard just stays on the same vcore all the time even when speedstep kicks in and lowers the clock to 12x. My old motherboard use to do this but not this one. I'm also running on 1.406v VTT to maintain the 4.1ghz OC. I can't lower the uncore multiplier with this board, even if i change it, it stays on 20x. I am looking for a new motherboard.

There are no Sabertooths around here in the Philippines, is a ASUS P6X58D-E a great/good/bad board?


----------



## intelchief

well actually its not 24/7. My computer is running i don know - maybe max 10 hours a day, mostly in IDLE.
Still i'm looking for some info about dynamic Vcore but it looks likemy mobo doesnt suport ths feature;/.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> From what I've been reading here, it seems your vcore lowers automatically when your PC is idled probably in conjunction with speedstep? My motherboard just stays on the same vcore all the time even when speedstep kicks in and lowers the clock to 12x. My old motherboard use to do this but not this one. I'm also running on 1.406v VTT to maintain the 4.1ghz OC. I can't lower the uncore multiplier with this board, even if i change it, it stays on 20x. I am looking for a new motherboard.
> 
> There are no Sabertooths around here in the Philippines, is a ASUS P6X58D-E a great/good/bad board?


Its a great board from what I heard...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> From what I've been reading here, it seems your vcore lowers automatically when your PC is idled probably in conjunction with speedstep? My motherboard just stays on the same vcore all the time even when speedstep kicks in and lowers the clock to 12x. My old motherboard use to do this but not this one.


SpeedStep is disabled on my MB. My Idle voltage drop is more than likely tied to Dynamic vCore, APIC and C1E. Remember that once you start overclocking you will really want to take advantage of dynamic vcore\offset voltage. it can be a pain in the butt though. The only other compromise is running low voltage 24/7 [anything less than 1.25v should be safe]. You won't be getting those lovely speeds you want though.

Quote:


> I'm also running on 1.406v VTT to maintain the 4.1ghz OC. I can't lower the uncore multiplier with this board, even if i change it, it stays on 20x. I am looking for a new motherboard. There are no Sabertooths around here in the Philippines, is a ASUS P6X58D-E a great/good/bad board? smile.gif


1.4vtt is still pretty high and not being able to change the Uncore is pretty rough. I've never used or reviewed a ASUS P6X58D-E so I can't tell the pros and cons. Sabertooth prices can go higher than the original MSRP depending on the seller. There aren't many left in the US on Ebay.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> well actually its not 24/7. My computer is running i don know - maybe max 10 hours a day, mostly in IDLE.
> Still i'm looking for some info about dynamic Vcore but it looks likemy mobo doesnt suport ths feature;/.


Maybe your board doesn't. Also when I use the term 24/7, I'm using a generic term. Basically I mean every time you run your PC it will run your specified voltage.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> From what I've been reading here, it seems your vcore lowers automatically when your PC is idled probably in conjunction with speedstep? My motherboard just stays on the same vcore all the time even when speedstep kicks in and lowers the clock to 12x. My old motherboard use to do this but not this one. I'm also running on 1.406v VTT to maintain the 4.1ghz OC. I can't lower the uncore multiplier with this board, even if i change it, it stays on 20x. I am looking for a new motherboard.
> 
> There are no Sabertooths around here in the Philippines, is a ASUS P6X58D-E a great/good/bad board?


Proud ASUS P6X58D Premium owner here. 214 blck stable and can go higher, but it doesn't lock on x22 with my 5650.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Proud ASUS P6X58D Premium owner here. 214 blck stable and can go higher, but it doesn't lock on x22 with my 5650.


Thanks! Could you share your settings to help with testing at the seller's place, if that's not much of a trouble? I'm planning to get this motherboard soon for $89.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Thanks! Could you share your settings to help with testing at the seller's place, if that's not much of a trouble? I'm planning to get this motherboard soon for $89.


Look for post #1009 on the X58 Xeon Club

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1000#post_22533787


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> -Decrease the VTT voltage for sure.
> -Decrease Vcore voltage to 1.24v
> -Try Vtt = 1.32v.
> -Set the Uncore from 1.8x - 2x the DRAM Frequency. [Example: DRAM -1500Mhz x1.8 = Uncore Freq. -2700Mhz]
> -Set RAM timings to 9-9-9-24-2T
> -Try to set the QPI manually or use "slow mode" is possible.
> 
> Try those settings and get back to me.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Motherboard, CPU cooler, and memory are all in my signature. An EVGA X58 FTW3, H80i, and a 4GB stick of Corsair XMS along with two 2GB sticks of Kingston Value. Timings were, for some reason, automatically set to 11-11-11-29, though both the XMS stick and both Kingston sticks were rated at CAS 9. I didn't mess with the timings, though I did set the memory ratio to 2x8 for ~1400mhz. 1500-1600mhz wouldn't boot.
> 
> I'm back at stock/auto settings right now, but at 3.6ghz I was running with:
> 
> BCLK 180
> Multi 20x
> Speedstep, C1E, Turbo Boost all disabled
> 
> Vcore was at 1.35
> VTT was ~1.42
> PLL and so forth were left at auto
> Uncore at 19x, so ~3400
> QPI left on auto
> 
> When I restarted to get some info from the BIOS, it failed to boot even at stock settings until I cleared CMOS again. I really think I screwed something up.


I have an EVGA FTW3 , since you are using a water cooler you HAVE to put a fan blowing over that big heat sink that is getting very hot.
Right now mine is an open air system, (no case) so I just laid a 120mm fan on top of the big heatsink and water block. Others have wire tied a 60mm fan to that HS .
That is made to get air flow from the CPU cooler fan, but since we are using water we have to add a fan.On my Asus I have a fan tied to the water line to blow on the chipset heat sink.

Set the CPU VTT to 125-150MV that will give you the 1.325-1.35V on the uncore, set the uncore to 2 times the ram speed. Anything other than what I did there the board is not stable.
Use the other settings Kana said to use, they are pretty much what I have set.
I run 24/7 at 100% load so I set my CPU v to 1.29 and leave it.
PS: You do have the latest BIOS installed? You should update if you do not.Update it at stock settings if you have to update it.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Look for post #1009 on the X58 Xeon Club
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1000#post_22533787


Thank you! Wow, 1.53v to reach 4.7Ghz. I think 4.6 requires a lot less voltage as per Kana-Maru's and it's the sweet spot.


----------



## Agonist

Just ordered a X5650 for $69 USD. Cant wait for it to get here. Gonna be a bunch of long days testing. Gonna test my 950 stock, 4,0 and 4,4 vs stock x5650, 4.0 and 4.4.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agonist*
> 
> Just ordered a X5650 for $69 USD. Cant wait for it to get here. Gonna be a bunch of long days testing. Gonna test my 950 stock, 4,0 and 4,4 vs stock x5650, 4.0 and 4.4.


It's going to be night and day bud. I came from an i7 930 running at 4.0, Watchdogs is running in the 70's (fps) now as opposed to the 40's previously.


----------



## Agonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> It's going to be night and day bud. I came from an i7 930 running at 4.0, Watchdogs is running in the 70's (fps) now as opposed to the 40's previously.


Thats awesome to hear.







I avg 30 fps with 7950 crossfire ultra graphics+ sweetfx @ 4016x1024 res. But im not really cpu bound at all with watchdogs. Mostly frostbite games i am. Need for Speed The run, Bad Company 2, BF3 and BF4 online rape my 950 @ 4.0 even with HT on.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agonist*
> 
> Thats awesome to hear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I avg 30 fps with 7950 crossfire ultra graphics+ sweetfx @ 4016x1024 res. But im not really cpu bound at all with watchdogs. Mostly frostbite games i am. Need for Speed The run, Bad Company 2, BF3 and BF4 online rape my 950 @ 4.0 even with HT on.


I did my Watchdogs test using the lowest graphics settings @1080p to see the FPS difference. I turn off HT on my X5670, It's faster that way for my games.


----------



## Agonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I did my Watchdogs test using the lowest graphics settings to see the FPS difference. I turn off HT on my X5670, It's faster that way for my games.


Ill try watchdogs lowest settings @1280x1024 to test it when it gets here.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Wrong formula. Doing the 48 hour test all over again.


----------



## nievz

Is anyone here running their xeon on 1.5v VTT? Has anyone damaged any yet?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Is anyone here running their xeon on 1.5v VTT? Has anyone damaged any yet?


You won't find anyone with windows booting at that voltage








you can try and report if your chip if able to hold


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> You won't find anyone with windows booting at that voltage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you can try and report if your chip if able to hold


I'm at 1.424v now and I'm not willing to go any higher. I do have water cooling and i Prime at 80C max, but some people think high voltage can damage IMC.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I'm at 1.424v now and I'm not willing to go any higher. I do have water cooling and i Prime at 80C max, but some people think high voltage can damage IMC.


It does and I can guarantee you holding that voltage longer will cause damage in the long run...


----------



## GENXLR

EvilMonk, I did stable get a spare X5650 that wouldn't OC to post into window and run benchmarks with 1.5VTT, however, i was seeing no more than 50Gflops. It was horribly slow. So for the most part, It's useless. And I may have ruined that IMC, but idk XD


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> EvilMonk, I did stable get a spare X5650 that wouldn't OC to post into window and run benchmarks with 1.5VTT, however, i was seeing no more than 50Gflops. It was horribly slow. So for the most part, It's useless. And I may have ruined that IMC, but idk XD


Bingo







we have a winner at IMC damage ding ding ding


----------



## nievz

Ha ha I don't have a choice until I get a better motherboard. I was able to lower VTT to 1.392v. At least better than previous one









So I see it plays between 1.376 and 1.392. Maybe depending on load.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Ha ha I don't have a choice until I get a better motherboard. I was able to lower VTT to 1.392v. At least better than previous one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I see it plays between 1.376 and 1.392. Maybe depending on load.


Its not so dangerous on these levels... but if you can get it still a little bit lower it would be very good.


----------



## GENXLR

Monk, tested the X5650 i ran at 1.5VTT at the same setup as my current X5650. It pulls just 3 Gflops less than this one at 4Ghz(70Gflops, current cpu is 73G/flops.) So I'd say it survived. I am NEVER doing that again though, nor should anyone else O_O


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Monk, tested the X5650 i ran at 1.5VTT at the same setup as my current X5650. It pulls just 3 Gflops less than this one at 4Ghz(70Gflops, current cpu is 73G/flops.) So I'd say it survived. I am NEVER doing that again though, nor should anyone else O_O


ROFL







You are a maniac







I don't think your chip would survive another run like that one







congrats on the massive balls it took to run that high on the VTT but please bud dont do that again lol


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Monk, tested the X5650 i ran at 1.5VTT at the same setup as my current X5650. It pulls just 3 Gflops less than this one at 4Ghz(70Gflops, current cpu is 73G/flops.) So I'd say it survived. I am NEVER doing that again though, nor should anyone else O_O


What do you use to measure GFlops?

I know linx does that but it varies every pass, it's not closer to a constant value i think


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> What do you use to measure GFlops?
> 
> I know linx does that but it varies every pass, it's not closer to a constant value i think


Intel Burn Test 2.54

Theres a link to download on majorgeeks or if you search Intel burn test download on google you will have it in the first results.


----------



## nievz

Whenever it reaches this point on Prime testing, the temps shot up. I'm using a Cooler Master Seidon 120XL cooler and I never thought the temps could reach this high on these settings. This is with the case open, with it closed they reach 89C. This is with HT on, I had HT OFF previously. Also, no matter how I reseat the water block, cores 3 & 4 always are around 10-20% cooler, is this common with these CPUs?


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Ha ha I don't have a choice until I get a better motherboard. I was able to lower VTT to 1.392v. At least better than previous one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I see it plays between 1.376 and 1.392. Maybe depending on load.


How do to you see that?


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> How do to you see that?


Using a program called Aida 64. Look at the blue area on the right in my screenshot, that's Aida's OSD.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Also, no matter how I reseat the water block, cores 3 & 4 always are around 10-20% cooler, is this common with these CPUs?


Yes it is very common to have a couple cores read 6c or more lower than the others.


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Using a program called Aida 64. Look at the blue area on the right in my screenshot, that's Aida's OSD.


under which category is the vtt?


----------



## nievz

So I ran a quick benchmark on BF4 while the SOS tower crumbled using the Mantle driver on an R9 290. Pay attention to the graph (yellow line), no bottleneck at all. This is on medium graphics setting. On my [email protected] this graph would be filled with spikes. I also noticed Frostbite only uses 8 threads so I think HT OFF would be beneficial for this game on the x5000.

Here's using DX 11:


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've been performing some more CPU OC's with vDroop Enabled [or LLC disabled] ]and low vCore with no crashing. I got 4Ghz to run with 1.200v with no crashing for over 6 hours in Prime95. I'm going to perform more testing later this week.

Here are the specs DURING IBT v2.54:

Voltage 1.200v



and here are specs afterwards:
Low voltage and multiplier.



So far so good.


----------



## GENXLR

don't hide yar G/flops from us XD


----------



## Konkistadori

Tinkering 4ghz settings, and just ordered NH-D15 cooler and MX100 SSD.








Then we can see comparison between small akasa venom vs NH-D15


----------



## Sart

So, after updating my bios and by following those tips on bios settings I could hit 4ghz, though it took ~1.27v to start booting into windows.

settings ended up being:

C1E enabled
vcore at 1.3
vtt at +50mv
mem ratio was 2:8, timings were 9-9-9-24-2T
mem at 1600mhz
uncore at 2x
qpi fast mode disabled
everything else at auto

However, things got very odd.

Windows booted insanely fast, and programs loaded almost as if I had an SSD installed.

Everything was awesomely snappy, until I tried loading up Battlelog to try BF4. The instant that page loaded, everything slowed to a crawl. Closing the tab sped things back up again. In BF4 itself, performance was abysmal. Where I'd normally get 70-80fps, I was now getting 20 unless I looked at the sky. Again, once the game closed everything was fast again.

I tried another game-PSO2-and it was a similar situation. The game is insanely toaster friendly, and at stock clocks I easily net anywhere from 140 to 210 fps. However, at 4ghz my framerate was a paltry 30 while in the lobby.

Loading up a quest is where things got really strange. Everything ran as if it was set to fast forward. The slightest actions were unnaturally fast, even though fraps was showing me getting little more than 40fps. It certainly was choppy, but animations and countdown timers were moving by ridiculously quickly.

I looked in CPU-Z, and voltages and clockspeeds were all over the place. Turbo boost, speedstep, everything but C1E was disabled, and voltages jumped anywhere from 1.2v to 1.411v. Clockspeeds varied from 3.9 to 4.4 as well. They kept fluctuating until I lowered VTT a bit. I'm at stock settings again for the time being, as I'd like to find some information on why something so strange was happening at those speeds and settings. Oddly enough the stock clocks are way faster when it comes to games.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why it happened? Was there some setting in the bios that I missed? Some issues with voltages? Could something be borked on my cpu or board? Could it be due to the updated bios?


----------



## intelchief

Well i spend last two days to find a solution for enabling C1E and sadly my motherboard doesnt supprt Vcore droop in idle after OC. BUT LOOK AT THIS:

http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/

This is the test (practical) with Vdroop off/Vdroop on. This guy wanted to check those "spikes". Pretty interseting conclusion.

EDIT
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I ran a quick benchmark on BF4 while the SOS tower crumbled using the Mantle driver on an R9 290. Pay attention to the graph (yellow line), no bottleneck at all. This is on medium graphics setting. On my [email protected] this graph would be filled with spikes. I also noticed Frostbite only uses 8 threads so I think HT OFF would be beneficial for this game on the x5000.
> 
> Here's using DX 11:


your temps are preety high even in games


----------



## intelchief

i forgot i post already sth in this topic and forgot to edit previous post(sry guys)


----------



## MK-Professor

Do anybody know how to see my vtt voltage with Aida 64?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> don't hide yar G/flops from us XD










Dual monitors. No need to upload the full resolution. I just wanted to capture "[Burning]" and "[Finished]". I'll post my 3.8Ghz @ 1.168v Gflops to give you an idea:


----------



## Konkistadori

I can't get 200BCLK stable on my system 







... And i had to order NM-i3 kit from noctua to NH-D15, local shop didn't have NM-i3 kits anymore..


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Thank you! Wow, 1.53v to reach 4.7Ghz. I think 4.6 requires a lot less voltage as per Kana-Maru's and it's the sweet spot.


I got my p6x58d-e board today and much more happier about the result!

Is the 'QPI/DRAM Core Voltage' setting in the BIOS the 'CPU VTT'?

'DRAM Bus Voltage' for Vdimm? (I'm confused on this since yours is set to 1.25v when DDR3 is 1.5v

Here's my current OC


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I just realized I posted this in the wrong topic. Ah well here is the info.
> 
> Ok so I ran some 24 hour test on my PC. I captured the watts and did the math. With my PC running under normal circumstances throughout the day and night it is costing me approx. $2.49 a day. I'll elaborate on how I run my PC. During the night everything is off and during the day the PC is running with the monitors and speakers off. I've posted how much power my PC draws in this post:
> 
> Which you can view here:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-discussion-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/2190#post_23154877
> 
> .


Kana, how many watts is that pc drawing and what is the electric cost of KWH? to cost 2.5$ a day?
I run my systems at 100% load 4-9 computers, and I pay 16-18 cents per KWH, at that rate my bill would be a thousand dollars, That seems to be a high number. for just one computer.
What formula are you using?


----------



## nievz

I think I found the sweet spot for gaming and desktop use. EIST is working as expected and lowering consumption but I can't seem to figure out the setting for the board board to lower the cpu voltage as well when on 12x multi. Disabling LLC doesn't do it.

Desktop



Load (not gaming)


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I got my p6x58d-e board today and much more happier about the result!
> 
> Is the 'QPI/DRAM Core Voltage' setting in the BIOS the 'CPU VTT'?
> 
> 'DRAM Bus Voltage' for Vdimm? (I'm confused on this since yours is set to 1.25v when DDR3 is 1.5v
> 
> Here's my current OC


Yup QPI/DRAM Core voltage is the IMC (Integrated Memory Controler) or the VTT you can adjust it to stabilize you overclock... do not do higher than 1.35v if you are not experienced with overclocking... you should ask for help from others at first to stabilize your cpu since IMC voltage can easily destroy your CPU

DRAM Bus Voltage is the voltage for the ram, you should set it at 1.5v (or up to 1.65v depending of the manufacturer specifications for your ram) which is the standard for DDR3 memory.


----------



## GENXLR

80 Gflops at 3.8Ghz? I can't even see 80Gflops or 78 at 4.0


----------



## Kana-Maru

It's possible that the wrong info was used. I'm actually double checking the rates since they change every month here.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's possible that the wrong info was used. I'm actually double checking the rates since they change every month here.


Damn that would be expensive as hell Kana







I hope for you its not that expensive


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> 80 Gflops at 3.8Ghz? I can't even see 80Gflops or 78 at 4.0


I get 60 Gflops at 4360Mhz, intel burn test must be buggy or something.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Kana, how many watts is that pc drawing and what is the electric cost of KWH? to cost 2.5$ a day?
> I run my systems at 100% load 4-9 computers, and I pay 16-18 cents per KWH, at that rate my bill would be a thousand dollars, That seems to be a high number. for just one computer.
> What formula are you using?


Corectly formula errors. Ok I just talked to the electric company [got the rates] and I'm going to have to re-do the testings as far as total cost. If we go by my PC Idle temps with both monitors and all fans running on low I would be using approximately 207 watts from my test.

Found here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-discussion-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/2190#post_23154877

So that [approx. 207watts] would cost me around *$0.31* a day if I ran my PC for 15 in a half hours. Obviously it would be much less since I now completely disconnect my PC after shutting it down, only run 3 out of 7 fans on low and have both monitors turned off throughout the day. I am going to do the test again.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Damn that would be expensive as hell Kana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope for you its not that expensive


I can afford it. Read above









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> I get 60 Gflops at 4360Mhz, intel burn test must be buggy or something.


Different settings can affect your Gflops from what I've read throughout the topics. My Gflops have been pretty consistent for years. Even when paired with similar setups.


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Different settings can affect your Gflops from what I've read throughout the topics. My Gflops have been pretty consistent for years. Even when paired with similar setups.


Like what settings?
The weird thing is that that with my i7 [email protected](without HT) I was getting 59 Gflops and with my [email protected] 60 Gflops, it doesn't make sense considering that my x5650 is two times faster.

*i7 [email protected](without HT)*
-wPrime 1024M = 279.734 sec
-CINEBENCH R15 score = 484
-IntelBurnTest = 59 Gflops

*
[email protected]*
-wPrime 1024M = 128.098 sec
-CINEBENCH R15 score = 1005
-IntelBurnTest = 60 Gflops

something must be wrong with the IntelBurnTest


----------



## GENXLR

Not enough voltage somewhere. The Xeons have a "slow" mode where if the voltage is to low, they perform poorly.


----------



## nievz

I have enabled C-states and I can't use the 25x multi on my x5670. Is that normal? I could only go up to 24x. However, in Windows, it speed stepping to 25x which is messing up my OC. I don't want to go on an higher Vcore to accomodate the higher auto multi. I also want C-states enabled (not just C1) to conserve power. With only C1 enabled the system is consuming 30watts more on Idle. Does anyone has an idea?


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Not enough voltage somewhere. The Xeons have a "slow" mode where if the voltage is to low, they perform poorly.


but it is stable, also there is no way I am putting more voltages, I am already at 1.392v for core and 1.368v for vtt


----------



## MK-Professor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I have enabled C-states and I can't use the 25x multi on my x5670. Is that normal? I could only go up to 24x. However, in Windows, it speed stepping to 25x which is messing up my OC. I don't want to go on an higher Vcore to accomodate the higher auto multi. I also want C-states enabled (not just C1) to conserve power. With only C1 enabled the system is consuming 30watts more on Idle. Does anyone has an idea?


if you disable the LLC you can have high vcore at low load(1 or 2 cores with the 25x) and at higher load your vcore will drop just like your multiplier


----------



## OCmember

I reduced my Uncore close to 1.5 (can't recall exactly) and @ 3.9GHz IBT 2.54 was doing 73Gflops. I then changed my Uncore to Auto and it set it to 1.8x the speed of my memory and my IBT Gflops shot up to 77. I think the BLCK also has an effect on things but I am not 100% sure. I'm at 163. The other settings I was fooling with were memory and it's ratio and they didn't produce any difference. Another setting I was fooling with was the vcore. I was running 3.9GHz @ 1.285v. I lowered that to 1.18 and the Gflops didn't change but I'll keep the 1.18v


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> if you disable the LLC you can have high vcore at low load(1 or 2 cores with the 25x) and at higher load your vcore will drop just like your multiplier


Got ya. Will test this now. Thanks!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> if you disable the LLC you can have high vcore at low load(1 or 2 cores with the 25x) and at higher load your vcore will drop just like your multiplier


Wait what? I think I'm missing something here. Then again never mind.


----------



## bill1024

This is how I figure my electric cost. We pay for KWH kilo-Watt Hour.
My server draws 500watts. Every 2 hours it is on is 1 KWH, I pay 18 cents a KWH 24devided by 2 = 12
So that is 12 KWH a day x .18cents = $2.18 for a 24 hours
250 watts would be $1.09 a day.
At 333 watts it would take 3 hours to use 1 KWH Devide 24 by 7, Then multiply that by cost .18 = cost per day.

I run two AMD 1045T @ 3.4ghz and three x5660 @ 4ghz all 100% loaded every day. 24/7/365
Then I add to that one dual x5650 and one 4 processor 24 core AMD 8425, and one 4 processor 48 core AMD 6168 for a couple weeks time off and on. Plus a couple 660Ti for several days in there at 100% load
All of that and add in the regular home stuff , washer drier and fridge my bill is still under 700 every two months.


----------



## shaolin95

Hello guys!
So I finally upgraded from my i7 920 to a X5650. Previous owner says he had it up to 4.6Ghz stable so while I know OCing varies, I was hoping for at least 4.4Ghz.
So far it only basically needed little to hit 4.3Ghz, in fact, I was doing it just pushing the Blck and leaving everything else as default but I have been trying to find tune a bit to hit 4.4 and so far cannot get it stable by leaving multi 20 and BLCK 215.
I can go higher with multi 22 (turbo) so maybe I should go that route but in any case, I would like some recommendations on what to tweak next.
This is the Rampage III Formula with the latest Bios and a Thermaltake Water 2.0 Extreme
If you think is best for me to create my own thread, let me know as well.

Regards!


----------



## nievz

Previously my uncore multiplier was set to 16x. I tried using 20x today and gained 7fps on the laggiest/slowest map in COD: Advanced Warfare. I'm not sure if anyone knows this.


----------



## Trondster

If you got the QPI/Vtt voltage headroom for it, you'll get a small gain from increasing uncore a bit. But - test for stability - you might have to increase the QPI/Vtt voltage too.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Previously my uncore multiplier was set to *16x*. I tried using *20x* today and gained 7fps on the laggiest/slowest map in COD: Advanced Warfare. I'm not sure if anyone knows this.


On my motherboard I also have those settings. I think it's aka the ratio. And it's associated with the Uncore. I left my setting on Auto and it set my Ratio to 15x to give me ~2440MHz. That puts my Uncore at ~2.5x my memory speed.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MK-Professor*
> 
> if you disable the LLC you can have high vcore at low load(1 or 2 cores with the 25x) and at higher load your vcore will drop just like your multiplier


It seems I've figured out how to prevent it from using the C-state multiplier (25x) and that is by not using the Turbo (24x) multiplier. I have it set at 22x right now and up'ed my BCLK and it doesn't speed step higher than that anymore. I'm back on a lower core voltage now.

Your suggestion forced me to run on 1.4v which I'm not comfortable with as it sucks too much power from the socket.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> I have it set at 22x right now and up'ed my BCLK and it doesn't speed step higher than that anymore. I'm back on a lower core voltage now.


That's exactly what I used to do with my i7 920: disable turbo and try to make up for the "loss" in multipliers by increasing the BCLK. I got my 920 C0 running at 3.6GHz that way with the vcore set to 1.25v in the BIOS, which actually resulted in LOWER peak temperatures than @ stock with turbo enabled...

In my opinion the turbo-mode is only useful when you run your CPU @ stock settings. As soon as you start overclocking I would just turn it off.


----------



## Kana-Maru

OK screwed up my rates the last time I ran my power wattage test. Putting the decimal in the wrong spot doesn't help either lol. So I've re-tested my PC power wattage for 24 hours. I ran my PC for 24 hours with EVERYTHING on. That includes speakers, all fans around 40% - 50% and both monitors. No gaming or benchmarking. Only basic usage [web browsing, word processing, YouTube, programming etc].

So now I can safely say that my PC running 24 hours only cost me *$0.52* [rounded number].

Obviously I"m not going to run my PC flr 24 hours unless I really need to. I will eventually get around to the overclock daily usage.


----------



## intelchief

My FINAL 24/7 OC:

BCLK 180Mhz
4321Mhz(with Turbo)
Memory 1800Mhz 10-10-10-27 1T



1.329V - Vcore both CPUs
1.325V - Vtt both CPUs
1.625-1.633 V - memory

Temps are pretty high but case was closed and there was no additional coolig device, only CPU coolers.

Last night i spent on configuration of signals beetwewn both CPUs(it has very big influence on stability on this mobo)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Congrats


----------



## Sart

Alright, so I asked a few days ago but it got buried in posts.

Basically, with my X5650 I'm getting worse performance in games at 4ghz than I am at stock clocks. Windows runs very quickly but games themselves are practically slideshows. One game in particular had low fps and was visually choppy, yet everything moved as if in fast forward.

Settings were

C1E enabled
vcore at 1.3 (lower settings had a bit of trouble booting into windows, though it may be too high for 4ghz)
vtt at +50mv
mem ratio was 2:8, timings were 9-9-9-24-2T
mem at 1600mhz
uncore at 2x
qpi fast mode disabled
everything else at auto

Any idea what could cause it? I'm sticking to stock settings until I can figure out what's wrong.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Any idea what could cause it? I'm sticking to stock settings until I can figure out what's wrong.


The first thing I would do is change "qpi fast mode disabled". Turn QPI fast mode ON \ Enable. Then test out your rig.


----------



## GENXLR

If you haven't caught up with some of the posts yet, To little Vcore can cause these cpu's to enter "slow" mode. Have you tried your Vcore at 1.35 at 4Ghz?

My X5650 at 1.3Vcore at 4Ghz got 48Gflops.... worse than my i7 920
My X5650 at 1.35Vcore at 4Ghz gets 76Gflops.

Spread spectrum is off?

Also at 1600Mhz at 9-9-9-24? You can use typically 1T timings instead of 2T


----------



## Sart

Alright, I enabled qpi fast mode again and bumped the vcore up a bit more, and now things are working perfectly fine.

Currently at 4.2ghz and running great. Temps are around 39C idle and haven't gotten higher than 51C under load.

Thanks guys.

I'm curious to see how much higher I can get, but I'll save that for later.


----------



## peteroaknyc

hi guys,

so i've build my system x58 sabertooth with x5650 at 4ghz.So my question to all of you is,what are your NB temps??Mines are 72 and it seems to be pretty high.Any feedback???


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peteroaknyc*
> 
> hi guys,
> 
> so i've build my system x58 sabertooth with x5650 at 4ghz.So my question to all of you is,what are your NB temps??Mines are 72 and it seems to be pretty high.Any feedback???


That has been my normal temps on my NB ever since I got it 5 years ago. Put a fan on it, such as the Antec SpotCool, and it should drop into the 50's, but just put a fan on it.


----------



## peteroaknyc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> That has been my normal temps on my NB ever since I got it 5 years ago. Put a fan on it, such as the Antec SpotCool, and it should drop into the 50's, but just put a fan on it.


ok thx,

so ive tried with bigger fan blowing in air to the nb and it works.Temps are now 52c.Will buy tomorrow a small fan in order to fit on the nb.Thx so much


----------



## Agonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peteroaknyc*
> 
> hi guys,
> 
> so i've build my system x58 sabertooth with x5650 at 4ghz.So my question to all of you is,what are your NB temps??Mines are 72 and it seems to be pretty high.Any feedback???


At 4.0 with my 950 my northbride was around 45c load. At 4.4 with ht its 85c load without fan with fan its around 60c. I used a 50mm fan from an old leadtek 6600gt
My x5650 arrives tomorrow. Im so damn excited lol.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> Alright, I enabled qpi fast mode again and bumped the vcore up a bit more, and now things are working perfectly fine.
> Currently at 4.2ghz and running great. Temps are around 39C idle and haven't gotten higher than 51C under load.
> Thanks guys..


No problem. I love the fact that there's so many users here willing to help others. That's a pretty good load temp. You can try lowering the vCore while keeping qpi fast mode enabled. Less vCore is usually always better if you can keep everything stable. It's simply a suggestion so if you are fine with your current settings then that's perfect fine as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peteroaknyc*
> 
> hi guys,
> 
> so i've build my system x58 sabertooth with x5650 at 4ghz.So my question to all of you is,what are your NB temps??Mines are 72 and it seems to be pretty high.Any feedback???


51c for me. Most of the time my NB never goes above 55c. With my fan or fans blowing above 60% I can get my NB lower than 45c. My case allows a 120mm180mm fan on the inside of the case that can be tilted. I changed my airflow and positions a more powerful fan to move the NB and GPU heat more efficiently. Before I got my new case I was using the Antec SpotCool. I actually love the NB design for the Sabertooth X58. It allows for the NB to get cooler much faster when you move the air. It feels good knowing that my NB isn't burning up when I'm OC'ing and playing games.

Here are links to the spotcool I recently posted for ampther user.

http://www.amazon.com/Antec-Spot-Cool-SpotCool-System/dp/B000I5KSNQ
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835209044

You should shop around for the best price if you decide to buy one. I've had my spotcool for around 3 or 4 years. I recommend it for anyone who is having heat issues. Especially when used for NB problems.


----------



## nievz

Which item is for your NB temp? My 'Motherboard' temp is in the 30C's, seems lower than what you guys are getting so I'm not sure if this is it.


----------



## OCmember

A simple solution for NB heating issues is to rest a fan on the GPU pointing towards the NB heatsink. One can easily rest a 120mm fan on it and cool the NB


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> If you haven't caught up with some of the posts yet, To little Vcore can cause these cpu's to enter "slow" mode. Have you tried your Vcore at 1.35 at 4Ghz?
> 
> My X5650 at 1.3Vcore at 4Ghz got 48Gflops.... worse than my i7 920
> My X5650 at 1.35Vcore at 4Ghz gets 76Gflops.
> 
> Spread spectrum is off?
> 
> Also at 1600Mhz at 9-9-9-24? You can use typically 1T timings instead of 2T


I'm pulling around 86Gflops at 4.2Ghz, 1.325v, 7-8-7-24 DDR3 1527Mh, [email protected]


----------



## Agonist

Just got my X5650 in today. Can happily report it works on MSI X58A-GD45 with latest bios.
Running completely stock settings in bios with TurboBoost on








Have to run speedbost in order to get 22xmultiplier on my mobo.
Currently @ 4.2 with HT on.
Highest temp was 70c.


----------



## bigpoppapump

So after talking to EVGA it turns out my x58 SLI Micro v1.0 will need a hard mod to accept x5600s. I can't find a damn bit of information about the mod anywhere except for these posts earlier in this thread where kpforce1 said he did it with a pencil and he hasn't responded to my PM. EVGA won't tell me anything except that they'll do it for $50.

Anyone know what I need to do?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigpoppapump*
> 
> So after talking to EVGA it turns out my x58 SLI Micro v1.0 will need a hard mod to accept x5600s. I can't find a damn bit of information about the mod anywhere except for these posts earlier in this thread where kpforce1 said he did it with a pencil and he hasn't responded to my PM. EVGA won't tell me anything except that they'll do it for $50.
> 
> Anyone know what I need to do?


Usually you need to bridge some resistance or something like that... I know it was mentioned somewhere in this thread or in the other thread started by Kana and there was pictures with explanations of the work that was needed to be done. Other than those informations I can't really help you since I own an SLI3 board which don't require this mod. Maybe someone here can tell you exactly where the post is and refer you to it


----------



## OCmember

I'm not sure if this will work for your board so you are taking a chance but these are what I found. I've never done it so I don't know if it will work for my 760 A1 Rev.1.0


----------



## Konkistadori

So this arrived, waiting for NM-i3 kit so i can install this


----------



## bigpoppapump

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'm not sure if this will work for your board so you are taking a chance but these are what I found. I've never done it so I don't know if it will work for my 760 A1 Rev.1.0


Yeah, I found those too, apparently it isn't compatible. There isn't much information on this mobo out there.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> So this arrived, waiting for NM-i3 kit so i can install this










My goodness. That thing is a monster. I thought my old CM Hyper 212+ was huge years ago. At least from the pic your NM-i3 looks much bigger.


----------



## Konkistadori

Indeed, it will look more ridiculous when its inside that SL33P3R case... I think this looks bit more "massive" than Silver Arrow SB-E i had.

NH-D15 package did not have "legacy" intel backplates, so i had to ask that NM-i3 kit so i can use this little cooler..

Im waiting for 10c temp drop







, am i too optimistic?


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's not problem at all man. Anyone can feel free to post their questions if they need help, want to brag or anything. I don't care. I don't mind helping either. Tech support is what I do most of the time anyways. Actually all of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check out my latest Titanfall video I uploaded. I really liked the Beta a lot. It was much better than most generic shooters I play today.
> 
> To answer your question........no I haven't had any issues with my X5660 CPU while running at stock. You'll also want to leave your LLC\Vdroop set at Normal if that's a option for you. The CPU only needs 1.14v to operate with a full load and the peak should be no higher than 1.18v with Auto voltages.
> 
> Have you made sure your memory and other hardware components are working fine? You might want to stress test at stock settings to ensure nothing else could be causing issues. Try setting your RAM to1333Mhz and test it out. 1333
> I'm sure there are. It'll just cost you around $90-$120 I bet.


Kana-Maru, Why do you think leaving Vdroop on is the way to go? You mentioned you are using 1.36v for 4.6Ghz, how much is the Vdroop on that under load? What is the value set in your BIOS and what BCLK and uncore are you using? Thanks.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Indeed, it will look more ridiculous when its inside that SL33P3R case... I think this looks bit more "massive" than Silver Arrow SB-E i had.
> 
> NH-D15 package did not have "legacy" intel backplates, so i had to ask that NM-i3 kit so i can use this little cooler..
> 
> Im waiting for 10c temp drop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , am i too optimistic?


Who knows. You'll have to tell us or show us how big the drop is.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Kana-Maru, Why do you think leaving Vdroop on is the way to go? You mentioned you are using 1.36v for 4.6Ghz, how much is the Vdroop on that under load? What is the value set in your BIOS and what BCLK and uncore are you using? Thanks.


I think it's the way to go based on Intel recommendation and the way Intel designed our CPUs. I'm sure if you have a good MB LLC won't be "that" bad, but some users\reviewers\Intel claim other wise. 4.6Ghz + Vdroop under a load drops me down to roughly 1.32v - 1.33v. I can get my cores to drop to 12x - 2400Mhz during Idle and light loads. So even with LLC Enabled I can combat the issues. There are mixed feelings on the situation so do as you please. Also I don't usually share my BIOS settings; takes the fun out of overclocking + OC achievements to me. I change my BIOS so much that I rarely save presets nowadays. I'm trying to get the most out of my system [Gflops, bandwidth, latency etc.]. You are welcome







.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigpoppapump*
> 
> Yeah, I found those too, apparently it isn't compatible. There isn't much information on this mobo out there.


Just go with EVGA doing it. These chips are worth it


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Indeed, it will look more ridiculous when its inside that SL33P3R case... I think this looks bit more "massive" than Silver Arrow SB-E i had.
> 
> NH-D15 package did not have "legacy" intel backplates, so i had to ask that NM-i3 kit so i can use this little cooler..
> 
> Im waiting for 10c temp drop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , am i too optimistic?


I was the creator of the official D14 thread here (my first ever







) and from what I have seen the D15 is a beast. Only beaten by the top AIO water coolers but at higher noise levels. If I was into air coolers again, the D15 will be easily my first choice.
Congrats!


----------



## Konkistadori

It sure was tight fit with that Noctua cooler... Might need to get new case for this one..
Ill post pics of installation later









If i calculated right, max avg temperature dropped 24c degrees...









Noctua NH-D15 with 2x stock fans 1500rpm


Noctua NH-D15 fans running under 700rpm, wow its quiet. 










Akasa Venom with 2xTy140 1300rpm


----------



## Konkistadori

Installation, fits like a glove.


----------



## nievz

So I experimented with CPU voltage offset today and it makes just a 1-3watts difference when the voltage (1.0'ish v) is lower and the multiplier is half-max (EIST @ 12x).


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> It sure was tight fit with that Noctua cooler... Might need to get new case for this one..
> Ill post pics of installation later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If i calculated right, max avg temperature dropped 24c degrees...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noctua NH-D15 with 2x stock fans 1500rpm
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noctua NH-D15 fans running under 700rpm, wow its quiet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Akasa Venom with 2xTy140 1300rpm
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yeah that heat sink is huge! Just as I thought......> beast.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Konkistadori*
> 
> Installation, fits like a glove.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Looks very good and clean. You BARELY had enough space. Lucky.
















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> So I experimented with CPU voltage offset today and it makes just a 1-3watts difference when the voltage (1.0'ish v) is lower and the multiplier is half-max (EIST @ 12x).


k.


----------



## Sart

Anybody got any tips for breaching past 4.3-4.4ghz on the X5650?

My goal now is to try to hit 4.5ghz, but the ram speeds start getting a bit too high to really be stable once I start raising the BCLK on my board. The instant I try 215 BCLK or more I start getting hit with 6B and FF error codes on my board, which I've read to _possibly_ be memory related but no one or nothing ever really gets into specifics. I have 3 memory ratios-2:6, 2:8, and 2:10-and I'm currently using 2:8 for ~1600mhz at bclk 205. 2:6 makes it too low and 2:8 raises it far too high.

At the moment I'm sitting at 205x20 @ 1.33v. Raising voltages didn't seem to help any even for 4.3ghz, and the memory options are an intimidating beast I'm not 100% familiar with.


----------



## shaolin95

Quote:


> which I've read to possibly be memory related


So first of all, did you confirm this by dropping to 2:6 and checking if the system becomes stable at that point? Or relaxing the primary timings on your memory could work as well for this test.


----------



## Sart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shaolin95*
> 
> So first of all, did you confirm this by dropping to 2:6 and checking if the system becomes stable at that point? Or relaxing the primary timings on your memory could work as well for this test.


I did try dropping to 2:6, but still had no luck. Haven't messed with timings yet though, so I'll probably be doing that next.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> I did try dropping to 2:6, but still had no luck. Haven't messed with timings yet though, so I'll probably be doing that next.


setting it to 2:6 worked but it didn't help? is that what you are saying?


----------



## Sart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> setting it to 2:6 worked but it didn't help? is that what you are saying?


I meant it still wasn't stable at 2:6.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sart*
> 
> I meant it still wasn't stable at 2:6.


try turning off HT and see if it's stable, that'll give you a clue what area needs more voltage


----------



## peteroaknyc

Hi guys,

so i have a challenge for all of you with xeon systems.My pc is x5650 at 4ghz and 1500mhz ram with 7950 vapor x at 1.1ghz core and 1450mhz memory.My problem is that i could not fully utilize my gpu , while playing company of heroes 2 in games 4v4.So i have a replay 4v4 and i am getting around 29 min frames during the big battles.My monitor is only 1680x1050 22inch and the gpu utilization is max 60% graphic setting are high and higher , aa medium vsynch off, but it doesn't matter that much because ive tried without shadows and without aa and the difference in the fps is around 3 , or 5 .So i will upload here the replay for you , just to try it out and see, what you are getting with your configuration.And for those of you who dont have the game, i'll say that its the best one and right now its on steam for 10 $ i guess.

Greets Peter


----------



## GENXLR

not enough information, Need some CPU-z screenshots please


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peteroaknyc*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> so i have a challenge for all of you with xeon systems.My pc is x5650 at 4ghz and 1500mhz ram with 7950 vapor x at 1.1ghz core and 1450mhz memory.My problem is that i could not fully utilize my gpu , while playing company of heroes 2 in games 4v4.So i have a replay 4v4 and i am getting around 29 min frames during the big battles.My monitor is only 1680x1050 22inch and the gpu utilization is max 60% graphic setting are high and higher , aa medium vsynch off, but it doesn't matter that much because ive tried without shadows and without aa and the difference in the fps is around 3 , or 5 .So i will upload here the replay for you , just to try it out and see, what you are getting with your configuration.And for those of you who dont have the game, i'll say that its the best one and right now its on steam for 10 $ i guess.
> 
> Greets Peter


no


----------



## peteroaknyc

Here the file,

so your looking at 18:20 to 19:40 min, those are one of the intense battles, where i get even 27fps.

coh2-4v4-bench.zip 286k .zip file


----------



## peteroaknyc

what do you mean "no"??


----------



## Konkistadori

Sure ill try when i get that game first.


----------



## nievz

Can I please request for your stable vcore setting at 4.6Ghz? I have to set mine at 1.45v for 4.6Ghz. Does increasing the IOH voltage affect OC on single GPU systems?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Can I please request for your stable vcore setting at 4.6Ghz? I have to set mine at 1.45v for 4.6Ghz. Does increasing the IOH voltage affect OC on single GPU systems?


In my experience that's about what I needed for 4.6Ghz on my i7 970 but the vcore limits are different between the desktop i7 970 and the Xeon 6 core Westmere chips.

i7 970
Xeon X5660


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hello OCN,

I'm looking for information on how to do the dual QPI mod on the EVGA X58 SLI3 (E767). There are pics of such a mod for the Classified here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-discussion-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/1330#post_22597537

But I can't find similar locations on an E767, which seems to be quite different in those areas (above the CPU and to the right of the IOH).

Thank you!


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Hello OCN,
> 
> I'm looking for information on how to do the dual QPI mod on the EVGA X58 SLI3 (E767). There are pics of such a mod for the Classified here:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-discussion-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/1330#post_22597537
> 
> But I can't find similar locations on an E767, which seems to be quite different in those areas (above the CPU and to the right of the IOH).
> 
> Thank you!


The FTW3, classified3 and SLI3 all support the xeons natively out of the box. The newest BIOS may be needed.

http://www.evga.com/support/motherboard/legacy/

* Westmere

Xeon X5690 - 3.46 GHz
Xeon X5680 - 3.33 GHz
Xeon X5677 - 3.46 GHz
Xeon X5670 - 2.93 GHz
Xeon X5667 - 3.06 GHz
Xeon X5660 - 2.80 GHz
Xeon X5650 - 2.66 GHz
Xeon L5640 - 2.27 GHz
Xeon L5630 - 2.13 GHz
Xeon E5649 - 2.53 GHz
Xeon E5645 - 2.40 GHz
Xeon E5640 - 2.67 GHz
Xeon E5630 - 2.53 GHz
Xeon E5620 - 2.40 GHz
Xeon E5607 - 2.27 GHz
Xeon E5606 - 2.13 GHz
Xeon E5603 - 1.60 GHz

* Westmere processors are only supported natively on the X58 SLI3, FTW3, and Classified3 Models. A product modification may be needed for older models.
** Latest BIOS update is necessary to run


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I know, but a tech suppoort guy @ EVGA EU told me in the morning today that only 1.1 and 1.2 rev SLI3 boards support 6-cores. I have a rev 1.0.

The exact problem is that even though the memory has successfully gone through 15 passes in memtest86+, and the memory settings in BIOS are set according to the manual, the board won't post randomly. This happens with both 82 and 83 (latest) BIOS.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> I know, but a tech suppoort guy @ EVGA EU told me in the morning today that only 1.1 and 1.2 rev SLI3 boards support 6-cores. I have a rev 1.0.
> 
> The exact problem is that even though the memory has successfully gone through 15 passes in memtest86+, and the memory settings in BIOS are set according to the manual, the board won't post randomly. This happens with both 82 and 83 (latest) BIOS.


Oh wow,sorry to hear that.
Is that with a xeon chip installed? Have you tried a xeon?
Did the guy from EVGA say they could mod it for you or will they tell you how to do it?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Yeah this is with an X5650, the same board and memory set works and posts fine with an i7 930 or 920, forgot which one it is exactly, probably the 930.

My board is out of warranty now, being a -TR part (2 year warranty), purchased 4 years ago. So they told me where to find pics of a similar mod for the other EVGA boards, but the schematics appear to differ enough to be useless for my board.


----------



## bill1024

I would think it would not post at all if it did not support it. Interesting.
I know it is not the same but with my Asus I had no post at all until the right bios was installed.
Maybe some one with an EVGA 757 board can say what happens with a xeon before the mod, if it posts at all.
Last but not least do you get any error codes when it doesn't post that may point to some other problem?
Are you using a water cooler and not blowing air over the chipset? I had major problems including no post when the chipset overheated.

Other options is have them fix it for you
, or sell the X-56xx CPU, use that money to buy W-xxxx xeon. Maybe cheaper than paying to have them mod the board with shipping costs and all.

I wish you the best of luck getting this figured out.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

It gives 68, 69, F3, sometimes F6, probably when more than 1 stick is installed. Sometimes I even see FF. All indicative of a memory error.

It wouldn't post even when cold booting in the morning for example, so the IOH overheating is out of the equation - it's ambient temp when the issue occurs.

W-series unfortunately are expensive, the cost like a modern i7 CPU, while the X56** cost about $70 on ebay, and that's what I can sell it for here in Russia, too - people are very careful and count every cent when byuing second-hand parts. They won't even buy the i7 920 for $50, saying it's worthless now that the X58 platform is dead. (Tried referencing anandtech, where they proved that clock-for-clock the 5930K is only 30% faster than the 980X, still no way.) Well whatever, waiting for another CPU to arrive is going to take a couple months, so not really an option.

I don't think they'd mod the board even if I paid, honestly, and the time and hassle it would take are not worth it, honestly.

Yeah a repoort form a guy with the E757 would be appreciated, indeed.

Thank you for the kind words, so far the tech support hasn't been able to help me, except for today's advice about doing an HW mod.


----------



## GENXLR

FF is attempt to post on most boards. at least mine.

lol, never mind, just one of my boards is funny


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Not when it gets stuck on FF, right?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Anyone done the dual QPI disable (Westmere) mod for E767 / E757?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Anyone done the dual QPI disable (Westmere) mod for E767 / E757?


When they system does not post, is it overclocked?
What size, make model ram and timings?
If it is 1600 9- 9-9-25 have you tried to run it slower and relax the timings like 1333 10-10-10-27
I had some odd problems with Gskill ripjaws 1600 9-9-9 ram sticks that were red. They were wacky in all 3 of my x58 boards.
After going through a couple sets G-skill sent me blue sticks that were 7-8-7-xx and they worked real well. Go figure.

I can not find the post, I am 85% sure I read that they put a x56xx in a 757 board and no post at all
When it does post does it show it is a xeon 56xx at xxxx speed on the screen as it scrolls by?
Again I remember reading a post some ware that they got stuck at FF code and they replaced the bios chip and it fixed their problems.
On e-bay there is a guys sells new bios chips for around 13$ shipped. I used on in my x58 P6T DV2 I did not have a CPU to flash the bios with.

Last but not least, just asking, did you pull the battery and unplug the power cord to the PSU and clear the CMOS?
Maybe re-seat the CPU and see if it helps Take a good look at the pins while the CPU is out.

If you leave it on say for 48-72 hours, does it seem to work properly?

Good luck, I hope you get it working.


----------



## GENXLR

FF assuming i have the bios right, should be a cpu exception. So if i had to guess, you have a cpu incompatibility with your bios, have any spare cpu's to use to flash the bios, then use your new one?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Nope, it's at stock.

The memory is 1333 9-9-9-24 1.50V Corsair XMS3 3x2 Gb, purchased as a kit. I only change 3 variables as per the EVGA manual - set the frequency to 1067, MCH Strap to DRAM Ratio (to get the correct timings automatically, as far as I understand), and tRL +2 (some setting related to incomplete memory detection, which does happen in my case unless the frequency is adjusted).

This is an E767 board, which is supposed to support Westmere CPU's out of the box.

Yes it reports the correct CPU in the POOST screen, brand, model, frequency, all fine.

I have cleared CMOS many times, with and without cutting off power to the board. After I clear CMOS, a message "CMOS checksumm error, defaults loaded, press F1 to continue or DEL to enter setup" apppears. I press F1, then a reboot occurs and the message "Keyboard error or no keyboard present" appears, and the keyboard indeed is inaccessible. POOST is stalled. Then I forcefully turn off the PC and on the next boot it usually won't POST, only after a few attempts, all with the error 68, 69, F3, F6. Go figure, indeed!

Re-seated a dozen times, seen no bent pins so far.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> FF assuming i have the bios right, should be a cpu exception. So if i had to guess, you have a cpu incompatibility with your bios, have any spare cpu's to use to flash the bios, then use your new one?


Well it does boot 1 out of 5 times wiith BIOS 82, and with the BIOS 83, which is said to be the latest one, it consistently boots on every second attempt.


----------



## intelchief

well, i decided to change my memory divider from 2:10 to 2:8. With 180mhz bclk i have 1440 mhz with 8-8-8-23 1T. For me there was no real benefit from higher clocked memory (1800mhz 10-10-10-27 1T) With lower ram frequency i was able to lower voltages for VTT (1.3V) and memory(1.56V). And there is one qestion about uncore frequency.

Right now i have 2880mhz which is 2x memory frequency - should i lower uncore multiplier?

forgot about spec
2x x5670 @4320mhz 1.329V
EVga sr2
12Gb ram (6 x 2 GB)
antec 1000W
gtx 670(modded bios)


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well you guys are going to laugh hard now.

Pulled the battery for half an hour, flipped the switch on the PSU as well, then put the battery back in, booted, set the correct memory frequencyand timings and the board now has booted fine 10 times in a row. Thank you everyone who has given advice.

Verdict:
a) Solutions are often unexpectedly easy, as we all know, but sometimmes forget
b) SLI3 rev 1.0 supports Westmere natively (without hardware mods), but you may need to update your BIOS. II'm running 82 currently.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well you guys are going to laugh hard now.
> 
> Pulled the battery for half an hour, flipped the switch on the PSU as well, then put the battery back in, booted, set the correct memory frequencyand timings and the board now has booted fine 10 times in a row. Thank you everyone who has given advice.
> 
> Verdict:
> a) Solutions are often unexpectedly easy, as we all know, but sometimmes forget
> b) SLI3 rev 1.0 supports Westmere natively (without hardware mods), but you may need to update your BIOS. II'm running 82 currently.


Good news, glad it is working for you.


----------



## TopicClocker

Awesome thread, thanks Kana-Maru and everyone for contributing!
I really appreciate all of the hard work!

I'm thinking of picking up a X5650 and a motherboard possibly sometime in January for some kind of editing, rendering and gaming RIG.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well you guys are going to laugh hard now.
> 
> Pulled the battery for half an hour, flipped the switch on the PSU as well, then put the battery back in, booted, set the correct memory frequencyand timings and the board now has booted fine 10 times in a row. Thank you everyone who has given advice.
> 
> Verdict:
> a) Solutions are often unexpectedly easy, as we all know, but sometimmes forget
> b) SLI3 rev 1.0 supports Westmere natively (without hardware mods), but you may need to update your BIOS. II'm running 82 currently.


Apparently there is a difference between resetting the bios via the hardware button on the board, and pulling out the bios battery completely. And all other things have to be unplugged and turned off to let the board fully power down.

Glad things are working for you now









I have a board that needs those terminals soldered to run a Xeon. I have a EVGA 760 A1 Rev 1.0 board that won't work unless modded.

Thanks and Congrats!


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

^_^ Now I'd be glad to actually find out the difference between using the reset button and pulling the battery. One thing I noticed was that the error message on the very first boot after resetting changed slightly, from "Please re-enter..." to "Please re-enter and don't forget to save / backup!". Interesting, isn't it? Some code may have been loaded from some non-volatile memory, from scratch.

Another important thing to mention is that I had flashed the BIOS a while before, but never pulled the battery afterwards. Is it required to do so after flashing the BIOS? That may explain why the message had changed - it could belong to the newer BIOS, which never actually was used until I had preformed the battery reset. Possible?

Now slightly more on-topic: there still are 2 quirks with the X5650 and how it is reported in both Linux KSysGuard (IIRC uses lmsensors) and the latest HWMonitor. Hardware cores are numbered 0 to 2 and then 8 to 10, with an obvious gap in the numbering. Temperature of the first core (#0) is always some 7-8 degrees higher than that of the coolest one (#9). Can that be due to an uneven heatsink pressure (although this shouldn't be the case since I've been using this heatsink on this very motherboard with an i7 for a few years without such a disbalance in temperatures)?

Screenshot follows:


----------



## bill1024

Yes the temp. difference on the cores seems to be normal, seems like everyone see it.

Yeah it is a good idea to pull the battery and unplug the power cord. Also push in the power button after doing that.
That will discharge any stored electric in the caps.
I do this after changing CPUs, new type of memory or after flashing the BIOS.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> Awesome thread, thanks Kana-Maru and everyone for contributing!
> I really appreciate all of the hard work!
> 
> I'm thinking of picking up a X5650 and a motherboard possibly sometime in January for some kind of editing, rendering and gaming RIG.


No problem. Those are a few of the main reasons I got my X5660. Things get finished much quicker plus I can multitask as well.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Is there a difference in performance between the X56** series and the i7 9** 6-core series at an identical frequency? If yes, how much (like 5%, 20%, etc.)? Thank you!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Is there a difference in performance between the X56** series and the i7 9** 6-core series at an identical frequency? If yes, how much (like 5%, 20%, etc.)? Thank you!


Same micro-architecture, so at the same frequency the performance should be the same, or extremely close.

But the main difference from my understanding is the QPI link, and the IMC is different, so it is more common to see people pumping more voltage to the memory/IMC and running at a uncore higher frequency and memory speed. So if there were differences, it would mainly be in benchmarks because of the variance in the memory speed.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I think I've narrowed the issue down to one parameter: QPI Link Speed. When the board used to start fine, I had manually set QPI to slow mode, but the PC was, wel, unusable, e.g. the GPU appeared to be way too slow even when drawing Windows Aero 3d effects, and te Marvell SATA III controller was working at 60 Mbs with a Corsair Force GT SSD. Now, I've set the QPI parameter to Auto, guess what? F3, F6, 68, 69.

Question: which speed - 4 800, 5-something thousand or 6 400 GT/s should I choose? Thank you!


----------



## nievz

Here's how far I can push my newly acquired G.Skill TridentX 2400mhz RAMs on my x58:


----------



## nievz

Guys please help me out with this. So I transfer a large folder from the network which contains the installer for an application, 12GB in size total. The files are highly compressed so while installation, it unpacks the files to the installation directory. Now the problem is, during installation whether from the network or from the copied files on my PC it fails due to a decompression error. It also appears that the copied files to my PC while overclocked are corrupted since it also fails after I reset bios to defaults and tries to install from there. When I load bios defaults, all is well no problem installing from the network. It seems the data is being corrupted at my PC's NIC.

My question is, which voltage should I adjust to try and stabilize the NIC and other pheriperals? My OC is rock stable when gaming, IBT, or Prime. It's only when I install something from the network is when the issue comes up.

[UPDATE] Ok it looks like I just needed to add more vcore. Still testing but it looks promising. 2nd pass and still no errors. Also, I'm using the 'Offset' setting in the Asus BIOS - it's probably not providing the voltage the cpu needs at low utilization. I might just go back to using a static voltage if it requires too much voltage.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> I think I've narrowed the issue down to one parameter: QPI Link Speed. When the board used to start fine, I had manually set QPI to slow mode, but the PC was, wel, unusable, e.g. the GPU appeared to be way too slow even when drawing Windows Aero 3d effects, and te Marvell SATA III controller was working at 60 Mbs with a Corsair Force GT SSD. Now, I've set the QPI parameter to Auto, guess what? F3, F6, 68, 69.
> 
> Question: which speed - 4 800, 5-something thousand or 6 400 GT/s should I choose? Thank you!


4800 would be best if you are going to overclock since it will be overclocked as well


----------



## Trondster

I'd recommend the slowest of the "fast" QPI speeds - when your overclock is final you could try raising it a notch. It won't affect performance, but a too high QPI may cause stability issues. I keep mine at 36x (4.8GHz) even at stock BCLK.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Hmm I am only sitting at about 60gflops when i do IBT.

I am running at 200bclk with 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 1T, and 2800 on my uncore freq.

Any thoughts on this?


----------



## Trondster

Try "Very High" if you want high numbers.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Here is info about voltage guidelines set by Intel. Hopefully this will answer some questions regarding the maximum voltage allowed. [1.35v or 1.4v]

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware-reviews/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Here is info about voltage guidelines set by Intel. Hopefully this will answer some questions regarding the maximum voltage allowed. [1.35v or 1.4v]
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware-reviews/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information


So these voltage spikes aren't visible to us via monitoring tools. Won't LLC eliminate the spikes since it may have enough current (amperes) to provide a constant voltage and not veer away from that voltage even just for a split second no matter what the load is? I'm not sure what the official description from Asus about this feature they implement on their high end boards.


----------



## Trondster

My own experiences regarding voltage and LLC:
I tried to overclock my own w3690, and wanted to test LLC vs vDroop.
To get stability in Intel Burn Test at 4350MHz (150BCLK x 29), I needed DVID +0.07500V, with a voltage of 1.312-1.328.
(For my Gigabyte board GA-X58-UD5 I can set vCore to "normal", which sets base vCore depending on the current CPU speed and adds the chosen DVID offset - very useful, as it can ramp the vCore up and down when C-states and EIST are enabled. When using this functionality the vCore fluctuates between two values 0.016V apart.)

Anyway - I needed a vCore of 1.312-1.328 to pass Intel Burn Test. This was with LLC enabled, but with C-states and EIST disabled and thus the idle voltage was at 1.312-1.328 too. Of course - there was probably a voltage spike undetectable by my monitoring tool when the CPU ramped up and down (especially while ramping down) while working, producing more heat and drawing more current.

I then tried disabling LLC. This would mean a lower load voltage with the same DVID setting, as the CPU vCore drops under load, to prevent a spike when the load goes back down again.
However - then CPU wasn't stable at all at a DVID of +0.07500V - it was still at an idle voltage of 1.312-1.328V, but under load it dropped to 1.264-1.280V - and the computer just froze while running IBT.

To get it stable during IBT, I had to up the DVID (through several iterations of trial and failure) to +0.13125V, giving an IBT load voltage of 1.312-1.328V, the same load voltage as I needed to get IBT stable when I had LLC activated (Prime95 pushed it "only" down to 1.328-1.344). However, my _idle_ voltage was now a steady *1.376V*; a rather high number, and _much_ much higher than the load voltage.
Surely, any voltage spikes would not go that much higher than 1.376V than they would spike above 1.312-1.328 with LLC activated - but then again the CPU was now running at a much higher voltage whenever the CPU was in a more idle state.

So - in sum - disabling LLC (and thus enabling vDroop) probably reduces any voltage spikes much higher than the idle voltage - but at what cost? A much higher idle voltage. On my motherboard and my CPU I needed the same load voltage to be stable anyway, both with and without LLC, and then the you have to ask for yourself:

- Do you want to disable LLC and enable vDroop, to avoid any voltage spikes above the normal idle voltage?
- Or do you want to enable LLC and disable vDroop to lower the idle voltage, but at a risk of voltage spikes higher than the normal idle voltage?

And the golden question is, of course, the one question I don't have the answer to: Are the voltage spikes when going to an idle state higher if you enable LLC or if you disable LLC.
That I can't answer, as I can't measure it myself.

More information:
What is vDroop anyway (an article that concludes that vDroop is a Good Thing): http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5
Here's a later article (an article with measurements of vCore, that concludes that LLC is a Good Thing): http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/

As for me?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



As I need the same load Vcore to be stable both with and without LLC, I'll just enable LLC, and let the motherboard try to lower the idle Vcore as good as it can.


You may reach different conclusions. Or the same. Whatever you choose - just don't run too high voltages!









Try yourself - see if LLC or vDroop gives you the lowest load voltage - in my experience, on my CPU and motherboard - when overclocking, it is the load voltage that determines your lowest possible voltage for a certain overclock. We overclockers don't set our voltages after a set idle voltage - we set our voltage after what it takes to get an overclock stable - without damaging any components in the process. But - your mileage may vary. Test what your own board can do.









Of course, at the same idle voltage enabling Vdroop will probably be good for the CPU longevity, as the load voltage will be lower. But - this won't (in my experience) be as stable at the same clock speed, and thus you need higher idle voltages to reach the same stability level at the same clock speed.

So - what is "best" for the CPU? A lower voltage when idle (with LLC enabled) or lower voltage spikes but higher idle voltage levels (with VDroop)? I don't know. What do you think? And have you found any articles going in more depth regarding LLC vs VDroop?

Sure - the VDroop may be about 0.05V - but how high will voltage spikes with LLC enabled be? I don't know. I'd guess it depends on the motherboard make and model - and we need hard facts from the motherboard manufacturers and/or in-depth measurements to know. As for my self, I neither have the time, the equipment nor the know-how to conduct such actual real-life measurements. I found one such article linked to above - do share if you know of others!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> So these voltage spikes aren't visible to us via monitoring tools.


They are visible if you use a oscilloscope. Intel says it should be limited to 100Mhz. It must be done at the die level as well.
Quote:


> Won't LLC eliminate the spikes since it may have enough current (amperes) to provide a constant voltage and not veer away from that voltage even just for a split second no matter what the load is?


LLC is only addressing one of the issues.....vDroop which is not a bad thing. Most overclockers could care less about the voltage being pumped into their CPU or spikes. I do care and LLC being disabled hasn't given me any issues.
Quote:


> I'm not sure what the official description from Asus about this feature they implement on their high end boards.


Well my BIOS is pretty straight forward and says; "_Improves the CPU VDroop directly_". That's pretty much what it does.
Quote:


> So - in sum - disabling LLC (and thus enabling vDroop) probably reduces any voltage spikes much higher than the idle voltage - but at what cost?


Nah it's the other way around. Not higher than idle voltage.

Quote:


> - Do you want to disable LLC and enable vDroop, to avoid any voltage spikes above the normal idle voltage?
> - Or do you want to enable LLC and disable vDroop to lower the idle voltage, but at a risk of voltage spikes higher than the normal idle voltage?


As for me:
Yes and no. My test are completely different. My Idle voltages pretty low even at 4.6Ghz. Even at 4Ghz my Idle [with LLC DISABLED] was 0.984v. Not even 1v. So yes I would want LLC disabled.
No I don't want to enabled LLC because I actually understand how to overclock while following Intel guidelines to get the most out of my CPU without losing performance. So the voltage spikes really don't apply since I understand how to avoid them. I suppose for some users who want to run some quick benchmarks and possibly degrade their CPU might.
Quote:


> we set our voltage after what it takes to get an overclock stable - without damaging any components in the process.


Intel engineers says otherwise. They say you will do damage and don't be surprised when it's time to upgrade or buy another one lol.

Quote:


> So - what is "best" for the CPU? A lower voltage when idle (with LLC enabled) or lower voltage spikes but higher idle voltage levels (with VDroop)?


Please stop saying that LLC [enabled] allows a lower voltage. I've tested them both and LLC disabled does not disappoint while keeping Glops and benchmarks just as high. If anything LLC disabled [vDroop enabled of course] actually allows me to keep my temps lower during benchmarks.

Quote:


> I don't know. What do you think? And have you found any articles going in more depth regarding LLC vs VDroop?
> Sure - the VDroop may be about 0.05V - but how high will voltage spikes with LLC enabled be?


I see someone read the article[0.05v], but read it again. Also the way you are talking about spikes are one sided. LLC is only half the battle. As I said in the article I will tackle more of the misconceptions throughout the article as it is updated. "but how high will voltage spikes with LLC enabled be?" <

Read the article again. I already told people about the 0.05v spike which I'm sure many didn't know......well or possibly did know. I explained voltage spiking in the article.

The anandtech article appears to be spot on. The second article leaves a lot of unanswered questions and is invalid from what I read. Intel engineers are pretty specific about testing equipment.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> _So - in sum - disabling LLC (and thus enabling vDroop) probably reduces any voltage spikes much higher than the idle voltage - but at what cost?_
> Nah it's the other way around. Not higher than idle voltage.


Uhm - what? We both agree that disabling LLC (and thus enabling vDroop) reduces voltage spikes higher than the idle voltage, no? It is LLC enabled that risk higher spikes - agreed?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> As for me:
> Yes and no. My test are completely different. My Idle voltages pretty low even at 4.6Ghz. Even at 4Ghz my Idle [with LLC DISABLED] was 0.984v. Not even 1v. So yes I would want LLC disabled.


Read all the premises I wrote: I disabled the C-states ad disabled EIST, and thus the motherboard ran at its "regular" idle voltage constantly. If you enable the lower C-states and enable EIST, your CPU will throttle down to lower multipliers, and the voltage will go down as well.
Do try yourself, with EIST disabled - if the CPU doesn't clock down and reduce the voltage - what idle voltages are you seeing then, with and without LLC; both with the voltage adjusted to the lowest possible value to keep the test stable?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No I don't want to enabled LLC because I actually understand how to overclock while following Intel guidelines to get the most out of my CPU without losing performance. So the voltage spikes really don't apply since I understand how to avoid them. I suppose for some users who want to run some quick benchmarks and possibly degrade their CPU might.


We all (well, most of us, anyway) want to keep our equipment safe. And - I too want to keep my voltages low enough that I won't be affected by and voltage spikes. The question is - does vDroop have other side effects - like higher than normal idle voltages? I think so - but I need more data.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> _we set our voltage after what it takes to get an overclock stable - without damaging any components in the process._
> Intel engineers says otherwise. They say you will do damage and don't be surprised when it's time to upgrade or buy another one lol.


Pray tell - where in my experiments I listed above did I try settings where "Intels engineers say I will do damage" to my components.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Please stop saying that LLC [enabled] allows a lower voltage. I've tested them both and LLC disabled does not disappoint while keeping Glops and benchmarks just as high. If anything LLC disabled [vDroop enabled of course] actually allows me to keep my temps lower during benchmarks.


I wrote that my findings were that enabling LLC allowed me to run a lower DVID and thus a lower idle voltage to successfully get IBT stable at Very High. When I tried the same DVID voltage (that was stable with LLC enabled) while disabling LLC, IBT wasn't stable, and the computer froze. I had to raise the DVID to get the CPU as stable as it was with LLC disabled. I don't have the temperature numbers here (I'm on my way to work), but I'll happily submit the temperatures I recorded too.
I needed the same load voltage to get IBT stable, both with and without LLC - and thus I required a higher idle voltage to get it stable with LLC disabled. Do you not believe my findings and numbers?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I see someone read the article[0.05v], but read it again. Also the way you are talking about spikes are one sided. LLC is only half the battle. As I said in the article I will tackle more of the misconceptions throughout the article as it is updated. "but how high will voltage spikes with LLC enabled be?" <
> 
> Read the article again. I already told people about the 0.05v spike which I'm sure many didn't know......well or possibly did know. I explained voltage spiking in the article.


Yes, you write in your article that the voltage spike is 0.05V. What the article has a lack of, though, is references. Please link to the Intel papers describing your claims, noting which page in the paper to find this information. It will make your article much better and more believable when you have the references to back up your claims. In Wikipedia terms - "_[citation needed]_". Will the spike _always_ be at 0.05V, or does it also for example depend on the voltage, or maybe the motherboard circuitry and components?
That Intel has a vDroop of about 0.05V seems to match very well in deed with my own findings - from 1.312-1.328V and up to 1.376V it is in deed 0.05V (or as close to 0.05V as the reported 0.016V increments will allow).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The anandtech article appears to be spot on. The second article leaves a lot of unanswered questions and is invalid from what I read. Intel engineers are pretty specific about testing equipment.


That's the problem - the second article is the only article I've found so far where others have tried to actually measure the voltage spikes - I'd love to see better and more in-depth articles on the subject.

As for myself, I'd like to keep my load voltages at 1.350V, for several reasons. The most important one is not to risk any voltage spikes killing the processor, but there are other reasons too - temperatures and the ever relevant diminishing returns - you need so much (and for me too much) voltage and extra cooling for that extra tiny little bit of performance - and my goal is a high stable speed - not high benchmarks ratings.

What I also could do is to re-run my tests with EIST and the lower C-states enabled - then I could see how the lowered voltages are with and without LLC and adjusted voltages.

And folks - remember this: _Of course_ the idle voltage won't be higher with LLC disabled than with LLC enabled if you keep everything else the same (including the set voltages).
What I seem to find is that with my motherboard (GA-X58-UD5) and my CPU I need to set higher voltages with LLC disabled than I need with LLC enabled (although the load voltage was the same), and it is this higher voltage that causes the higher idle voltage when I have LLC disabled.


----------



## GENXLR

So kana- I'm going to try running without LLC and see what happens, will report back after testing. My other D5400XS has both cpu's with LLC on, wonder if that changes anything.


----------



## Trondster

More reading material for LLC:
http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=46502
http://www.overclock.net/t/657317/vdroop-or-not-llc-poll
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/24019-load-line-calibration-why-overclockers-should-care/

As for myself I want to do some more tests - I want to test the required voltages to get my system fully stable - not just IBT VH (Very High) stable, as my single previous test, but also IBT Maximum and Prime95 stable, both with and without LLC - and with the resulting temperatures and idle/load voltages.

The LLC implementations seem to be different from manufacturer to manufacturer and from model to model - I have only got LLC enable/disable, while others have several levels of LLC. I'd like to warn people to lower the vCore when going up in LLC levels - my own DVID setting for a stable overclock with LLC disabled will on my board result in a notably higher voltage if I enable LLC and keep the voltage the same. Your mileage may vary - monitor the actual voltages in Windows to see how your board behaves, and I recommend to heed Kana's warning to not exceed max load voltage - don't let it go above 1.35V.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Hmm I am only sitting at about 60gflops when i do IBT.
> 
> I am running at 200bclk with 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 1T, and 2800 on my uncore freq.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?


I'm at 4.4Ghz, 92GFlops. 3609mhz uncore, DDR-2005 8-9-9-16-2. PCIE-e 110mhz.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I'm at 4.4Ghz, 92GFlops. 3609mhz uncore, DDR-2005 8-9-9-16-2. PCIE-e 110mhz.


That's a pretty sweet over clock, I admit mine is really quick and dirty. I'll probably post more info, I have it saved as a profile and when I play games I just load it up, and when I'm not everything is set to default haha.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I'm at 4.4Ghz, 92GFlops. 3609mhz uncore, DDR-2005 8-9-9-16-2. PCIE-e 110mhz.


Whoah - nice timings. At which voltages are you? And that is a _very_ high PCI-E overclock, isn't it?


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> Whoah - nice timings. At which voltages are you? And that is a _very_ high PCI-E overclock, isn't it?


I just started using my PCIE on that speed yesterday. Makes my SSD and GPU faster. TridentX 2400 RAM @ 1.65v.

PCIE @ 110mhz:

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/

* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 412.825 MB/s
Sequential Write : 235.529 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 374.054 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 50.939 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 24.083 MB/s [ 5879.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 21.995 MB/s [ 5370.0 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 249.411 MB/s [ 60891.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 21.099 MB/s [ 5151.1 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 86.6% (96.7/111.7 GB)] (x1) <0Fill>
Date : 2014/12/16 7:22:25
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)

Pass 2:

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/

* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 405.534 MB/s
Sequential Write : 259.100 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 372.997 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 126.275 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 22.806 MB/s [ 5567.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 24.360 MB/s [ 5947.2 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 243.447 MB/s [ 59435.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 22.743 MB/s [ 5552.5 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 86.6% (96.7/111.7 GB)] (x1) <0Fill>
Date : 2014/12/16 7:39:01
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)

PCIE @ 100mhz:

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/

* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 375.654 MB/s
Sequential Write : 239.784 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 343.824 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 112.366 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 22.888 MB/s [ 5587.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 22.382 MB/s [ 5464.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 232.752 MB/s [ 56824.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 21.522 MB/s [ 5254.3 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 86.6% (96.7/111.7 GB)] (x1) <0Fill>
Date : 2014/12/16 7:30:25
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)


----------



## Trondster

But what are your QPI/Vtt, vCore etc voltages?


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> But what are your QPI/Vtt, vCore etc voltages?


VTT 1.35, vCore 1.37


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> Yes, you write in your article that the voltage spike is 0.05V. What the article has a lack of, though, is references. Please link to the Intel papers describing your claims, noting which page in the paper to find this information. It will make your article much better and more believable when you have the references to back up your claims.


I've worked for and now with Intel so I even if it's believable or not It doesn't matter to me. I've done the testing and Westmere isn't anything new at all. The testing matches exactly what I remember from the 45nm. Actually I believe the 45nm was 0.006v, but I'm sure it varies. I can't do the reading for you, but the info is clearly available for ANYONE to read. Also I love how you posted *"That Intel has a vDroop of about 0.05V seems to match very well in deed with my own findings - from 1.312-1.328V and up to 1.376V it is in deed 0.05V (or as close to 0.05V as the reported 0.016V increments will allow). "*. Thanks I guess what I posted in the article was believable after all right?

Quote:


> That's the problem - the second article is the only article I've found so far where others have tried to actually measure the voltage spikes - I'd love to see better and more in-depth articles on the subject.


That's my problem as well. It doesn't appear that the second article tested the CPU correctly or at least by Intel standards. Thats is the reason I rejected it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> So kana- I'm going to try running without LLC and see what happens, will report back after testing. My other D5400XS has both cpu's with LLC on, wonder if that changes anything.


Alight keep me posted.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I'm at 4.4Ghz, 92GFlops. 3609mhz uncore, DDR-2005 8-9-9-16-2. PCIE-e 110mhz.


*PCIE-e 110mhz* That's very high OC. Keep us posted and let me know if you have any damage on your motherboard. Damage such as audio issues, SSD crashing, or high dpc latency issues etc. Nice timings on the highly clocked RAM.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *PCIE-e 110mhz* That's very high OC. Keep us posted and let me know if you have any damage on your motherboard. Damage such as audio issues, SSD crashing, or high dpc latency issues etc. Nice timings on the highly clocked RAM.


I've done intensive research on this on the web and not a single report of damage at 110mhz. I'm not willing to go any higher.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Wow, and I was never willing to go over 101 myself. Never heard of anyone ever going above 105, so please let me know how that works for you and all your PCIe devices. Love to see how the Video Card responds to that situation.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I've done intensive research on this on the web and not a single report of damage at 110mhz. I'm not willing to go any higher.


I've seen otherwise personally. My bro went up to 105 - 106Mhz and killed his on-board audio. During another high X58 overclock going above 105 killed his SSDs. I've personally had PCI-E experiences and none of them were good. I leave it alone on my OCs


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I always thought the manufacturer designs PCIe devices for a specific clock rate only and does not take into account possible overclocking, including the video card manufacturers? Wouldn't a 10% overclock really help PCIe devices if they can handle it?


----------



## Kana-Maru

The PCI-E Frequency is responsible for several components on the board. There's no telling when one will bite the dust. From previous experiences I leave it at 100Mhz. I'd rather not go through those issues again especially since I didn't notice to much of a difference by increasing the frequency.


----------



## nievz

I had issues before with PCI clocks where the IDE controller would stop working unless I go back to 33.33mhz. With PCIe @ 110, i think i am increasing its bandwidth by 10% as shown by my increased SSD transfer rate. My board has an onboard sata3 which is connected to an pcie x1. I'll report any unexpected findings if something comes up.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've worked for and now with Intel so I even if it's believable or not It doesn't matter to me. I've done the testing and Westmere isn't anything new at all. The testing matches exactly what I remember from the 45nm. Actually I believe the 45nm was 0.006v, but I'm sure it varies. I can't do the reading for you, but the info is clearly available for ANYONE to read. Also I love how you posted *"That Intel has a vDroop of about 0.05V seems to match very well in deed with my own findings - from 1.312-1.328V and up to 1.376V it is in deed 0.05V (or as close to 0.05V as the reported 0.016V increments will allow). "*. Thanks I guess what I posted in the article was believable after all right?


Who says I don't believe most of your article?
And - you forgot to quote the point of my rambling - my question "*Will the spike always be at 0.05V, or does it also for example depend on the voltage, or maybe the motherboard circuitry and components?*". To get an answer for that it would be so much better to check the actual sources. Do you have the answer?
Sure - the vDroop definitely seems to be set at 0.05V - at least on my CPU, my motherboard and my voltages, but will any voltage spikes from my particular motherboard manufacturer also automatically be at 0.05V?

But still I don't think you got _all_ the facts right - not if you believe that the combination of enabling LLC and adjusting the voltage accordingly won't lower idle voltages. They will - that's the entire point of the LLC - to keep the idle and load voltages similar. This is simple physics/electronics. VDroop causes the load voltages to be lower than the idle voltages, but with lower voltage spikes. LLC causes the idle voltages to be closer to the load voltages, but with increased risk of voltage spikes. If you adjust the LLC without changing voltage, then _of course_ LLC will give you the same idle voltage. (May be dependent on how the motherboard manufacturer has implemented LLC - on my motherboard I get the same idle voltages with and without LLC - but a difference in load voltages. And - a slight difference in this behavior depending on the selected voltage.)

If you adjust the voltage accordingly, to get the same stability - do you (now) believe/understand that having LLC enabled will give you a lower idle voltage? Or do you disagree? (From the descriptions of your own LLC tests it seems that you didn't take into accord that you also have to adjust the voltage when adjusting LLC levels.)

The more interesting questions are (_assuming that one does adjust voltages accordingly when changing LLC-related settings - making sure the voltages give the same stability under load_):
- Will the load voltages for a given stability level be higher or lower with LLC enabled or disabled? (Again - with adjusted voltages according to the chosen LLC level!)
- Will the higher idle voltages of vDroop with LLC disabled be just as high as any voltage spikes from LLC?
- If the peak voltages are the same from the increased voltages with vDroop enabled and the spikes from LLC - what's better for the CPU longevity - a higher constant voltage or a lower voltage with intermittent spikes?

What I do say about your article is that it will be a _lot_ better with proper references - then you're not just a random person on teh interwebs claiming stuff, but a random guy on teh interwebs who backs up his/her claims with solid data. Sure - I believe most of what you wrote, and I agree with most of your conclusions, but I am a skeptic by nature and an academic by profession, and I like to check the sources to get the correct information - both for what I say myself and for what others say. And - it would be a so much better article, linked so much more on the internet, if it has proper sources. Then it's not just "this guy claims that...", but rather "This guy claims that .. - and these links prove it!".
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's my problem as well. It doesn't appear that the second article tested the CPU correctly or at least by Intel standards. Thats is the reason I rejected it.


Maybe - but it is still very interesting information.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana, Could you start providing evidence via Oscilliscope? I could use my aged Hitachi V212 scope to provide LLC results myself as well, But he does have some points I myself would like to Clarify.

Regardless I'm sick again and trying to recover for the 3rd time this month >.< So I can't provide any results.

Also just got screwed by Kingston's Bait and Switch on the SSDnow V300 SSD's x.x
it's a shame to, used to LOVE Kingston, but that time may be over.


----------



## nievz

Guys have you seen this article? He used an oscilloscope to test LLC. http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/

Feels good to have an ASUS board after reading this


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Guys have you seen this article? He used an oscilloscope to test LLC. http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/
> 
> Feels good to have an ASUS board after reading this


Yes - it is the test Kana-Maru "rejects" - as for myself I'm not so sure.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> Yes - it is the test Kana-Maru "rejects" - as for myself I'm not so sure.


My view on vdroop is that Intel takes in consideration all kinds of boards, mostly the generic/OEM/cheap ones. These boards have to be compliant to intel's minimum specs to be safe. Now for us, we are using enthusiast class boards which I think are on an entirely different level. Looking at the article, I can rest assured that Asus had done a great job engineering their VRMs and that article was based on the S775 platform, so any advancement since then could only be a good thing.


----------



## Trondster

If - and that's a big "if": _If_ the motherboard manufacturers have managed a way to control the voltage spikes and severely reduce them when the CPU draws more current under load - _if_ they have managed to do so - then LLC would be a good thing. Then LLC would be a way to reduce (what then would be) unnecessary high idle voltages.
Is that true? Can they reduce the spikes? I do not know. I want to know, though.

If the motherboard manufacturers _aren't_ able to reduce the voltage spikes, I still have a question: if it is true that we need (about) the same load voltage for the same stability (as my own single test seems to suggest), and it is true (which Kana-Maru seems to claim) that both the VDroop and the spikes are of a magnitude of 0.05V - what would be better, if we say that the load voltage for a given stability for a given sample of a motherboard and CPU is 1.300V:
- To have VDroop enabled, with an idle voltage of 1.350V? (And maybe a 1.050V voltage when clocked down in a low-energy C-state.)
- ..Or to have LLC enabled, with both idle and load voltages of 1.300V, but with intermittent voltage spike of up to 1.350V when going up or down in CPU load. (And maybe a 1.000V voltage when clocked down in a low-energy C-state.)
A bit of theory crafting here, but I think you see my point. I'll post some test results when I've gotten my new overclock settings stable, so I'll be able to compare apples to apples.


----------



## nievz

It seems some high end equipment is needed to find the answer. I do not know much about oscilloscopes but the guy on the article from overclock.com seems to have a device sensitive enough to detect the jitters. My question is, how many milli seconds is the refresh rate of that oscilloscope when it logs the readings? is it a quick enough interval to catch any possible spikes in between logging? He did try 5 or 7 times and couldn't detect spikes.

http://www.overclock.net/t/591469/a-foray-into-load-line-calibration-oscilloscope-testing


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> Who says I don't believe most of your article?
> And - you forgot to quote the point of my rambling - my question "*Will the spike always be at 0.05V, or does it also for example depend on the voltage, or maybe the motherboard circuitry and components?*". To get an answer for that it would be so much better to check the actual sources. Do you have the answer?
> Sure - the vDroop definitely seems to be set at 0.05V - at least on my CPU, my motherboard and my voltages, but will any voltage spikes from my particular motherboard manufacturer also automatically be at 0.05V?


Yes my answer is = *Intel said so*. I didn't design these CPUs I only learned about them sometime ago. After seeing a lot of wrong info being passed around I decided to at least give some clarity in my article. I can't speak for MB manufactures or other motherboards since I only have one. I can only tell you what *Intel provides*.
Quote:


> But still I don't think you got _all_ the facts right - not if you believe that the combination of enabling LLC and adjusting the voltage accordingly won't lower idle voltages


Enabling LLC will do nothing to prevent negative and positive spikes.
Quote:


> They will - that's the entire point of the LLC - to keep the idle and load voltages similar. This is simple physics/electronics.


The entire point of LLC was to address enthusiast who ******* and complained about voltage and stability. The game changed and everyone wasn't happy. Usually the high end boards were worth the extra money and included the future. Then again I can't remember if lower end boards had the feature.....I don't believe so. Also it depends on how you overclock your build. You can do it old fashion way around the net or Intels way. I chose Intel that's all. LLC disabled still gets me high overclocks with lower temps.
Quote:


> What I do say about your article is that it will be a lot better with proper references - then you're not just a random person on teh interwebs claiming stuff, but a random guy on teh interwebs who backs up his/her claims with solid data.


That's why I said I will be updating the article with more info. Stay tuned. Secondly all the info is out there for you to read. I could easily and simply say "Prove me wrong". At the end of the day I inform people so they will hopefully make the best decisions when overclocking their 32nm [or 45nm I suppose]. I will always go by what the original engineers states. If you want to overclock a different type of way that's fine.

Now as far as voltages goes. I'll be discussing that on the other site. Perform all the test you like, but at the end of the day it's Intels CPU. There's no reason not to follow their guidelines and regulations. I've done the homework for you and the article will be updated soon. I don't have as much time as I used to have so bear with me.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes my answer is = *Intel said so*. I didn't design these CPUs I only learned about them sometime ago. After seeing a lot of wrong info being passed around I decided to at least give some clarity in my article. I can't speak for MB manufactures or other motherboards since I only have one. I can only tell you what *Intel provides*.


Great! _Where_ do they say so? Where do they provide that information?
The technical documents are full of thick, hard to read technical lingo - could you show us where in the wall of documentation and information they say so?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Enabling LLC will do nothing to prevent negative and positive spikes.


I know - and that's exactly what I wrote, too: "*LLC causes the idle voltages to be closer to the load voltages, but with increased risk of voltage spikes*".
But - enabling LLC (again - as long as you also adjust the voltage accordingly) _will_ enable a lower constant _idle_ voltage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The entire point of LLC was to address enthusiast who ******* and complained about voltage and stability. The game changed and everyone wasn't happy. Usually the high end boards were worth the extra money and included the future. Then again I can't remember if lower end boards had the feature.....I don't believe so. Also it depends on how you overclock your build. You can do it old fashion way around the net or Intels way. I chose Intel that's all. LLC disabled still gets me high overclocks with lower temps.


I'm still not sure you compared with and without LLC in the correct way - I'm not sure that you also reduced the voltage when enabling LLC - otherwise you weren't comparing apples to apples.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I could easily and simply say "Prove me wrong".


If you still think that LLC won't give a lower constant idle voltage, then yes, regarding that specific tidbit, I will. Or rather - I will run my experiment and report the results, whatever the results may be.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't have as much time as I used to have so bear with me.


Word - I know of that one way too well.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Great! _Where_ do they say so? Where do they provide that information?
> The technical documents are full of thick, hard to read technical lingo - could you show us where in the wall of documentation and information they say so?
> I know - and that's exactly what I wrote, too: "*LLC causes the idle voltages to be closer to the load voltages, but with increased risk of voltage spikes*".
> But - enabling LLC (again - as long as you also adjust the voltage accordingly) _will_ enable a lower constant _idle_ voltage.
> I'm still not sure you compared with and without LLC in the correct way - I'm not sure that you also reduced the voltage when enabling LLC - otherwise you weren't comparing apples to apples.
> If you still think that LLC won't give a lower constant idle voltage, then yes, regarding that specific tidbit, I will. Or rather - I will run my experiment and report the results, whatever the results may be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Word - I know of that one way too well.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Now as far as voltages goes. I'll be discussing that on the other site. Perform all the test you like, but at the end of the day it's Intels CPU. There's no reason not to follow their guidelines and regulations. I've done the homework for you and the article will be updated soon. I don't have as much time as I used to have so bear with me.


Check the article for updates in the future as well.


----------



## TopicClocker

Hey!

From my research into Nehalem, Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge, it seems that to match the performance of an i7 2600K you would need an i7 920 at 4.0GHz, and to match the performance of a i7 3930K or 3960X you would need a Xeon X56xx at 4.0GHz, is that about right? I've gathered this from various i7 3930K/3960X reviews and i7 2600K reviews that also include the performance of these chips.


----------



## Trondster

Cheers, all.

I have tested a bit more. I previously had my computer stable at 150BCLK, 29x CPU (4350MHz), 10xSPD(1500MHz) 6-6-5-15-1T, Uncore 20x (3000MHz), QPI 36x(5400MHz), DRAM 1.600V, IOH Core 1.100V, QPI/Vtt 1.275V, LLC enabled and a DVID +0.11250V, resulting in max load (and max idle) voltages of 1.344-1.360V.

(Edit: new paragraph) I previously did a couple of tests with LLC enabled and LLC disabled and posted my findings, concluding that LLC enabled gave lower idle voltages (when you adjust the voltage accordingly) by 0.032V, but higher IBT VH load voltages by 0.016V. However - I had only checked stability with IBT VH, and hadn't checked stability with neither Prime95 nor IBT at Maximum, and hadn't enabled EIST nor C-states either, and this last part caused the idle voltages and CPU multiplier to run at full tilt all the time. How would LLC enabled/disabled work out with EIST/C-states enabled, and how would Prime95 and IBT Max stability be? I was sure I would have to go up with DVID to get IBT Max and Prime95 stable, but would load and idle voltages (for the lowest stable DVID voltage) be different depending on the LLC settings? Sure - the maximum idle voltage was higher with vDroop (that's the nature of the beast), but how would the idle voltages be when the CPU clocked down into lower power states and correspondingly lowered the voltage? That's what I wanted to find out.

So, I have tested a bit more. I have previously spent some time trying (and failing) to get the bloody IMC and RAM stable with all six sticks at 1600 (and the rated 1866) MHz, but discovered that I could get it seemingly stable at 1500 MHz with only 1.500V DRAM and a QPI/Vtt of 1.195V. Woot - lower voltages means lower temperatures.








However, after running several tests, both with and without LLC, I found out that the voltage settings weren't Prime95 stable - I found out that my voltages were juuust a smidgen too low on QPI/Vtt. But after a bump up to a QPI/Vtt of 1.215V I was back in business - the LLC enabled settings were finally stable. I was now able to run new tests, making a true apples to apples comparison - try to find out which voltages and temps I would get with LLC disabled (and thus vDroop enabled) vs having LLC enabled (and vDroop disabled).









I first ran this setup (with LLC enabled) with a DVID of +0.07500V (1.312-1.328V), but IBT (Intel Burn Test) failed at VH (Very High), so I ramped up to a DVID of +0.09375 (giving voltages of 1.328-1.344V), but Prime95 failed after 7hrs 34 minutes. So - I ramped up again to DVID +0.11250, and it was finally stable - Prime95 ran successfully for 11hrs 30minutes. (I knew this DVID voltage was going be stable; I had previously run the previous stable setup with QPI/Vtt 1.275V and DRAM 1.600V for 31 hours - it was now the CPU voltage that was the limiting factor.)

So - _the setup_:
(Edit: Hardware): Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5, Xeon W3690, 6x2GB Corsair Dominator GT (7-8-7-20-2T 1866, if you care).
I used the following settings:
*Frequencies: 150BCLK, 29x CPU (4350MHz), 10xSPD(1500MHz) 6-6-5-15-1T, Uncore 20x (3000MHz), QPI 36x(5400MHz)
Voltages: DRAM 1.500V, IOH 1.100V, QPI/Vtt 1.215V, LLC enabled, DVID +0.11250V
C1, C3/C6/C7, EIST and Hyper Threading are all enabled (I'll reboot to BIOS and verify that later).*
When switching LLC off/on, the _only_ changes are the DVID voltage adjustment and the LLC Enabled/Disabled.

*LLC ENABLED:*
So - I started the computer. Idle voltages were *1.088-1.360V*:

I ran *IBT* (Intel Burn Test v2.54) at *Very High* x10, giving *load voltages of 1.344-1.360V* and temperatures of *68/68/63/63/69/68 °C* (and GFlops of 81.5-81.7).
 

As you can see, both the idle max and load max are at 1.360V - both idle and load voltages are 1.344-1.360V, due to the LLC being enabled. And - because I have EIST and the C-states enabled, the CPU often clocks down and goes down to a floor of 1.088V.

*LLC Disabled:*
I then disabled LLC. When I disable LLC, load voltage is going to be a lot lower with the same idle voltage, and thus I knew I would have to raise the voltage adjustment.
I started turning DVID up one notch - at +0.13125. This gave an idle voltage of 1.104-1.376V. I fired up Prime95, figuring that it would probably be the limiting factor, and sure enough, I got a BSOD 0x50. Up with the DVID.
I tried a DVID of +0.15000V, with idle voltages of 1.120V-1.392V. I ran Prime95 for 10 minutes, with Prime95 voltages of 1.328-1.344-1.360V. It ran OK, so I fired up 10x IBT VH, for load voltages of 1.328-1.344V - and it passed! I went on to Prime95, and it ran 19 hours 22 minutes stable (yaay!). But - when I fired up IBT at Maximum (10068MB) it failed already on the second go. So - the voltage would have go up even one more notch.

I then went for a *DVID of +0.16875V*, giving idle voltages of *1.136V-1.408V*. I ran *IBT Maximum (9936MB)* x10, giving *load voltages of 1.360-1.376V* and temps of *66/66/63/62/67/67 °C*:
 
As you can see here, the load voltages are markedly lower than the max idle voltages - that's how vDroop works.

Edit II: pictures of the completed run - GFlops scores of 57.9-58.4 GFlops:
 

To check the max temperatures and load, I ran *IBT VH x10*, giving *load voltages of 1.344-1.360V* and temps of *68/68/64/64/69/70 °C* (and GFlops of 81.3-81.7) - essentially the same voltages and temps (and GFlops) I got with my stable settings of LLC enabled.
 
Again we see that when IBT has finished, the max voltage jumps back up from 1.344-1.360V and up to 1.408V.

But - would my previous configuration with LLC enabled also be stable in IBT maximum?

*LLC Enabled pt II:*
I re*enabled LLC* and reduced the *DVID* back to *+0.11250V*. Idle voltages were 1.088-1.360V, with several dips down to 1.072V. I fired up IBT Maximum (10068MB), and as always with my LLC (at a given DVID) I got *load voltages of 1.344-1.360V*. The temps were *65/66/63/63/67/67 °C* - the same as I got with LLC disabled.

..Oh yes it was stable.








Edit II: With GFlops scores of 57.4-58.2.

*Conclusion*
So - there you have it, apples to apples: On my computer and my CPU, overclocked to 4350MHz, I need the same load voltages at the most extreme load (with IBT VH) to get my three tests (IBT VH x10, IBT Max x10 and Prime95 for many hours) stable, both with LLC enabled and LLC disabled - I get the same kind of GFlops score, the same temperatures and the same IBT VH load voltages.
But - this also means that the _idle_ voltages differ. The idle voltages were 1.136-1.408V with LLC disabled (and vDroop enabled), but only 1.088-1.360 (occasionally 1.072) with LLC enabled - a whopping 0.048V (to 0.064V) difference! And - the IBT Maximum (and presumably Prime95) ran mostly at one notch higher with LLC disabled - at 1.360-1.376V, versus 1.344-1.360V with LLC enabled.

Edit II: The IBT Max GFlops scores were _slightly_ higher with LLC disabled than with LLC enabled - this could be to circumstances (I have several times experiences higher/lower scores of up to +/- 1 GFlops on different reboots with the same settings), or it could be because the load voltage is slightly higher with LLC disabled during IBT Max runs.

So - you get the same load voltages when running the very most extreme test (IBT VH), but when idle or at lower loads, disabling LLC will give higher voltages - up to a difference of 0.048-0.064V at idle. And that is quite a bit!

So - certain forum members claims that enabling LLC will cause voltage spikes of up to 0.05V. Does it? And if so - is it dangerous? I don't know. I want to find out, though.
I do know, however, that for my overclock on my CPU and my motherboard I can choose between enabling LLC, and maybe risk potential spikes of 0.05V when going down to a lower idle load - or disable LLC, and get a voltage 0.05V higher at idle _all the time_.
Do I want a potential extra spike of 0.05V, or do I want a surefire constant idle voltage delta of +0.05? For me that question is simple to answer. Your mileage may vary - your answer may be different than mine, or it may be the same. Or - maybe your CPU and/or motherboard behaves differently. I do not know - I have only got this one X58 motherboard.









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



When Intel has stated that the max voltage for my CPU is 1.4V - do I want to run my CPU at 1.344-1.360V, which maybe may get an occasional spike up to 1.4V - or do I want my idle voltage to frequently and for longer periods go up to 1.408V - all the time? I'll leave it up to the reader to guess as to what my own answer to this particular dilemma might be.



But anyway - when enabling LLC - _do remember to lower your voltage at the same time_ - the same idle voltage will give a higher load voltage when LLC is enabled, and thus you must reduce it to get the same load voltage.

*And thus - as long as you adjust the voltage accordingly when enabling/disabling LLC (for my overclock it was a difference of 0.048V measured in Windows and 0.05625V chosen in the BIOS), enabling LLC will give you lower voltages.*

(Edit: specifying obvious conclusion And yes, due to the danger of potential voltage spikes, I will _of course_ tolerate higher idle voltages with LLC disabled than with LLC enabled. Idle voltages of 1.408V with LLC enabled? _I don't think so!_ Not on my rig, anyway! Higher idle voltages than 1.408V with LLC disabled? Nope. Don't want it. Even 1.408V is a bit too high.

So - any comments/questions to (the results of) my little test?









Cheers,
Trondster

Some background information:
- When Windows has started, my motherboard and software reports CPU vCore voltages in steps of 0.016V. As the BIOS has voltage steps of 0.00625V, I usually go up and down three of those BIOS steps at a time, giving steps of 0.01875V, which is the closest I can get to the 0.016V measured steps. If I find that a step of 0.01875V takes me two 0.016 steps up when checking the voltages in Windows, I usually reboot and try a smaller step instead. But - this happened not to be the case in the tests above.
- On my computer, IBT at VH (Very High) generates the most amount of heat - it generates more heat than IBT at Maximum. So - that's why IBT VH gives the lowest voltages with LLC disabled and generates the highest temps.
- I have found that IBT gives lower GFlops scores when I have just ran Prime95 for many, many hours, so in my tests I always boot after a Prime95 run, to keep all the scores and results more consistent.
- Both CPU-Z and EasyTune6 report the correct voltages, but they have different polling intervals. When taking screenshots I have tried to get shots of one showing the lowest idle voltage and the other one showing the highest idle voltage, to get both in several screenshots. The voltages do vary all the time when idle...


----------



## KingT

Here's my *i7 4930K* @ 4.2Ghz in Cinebench R15:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Maybe you can compare it to your system.

BTW great thread.









CHEERS..


----------



## Trondster

(Updated my little "test article" above with a couple of paragraphs and corrected a few typos. See what you think!







)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KingT*
> 
> Here's my *i7 4930K* @ 4.2Ghz in Cinebench R15:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you can compare it to your system.
> 
> BTW great thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CHEERS..


Thanks. I'm sure that will help some users who are wondering about their CPU performance. From my benchmarks there seems to be approx. 9%-10% performance difference.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Edit:

Dang Double Post.


----------



## KingT

Here's 4930K @ 4.2GHz in Cinebench R 11.5, it outperforms X5660 @ 4.8GHz. (score 12.61 vs 12.38)


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







CHEERS..


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KingT*
> 
> Here's 4930K @ 4.2GHz in Cinebench R 11.5, it outperforms X5660 @ 4.8GHz. (score 12.61 vs 12.38)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CHEERS..


That's cool! How does that CPU perform at stock against an overclocked X5660?
How high does the Xeon have to be overclocked to come close to matching it?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KingT*
> 
> Here's 4930K @ 4.2GHz in Cinebench R 11.5, it outperforms X5660 @ 4.8GHz. (score 12.61 vs 12.38)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CHEERS..


Actually my highest was 12.40 pts for the highest with only 1670Mhz CAS9.

Also since you brought more i7-4930K [X79] results in the topic I'll add my own data from HWBOT to give X5xx and potential users more X58 performance comparisons:

*wPrime 32m:*
4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2400Mhz* = 3.727 sec *[3.16%]*
4930K @ 4.6Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2183Mhz* = 3.720 sec *[3.36%]*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 3.854 sec [0.0%]

*wPrime 1024m:*
4930K @ 4.838Ghz[1.53v] DDR3-*2669Mhz* = 1min 40sec 281ms *[7.9%]*
*X5660* @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 1min 48sec 290ms *[0.0%]*
4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2400Mhz* = 1min 48sec 326ms [-0.03%]

X5660 beating a highly clocked 4930K [above] is weird and hilarious at the same time. It was only by 0.03%.

*WinRar 4.20v:*
4930K @ 4.829Ghz[*1.64v]* *DDR3-2576Mhz* = 17,099 KB/s *[3.89%]*
X5660 @ *4.6Ghz*[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 16,458 KB/s [0.0%]

IIRC that's WinRar 4.20v #1 in the world by the way.

*HWBOT Prime:*
4930K @ 4.86[n/a] *DDR3-2134Mhz* = 7441.92 pps *[12.94%]*
4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.58v] DDR3-1866Mhz = 7283.57 pps *[10.5%]*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 6588.69 *[0.0%]*

*FryBench:*
4930K @ 4.748[1.472v] *DDR3-2667Mh*z = 2min 37sec 0ms *[8.43%]*
4930K @ 4.86[n/a] *DDR3-2137Mhz* = 2min 38sec 0ms *[7.98%]*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 2min 57sec 0ms [0.0%]

So yes for $50-$80 I feel that everyone X58 user could potentially benefit especially at high OCs. Every CPU is different and X79 is a side grade anyways. The performance jump isn't enough to make me run out and spend $500+ on a 3930K\4930K. Let's not for about the RAM and MB. That's the money I was planning to spend on my GTX 970s right there lol. I've since decided to keep my GTX 670s

Now for gamers.

*Realbench V2:*
4930K @ 4.9[1.50v] *DDR3-2400Mhz* + *2x GTX 780 Ti OC 1270Mhz* = 109,250 points *[19.6%]*

X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz + *2x GTX 670 2GB Ref. OC 1006Mhz* = 91,312 points [0.0%]

I'm pretty sure if I would've thrown 2 overclocked GTX 970's in my build I would change the 91,312 pretty quickly. Since the GTX 670 is still doing great I've decided to keep them a little while longer. That's my own RealBench V2 test by the way. I haven't re-tested with the latest drivers. I still feel this is enough info for anyone wondering.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Actually my highest was 12.40 pts for the highest with only 1670Mhz CAS9.
> 
> Also since you brought more i7-4930K [X79] results in the topic I'll add my own data from HWBOT to give X5xx and potential users more X58 performance comparisons:
> 
> *wPrime 32m:*
> 4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2400Mhz* = 3.727 sec *[3.16%]*
> 4930K @ 4.6Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2183Mhz* = 3.720 sec *[3.36%]*
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 3.854 sec [0.0%]
> 
> *wPrime 1024m:*
> 4930K @ 4.838Ghz[1.53v] DDR3-*2669Mhz* = 1min 40sec 281ms *[7.9%]*
> *X5660* @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 1min 48sec 290ms *[0.0%]*
> 4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.47v] DDR3-*2400Mhz* = 1min 48sec 326ms [-0.03%]
> 
> X5660 beating a highly clocked 4930K [above] is weird and hilarious at the same time. It was only by 0.03%.
> 
> *WinRar 4.20v:*
> 4930K @ 4.829Ghz[*1.64v]* *DDR3-2576Mhz* = 17,099 KB/s *[3.89%]*
> X5660 @ *4.6Ghz*[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 16,458 KB/s [0.0%]
> 
> IIRC that's WinRar 4.20v #1 in the world by the way.
> 
> *HWBOT Prime:*
> 4930K @ 4.86[n/a] *DDR3-2134Mhz* = 7441.92 pps *[12.94%]*
> 4930K @ 4.8Ghz[1.58v] DDR3-1866Mhz = 7283.57 pps *[10.5%]*
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 6588.69 *[0.0%]*
> 
> *FryBench:*
> 4930K @ 4.748[1.472v] *DDR3-2667Mh*z = 2min 37sec 0ms *[8.43%]*
> 4930K @ 4.86[n/a] *DDR3-2137Mhz* = 2min 38sec 0ms *[7.98%]*
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz = 2min 57sec 0ms [0.0%]
> 
> So yes for $50-$80 I feel that everyone X58 user could potentially benefit especially at high OCs. Every CPU is different and X79 is a side grade anyways. The performance jump isn't enough to make me run out and spend $500+ on a 3930K\4930K. Let's not for about the RAM and MB. That's the money I was planning to spend on my GTX 970s right there lol. I've since decided to keep my GTX 670s
> 
> Now for gamers.
> 
> *Realbench V2:*
> 4930K @ 4.9[1.50v] *DDR3-2400Mhz* + *2x GTX 780 Ti OC 1270Mhz* = 109,250 points *[19.6%]*
> 
> X5660 @ 4.8Ghz[1.46v] DDR3-1670Mhz + *2x GTX 670 2GB Ref. OC 1006Mhz* = 91,312 points [0.0%]
> 
> I'm pretty sure if I would've thrown 2 overclocked GTX 970's in my build I would change the 91,312 pretty quickly. Since the GTX 670 is still doing great I've decided to keep them a little while longer. That's my own RealBench V2 test by the way. I haven't re-tested with the latest drivers. I still feel this is enough info for anyone wondering.


Since I do not bench much, I'm only interested in the gaming performance








Also, I think the X-565x is already a darn good cpu considering it is a product introduced all the way back in year 2010, while the 4930K was introduced not long ago at 2013.


----------



## nievz

I got 971 points on C15 on an [email protected] with HT ON. with HT off, 770 pts.

My advice for gaming, turn off HT. Physical cores are always better than logical threads. I get more FPS with HT off.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've seen otherwise personally. My bro went up to 105 - 106Mhz and killed his on-board audio. During another high X58 overclock going above 105 killed his SSDs. I've personally had PCI-E experiences and none of them were good. I leave it alone on my OCs


Can you explain why and link to any technical review or documents? It doesn't make sense overclocking 10% killing an hardware. I've been running 110 for a week and not a single crash playing COD, BF4, ACU, FC4. Moreover, it's not overvolted. Anything i can find on the web is inconclusive + Asus doesn't give a warning in the bios for this setting. Also i have had no sign of instability on my peripherals.


----------



## Trondster

I haven't seen technical documents about overclocking the PCI-E bus, but have read several warnings all over the net.
http://www.overclock.net/t/653075/overclocking-pcie
http://www.overclock.net/t/1344748/pcie-frequency-overclock
http://www.overclock.net/t/914546/who-is-overclocking-pcie-frequency

You did report some instability over the network - did you overclock your PCI-E at the time?


----------



## nievz

No, I had that issue for a while. The network instability wasn't due to PCIE lane oc'd. I just needed to lower my oc to 4.2ghz and it never reoccured after 3x trying to unpack the same file over the network. Somehow, 4.4ghz corrupts network transfers, i'm sure it's something in my settings that i haven't figured out yet. At 4.4, i experimented up to 1.412vcore and the problem still occurs, but at 4.2 at 1.32 it's stable. I am now keeping that particular file on the network indefinitely for testing stability. It is an highly compressed file (35GB in a one 12GB file).


----------



## BasTijs

I've tried to install a X5675 in a X58 MSI Eclipse SLI but no luck, not getting any beeps







It all works fine with my 920...
Does it need a microcode update or something? And is someone able to do this?


----------



## nievz

In terms of Cinebench R15 scores, mine is as fast as a 4770K @ 4.7ghz at 4.2ghz http://www.overclock.net/t/1431032/top-cinebench-r15-cpu-scores


----------



## BasTijs

I solved my MSI eclipse motherboard problem by inserting the microcodes for the x5675 with MMtools. I also noticed there was a newer/beta bios version on a german msi forum that had the microcodes in it when comparing it to my own (that should have been the latest acc. to msi live update software).

http://valid.x86.fr/73vbuq


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yo!

Guys, I just scored an x5660 to go in my long suffering Gigabyte EX58-UD3R V1.6. With the newest BIOS it works sweet.

I was reading this thread for a few weeks before I bought the chip. It will be for gaming [also with 7970 at 1.18GHz] and also work - like Raytracing and FEA.

Idea47bAlternativeRender.jpg 878k .jpg file


I have previously been running an i7 920 at 4 in that rig, so I have cooling and PSU capacity.

I am intending to to the overclock in stages, as-per Miahallen's guides for x58.

I have tried a quick and dirty method and got this, though never tested for longer to ensure true stability.

Can I get a few users to post their BIOS and Software [CPU-Z, Realtemp etc] readings [VOLTAGES, TIMINGS, TEMPERATURES] to refer-to when setting this thing up properly? I want to hit 4.4+ Stable, and 4ish for 24/7.

I shall be in communication and help contribute to the thread as I go.

Thanks!


----------



## gofastserstripe

Overclocking PCIE is well known to break stuff. Dunno why, but warnings about that go back as far as x58, if not before.


----------



## BasTijs

Would be good to have a how to get started guide for newbs like me








With the i7 920 I could easily increase the bclk, but with the X5675 it seems much harder.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BasTijs*
> 
> Would be good to have a how to get started guide for newbs like me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With the i7 920 I could easily increase the bclk, but with the X5675 it seems much harder.


Keep your Uncore no more than 2x the speed of the DRAM frequency.

e.g.

DDR 1600

'Uncore = 3200 or <'


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yeah, that seems to help. Ta.

Now have uncore on auto Volts [maybe- BIOS reports 1.3V], QPI 7.4GT/S and 3200 memory controller Hz on 1600MHz Ram. 3.0GHZ locked 200*15


----------



## Mike486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Yeah, that seems to help. Ta.
> 
> Now have uncore on auto Volts [maybe- BIOS reports 1.3V], QPI 7.4GT/S and 3200 memory controller Hz on 1600MHz Ram. 3.0GHZ locked 200*15


Nothing to offer, other than to ask - did you type your username in a hurry dude?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Very funny. It's the character limit, dude









EDIT.

Arse.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Interestingly, increasing the Uncore speed slightly reduces my 3D Mark physics score.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Interestingly, increasing the Uncore speed slightly reduces my 3D Mark physics score.


You get a slightly increased bandwidth with higher uncore speed - but adjusting voltage and uncore when on the border line of stability you may get small variations in benchmarks.


----------



## BasTijs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Keep your Uncore no more than 2x the speed of the DRAM frequency.
> 
> e.g.
> 
> DDR 1600
> 
> 'Uncore = 3200 or <'


Uncore seems to be greyed out, but I found the problem. I had to set the RAM timings a bit less tight. Made a stable OC @ 4.4 after an evening of playing around:


----------



## Lunarlegends

Hello,

i just got my first xeon x5675 and installed it on an asus rampage III gene with 12gb g.skill sniper.
It runs great so far, the only issue i have is, that im unable to set my ram speed to 1600mhz, no matter the voltage (1,5-1,66v) or settings.
The ram specs are DDR3-1866, CL9-10-9-28 (1,5v), but the pc wont boot unless the ram is set to 1333 or lower.
Im not sure if its the xeon restricting the frequency, since the official support is only up to 1333.
For the time being i managed to tighten the timings at 1333 to 6-7-6-18 (1,5v), but id really like to get it to 1600 if possible.
I also have a htpc with a xeon x5570 with 12gb g.skill ripjaws on an asus rampage III forumla, which runs fine at 1600 7-7-7-18 (1,5v), which makes me think, why it works with the x5570, but not with the x5675.
Also tried the ripjaws with the x5675 setup but same result as the sniper, the pc wont boot at 1600 frequency.
Cpu is clocked at 3,66ghz (22x/166blk/1,15v) for the time being.
If someone could give me a hint of what could be wrong, or an explanation, why it is the way it is, id be really grateful.


----------



## bill1024

I have the Rampage 3 Gene with a x5660 and I can boot 21 x 200 for 4.2ghz with 1600 ram.
I have 3 x2gb Gskill 9 9 9 25 1.65v
What is your uncore? I have to run mine at 2x ram speed or one click under 2x ram and I have it at 1.3v
I normaly run 23x175 for a 4ghz 24/7 overclock. Ram is in the 144x range 8 9 8 24
You should be able to post at 1600 with your hardware.


----------



## Trondster

What is your Uncore speed? It must be at least 1.5x your RAM speed.
It could be that you need more QPI/Vtt voltage to get the RAM stable at that speed.


----------



## Lunarlegends

Thanks for the replies, i tried both uncore x1,5 and x2 and also qpi/vtt from 1,2/1,25/1,3.
Mysteriously it started with 1600mhz now this morning, with the multi set to 23x.
But somehow the timings got really bad, im only able to get it stable at 9-9-9-24,
the lowest i can start it is 7-8-7-18, but gets me alot of explorer errors and bluescreens,
same with 8-8-8-20, increasing ram voltage didnt help either.
1,5x or 2x uncore and different qpi/vtt settings didnt affect the stability at lower latencies either,
so its running stable at 1600mhz (9-9-9-24) with 1,5x (2400mhz) uncore and 1,2 qpi/vtt for now.
Somehow i feel im better off with the 1333mhz (6-7-6-18) setting, if im not able to get better latencies at 1600mhz.
Also i read in a guide, that its better for westmere to set the uncore to 1,5x, than 2x like for bloomfield,
not sure if it makes any difference.


----------



## Lunarlegends

after taking a look at bill1024's timings, i also managed to get 8-9-8-24 running stable,
but overall 1333 CL6 (6/1333 = 0,0045) seems to be the better deal, than 1600 CL8 (8/1600 = 0,005).
Getting 1600 CL7 (7/1600 = 0,0043), like on my other build, would have been perfect,
but i guess the gene with the x5600 series doesnt want to go at it, like the formula with the x5500 series.








Now im thinking, if i should swap the the x5570 with the second x5675 (since i got a matched pair of them for a great deal), as a further upgrade for the htpc, since it also might have better temps.


----------



## mistax

so i've been contemplating upgrading from my 970 to a 4790k for more single core performance in cpu heavy games like wow/heroes/ and starcraft, but i remember this thread. From what i am reading the xeon has comparable performance to the 4770k. Was wondering if there is much more headroom if i change from my 970 to a x5660 on overclock and how well my rampage fomula iii would do vs a sabertooth for overclocking.


----------



## Trondster

I have six sticks of 2GB RAM, mixed from two old 7-8-7-20-2T 1866MHz kits - I've been unable to run them stable faster than 1500MHz, but then again I'm able to run them at 1500MHz at 6-6-5-15-1T with only 1.5V, so I guess I'm quite happy with that.


----------



## Lunarlegends

Now this is intressting, i just installed the other xeon x5675 in my htpc and i cant run my ripjaws at 1600 7-7-7-18 CR1 anymore, they perform even worse than the snipers at 1600 8-9-8-24 CR1 now and a stable boot is only possible at 1600 9-9-9-24 CR1.
At 1333 the ripjaws do a stable boot at 7-7-7-18 CR1 while the snipers can at 6-7-6-18 CR1.
At first i thought, it was because the formula would perform better at ram overclock than the gene, but now im sure its the cpu that causes the difference. It seems the xeon x5500 series performs better at ram overclock than the x5600 series does, might be thanks to a different memory controller architecture in the smaller 32nm die. On a side note the g.skill sniper seems to overclock better than the red ripjaws does and here i thought the ripjaws were the better ones at overclocking, but the sniper is ahead in terms of performance together with a westmere cpu. Overall the big increase in cpu performance, combined with lower voltage needs and lower temperatures thanks to the smaller die, makes up for the little loss in overclocked ram performance. Both xeon x5675 are running stable at 3,66ghz with 1,125v now, further undervolting might be possible.


----------



## Lunarlegends

As for the formula and sabertooth, i think they perform quite identical with overclocking, but i didnt push either to the limit, since im more after a stable 24/7 balanced overclock/undervolt setting and 3,66ghz is more than enough for daily needs. A friend of mine uses the sabertooth with a xeon x5650 at 3,66ghz and it runs with identical settings as the formula and gene im using. Judging from the temperatures and low voltage settings, theres plenty of room left for further overclocking. The main difference would be, the formula is able to do 3-way sli, with better audio and intel lan chipset, while the sabertooth only offers 2-way sli and realtek audio/lan solutions, aside from that, the bios have different layouts.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

3.6ghz is good enough, although I think your issue is a weak x5600. We have plenty of X5650's and up that run ram as high as 1866 or more. My Ripjaws barely make it into the 1800's but I see no benefit from it, not a benefit I care about anyway. I get better results working on the timings as you already did. Mine do 1600 at 1.5v and possibly could go lower but I have not tried it. All this on a Rampage III Extreme and a X5650 at 20x200.

So, I just think its the CPU's IMC you have that is limiting your ram overclocks. This does not mean it is defective though.


----------



## GENXLR

My X5650 can't make it above 1700MHZ on ram without throwing memtest errors.


----------



## Lunarlegends

Its not about the max frequency, i could go higher with the speed , but i simply didnt, because i dont see any real benefit higher than 1600, but i cant get the latencies as low as on the x5500 series on the x5600 series with same frequency. Both the sniper and ripjaws are able to run 1866 at 1,5v as well, if i increase the timings further, im sure they work at even higher speeds too. The sniper nets the better latencies though.


----------



## mistax

Would the only worthwhile time to upgrade to 4790k be if you plays games like guild wars, wow, Starcraft, and heroes where they are cpu bound instead of gpu?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mistax*
> 
> Would the only worthwhile time to upgrade to 4790k be if you plays games like guild wars, wow, Starcraft, and heroes where they are cpu bound instead of gpu?


If you run BOINC or Folding at home it would be worthwhile since they would take advantage of the new instructions missing in the x58 chips.
From my "memory" VTX and VTX2 instructions. Primegrid is much, much faster with those.

EDIT: AVX and AVX2 I do believe are the correct instructions missing in the x58 1366 chips.


----------



## GENXLR

no game has yet been bottlenecked my my X5650 yet


----------



## Moparman

My [email protected] is running strong with tri sli 4gb 680s. I wouldn't upgrade if I didn't have a killer setup to go to.


----------



## GENXLR

That double negative.... my brain hurts.


----------



## mistax

Alright, cause I picked up a 4790k from ire but have yet to open it. Couldn't justify haswell so I opted to skip it. I'm playing at 2560x1440 and I can never keep constant 60 with my 4.2 970.


----------



## Firehawk

Best way to answer that is to have monitoring software running while you game. If your framerate drops, Alt-Tab out and see why. GPU at 100% means you're GPU limited. Same for CPU.

1440p is a demanding resolution for one card in some games.


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Best way to answer that is to have monitoring software running while you game. If your framerate drops, Alt-Tab out and see why. GPU at 100% means you're GPU limited. Same for CPU.
> 
> 1440p is a demanding resolution for one card in some games.


This is the best way to find out what is bottlenecking or limiting performance.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Right - I'm going to start overclocking from today using

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/

Please can some people post frequencies, voltages and temps they use and see?!

I'm not just being lazy - this is a 245 page thread and it's nigh-on impossible to find anything easily.

Also - can people confirm these maximum/limit voltages for me:

80C is safe 24/7 limit [100=always autothrottle and will prevent damage?]

1.35 VCore [intel spec] - could be exceed a little with enough cooling, perhaps 1.4ish

1.35 VTT [uncore, memory controller, QPI] -- ESPECIALLY WITH RAM:UNCORE AT 1:2***** YES? [I tried to read the techdoc, but it's impossible to calculate I think - I would expect to run my Uncore at 3200 24/7 unless that's a bad idea or the bench figures actually drop as I raise it.

RAM:VTT <0.5V [shouldn't be an issue for me with 1.5V RAM I think]

Max Multiplier available 23 or 24 with Turbo ON

I am aiming for a safe 24/7 overclock, perhaps 4GHZ? i am also aiming for a safe Bench/Gaming overclock [hotter, but still 100% safe] - perhaps 4.4+GHz

Please - some feedback?

Thanks.


----------



## mistax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Best way to answer that is to have monitoring software running while you game. If your framerate drops, Alt-Tab out and see why. GPU at 100% means you're GPU limited. Same for CPU.
> 
> 1440p is a demanding resolution for one card in some games.


hmm at most only 2 of my core are around 30-40% during games. my 290 is hovering between 80-100% gpu usage


----------



## gofastserstripe

That looks like GPU limitations, yes.

Try overclocking the GPU using the AMD Catalyst utility and watch your framerate. Very linear clock/FPS scaling would confirm it, though this may be complicated by cooler limitations..... so....

What are your GPU temps in game?

Is is a reference-cooled card?


----------



## mistax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> That looks like GPU limitations, yes.
> 
> Try overclocking the GPU using the AMD Catalyst utility and watch your framerate. Very linear clock/FPS scaling would confirm it, though this may be complicated by cooler limitations..... so....
> 
> What are your GPU temps in game?
> 
> Is is a reference-cooled card?


its a asus 290x DC2. Already overclocked to 1100. Hmmm does this mean i should consider crossfire?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Crossfire should help [up to 2x performance in theory], but with those cards it's worth investigating whether you're really holding the boost clocks during gaming.

Run MSI Afterburner or a similar program which can record the clocks and check it.

I'm not over familliar with these fiddly Boost settings, I use a Sapphire 7970 at 1160 and the clocks hold during gaming. I increased the power budget in the catalyst utility. I think that if I hadn't the clocks might reduce themselves.

Crossfire will also require shedloads of PSU power.


----------



## gofastserstripe

I have another question, actually.

How do people prevent OS corruption when testing overclocks? I have a lot of things I need to use my PC for in the coming months, and a borked OS would be quite an issue.

I would happily use a Linux distro, but I don't think there are any with proper core temp monitoring facilities.

Tips?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> I have another question, actually.
> 
> How do people prevent OS corruption when testing overclocks? I have a lot of things I need to use my PC for in the coming months, and a borked OS would be quite an issue.
> 
> I would happily use a Linux distro, but I don't think there are any with proper core temp monitoring facilities.
> 
> Tips?


You could make an ISO/backup of your computer right after you install the OS and monitoring software.
Do the OC and get it set where you want it, good and stable.
Then do a restore from your back up. Then you know all the files are in good condition.

I run Linux Ubuntu on a few systems and I can't find good monitoring programs for Intel.
Psensor works ok for temps and fan speed but finding clock speed is sketchy at best from what I have found.

I have had better luck with AMD monitoring software in Linux, but it will not work for Intel.


----------



## GENXLR

The method mentioned for determining bottle necks doesn't help :/ my Workstation's GPU doesn't hit near 80% gpu or CPU, but the games are around 30-45fps while my main rig is at 60.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> EXACTLY OCmember, that's what I was getting at. Since these Xeon CPUs will sell easily on the X58 platform some people will purchase a couple of them. They are cheap and they will make at least 90% or more of their money back very easily. They are basically abusing the hell out of these CPUs while digging for the "golden chip". Shoving vCore into the CPUs more than likely. If it doesn't hit a high OC then they'll re-sell them to whomever will buy them. I usually buy from a company or a seller who has tons of Xeons. There will always be defectives with anything in electronics for sure, but you have less of a headache when you figure out what resellers are doing. I doubt if a seller with 50 - 200+ will be digging for the best CPU. I've been trying to warn people to stop buying from sellers who own 1-5 or some other small number. They price is good, but the CPUs probably won't hit 4.2Ghz - 4.4Ghz easily [which is why they are reselling them]. Just saying.


Stahp telling all my secrets!


----------



## gofastserstripe

What GPU and what games? If it's a Workstation GPU [FirePro/Quadro] it might not behave the same way, especially running games. Mostly this is due to the way the drivers work. Gaming GPUs focus on fast calculations, workstation ones focus on accuracy.


----------



## GENXLR

Most any game I've ran on it thats intensive. It runs source games no problem, sometimes Warthunder gets 60, and others like World of tanks, or Starcraft or similar games will fall in fps, no matter what quality is used. It does this no matter if i use my GTX 480, 580 or 660ti, and my Tesla C2070's seem to perform better than my other GPU's in this rig. It's so annoying, could it be a ram/bus bottleneck?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> You could make an ISO/backup of your computer right after you install the OS and monitoring software.
> Do the OC and get it set where you want it, good and stable.
> Then do a restore from your back up. Then you know all the files are in good condition.


Cheers, if I have enough space free I'll do that. I have a pile of old small drives all full of stuff that people have given to me for storage, and what was my main backup 1TB drive now contains 500 movies, which complicated things. In fact it's got so out of hand I may have to buy another big drive and simplify it all as I keep deleting important things by mistake.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Most any game I've ran on it thats intensive. It runs source games no problem, sometimes Warthunder gets 60, and others like World of tanks, or Starcraft or similar games will fall in fps, no matter what quality is used. It does this no matter if i use my GTX 480, 580 or 660ti, and my Tesla C2070's seem to perform better than my other GPU's in this rig. It's so annoying, could it be a ram/bus bottleneck?


Well, I don't know the entire situation [I'm a little late to this party and seem to have started badly by getting my own damn username wrong] but if you have an overclock, perhaps you've tripped the QPI Slow mode or something?

Try reverting to stock clocks and retest. The only thing to do in this circumstance is to eliminate possibilities, reduce the complexity of the issue.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Jebus, things fall off the page quick on this thread!

A plea for help:

Please can some people post frequencies, voltages and temps they use and see?!

I'm not just being lazy - this is a 245 page thread and it's nigh-on impossible to find anything easily.

Also - can people confirm these maximum/limit voltages for me:

80C is safe 24/7 limit [100=always autothrottle and will prevent damage?]

1.35 VCore [intel spec] - could be exceed a little with enough cooling, perhaps 1.4ish

1.35 VTT [uncore, memory controller, QPI] -- ESPECIALLY WITH RAM:UNCORE AT 1:2***** YES? [I tried to read the techdoc, but it's impossible to calculate I think - I would expect to run my Uncore at 3200 24/7 unless that's a bad idea or the bench figures actually drop as I raise it.

RAM:VTT <0.5V [shouldn't be an issue for me with 1.5V RAM I think]

Max Multiplier available 23 or 24 with Turbo ON

I am aiming for a safe 24/7 overclock, perhaps 4GHZ? i am also aiming for a safe Bench/Gaming overclock [hotter, but still 100% safe] - perhaps 4.4+GHz

Please - some feedback?

Thanks.


----------



## GENXLR

My rig is older, it's not X58 based, is Seaburg 5400 based, and now, slow mode was a phenomena we observed when the CPU had to little voltage. If i run my Workstation at stock speeds, gaming becomes unplayable. Bus speed? XD


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Jebus, things fall off the page quick on this thread!
> 
> A plea for help:
> 
> Please can some people post frequencies, voltages and temps they use and see?!
> 
> I'm not just being lazy - this is a 245 page thread and it's nigh-on impossible to find anything easily.
> 
> Also - can people confirm these maximum/limit voltages for me:
> 
> 80C is safe 24/7 limit [100=always autothrottle and will prevent damage?]
> 
> 1.35 VCore [intel spec] - could be exceed a little with enough cooling, perhaps 1.4ish
> 
> 1.35 VTT [uncore, memory controller, QPI] -- ESPECIALLY WITH RAM:UNCORE AT 1:2***** YES? [I tried to read the techdoc, but it's impossible to calculate I think - I would expect to run my Uncore at 3200 24/7 unless that's a bad idea or the bench figures actually drop as I raise it.
> 
> RAM:VTT <0.5V [shouldn't be an issue for me with 1.5V RAM I think]
> 
> Max Multiplier available 23 or 24 with Turbo ON
> 
> I am aiming for a safe 24/7 overclock, perhaps 4GHZ? i am also aiming for a safe Bench/Gaming overclock [hotter, but still 100% safe] - perhaps 4.4+GHz
> 
> Please - some feedback?
> 
> Thanks.


Well for me and my three x58 computers with x5660 CPUs 175 x 23 = 4ghz, I have the CPU V at 1.3v, the uncore at 1.3 - 1.35V
My ram three sticks at 1.65v
Ram speed is around 1440mhz or so 9 9 9 25 2T my uncore is 2x ram speed or one notch under 2x ram speed.
I do have it set for no vdroop on the cpu

My computers run 24/7 100% load running BOINC and are used for TV recording like a DVR so being 100% stable and I would like long life out of these systems. 4ghz seems to be plenty fast and the ram speed I do not see much difference from 14xx to 1600 anyway.


----------



## meganerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> You could make an ISO/backup of your computer right after you install the OS and monitoring software.
> Do the OC and get it set where you want it, good and stable.
> Then do a restore from your back up. Then you know all the files are in good condition.
> 
> I run Linux Ubuntu on a few systems and I can't find good monitoring programs for Intel.
> Psensor works ok for temps and fan speed but finding clock speed is sketchy at best from what I have found.
> 
> I have had better luck with AMD monitoring software in Linux, but it will not work for Intel.


i7z works great for me. Seems to be in the default Ubuntu repositories, probably the default Debian ones too (which means any related distro should have it packaged as i7z). If RHEL/Fedora et al. do not, check the EPEL repositories.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Thanks Bill/Meganerd

Next question - temp differences.

I'm seeing a spreat of about 10C between the hottest and the coolest cores. Is this normal?

At 3GHZ 1.056vloaded 3200MHz Uncore locked I get [with Intel Burn Test :Maximum]

48/48/47/42/52/50C and 56GFlops.

Is this normal temps/difference and gflops for that speed?

My cooler isn't very flat, and the chip's heatspreader might have a little bump/scrape on it too, but if the temps are normal I'm not going to bother trying to fix it. And I'm damn well not lapping a cooler again - it wobbled about and ended-up bowed, then I had to get someone to correct it by hand. I used a grinding machine, but the damn thing moved about.

I really don't want to have to replace the cooler!


----------



## GENXLR

i'm at 82C full load at 4ghz, ur fine. 4Ghz sees 76 Gflops btw


----------



## gofastserstripe

Cheers. The temp spread is bothering me, is ten degrees normal?


----------



## u3b3rg33k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Cheers. The temp spread is bothering me, is ten degrees normal?


it can be. just base your OC on the highest temp reported.


----------



## bill1024

Most people see the temp difference, so yeah it's normal.

AT 4ghz with a 4 heat pipe Intel cooler I was at 72c-74c-ish prime95 Now with a H90,H70,H80 Hydro cooler, I am at 56c-ish.
I just ran IBT for the first time and at 4ghz I was at 82,83,84, depending if I did it what level I did it at high, max.
So I guess that is good. I set it for 10 passes and only let it do 5 or 6 passes at each setting.
That was on an EVGA FTW3, 6gb 2x3, 8 9 8 25 2T,1440ish mhz 23 x175 4ghz CPU, 2 x ram is my uncore setting.


----------



## Lunarlegends

one of the cores (the 5th) on one of my xeons is also always about 6-10 degree cooler than the others are. While the others are between 25-30, it stays between 20-24 in idle mode. Guess such things happen sometimes.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Thanks for all the help everyone. The reason I'm wondering about the temps is *there's no temp sensors outside the cores.* I also lapped my i7, and somehow it fitted the heat sink fine, but with this chip, I'm worried that if it is not making good contact it'll cook. I could buy another CNPS10X Extreme, but they still go for £40 or more, so I'm wondering if I should...

GENXLR, I'm sorry I don't think I can help with your other rig, I was a PowerPC guy before X58, got nothin to go on. This machine was originally going to be a Hackintosh, but it turned out Win 7 and Linux do the job fine!


----------



## bill1024

I use RealTemp for my Intel in Windows. In the folder there is RealTempGT, Make a desktop icon link for RealTempGT It shows all 6 cores.

From reading the instructions from their webpage from the software writer, from what I got from the instructions.
Let the computer post and go into BIOS and under hardware see what the temp is showing after the sys. sits idle for a couple min.
In the software under settings you can calibrate the temp reading by adding -3 ot add 3 to what ever the reading is at the time.
3 being a random number for the sake here. Add or subtract the number you need to calibrate your system to the reading you had in the bios. Each core can be calibrated.
Having to boot into Windows to get to the software, you have to make sure no programs are running and let the system sit idle so it is a cool as it is going to get before you make the changes. One or two min. should do the trick.

Some readings seem to be spot on and some are off 7, 8 deg or so.
Is this perfect, maybe not but I know of no other way.
Also most sensors are more accurate the warmer the temps, and many sensors are of by + or - a deg or two to begin with.

Go to the Realtemp software page and read around and see what you think.
This is how I do mine
The temps are close to the temp read out on the display built on my EVGA FTW3 when loaded 100% in primegrid or folding. To me as long as they are with in 2 or 3 deg of each other and under 70c I am a happy camper.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Hello again, all's going well following Miahallen's guide.

Working on Uncore now, bringing it up a step at a time. Currently on [email protected]

Is there any reason I can't run my Uncore >2X RAM if it's stable <1.35V?

Ta!


----------



## GENXLR

No, just keep your voltage down, but there isn't huge uncore benifits beyond 2x.


----------



## gofastserstripe

OK. I got to 3520 [220x16] at 1.295V

I think I'll leave it at that.

Now testing 1600MHZ ram at 1760, then to tighten timings if possible.


----------



## gofastserstripe

After about 4 hours of prime95 [Blend] I crashed.

Error log showed "cache heirachy error" a few times. So I'm guess it was the uncore, not the RAM.

Now I have set BCLK to 210 for an uncore of 3360 at 1.295V. I have set the RAM back to 1200 as well.

Will leave Prime95 on Blend overnight. [3520 passed IBT Extreme 20x, but it does say cache error, so I'm guessing not the RAM overclock I was testing].

I figure if I pass blend at 3360, I'll be safe for 3200 [around 2x RAM at 200, which I am pretty sure will net me a good core overclock, I figure I can aim for 4.4 with all speedstep etc functions on for downclocking.

I also figure I could push the VTT higher, but I really doubt I need a CPU overclock of more than 4.4 for now. I am also logging all my steps, so if I revisit in the future I can probably push things higher without starting from scratch.

Any advice at this point?


----------



## Trondster

Try lower overclocks with different parameters - it could be too low vCore, too low QPI/Vtt, too high QPI and/or too high CPU frequency. Try to raise one or more voltages and/or lower one or more frequencies and try again.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Cheers dude. I'm doing this step by step. Uncore first, low multi for cpu and ram. Then bring the ram into line, then boost core speed.

Now the CPU is locked at 2.5, with a small v core boost applied to eliminate it, vtt had been brought up a step at a time from 1.22

Still think I should change anything else?


----------



## gofastserstripe

I pretty much gave up on the RAM - I know it's nearly worthless to boost it anyway.

RAM is 1680 88824 1T [1T seems fine]

Next I've enabled LLC and then reduced the VCore to pretty much the voltage CPU-Z was showing under load.

Started with stock speeds and have tested up to 3.4 with no more core volts. CPU-Z now showing something between 1.168 and 1.152 [it still droops a little on the UD3R I think].

I'm changing the multiplier rather than the FSB at this point. 210x16 is my current setting being tested.

This is NOT the way in the guide, but I don't want to go lower on Uncore or RAM. Any reasons this is a bad idea?

Peas!


----------



## Sisi

Quote:


> Now the CPU is locked at 2.5, with a small v core boost applied to eliminate it, vtt had been brought up a step at a time from 1.22


Is the CPU locked ? I first encountered this problem.

htc desire eye hülle


----------



## gofastserstripe

Not sure what you're asking, but I think we've just missed each-others meanings here.

My CPU was set to ["locked at"] a very low multiplier so as to prevent any crashes being caused by it when I was working on the Uncore.

The only comparability issue I have with the X5660 and the Gigabyte EX58-UD3R V1.6 is the Ram multiplier seems to be stuck at x8. I can set it what ever I want in the BIOS [this is with the FK BIOS] but when I boot it's set to x8.

However, this doesn't bother me as the UD3R seems to be stable with massive FSB speeds [210, probably would be OK at 220 if I wanted to bump my VTT again to above 1.295]. so 210 x gives a 1640MHz RAM speed, and my ram is...........1600 MHz rated









Cool?


----------



## nievz

I found that QPI/uncore directly impacts FPS in demanding games. Has anyone tried to go past what 1.35v allows by tweaking the following?

QPI PLL VCore: Quick Path Interconnect Phase Locked Loop voltage. For 24/7 overclocking this voltage can be left at stock in most instances. Again, if you need to use more it's probably wise to pull back a little on QPI frequency to a speed that requires no more than 1.2V. For benchmarking, we used 1.45V to reach 239 BCLK for a CPU-Z shot.

IOH VCore: Input/Output Hub voltage uses a 1.10V base. Stock values usually suffice for 24/7 overclocking even when using multiple graphics cards; we had no problems in reaching a stable 200 BCLK X20 for 4GHz CPU speed. For more extreme QPI frequencies this voltage will need to be increased. For 3D benchmarking past 220 BCLK we used 1.45V. We needed 1.50V to reach 239 BCLK. Values over 1.50V failed to POST or locked up in the OS; use only as much voltage as you need.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2727/evga-x58-classified-first-look/7

I'm currently running mine at uncore 3600mhz at 1.36v.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I found that QPI/uncore directly impacts FPS in demanding games. Has anyone tried to go past what 1.35v allows by tweaking the following?
> 
> QPI PLL VCore: Quick Path Interconnect Phase Locked Loop voltage. For 24/7 overclocking this voltage can be left at stock in most instances. Again, if you need to use more it's probably wise to pull back a little on QPI frequency to a speed that requires no more than 1.2V. For benchmarking, we used 1.45V to reach 239 BCLK for a CPU-Z shot.
> 
> IOH VCore: Input/Output Hub voltage uses a 1.10V base. Stock values usually suffice for 24/7 overclocking even when using multiple graphics cards; we had no problems in reaching a stable 200 BCLK X20 for 4GHz CPU speed. For more extreme QPI frequencies this voltage will need to be increased. For 3D benchmarking past 220 BCLK we used 1.45V. We needed 1.50V to reach 239 BCLK. Values over 1.50V failed to POST or locked up in the OS; use only as much voltage as you need.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/2727/evga-x58-classified-first-look/7
> 
> I'm currently running mine at uncore 3600mhz at 1.36v.


The quoted voltages are for 45nm quad-cores, not 32nm hexacores. The 32nm CPUs can't take that much voltage.


----------



## Asus11

playing around with a x5650, managed to get 4.4ghz @ 1.337v

but thing is turbo is not kicking in? does c state have to be enabled for it to come on?


----------



## gofastserstripe

BIOS=1.295VTT [probably less really] should be fine forever, though, right?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> playing around with a x5650, managed to get 4.4ghz @ 1.337v
> 
> but thing is turbo is not kicking in? does c state have to be enabled for it to come on?


I think so.


----------



## nievz

I had a scare for the past few days and been banging my head why I set my pcie to 110mhz. If you are interested on what happened, I created a new thread. The root cause doesn't really point to the pcie overclocked, but I feel it had contributed to accelerating or highlighting the imminent failure.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1533698/the-pcie-110mhz-report-x58


----------



## gofastserstripe

Cheers for the info.

Any foreign matter on the PCB will cause issues, for sure - the voltages, capacitances and resistances of these components is critical - so even a small bit of goop will mess things up.

While this may have been the issue in your case, I would like to state again that I have heard:
_changing the PCIE speed *will* cause hardware damage_.

This is from several sites and users over several years.

What difference to framerate/loading times does it make, anyway?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Somebody said 74 GigaFlops at 4GHz.

Which IBT level is this at? At 3990 I am getting 69 at Standard and 60 at Maximum. [uncore 3350, 1680 8/8/8/24 RAM]


----------



## Trondster

Try "very high" for high GFlops scores - but they don't really matter that much...


----------



## gofastserstripe

Thanks - I'm just wondering because i thought they could indicate low voltage instability, but I see IBT compares the results and finds inaccuracy, so i guess it truly doesn't matter









Cheers!


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yeah, I'm really stuck.

I seem to be heaping on the VCore, and it's not helping, it's just freaking me out [don't wanna break it]

2.73GHz - 1.168V loaded prime 1hr stable
3.4GHz - 1.152V loaded prime 1hr stable
3.8 GHz - 1.2 loaded prime 1hr stable
4GHz - 1.296 loaded IBT MAX NOT STABLE

Could I get a little advice, pretty please? Feeling pretty disappointed with myself!









I have dialed-in my uncore and BCLK - and moved on to VCore

I know there's quite a bit of vDroop on this mobo, so maybe I should be braver and go with the CPU-Z readings? But I don't want to brute-force it, I want to set it up voltage-conservatively for now so I can run 4+ whenever I game and for years to come [planning dual 970's after I finish my MPhil]

The machine will also be used for FEA/CAD work, so I don't want to roast it, yet I really would appreciate the extra computing power, renders that took 18 hours with the i7 920 at 3.8 should fly by* with this X5660

Testing using IBT:Maximum. Temps so far are touching 72 Max.

Board: EX58-UD3R 1.6 PSU 700W CoolerMaster [at the wall I'm pulling around 280W now]

My BIOS settings:
As pictured - but with CPU Clock drive set back to 800 [tested 900mv - didn't fix it] Should I try 1000mV? [A friend's suggestion]






I have been testing with all power saving features enabled, [c1e etc etc] - this was 100% stable with the i7 920 at 4.0 but i can try without

EDIT - TRIED 200*20 WITH THESE ALL DISABLED AND VCORE BUMPED TO 1.3475 IN BIOS - NO JOY.

BIOS Voltages deviate from CPU-Z - Under load it's showing 1.296V

Should I try raising anything?

Dropping anything? PLL < 1.8?

Perhaps Uncore volts are drooping seeing as this clockspeed is drawing more current and unstabilizing it?

I'm thinking I'm just doing something wrong?

T. Hanks in advance.

*well, you know, kinda.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Can you explain why and link to any technical review or documents? It doesn't make sense overclocking 10% killing an hardware. I've been running 110 for a week and not a single crash playing COD, BF4, ACU, FC4. Moreover, it's not overvolted. Anything i can find on the web is inconclusive + Asus doesn't give a warning in the bios for this setting. Also i have had no sign of instability on my peripherals.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I had a scare for the past few days and been banging my head why I set my pcie to 110mhz. If you are interested on what happened, I created a new thread. The root cause doesn't really point to the pcie overclocked, but I feel it had contributed to accelerating or highlighting the imminent failure.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1533698/the-pcie-110mhz-report-x58


I'm not sure everyone wants technical reviews and info from me when all of the info has been available for many years. If you don't like the info I provide then don't use it. I only try to help and speak from what I know and\or experience. Long story short don't mess with the PCI-E if you have a brain. I'm hitting 4.6Ghz and 4.8Ghz without touching the PCI-E. Another warning = Don't touch CPU PLL either [1.8v]. It has been known to kill quicker than vCore.

I read your 110Mhz PCI-E topic. Keep running PCI-E above 100Mhz and especially at 110Mhz. I expect certain components will become defective or give you problems over time. Hopefully your SSDs don't freak out and get damaged.

It is possible that the PCI-E did speed up some issues. It could very well be "the" issue as well.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Kana-Maru, seeing as you're here, do you have a few minutes to give me a hand?

Sorry to ask, but I'm really miserable









Cheers.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Kana-Maru, seeing as you're here, do you have a few minutes to give me a hand?
> 
> Sorry to ask, but I'm really miserable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers.


Sure man. What's going on. I can help for awhile.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BasTijs*
> 
> I solved my MSI eclipse motherboard problem by inserting the microcodes for the x5675 with MMtools. I also noticed there was a newer/beta bios version on a german msi forum that had the microcodes in it when comparing it to my own (that should have been the latest acc. to msi live update software).
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/73vbuq


Hi, can you please give a link to the correct microcode file?


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm not sure everyone wants technical reviews and info from me when all of the info has been available for many years. If you don't like the info I provide then don't use it. I only try to help and speak from what I know and\or experience. Long story short don't mess with the PCI-E if you have a brain. I'm hitting 4.6Ghz and 4.8Ghz without touching the PCI-E. Another warning = Don't touch CPU PLL either [1.8v]. It has been known to kill quicker than vCore.
> 
> I read your 110Mhz PCI-E topic. Keep running PCI-E above 100Mhz and especially at 110Mhz. I expect certain components will become defective or give you problems over time. Hopefully your SSDs don't freak out and get damaged.
> 
> It is possible that the PCI-E did speed up some issues. It could very well be "the" issue as well.


I already dialed back to 100mhz since I started having issues. A couple of days after cleaning the video card, it's still working as normal.


----------



## gofastserstripe

W
E
L
L

I

C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
.
.
.


----------



## gofastserstripe

.
.
.
N
E
E
D

M
O
R
E

S
L
E
E
P


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sure man. What's going on. I can help for awhile.


Ooops - we missed each other!

Have a look at my post above the one you spotted - the long one with pics.

I'm in the UK, so I went to bed after that message [3am!] sorry.

Cheers.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Yeah, I'm really stuck.
> 
> I seem to be heaping on the VCore, and it's not helping, it's just freaking me out [don't wanna break it]
> 
> 2.73GHz - 1.168V loaded prime 1hr stable
> 3.4GHz - 1.152V loaded prime 1hr stable
> 3.8 GHz - 1.2 loaded prime 1hr stable
> 4GHz - 1.296 loaded IBT MAX NOT STABLE
> 
> Could I get a little advice, pretty please? Feeling pretty disappointed with myself!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have dialed-in my uncore and BCLK - and moved on to VCore
> 
> I know there's quite a bit of vDroop on this mobo, so maybe I should be braver and go with the CPU-Z readings? But I don't want to brute-force it, I want to set it up voltage-conservatively for now so I can run 4+ whenever I game and for years to come [planning dual 970's after I finish my MPhil]
> 
> The machine will also be used for FEA/CAD work, so I don't want to roast it, yet I really would appreciate the extra computing power, renders that took 18 hours with the i7 920 at 3.8 should fly by* with this X5660
> 
> Testing using IBT:Maximum. Temps so far are touching 72 Max.
> 
> Board: EX58-UD3R 1.6 PSU 700W CoolerMaster [at the wall I'm pulling around 280W now]
> 
> My BIOS settings:
> As pictured - but with CPU Clock drive set back to 800 [tested 900mv - didn't fix it] Should I try 1000mV? [A friend's suggestion]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been testing with all power saving features enabled, [c1e etc etc] - this was 100% stable with the i7 920 at 4.0 but i can try without
> 
> EDIT - TRIED 200*20 WITH THESE ALL DISABLED AND VCORE BUMPED TO 1.3475 IN BIOS - NO JOY.
> 
> BIOS Voltages deviate from CPU-Z - Under load it's showing 1.296V
> 
> Should I try raising anything?
> 
> Dropping anything? PLL < 1.8?
> 
> Perhaps Uncore volts are drooping seeing as this clockspeed is drawing more current and unstabilizing it?
> 
> I'm thinking I'm just doing something wrong?
> 
> T. Hanks in advance.
> 
> *well, you know, kinda.


Your CPU VTT voltage seems low for 3.35ghz uncore. I use 1.362v to make it stable at 3.6ghz. Have you tried the lowest uncore multiplier at 4ghz CPU clock?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yeah, I tried that too. No dice.

I'll try bumping the QPI next, but honestly, 1.32 is as far as I will go. I am terrified of breaking it, or damaging it so it craps out when I have deadlines approaching and I use the overclock. I can't get a voltage reading in Windows for Uncore from CPU-Z, Hence the margin of safety! Anyone know a program which can monitor it? Or is there no monitor on the chip?

Are there no other voltages to ramp which might stabilise the uncore without stressing it further?

I'll keep you up to date.

Cheers.


----------



## Trondster

How about trying to lower the uncore a bit? The minimum is 1.5x the memory multiplier...


----------



## gofastserstripe

I tried 2400ish [210XiForget] and still a fail.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> I tried 2400ish [210XiForget] and still a fail.


Try using just a single DIMM or a couple in dual channel (inserted on same colored slots). I couldn't get IBT stable while I had 6 DIMMs populated with my desired memory clock. So now i use 4x2 TridentX's in dual-channel mode.


----------



## gofastserstripe

That might work, but the performance lost from memory bandwidth reduction kinda rules it out for me.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> That might work, but the performance lost from memory bandwidth reduction kinda rules it out for me.


I suggest you try it to know which part is holding you back.

I pull 86gflops with the current settings in my signature.


----------



## gofastserstripe

RESULLLLTTTTT!!!!!!!!!1

Bumped VTT to 1.312 V, set back to 200x20 3200 Uncore annndddd.....


This score is higher than yours with a lower Uncore and a lower overclock, so the RAM bandwidth must be helping.

Not trying to be rude - I just think a more balanced system is beneficial.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> RESULLLLTTTTT!!!!!!!!!1
> 
> Bumped VTT to 1.312 V, set back to 200x20 3200 Uncore annndddd.....
> 
> 
> This score is higher than yours with a lower Uncore and a lower overclock, so the RAM bandwidth must be helping.
> 
> Not trying to be rude - I just think a more balanced system is beneficial.


So problem solved and it was your VTT? All good now? Looks like triple channel is helping, I have higher uncore than you but pulls around the same Gflops at 4.0ghz. Oh, btw, i have HT off. Maybe i'll test with it turned on.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yes, it was the VTT.

I'll leave 1.315 on, but my next step up is 1.335 and that's to close for me!

I'm guessing on the EX58-UD3R the voltage regulators aren't as heavy-duty as on the more expensive boards, so the previously stable VTT setting wasn't enough with so much power being drawn by the CPU.

Now testing 210*19 and all downclocking settings enabled again.


----------



## gofastserstripe

That failed.

Now trying 200x20 with power savings on [uncore at 3200 not 3360].


----------



## gofastserstripe

Failed again.

Trying 3000 Uncore.

*** is going on? It passed plenty of times earlier with the exact same setup.

Can I safely try raising IOH Core to 1.2? Reducing CPU PLL?

This is taking waaay to long and really making me fed up.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Failed again.
> 
> Trying 3000 Uncore.
> 
> *** is going on? It passed plenty of times earlier with the exact same setup.
> 
> Can I safely try raising IOH Core to 1.2? Reducing CPU PLL?
> 
> This is taking waaay to long and really making me fed up.


Try my 1 or 2 or even 4 DIMM suggestion and see if it passes 20x. Then you might need to get new modules. That's what I did.


----------



## gofastserstripe

OK - I will, but I have JUST bought this RAM, I was expecting to run it at stock.

Hell, now I'm running it below stock - 1200, still no joy.

Dammit.

The thing that is confusing me is that it passes plenty of times before. But I keep checking my settings, and they should be fine.

It's passing again now, but still 20GF below what it was on - like the voltage is a little low and causing errors.

Except it's the same as before!


----------



## Trondster

Did you buy a single 6x kit or several smaller kits?
I gave up running my two 3x2GB 1866MHz kits at any faster speeds than 1500MHz, but then again they are running at that speed with nice timings and low voltages, so...
And - prolonged runs of Prime95 is the hardest test for the IMC.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> OK - I will, but I have JUST bought this RAM, I was expecting to run it at stock.
> 
> Hell, now I'm running it below stock - 1200, still no joy.
> 
> Dammit.
> 
> The thing that is confusing me is that it passes plenty of times before. But I keep checking my settings, and they should be fine.
> 
> It's passing again now, but still 20GF below what it was on - like the voltage is a little low and causing errors.
> 
> Except it's the same as before!


I had the same experience with all DIMM slots populated. Drove me crazy until I settled with 4 DIMMs. It's something about x58's that couldn't handle the memory capacity you are running or something, but I think Kana-Maru has all slots populated and he's not having issues.


----------



## gofastserstripe

I'm running 3x4GB Crucial DIMMS.

When I put the setting back to as it was for the pic above, I got 65GFlops and some reboots- something is not right here!

Uh-oh - I just got a bench of 45GFlop at 4.

Unless the lower RAM speed makes that much difference, I think this chip might be dieing














It was secondhand, but was supposed to be ex-server, never abused [or so I though]

Surely not - I've not exceeded any voltages?!

I really could do with some advice RE other _safe_ BIOS settings - IOH Core etc.


----------



## gofastserstripe

This is getting really worrying now - can't pass IBT with 1.337v VCore and 1.315 VTT with the Uncore at 2800

What is going on?

[measures 1.296-1.312 under load in CPU-Z]


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> I had the same experience with all DIMM slots populated. Drove me crazy until I settled with 4 DIMMs. It's something about x58's that couldn't handle the memory capacity you are running or something, but I think Kana-Maru has all slots populated and he's not having issues.


That is true. I'm using all 6 RAM slots with no issues[1600Mhz]. I used another triple channel kit [2000Mhz] and OC'd the RAM all the way up to 2200Mhz+ and still had a stable system at 4.6Ghz + 4.8Ghz.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> I'm running 3x4GB Crucial DIMMS.
> When I put the setting back to as it was for the pic above, I got 65GFlops and some reboots- something is not right here!
> Uh-oh - I just got a bench of 45GFlop at 4.
> Unless the lower RAM speed makes that much difference, I think this chip might be dieing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was secondhand, but was supposed to be ex-server, never abused [or so I though]
> Surely not - I've not exceeded any voltages?!
> I really could do with some advice RE other _safe_ BIOS settings - IOH Core etc.


I'm a bit late to respond to you. Yeah man that's way to low! 45Gflops is below stock settings. Your RAM should be fine, but I'd start over at 3.8Ghz and work your way up.

I noticed that you posted:
Quote:


> 2.73GHz - 1.168V loaded prime 1hr stable
> 3.4GHz - 1.152V loaded prime 1hr stable
> 3.8 GHz - 1.2 loaded prime 1hr stable
> 4GHz - 1.296 loaded IBT MAX NOT STABLE


3.8Ghz @ 1.2v and 4Ghz @ 1.3v - [1.296v] is a large jump in voltage. Somethings definitely not right IMO. I'd start at 3.8Ghz and work my way back up again if I were you. You also need to find your max BCLK if you don't know it yet.

You can try these settings for testing purposes.

-Since you are running LLC, leave it enabled.
-Disable all C-States.
-Disable EIST-Turbo
-Set BCLK to 190Mhz
-CPU Ratio to 21x
-VCore - 1.32v
-Set your RAM Timings to whatever it is labeled on your memory modules [it will be listed 9-9-9-24 or 10-9-10-24]
-DRAM voltage should match what is on the label. Setting it to 1.64v-1.65v shouldn't hurt though.
-Uncore should be 2 times the RAM Frequency. You can also try 1.8x.
-QPI\VTT - 1.36v
-Try to target 1600Mhz or below if possible. I know you want to use higher DRAM frequencies, but not yet.
-As far as QPI goes, try to keep the multiplier around 36x. OR try to keep it between 6.5GT/s - 7.8GT/s.

If you still have stability issues after trying the settings above you can also try ICH to 1.20v and the IOH to voltage. You can also PM if you have other questions or need any info. I'm in and out of the office today so I'll reply randomly throughout the day. I have a ProLiant Server down so I know I'll be a little busy.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yo! I'll try those settings, though I am starting with VTT at 1.335 as the next bump is 1.355 and I'd rather aim lower than burn it out!

You want 1.3V loaded, not BIOS I am assuming.

RAM has been set to the sticker speed since I lost stability - still not good, though it was only 1680 at most.

All other settings are as you requested and I'll IBT Max test.

The thing that really puzzles me is the 87 GFlops for 4GHz then dropping to 65?! Maybe I turned Turbo on?!

I worked up to max BCLK and Uncore by isolating, then bumping them one at a time [raising the multiplier and volts as required but staying short of Intel's Limits] I stopped at 3360 1.295VTT with 210BCLK. RAM Passed Blend and memtest at 1680 8/8/8/24 1T but is now set to 1600 8/8/8/24/2T

IOH, ICH reducing CPU PLL and raising CPU Clock Drive were the last options I had considered. Though I feel it's the Uncore that's acting up...

Maybe I'll take it more slowly over the next few days - really thought I'd be able to dial in the 4-4.2 last night and leave it stress testing. The jump and then drop in GFlops made me shift into panic/obsessive mode though, sorry for all the posts!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> You want 1.3V loaded, not BIOS I am assuming.


Yup loaded in the OS.
Quote:


> All other settings are as you requested and I'll IBT Max test.


Using Standard will be fine for quick stability test. Forget Max for now.
Quote:


> IOH, ICH reducing CPU PLL and raising CPU Clock Drive were the last options I had considered. Though I feel it's the Uncore that's acting up...


Definitely leave all of the other settings at stock unless you need to mess around with them. Don't go to high with the IOH and ICH though.

Quote:


> Maybe I'll take it more slowly over the next few days - really thought I'd be able to dial in the 4-4.2 last night and leave it stress testing. The jump and then drop in GFlops made me shift into panic/obsessive mode though, sorry for all the posts!


Taking it slow will pay off in the long run. That's true for overclocking CPU, RAM, GPU and women.........trust me. I would panic if my PC Gflops fell of the charts like that as well.


----------



## gofastserstripe

In CPU-Z

1.286v load = 57GF
1.296/1.312 [fluctuates] 53GF

I'm going to bump VTT to 1.355 and test [I'm assuming you have more experience here than me WRT droop in VTT vs BIOS]

1.355 gives 63 GF - how the heck did I get 87/88?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Switching to standard tests for faster results.

The other settings I did dial in very carefully, over a few days.

It was just when I went to the VCore/Frequency it went crazy.

******************************************************************

The multi Uncore Multi was 16, I'm reducing it to 15 as that gives me 1.8x RAM and I guess you're after even numbers with 2 or 1.8x.

1.35 BIOS volts gives 1.312 loaded also 63-64GF, so I'll stick to 1.34 which loads to 1.296-1.312.

Are we assuming that I'm losing the same amount of VTT as Vcore? IE if i choses 1.355 I'm really supplying 1.34ish? Or does it not work like that?


----------



## gofastserstripe

BINGO - GOT IT...

Something nievz said made me think... hyperthreading!

Maybe I disabled HT by mistake when I turned C-states off [they're all in the same "Advanced CPU Features bit"]?

Tried that - voila 81GF with HT OFF!

Now dropping VTT a notch and setting back to 16x.....

EDIT 1 - that passed 10x standard tests at 83GFpeak

Now to try 210*19*3360 again.... for a score...


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yep - 210*19 [email protected] is 86-87GF - that's where the figure came from....but it's not stable at 1.335VTT.

Can I get 200*20 / 3200 to hold stable...?

EDIT - Yes, passed Standard with HT off.

EDIT 2 - and with it ON







Now trying Maximum - out of curiosity.


----------



## Kommanche

Just bagged a Asus Rampage II X58 Extreme from work at £40.

Gonna drop a X5650 in it. Good route to go?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Why not?

Is it compatible?


----------



## Kommanche

Yup







Havent any experience with 1366 though. How often can these chips hit 4ghz? What cooler should I use?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kommanche*
> 
> Just bagged a Asus Rampage II X58 Extreme from work at £40.
> 
> Gonna drop a X5650 in it. Good route to go?


yes dude also how did you bag that so cheap!









just got a x5650 to 4.6 turbo enabled @ 1.34v Ram @ 2000mhz

they are epic chips imo

cost like £60 aswell


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> yes dude also how did you bag that so cheap!


Have you seen where he works?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> just got a x5650 to 4.6 turbo enabled @ 1.34v Ram @ 2000mhz
> 
> they are epic chips imo
> 
> cost like £60 aswell
> :thumb:c


Could you post your [load] voltages and timings for that? Is it IBT Max stable?

I'm finding it much harder.


----------



## BasTijs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> Hi, can you please give a link to the correct microcode file?


From this post:
http://www.msi-forum.de/index.php?page=Thread&postID=777877#post777877
http://www.msi-forum.de/index.php?page=Attachment&attachmentID=18428&h=5f5e35aa2e5fd4cbce526431b1fe5e4c95774223


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Yep - 210*19 [email protected] is 86-87GF - that's where the figure came from....but it's not stable at 1.335VTT.
> 
> Can I get 200*20 / 3200 to hold stable...?
> 
> EDIT - Yes, passed Standard with HT off.
> 
> EDIT 2 - and with it ON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now trying Maximum - out of curiosity.


Nice. Did it work with HT on? Sometimes HT requires a bit more voltage to stabilize the OC. Remember you'll have to run other test as well. Prime95 is a good to run all night and day or at least when you are sleep.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Trying to bring those voltages down - they're a little scary. Wanted a 4GHz with lower volts - tried 4000, with 2800 UCore at 1.312/1.315 and power saving features enabled but still not passing IBT Max









It will pass Standard at that, though. :/

Should I bother or are those too high to keep 24/7 for gaming?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Yes, passed Maximum with HT on at those volts.

Is there something I could do to share the strain - does a higher IOH allow less VTT, for example?

EDIT - should I test with P95 Blend? I was passing Small on '95 more easy, it's IBT that fails it!


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Have you seen where he works?
> 
> Could you post your [load] voltages and timings for that? Is it IBT Max stable?
> 
> I'm finding it much harder.


dude that motherboard is like 5 years old..

btw I did just notice haha, maybe its a RMA.. but I doubt.. who knows lol

anyway load volts in HWinfo says 1.35v

multiplier on auto , 200Bclk

ram timings 8-9-8-24 1N 2000mhz

1.268 QPI 1.65v ram

I havn't tested on intel burn as I don't believe its realistic

I run Asus realbench on H.264 for 6 runs consecutively.. if it passes.. I guarantee its stable.. its been stable so far 2 days gaming etc everything.. always use realbench H.264 bench

even for my haswell overclock(which has been stable since July), and the good thing is H.264 requires more volts from a CPU so you will find if it passes @ a given volts via realbench it can be dropped down a notch after testing, but I haven't done that yet tbf 1.34v is perfectly good

max Temps 69c on a corsair h75


----------



## gofastserstripe

Thanks again to everyone for their continuing help


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Yes, passed Maximum with HT on at those volts.
> Is there something I could do to share the strain - does a higher IOH allow less VTT, for example?


Increasing IOH never allowed me to use less VTT. I don't think it would matter much anyways.

Quote:


> Should I bother or are those too high to keep 24/7 for gaming?


If you are talking about "1.312/1.315" then yes those are fine for 24/7. You can go a bit higher if you want, Just make sure everything is stable and be sure to keep an eye on your temps. Especially in the warmer seasons. 3.8Ghz seems to be fine for a tone of programs for me. Then again I can hit 3.8Ghz with only 1.16 vCore. Gflops [around 80flops - 83Gflops depending on settings] and performance are great at 3.8Ghz. When you add in the power efficiency and temperatures it's simply a win win situation.


----------



## chinesestunna

Hi all,

I just got the X5670 chip for my eVGA 132-BL-E758-TR board and got it up and running. Latest bios 83 installed but, I noticed something very strange when overclocking, the uncore frequency, as reported by CPU-Z as NB Frequency, is stuck at ~4000Mhz when I'm running at 22x200bclk turbo off.
I've tried all the CPU Uncore mulitpliers from 12x to 18x but the Uncore number won't budge as reported in CPU-z.
I'm having trouble stabilizing the system with CPU VTT voltage staying under 1.4V which is the limit for these chips and am wondering if there's something I'm doing wrong, seems that the Uncore speed is causing instability but the board doesn't seem to want to adjust it for whatever reason.

Thanks for any advice and thoughts!


----------



## gofastserstripe

Strewth - how's this for an offer:

"My Z800 workstation is now sat spare for the minute, if you are not far away you are welcome to extract and test the X5650's in there and swap if one is better. "

Should I do it?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chinesestunna*
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I just got the X5670 chip for my eVGA 132-BL-E758-TR board and got it up and running. Latest bios 83 installed but, I noticed something very strange when overclocking, the uncore frequency, as reported by CPU-Z as NB Frequency, is stuck at ~4000Mhz when I'm running at 22x200bclk turbo off.
> I've tried all the CPU Uncore mulitpliers from 12x to 18x but the Uncore number won't budge as reported in CPU-z.
> I'm having trouble stabilizing the system with CPU VTT voltage staying under 1.4V which is the limit for these chips and am wondering if there's something I'm doing wrong, seems that the Uncore speed is causing instability but the board doesn't seem to want to adjust it for whatever reason.
> 
> Thanks for any advice and thoughts!


As far as I am aware you need to stay under 1.35V for VTT. In fact many people are saying steer well away from it, especially if you're running =>3200MHz Uncore!

I'm afraid i don't know what will fix it, sorry.


----------



## gofastserstripe

*Any help reducing voltages much appreciated!*

I can hold the following [HT ON IN ALL CASES]

190x21= 3990 [Uncore 16x =3040] /// Vcc About 1.30 under load [Vtt 1.315 in BIOS]
200x20= 4000 [Uncore 16x =3200] /// Vcc About 1.30 under load [Vtt 1.33v in BIOS]

Scores:
927: Cinebench R15 CPU at 4/3200
918: Cinebench R15 CPU at 4/2800

103.48: Cinebench R15 OpenGL at 4/3200
100.66: Cinebench R15 OpenGL at 4/2800

And a Firestrike Physics score of 13983

Temps stay about 71, max

I might be able to bench at 4.2, but I can't pass IBT, even Standard. Well, it passed a few, then gave an error. Ramping core voltage up several steps won't help at 4.2.

Also tried: CPU PLL to 1.5, Small bumps to IOH and QPI PLL and even a 50microsecond skew on the CPU clock. None allow me to reduce volts or go to higher frequencies on the Core.

I'm pretty happy at 4.0, but kinda disappointed/surprised with the clock speed, based on what others see with these chips. Maybe mine's just not as good as some. I'm certainly concerned about the 13degreeC spread in temps I'm seeing at 4.2/IBT. Yes, the cooler is seated OK.

I'll try Prime95 Blend for 8 hours tomorrow on the faster setting to ensure it's really really stable

If I was offered to try a pair of x5650s and keep the best from all 3 of the chips - how could I could I quickly find the one that will hold the highest clockspeed with low volts? The offer is there, if I can get to the location of the chips, but my girlfriend will kill me if I spend much more time on this project!

See ya starside ***********************************

Sam


----------



## chinesestunna

no worries and thank you for the input, funny enough I remembered something similar where a setting was stuck for my Bloomfield chip that last ran in this board and decided to reset to default to see and what do you know? It's now fixed







The uncore is running nicely at 16X now and I'm trying to get the system stable at 4.4Ghz, 200x22 but currently it seems to require too much vCore, I can run at 1.25v for 4.2Ghz but even 1.375 seems unstable for 4.4Ghz. Real life gains not worth the heat and power consumption IMO and I think I'll stick to fine tuning lowest voltage/temps for 4.2Ghz now.


----------



## GENXLR

have you considered it's not the Vcore 

Other things may need voltage too you know


----------



## chinesestunna

yes I was just putting the 2 main voltages in my post as my main concern from yesterday was fixing the uncore issue. PLL etc from my understanding is mostly to help with hitting bclk and ram OCs but mine are fine at 200mhz and 1600mhz. Again, I've been running at 4.2 with 1.25Vcore, 1.3Vtt, 1.6VRam and almost stock everything else just fine


----------



## prznar1

Guys will it be safe for me to upgrade my old i7 920 for x5650 and do some avrage overclock it on ASUS P6T SE? To something like 3.8 GHz?


----------



## Eebobb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Guys will it be safe for me to upgrade my old i7 920 for x5650 and do some avrage overclock it on ASUS P6T SE? To something like 3.8 GHz?


Yes you should be able to get that pretty easily and at least 4 ghz. I have that board and processor and it runs just fine


----------



## gofastserstripe

CPU is using about 150W, according to my UPS [load-idle=145W]


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> CPU is using about 150W, according to my UPS [load-idle=145W]


At 4.2ghz, mine is about the same at idle, 145W.

Cinebench R15 (with HT ON) = 971.


----------



## gofastserstripe

Passed 8hrs Blend at the 4/2800 setting. <72C on the hot core.

No tips from anyone to lower the volts?


----------



## gofastserstripe

The wattage is for the CPU alone - Its the difference between the idle and load power draw, though it probably included chipset and RAM overheads.


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> Passed 8hrs Blend at the 4/2800 setting. <72C on the hot core.
> 
> No tips from anyone to lower the volts?


That's a bit high since it's Prime and not IBT. Probably has something to do with your cooler or ambient or thermal paste. You're running on 1.3 vcore, i'm on 1.312v @4.2ghz but i only get around 70C max on IBT @25C room temp. On Prime blend i get 58C max.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofastserstripe*
> 
> The wattage is for the CPU alone - Its the difference between the idle and load power draw, though it probably included chipset and RAM overheads.


I was measuring from the socket, so that's power draw for the whole system except the monitor.


----------



## gofastserstripe

^^^^ SOMEWHAT WRONG - CBA to fix. They're all 140mm apart from the REAR ONE=120mm


Quote:


> What's your cooling scheme for the entire system not just the CPU?
> 
> What fans are placed where and are they sucking air in or out, how are they controlled? Where's the PSU placed and what is it's fan doing? What CPU cooler with what fan(s) blowing in which direction also what paste are you using?


Overall pressure is -ve. It was better with my 470GTX, which was a blower, the 7970 Vapour-X is a Recirc type, but it much much faster, so meh.

The only fan that is controlled is the CNPS-10X Extreme cooler fan, which is PWM with the 4-position fan controller built-in to the cooler. It can do something like 900-1200, 1000-1500 and 1200-2100 or Manual. With this Xeon I'm just using Low or High PWM modes.

Paste is Artic MX-4.

As you can see, the temps are OK. If I hit 72% of Intel's max temp when running a power virus for 8 hours, running 30% overclocked and 30% over volts I'm not worried!

I think the Chip itself is not well bonded to it's heat spreader, as I only used to have a 5C spread with the i7.

I'm considering buying another of these Zalman coolers, as my attempt at lapping it was a failure [ended up bowed, then fixed by hand but still about the same as before] But then, spending another £40 is a bit of a waste of time, as the hottest core is still cool enough. An unmolested cooler may help, or it may not. I guess I could always send it back if it made no difference.

The machine is really near silent unless it's benching, or if the 7970 is working hard. Max temp for the 7970 is about 63 when 114% power limit, 1180MHz. It's fans are quite annoying, but still less then the 470was! The massive floorstanding speakers tend to drown thee fans out, however.

The only things I'm thinking I should try are a new HSF and, perhaps turning it 90degrees, but I don't think I _need_ to do either really.

I do have to remove the rabbit fluff from the coolers and fans regurlary. The bit vents in the plexi-glass are liable to suck fluff in, and the mesh at the front has a foam sheet behind it, and a bit gap at the bottom of the front panel where fluff goes in, too. Design FAIL









Any feedback then?


----------



## gofastserstripe

Passed 7 hours of prime with slightly higher voltages and Uncore at 3200. Max temp 74.

Other info - setting Uncore to 2800 drops Cinebench score to Circa 900 [from 927].

I´m also setting up an overclock of about 3.6 GHZ next with lower voltages, but first I´ll push my Vcc to 1.3 in Windows, loaded and see what happens then [4.4/ 4.6?].


----------



## gofastserstripe

Goodbye cruel world!


----------



## gofasterstripes

10 PRINT "Hello World"


----------



## fallenzeraphine

I think I'll settle for this with the new board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice.

Is that with Hyperthreading on or off?

What's your score on the "Standard" stress level, with HT on?


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice.
> 
> Is that with Hyperthreading on or off?
> 
> What's your score on the "Standard" stress level, with HT on?


With HT on of course, I get around 70GFLOPS when running standard stress test


----------



## gofasterstripes

Well, yes of course HT is worth having on and I'd always overclock with it enabled; but it makes a huge difference to the IBT scores.

With it off you'd probably hit 90-odd. Which matters not a jot, but it helps keep the comparisons apples-to-apples


----------



## Kommanche

Okay so I have my X5650 and I've managed to swap the R2E for a R3E because we had one lying around.

Will I need to update the BIOS?

Also, any problems with using 1.5v RAM?


----------



## gofasterstripes

1.5V is fine on my EX58-UD3R.

No idea about the BIOS though, sorry. If your board/bios supports the 6-core 32nm i7 chips, there's a good chance. Just try it


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kommanche*
> 
> Okay so I have my X5650 and I've managed to swap the R2E for a R3E because we had one lying around.
> 
> Will I need to update the BIOS?
> 
> Also, any problems with using 1.5v RAM?


It supports all x58 Xeons.


----------



## fallenzeraphine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Well, yes of course HT is worth having on and I'd always overclock with it enabled; but it makes a huge difference to the IBT scores.
> 
> With it off you'd probably hit 90-odd. Which matters not a jot, but it helps keep the comparisons apples-to-apples


Haha yeah I get around 94GFLOPS with HT off


----------



## nievz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Well, yes of course HT is worth having on and I'd always overclock with it enabled; but it makes a huge difference to the IBT scores.
> 
> With it off you'd probably hit 90-odd. Which matters not a jot, but it helps keep the comparisons apples-to-apples


Not just benchmarks.

I lose 15-20fps in Far Cry 4 with HT on. The logical cores can't compete clock for clock with the Haswell's or Ivy's of the world. Turning HT off will dedicate a physical core to the task and removes overhead on having to emulate cores in the cpu.

Far Cry 4 is heavy on CPU3. Yeah it's poorly optimized along with other Ubi games, but what can we do. I love the games. Until direct metal access is enabled by DX12, we have to live with that.


----------



## Kommanche

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nievz*
> 
> Not just benchmarks.
> 
> I lose 15-20fps in Far Cry 4 with HT on. The logical cores can't compete clock for clock with the Haswell's or Ivy's of the world. Turning HT off will dedicate a physical core to the task and removes overhead on having to emulate cores in the cpu.
> 
> Far Cry 4 is heavy on CPU3. Yeah it's poorly optimized along with other Ubi games, but what can we do. I love the games. Until direct metal access is enabled by DX12, we have to live with that.


Windows 8 better utilises HT than Windows 7. Its worth turning off HT in Win7 but in Win8 its worth keeping on.


----------



## nievz

I use Windows 8.1


----------



## neomirceac

Hello all,

I am the proud owner of an Xeon X5650 on a MSI Big Bang X-Power motherboard. Also on the motherboard I have 3x4GB Corsair Dominator 1600 MHz + 3x1GB Kingston HyperX 2000MHz modules (6 in total). The problem is that the Uncore ration on my board is locked. For 1333MHz on the memory I have 2400 MHz Uncore. The QPI speed is set to 4800MHz.

I'm running the system at stock: 2,66 GHz for the processor and 1333 MHz for all memory modules. For this setting in BIOS I need to dial in 1,15 QPI voltage (Memory voltage default 1.5 V). I think this voltage of 1.15 for QPI is high, and it should be more of ~1V......

In terms of cooling I'm using a Thermalright SIlver Arrow cooler with only one fan (between radiators) because of space issues. I have never seen temps higher the 46C on my CPU even after 3 days of [email protected], which is nice......

Anyway, I want to overclock to about 3,3 GHz with 3,6 GHz turbo (or more ..... but I'm looking at 24/7 operation.....). For this I need to bump the BCLK to 166. This setting will give me (a divider of 5) 1328 MHz for the memory (which is close to 1333 MHz), Uncore frequency of about 2400 MHz and the QPI frequency of ~5900 MHz.

As voltages go, I dialed in as follows: 1,3V on CPU, 1,25V on QPI. no change to PLL (1,8V) and no change to memory (1.5V).

With this setting I still can't get into windows :-s....... I get POST every time but can't get it to be stable. I think the CPU voltage is at this point really high for this speed I am not willing to go any higher, for this speed. The QPI voltage also is massive for this CPU/Memory frequency/voltage, so I just stopped at this point.

Can someone help me? Am I doing something wrong on my rig? Because all memory modules are populated and should I remove the 3x1GB modules for higher overclock ?

PS: Can you guys point out a program so I can verify the current voltages for my motherboard, because MSI's Control Center Is somewhat bad..... ! In bios i dial in 1,25V (and I checked with a multimeter) and the software reports something like ~1,35V. So no good voltage reading for this voltage.....

PS2: In my rig I have two way SLI: 2x680 GPUs: MSI Lightning and Gigabyte OC edition of the 680 2GB versions. My PSU is a Fortron Aurum 700W edition, which is review (not by me biggrin.gif) and puts out all of it's 700W.....

Best regards to all!


----------



## gofasterstripes

CPU-Z is tiny and works for me - try that.

As for the rest, I'll pitch in with some help ASAP, but I'm a bit tied up right now.

I'd definitely start by taking 1/2 the ram out and one video card. When it's stable like that, the you can go back one bit at a time.

I can report I seem to have Uncore at 2700 for about 1.255VTT and Core at 3.57 [170*<21, Turbo off, other features on] for 1.22-1.232V Loaded in Windows via CPU-Z.

YMMV


----------



## nievz

raise your cpu vtt one step at a time until it boots to windows and is stable. people here says it shouldn't go over 1.35v, i have mine at [email protected] uncore.


----------



## intelchief

It's once again me

for those who forgot my spec:

2x X5670 @ 4319 Mhz @ 1.329 V
Evga sr2
12Gb (6 x 2) 1440mhz 8-8-8-24 1T 1.55V
GTX 670 @ 770
Antec HCP 1000W

I've got a question for u. Is it safe to rise uncore higher than 1.5 of memory frequency. I've read somwhere that its safe only if VTT voltage is lover than 1.35.

I had Uncore set to 2160mhz( 1440 x 1.5) but i tried higher uncore and i see that it has a pretty huge impact on performance(without increasing the voltages).

I forgot my VTT voltage is 1.3V


----------



## Trondster

It's quite safe to have uncore between 1.5x and 2.0x memory frequency.

The warning is the combination of QPI/Vtt of > 1.35V _and_ Uncore > 2x memory frequency.


----------



## intelchief

What im observing right now, is that with higher uncore ferqunecy, performance is better and i need less vcore . Before i wasnt able to even start torturę test with lower vcore. Right now its running for more than 5 minutes.

So assuming that my QPI/Vtt is set straight to 1.3V , can i push uncore higher?


----------



## OCmember

Fooling with my uncore just recently and I think it's somewhere above 3x my memory speed. Uncore at 1.25, vcore at 1.34v, DRAM at 1.60v, cpu at 4.213GHz

All voltages determined with a voltage meter on terminals from the motherboard, thank you


----------



## intelchief

Well i have one more question (for now). When you're testing stability with IBT, why you're using only high option? (why not very high or maximum? When i see your screenshots with results there is always"high"


----------



## gofasterstripes

Interesting Q.

I don't, I test with Maximum. My chip does not seem to want to do higher than 4.0 in this config. Though I think a better motherboard might help, somewhat.

I wonder if everyone's overclocks here would pass 10 loops on Maximum?

Try it - and keep and eye on those temps


----------



## gofasterstripes

One reason might be - to gain a comparable figure for GFlops. With the machine set up the exact same way, run the various benchmarks after each other and you'll find the figure changes. Hyperthreading also makes a very large difference to the figure.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Well i have one more question (for now). When you're testing stability with IBT, why you're using only high option? (why not very high or maximum? When i see your screenshots with results there is always"high"


I test both Very High and Maximum.
Very High gives me the highest scores and highest temps with Hyper Threading enabled (low 80's GF, 63-69 deg C at VH and about 60 GF, 63-67 deg C at Max), while Maximum gives the highest scores with Hyper Threading disabled (90-91 GF at VH and 91-92 GF at Max).
I use ten passes with Very High for a quick stability test, before I move on to 10 IBT Maximum and long runs of Prime95.
The final test is gaming, but I have yet to see my computer unstable after passing IBT and Prime95.


----------



## Kana-Maru

More editing. I've been pretty busy lately. Hope you all had a good new year so far.

HTML article for my X5660 review:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> More editing. I've been pretty busy lately. Hope you all had a good new year so far.
> 
> HTML article for my X5660 review:
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review


Great work, man!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks a ton







.

I'm still going to be updating the CPU and GPU sections. Especially for a lot of the latest games.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks a ton
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> I'm still going to be updating the CPU and GPU sections. Especially for a lot of the latest games.


Awesome looking forward to HT on/off comparison in latest games.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice work mate. Thanks again


----------



## OCmember

Is there a listing of all the X58 motherboards that the Xeons will work on, and the ones that don't?


----------



## OCmember

Have an opportunity to be an Asus Sabertooth X58 motherboard for a decent price. Does this board offer voltage terminals for a voltage meter?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Awesome looking forward to HT on/off comparison in latest games.


We will see about HT on and off. That will be interesting to see. I'll probably just run a series of benchmarks during high end games like Crysis 3 and newer titles.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice work mate. Thanks again


Thanks you for reading.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is there a listing of all the X58 motherboards that the Xeons will work on, and the ones that don't?


Yes there is. I haven't updated it yet. I'm going to be adding a big list to the article I posted above. The list will contain all of the X58 motherboards that will work with the Xeons. I will let you know when I upload them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Have an opportunity to be an Asus Sabertooth X58 motherboard for a decent price. Does this board offer voltage terminals for a voltage meter?


Nope. I wish it did. The Sabertooth didn't get that. it does have the CPU and RAM over-voltage though. You'll have to do it the old fashion way.


----------



## OCmember

Hmm. Thanks for the reply. That's kinda scary. Even though my in-OS readings are higher than the terminals they are still way off. My CPU VTT in OS reads 1.36 while on the terminal it's only 1.28/1.275, DRAM reads 1.636 when the terminal says 1.60, CPU seems to be pretty close, in OS says 1.34 and the terminal reads 1.33.. still though 150$ for an Asus Sabertooth in "great condition" isn't bad.


----------



## Kana-Maru

$150 is a GREAT price for the Sabertooth X58. That's a reasonable price before the Xeon 56xx price hike. I know there are apologist and re-sellers who go on to talk about "demand" and things like that. I don't want to hear it. It was price gouging at it's finest for X58 MBs.

Your terminals and OS readings are off. They say that you shouldn't depend on OS reading that much anyways. Did you try to check the voltages while running a 100% Load on the CPU + RAM usage?


----------



## intelchief

Does someone have here single GTX 670 and OC 'ed xeon? It's possible to make a test in firestrike(standard)? I would like to compare, because mine looks pretty low:/



btw, I was able to lower my VTT voltage to 1.275V and rise uncore freq







gflops rised by a little


was pretty warm in the room(beacuse of girlfriend). Whats more, my Xeons are running with air cooling and of course test is with case closed


----------



## Kana-Maru

Added the list of compatible X58 motherboards to the full review. Just look for the page named "List of motherboards compatible with Xeon 56xx".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Does someone have here single GTX 670 and OC 'ed xeon? It's possible to make a test in firestrike(standard)? I would like to compare, because mine looks pretty low:/
> 
> 
> 
> btw, I was able to lower my VTT voltage to 1.275V and rise uncore freq
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gflops rised by a little
> 
> 
> was pretty warm in the room(beacuse of girlfriend). Whats more, my Xeons are running with air cooling and of course test is with case closed


Congrats. Everything is looking good for you.

I can run some single GTX 670 tests or simply the Firestrike benchmark for you. I just need to know if you are running stock or overclocked settings. Also what is the frequency you are hitting after the boost.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Added the list of compatible X58 motherboards to the full review. Just look for the page named "List of motherboards compatible with Xeon 56xx".
> 
> Congrats. Everything is looking good for you. I can run some single GTX 670 tests or simply the Firestrike benchmark for you. I just need to know if you are running stock or overclocked settings. Also what is the frequency you are hitting after the boost.


Awesome! My GTX 670 is OCed.

and after the boost its 1200mhz


----------



## 99belle99

Can someone help me. I have a X58A-UD7 Gigabyte motherboard. I had a i7 920 OC to 3.9GHz working fine with 6 x 2GB of RAM. Each triple is the same. So I have 3 of these and 3 of these. So my problem is I recently got a Xeon X5660 and it will not overclock. It will overclock a tiny bit but when I try to do a good bit the computer will turn on, I do not get the splash screen or even to the bios setup so I have to reset the CMOS and start again just to get the computer to start. What am I doing wrong. I know you change the exact same settings as a i7 920. I did have a problem with all 12 GB of RAM being recognized when I first installed the chip. Could it be a faulty chip?


----------



## Firehawk

Did you update your BIOS before swapping the chip? Does it run fine at stock? How far do you get before the above problem occurs?

Sounds like what happens with my board. If the QPI link speed gets to around 8 GHz it won't start. Turn down the multiplier from x48 to x44 or x36 and see if it helps.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Did you update your BIOS before swapping the chip? Does it run fine at stock? How far do you get before the above problem occurs?
> 
> Sounds like what happens with my board. If the QPI link speed gets to around 8 GHz it won't start. Turn down the multiplier from x48 to x44 or x36 and see if it helps.


I always have the multiplier on x36 when overclocking. No the last time I updated the bios was a few months ago. When I had the chip overclocked a bit Battlefield 4 crashed on me and it also crashed when updating windows and I was just lucky it didn't corrupt windows on me.


----------



## Firehawk

There was another user that had a similar problem a few weeks ago. Might be with the same motherboard model. I'm not sure if he solved the issue, though.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> There was another user that had a similar problem a few weeks ago. Might be with the same motherboard model. I'm not sure if he solved the issue, though.


I see that I read through the thread. It was only two or three days ago. He has the exact same problem as me. He wasn't even overclocking much either like me. I see some guy's get 4 GHz and above running fine. I cannot even get into bios or even system to boot like him. Maybe we have bad chips. About motherboard compatibility, every site says mine is compatible.


----------



## 99belle99

I just re-read his post and we have different motherboards. At least he can get post when overclocking, it's just Windows not booting for him. I cannot even get post when overclocking.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Can someone help me. I have a X58A-UD7 Gigabyte motherboard. I had a i7 920 OC to 3.9GHz working fine with 6 x 2GB of RAM. Each triple is the same. So I have 3 of these and 3 of these. So my problem is I recently got a Xeon X5660 and it will not overclock. It will overclock a tiny bit but when I try to do a good bit the computer will turn on, I do not get the splash screen or even to the bios setup so I have to reset the CMOS and start again just to get the computer to start. What am I doing wrong. I know you change the exact same settings as a i7 920. I did have a problem with all 12 GB of RAM being recognized when I first installed the chip. Could it be a faulty chip?


What voltages and frequencies are you using?
The 32nm Xeons are not the same as the 45nm quadcores - you can't use quite as high voltages, and the uncore is different - you can use down to 1.5x memory multiplier.


----------



## GENXLR

X5660?

Lets do a dirty test

Follow my settings exactly if your UD7 allows, report any blocked settings or missing settings

BLCK 181
Multi 21
UNCORE X16 (should say 2896)
MEM Multiplier X8 (should say 1448)
Use QPI Link X36
Disable Turbo
Enable Speedstep
Disable all C-states

Voltages

CPU Vcore 1.35(Do NOT Exceed yet)
CPU PLL 1.8
QPI VTT 1.30(DO NOT EXCEED)
IOH Core 1.2
ICH Core 1.3(1.4 is also fine but likely has no effect)
DRAM 1.65 or 1.66v
Enable Level 1 Load Line Calibration

i attempted to remember the settings names exactly


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> X5660?
> 
> Lets do a dirty test
> 
> Follow my settings exactly if your UD7 allows, report any blocked settings or missing settings
> 
> BLCK 181
> Multi 21
> UNCORE X16 (should say 2896)
> MEM Multiplier X8 (should say 1448)
> Use QPI Link X36
> Disable Turbo
> Enable Speedstep
> Disable all C-states
> 
> Voltages
> 
> CPU Vcore 1.35(Do NOT Exceed yet)
> CPU PLL 1.8
> QPI VTT 1.30(DO NOT EXCEED)
> IOH Core 1.2
> ICH Core 1.3(1.4 is also fine but likely has no effect)
> DRAM 1.65 or 1.66v
> Enable Level 1 Load Line Calibration
> 
> i attempted to remember the settings names exactly


I will try them settings as soon as my memory test finishes. I am running a memtest86+ on memory at the minute. I also ran a intel processor diagnostics tool and it passed. Just trying to rule out possibilities.


----------



## GENXLR

Just going to call out your other post, overclocking an X5600 is NOTHING like the i7 900. They are entirely different and like to be treated as such. and boy oh boy do they show it.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Just going to call out your other post, overclocking an X5600 is NOTHING like the i7 900. They are entirely different and like to be treated as such. and boy oh boy do they show it.


I stopped the memory test to try your settings and again I'm stuck not booting. Black screen on monitor and all fans and lights working on pc. Will not boot to post. So cannot get into bios to change settings.


----------



## GENXLR

If you have a Reset CMOS jumper, use it, otherwise, pull the CMOS battery, unplug the computer, press power, then put the battery back and plug it in, should be reset.


----------



## 99belle99

There is a button. So nice and handy.

I tried these below.

BLCK 160
Multi 21
UNCORE X16
MEM Multiplier X8
Use QPI Link X36
Disable Turbo
Enable Speedstep
Disable all C-states

Voltages

CPU Vcore 1.2
CPU PLL 1.8
QPI VTT 1.195
DRAM 1.5
Enable Level 1 Load Line Calibration
Everything else set to auto.

And it would not boot again.


----------



## GENXLR

Try the settings that i gave you


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Try the settings that i gave you


I did and same black screen. Reset cmos and tried the settings I wrote as I had it booting at a lower overclock before. I thought they were the settings but now that I think of it I think the settings were lower. Also when I did have it overclocked a bit it was not stable, crashed playing Battlefield 4.

I just reset cmos and everything to stock and just decided to try xmp-profile1. Same black screen and will not boot. I think it is RAM at fault. As I said when I first installed CPU I could not get all 12GB of RAM to be recognized.


----------



## GENXLR

Try just 3 Sticks then, instead of all 6, X58 is problematic with 6


----------



## 99belle99

What is the max frequency RAM the xeon X5660 can handle. I have 1600MHz at the minute but looking to get 3 x 4GB 2000MHz. Can that processor handle 2000MHz?


----------



## gofasterstripes

It's rated for <1333 only. Many people hit 1600, some hit 2000. 6 Sticks may make that impossible!


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> It's rated for <1333 only. Many people hit 1600, some hit 2000. 6 Sticks may make that impossible!


I seen that on intel website.
My old i7 920 is rated <1066 but I was running 1600 no problem.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Uh huh.

Still - that's the answer!


----------



## intelchief

i was running with my two Xeon's on SR2 6 sticks of Kingston hyper X(1600mhz). After CPU OC they were running without a problem with 1800mhz. But my memory only allowed 10-10-10-27 1t timings.

Anyway i tested 1800mhz and i can confirm that it is working


----------



## Kana-Maru

ATTN: intelchief

I will try to test the GTX 670 Single matching your setup tonight. There's a lot going on. Sorry for the delay.


----------



## intelchief

No problem Kana-Maru!
Thank you very much for all the effort!


----------



## GENXLR

no, around 1600 mhz, at 1T timmings is better than 2000Mhz at 2T


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> no, around 1600 mhz, at 1T timmings is better than 2000Mhz at 2T


What does 1T and 2T mean?


----------



## Kommanche

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What does 1T and 2T mean?


It's the RAMs Cycle Rate/Command Rate Timing


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What does 1T and 2T mean?


Command rate - see http://www.overclock.net/t/32605/1t-vs-2t-command-rate-is-there-a-real-performance-difference - a couple of years old, but still interesting.

And: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3851/everything-you-always-wanted-to-know-about-sdram-memory-but-were-afraid-to-ask


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What does 1T and 2T mean?


Another delay cycle figure. AFAIK all the figures used for RAM timings are delay values, so reducing them enables faster throughput. However, like all such timings and frequencies you need to slowly build up to your overclock. Don't just set everything to max and expect to be able to debug it after!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> No problem Kana-Maru!
> Thank you very much for all the effort!


No prob. I'll post my results shortly. I need to match your settings before starting.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry for the delay intelchief. Very busy at the moment. I did find time to run the FireStrike benchmark. I attempted to mimic your settings. I set it up quickly for testing purposes.

-Disabled SLI
-CPU = 4140Mhz [4.14Ghz] 23x. That's what your CPU will run once the benchmark starts.
-RAM = 1440Mhz 9-9-9-24-1T
-GPU = 1201Mhz Core

Here are my results:










I noticed that you are running dual CPUs. For a fair comparison change the settings to allow only 1 processor. It appears that your score is perfectly fine. You have a higher physics score due to your dual processor setup. Compared to your score it's only a 2.87% difference. Your results are perfectly fine.


----------



## OCmember

I asked that guy a bunch of questions about his Sabertooth for 150$ and the only thing he could reply is, "I can offer you a 20 day warranty" lol! ok.

edit: lol just got another reply, "I will refund you money" lol!! Ok


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry for the delay intelchief. Very busy at the moment. I did find time to run the FireStrike benchmark. I attempted to mimic your settings. I set it up quickly for testing purposes.
> 
> -Disabled SLI
> -CPU = 4140Mhz [4.14Ghz] 23x. That's what your CPU will run once the benchmark starts.
> -RAM = 1440Mhz 9-9-9-24-1T
> -GPU = 1201Mhz Core
> 
> Here are my results:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed that you are running dual CPUs. For a fair comparison change the settings to allow only 1 processor. It appears that your score is perfectly fine. You have a higher physics score due to your dual processor setup. Compared to your score it's only a 2.87% difference. Your results are perfectly fine.


Ok i switched the jumper on motherboaqrd and locked one CPU. So those reasults are nearly the same (i downclocked my CPU to 4153, as close as i could get to your frequency) So it looks that my GPU is fine


Once again Kana-Maru thanks for all the effort and help


----------



## Detroitsoldier

Wow, I'm actually really impressed that this thread is alive and kicking. Good to see X58 support is still out there. Can't say I've ever been disappointed with my i7 930 lately, though with how cheap hexacores are, I may postpone selling my rig and just opt for getting a new graphics card and a hexacore if the 930 is struggling.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Detroitsoldier*
> 
> Wow, I'm actually really impressed that this thread is alive and kicking. Good to see X58 support is still out there. Can't say I've ever been disappointed with my i7 930 lately, though with how cheap hexacores are, I may postpone selling my rig and just opt for getting a new graphics card and a hexacore if the 930 is struggling.


Just remember they won't last forever so grab one while they're cheap


----------



## Space Marine

Hi there!

Just wanted to say that today my x5670 arrived and now is working on a P6T vanilla without issues









Later today ill start messing up with clocks, hoping my cooler will hold (CNPS10x Performa on Gelid GC Extreme)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I asked that guy a bunch of questions about his Sabertooth for 150$ and the only thing he could reply is, "I can offer you a 20 day warranty" lol! ok.
> 
> edit: lol just got another reply, "I will refund you money" lol!! Ok










Definitely avoid that. Great price, but it's to good to be true. Turns out it was.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Ok i switched the jumper on motherboaqrd and locked one CPU. So those reasults are nearly the same (i downclocked my CPU to 4153, as close as i could get to your frequency) So it looks that my GPU is fine
> 
> [SPOILER=Warning: Spoiler!][URL=http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2318479/width/500/height/1000]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2318479/width/500/height/1000[/URL][/SPOILER]
> 
> Once again Kana-Maru thanks for all the effort and help;)[/QUOTE]
> 
> No problem man. Once again sorry for the delay. I have a lot going on right now in life. Things look better. Less than 1% difference. I'm sure if I run the same CPU speed with DDR3-1600Mhz or tighter timings on 1440Mhz there would be less than 0.5%.
> 
> I normally run dual 670s. So far it hasn't let me down at all. Very respectable GPU.
> 
> Quote:
> [QUOTE]Originally Posted by [B]Detroitsoldier[/B] [URL=https://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2620#post_23411983][IMG alt="View Post"]https://www.overclock.net/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/URL]
> 
> Wow, I'm actually really impressed that this thread is alive and kicking. Good to see X58 support is still out there. Can't say I've ever been disappointed with my i7 930 lately, though with how cheap hexacores are, I may postpone selling my rig and just opt for getting a new graphics card and a hexacore if the 930 is struggling.


Yup it never died. Not as long as the X58 spirit is alive. I've been eyeballing dual GTX 970s for awhile now. I think I'm going to wait since I'm still doing fine @ 1440p & 1600p. I have a list of several games I've played benchmarked [not just by using the benchmark tools, but an actual in-game benchmark].
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Hi there!
> 
> Just wanted to say that today my x5670 arrived and now is working on a P6T vanilla without issues
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Later today ill start messing up with clocks, hoping my cooler will hold (CNPS10x Performa on Gelid GC Extreme)












Congrats


----------



## intelchief

When i was buidling my PC, my idea was to make 2 way or event three way SLI with GTX670. After GTX970 premiere i was thinking aboout this card. But, prices are pretty high for now. What is more important that maybe i will be able to play on my gtx on high in GTA V - this is the game i've been waiting for

Right know i'm still thinking about CPU frequency.
Option A
4321mhz with 1.329 V and 1440mhz 8-8-8-24 1T
Option B
4200mhz with 1.305 V and 1750 mhz 9-9-9-27 1T (maybe even lower voltage, i will be checking this on the weekend)

According to benchmarks "A" is faster but needs more voltage on the core. and I actuallly like my CPU's


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> When i was buidling my PC, my idea was to make 2 way or event three way SLI with GTX670. After GTX970 premiere i was thinking aboout this card. But, prices are pretty high for now. What is more important that maybe i will be able to play on my gtx on high in GTA V - this is the game i've been waiting for
> 
> Right know i'm still thinking about CPU frequency.
> Option A
> 4321mhz with 1.329 V and 1440mhz 8-8-8-24 1T
> Option B
> 4200mhz with 1.305 V and 1750 mhz 9-9-9-27 1T (maybe even lower voltage, i will be checking this on the weekend)
> 
> According to benchmarks "A" is faster but needs more voltage on the core. and I actually like my CPU's


What is the Uncore delta between the two? I've been able to stabilize my Uncore, knock on wood, at 3.5GHz @ 1.28v. It's a noticeable difference with my FPS on RO2: Rising Storm, 1080 all in-game video settings maxed. I have a higher minimum fps with a stronger max fps. I was at 3.9GHz Core, and ~ 2.5GHz Uncore before.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely avoid that. Great price, but it's to good to be true. Turns out it was.


I did get another reply testifying that the condition of the board is in excellent condition and everything works. I told him that I needed him to state that incase something is wrong, so Paypal can protect me as a buyer. He offered it at 135$ best price. Hmm. This could be a good investment. Only thing is tearing down the current rig just to test out this board..


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What is the Uncore delta between the two? I've been able to stabilize my Uncore, knock on wood, at 3.5GHz @ 1.28v. It's a noticeable difference with my FPS on RO2: Rising Storm, 1080 all in-game video settings maxed. I have a higher minimum fps with a stronger max fps. I was at 3.9GHz Core, and ~ 2.5GHz Uncore before.


Option A
CPU: 4321mhz with 1.329 V and 1.275 VTT (180mhz x 24)
uncore: 3600mhz
MEMORY: 1440mhz 8-8-8-24 1T with 1.54V\

Option B
CPU: 4200mhz with 1.305 V and VTT 1.275 (will try to work with volatges on the weekend)
uncore 3500mhz (for now, i will try to increase this value on the weekend)
Memory 1750 mhz 9-9-9-27 1T 1.63 V


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Option A
> CPU: 4321mhz with 1.329 V and 1.275 VTT (180mhz x 24)
> uncore: 3600mhz
> MEMORY: 1440mhz 8-8-8-24 1T with 1.54V\
> 
> Option B
> CPU: 4200mhz with 1.305 V and VTT 1.275 (will try to work with volatges on the weekend)
> uncore 3500mhz (for now, i will try to increase this value on the weekend)
> Memory 1750 mhz 9-9-9-27 1T 1.63 V


From what I hear that is a good range to be in. I've heard somewhere that 4GHz Uncore is either impossible or damaging ? don't remember. I wouldn't trust the OS readings for the voltages, as I've said before my readings are way off on some things. My board has terminals to test with a multi-meter and the VTT reads 1.356 in OS and on the meter it reads 1.28v That's too big of a difference to mess around with. Vcore is pretty much on but my point is play is safe. 4.2GHz is fantastic @ 1.3v Core. What is your Uncore voltage?


----------



## intelchief

.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> From what I hear that is a good range to be in. I've heard somewhere that 4GHz is either impossible or damaging ? don't remember. I wouldn't trust the OS readings for the voltages, as I've said before my readings are way off on some things. My board has terminals to test with a multi-meter and the VTT reads 1.356 in OS and on the meter it reads 1.28v That's too big of a difference to mess around with. Vcore is pretty much on but my point is play is safe. 4.2GHz is fantastic @ 1.3v Core. What is your Uncore voltage?


On my SR2 i also have terminals but sadly i dont have tools;/

Anyway my uncore voltages are 1.275 V in both cases(on evga motherboard is called CPU VTT voltage). But as i said i will work with "option b " on the weekend. maybe i will be able to lower vcore to 1.29 and increase uncore. frequency (my cpu VTT cant be lower than 1.275;/)

i've read that it's dangerous if uncore voltage is higher than 1.3V and memory frequency to uncroe frequency ratio is higher than 1.5-1.8. But if you're bellow 1.3 uncore voltage it's ok


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> .
> On my SR2 i also have terminals but sadly i dont have tools;/
> 
> Anyway my uncore voltages are 1.275 V in both cases(on evga motherboard is called CPU VTT voltage). But as i said i will work with "option b " on the weekend. maybe i will be able to lower vcore to 1.29 and increase uncore. frequency (my cpu VTT cant be lower than 1.275;/)
> 
> i've read that it's dangerous if uncore voltage is higher than 1.3V and memory frequency to uncroe frequency ratio is higher than 1.5-1.8. But if you're bellow 1.3 uncore voltage it's ok


Hmm. I also have an EVGA board. 760 A1 Rev.1.0 Wonder why the CPU VTT can't be any lower? Do you have the latest bios? My default VTT is 1.20v, and you should get a multi meter. If you can afford that board you should be able to afford a 20$ multi meter from Home Depot, or Lowes or any hardware store.


----------



## intelchief

well in my case it's probably because of two CPU's which are conncecting using QPI path. But it's my guessing Actually i have three bioses. i'm using the latest one but also in a free time i'm testing others(older ones)

you mean something like this?
http://allegro.pl/miernik-lcd-multimetr-z-temperatura-dt9208a-i4927016880.html


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> well in my case it's probably because of two CPU's which are conncecting using QPI path. But it's my guessing Actually i have three bioses. i'm using the latest one but also in a free time i'm testing others(older ones)
> 
> you mean something like this?
> http://allegro.pl/miernik-lcd-multimetr-z-temperatura-dt9208a-i4927016880.html


Yeah, something like that.


----------



## Space Marine

So i started messing up with the clocks, and it easily went up to 4ghz at 167x24 1,275v at 63° celsius (20 ambient temp), LLC disable (so vdroop enable i guess) and HT disable (since i use it just for gaming).
After 2 hours of IBT no errors so id say it's likely stable.

Problem is that i cant go any higher without making a big jump in voltage. Tried 4.1 ghz with 171x24 and ibt crashed after 30 secs at both 1,275v, 1,2875v and 1,30v.
Since i didn't want to go much higher than that with voltages i wonder if im not making some mistakes.

Everything else is pretty much at the minimum manual default, both QPI and uncore are at their lowest multi (since i just wanted to find the highest stable cpu clock), and every other voltage is at its minimum value, so PLL should be 1,80, ioh 1,10 and so on. My ram is rated 1600 cas9, and atm is way below that spec.

Any suggestion on how to avoid just a big voltage jump for 100mhz?


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's pretty much what I saw too. I think it might be a product of the architecture of these chips.


----------



## Space Marine

there were people in this same thread running 4.2 at 1.32 and 4.3 at 1.33

I just did another 100cycles ibt and is unstable at 4.1 /1.332v with QPI at 1,25

With my 920 it was either bsod-ing 101 or 124, giving an hint about which voltage had to be increased. Here instead it just crashes IBT, but had only 2 times a bsod, one time was 0x18 another 0x7E, which i have no idea what they are supposed to mean


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> there were people in this same thread running 4.2 at 1.32 and 4.3 at 1.33
> 
> I just did another 100cycles ibt and is unstable at 4.1 /1.332v with QPI at 1,25
> 
> With my 920 it was either bsod-ing 101 or 124, giving an hint about which voltage had to be increased. Here instead it just crashes IBT, but had only 2 times a bsod, one time was 0x18 another 0x7E, which i have no idea what they are supposed to mean


For 4.2 my CPu need 1.3(maybe less i ddint check). 4.3Ghz 1.329V
if u want i can give you my settings.

Huge impact on stability has memory divider/volateg and timings.

U said that youre OCing with Vdroop on, voltages youresaying are under stress or in the idle


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Huge impact on stability has memory divider/volateg and timings.


Jolly good - which settings are more stable then?


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Jolly good - which settings are more stable then?


i would say that you should start with 2:8 divider and higher timings.
What stock voltages your memory require to run on stock settings? 1.5 or 1.65?


----------



## Space Marine

Having a look at ur settings would be good









My voltages are always the ones i set inside the BIOS, under load they go lower of course (with LLC disabled)

My memory divider is the lowest one, should be x8 (my bios doesnt show the multi but the result of the multiplication), and is below my memory rated specs. They are Corsair 1600 c9 at 1.65v. I can hit 1600 only at 200bclk with that multi (and im still far from this bclk)

Btw Atm im testing with multi 22. As before 4ghz is stable, 4.1 cant make it stable yet.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Having a look at ur settings would be good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My voltages are always the ones i set inside the BIOS, under load they go lower of course (with LLC disabled)
> 
> My memory divider is the lowest one, should be x8 (my bios doesnt show the multi but the result of the multiplication), and is below my memory rated specs. They are Corsair 1600 c9 at 1.65v. I can hit 1600 only at 200bclk with that multi (and im still far from this bclk)
> 
> Btw Atm im testing with multi 22. As before 4ghz is stable, 4.1 cant make it stable yet.


Sry for the delay but i had to visit my University

So
E - means enabled
D - disabled

C1E support - E
Max CPUID value limit - D
Intel Virtualisation tech -E
Intel VT - E
Coherency support - D
Execute disable bit - E
Intel HT technology - E
Active processo Cores - ALL
A20M - D
Aintel Speedstep tech - E
intel Turbomode tech - E
Performance/watt select - traditional
intel C-state - D
ACPI t state - D

BCLK 175
PCIE 100
Multiplier 22
memory frequency 1333mhz (means 2:10)
MCH strap 1600mhz
CPu uncore x21

Voltages: settings in bios/readings
Without Vdroop
CPU: 1.30625/1.305
CPU VTT: 1.275/1.275
CPU DIM voltage: 1.54/1.623
IOH 1.325

All the rest settings are set on auto.
You have said that youre testing x22 multiplier. Why youre not using Turbo technology? it gives u extra 2


----------



## Space Marine

Man, that's 3850mhz, 175x22







it's 250mhz less then where i am now









I dont like turbo, i want all the cores working at the maximum possible speed all together. I don't use apps that would be better on 2 cores then 6, and it add another variable to the already complex thing that is overclocking








Also i can already use the 24x multi without turbo, with all 6 cores active, but wanted to try a better bclk at the same clock speed

Btw now im at 4.1 stable with LLC ON at 1.30v Vcore and 1,275 QPI
Im not sure if i want to keep LLC on or off, im still experimenting on it. For sure temps increased btw (69 degrees), but im still missing a test with LLC off and the resulting load voltage at 1.30v (i went up to 1,32v on idle but resulted in 1,280 under load).

Atm i wanna see how far i can go without pushing past 1,35v (and even less possibly) or past 4.3/4.4 ghz, or 75 degrees, and then i'll decide which setting is better for me.
For sure i like the very low voltage i am at 4ghz, i dunno why im hitting this voltage wall after just 100mhz


----------



## intelchief

but with Turbo ALL cores are working with 4,2ghz. I'm not speaking about x25 multiplier)

Actually for me is better to OC with multiplier - it requiress much less vcore and other voltages.


----------



## GENXLR

incorrect, With Turbo, only 1-2 Cores can operate under load at 24x, once 3 or 4 cores see load, it drops to 23x, and any more than that, it's 22x, thats how X5600 uses Turbo


----------



## intelchief

is there something, i've been missing? ss made during IBT test, all cores 4,2Ghz, all core x24 multi(x5670 max multiplier is 25 but in my case cstate is locked, so i use only x24)


----------



## Space Marine

what's ur Gflops under IBT maximum at 4.2?
At 4ghz im hovering around 80, if 2 or more cores are missing it would be easy to check this from the gflops value

also, any specific reason for which u keep ur IOH at 1.325?
mine is at 1.10v (default) and looks stable


----------



## intelchief

Well you must consider that i have two CPU's motherboard and in my case things are a little bit different with voltages Funny and interesting thing is that during OC i have to tweak signals, to improve CPU's communication - hard thing

At 4.2 i have from 159Gflops to 165 gflops. I didnt make a ss because i will be tring tommorow to lower vcore to 1.29V

i have ss from 4.3ghz - average 170gflops


----------



## Space Marine

i'll try to activate the turbo later, even if maybe it's ur motherboard which allows you for that









Btw, on 22 multi managed to get 4.2 stable but at 1,3375 with LLC ON and actually during load it was going up to 1,344 on cpu-z, so not rly a great result :/

Now im trying to push on 21 multi and see if anything changes.
Btw what about ur IOH being so high?


----------



## intelchief

well generally it's because of that IOH is the NB Vcore which directly affects your PCI-E and PCI slots, but on my motherboard in additional i have nforce chipset from nvidia which is a little bit "hungry"

pretty high, 1.344 for 4.2Ghz;/


----------



## Space Marine

Well i was never lucky with my CPUs, or maybe was never good enough at overclocking









Btw i might have found a better approach, looks stable after a fast run of IBT with those settings:

4,2ghz - 200x21
LLC off (so Vdroop on)
QPI voltage 1,30
Ram 1,64

Vcore:
- In bios is set at 1,35
- in windows idle cpu-z says 1,328v
- under IBT max load it swings in between 1,296 and 1,312, mostly hovering around 1,304

Max temps are 70celsius, exactly like when running at 1,3375/1,344 LLC on (this cpu looks like has it's temp related more to clockspeed then to voltage, at least looking at the values i wrote down from my tests)

Does it look better?









Gonna stress test it with a 200 cycles run

Btw, thinking about LLC off and high idle voltage, since LLC should be off according to intel spec, it makes me wonder if it is also supposed to be used together with other features which should be on according to these same intel specs, like speedstep for example, which would avoid the high idle voltage problem.

And another thing which makes me worrying a bit, is the high QPI frequency, according to cpu-z is 3600 atm, and it's set at it's lowest multi.
Is it safe?


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Well i was never lucky with my CPUs, or maybe was never good enough at overclocking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw i might have found a better approach, looks stable after a fast run of IBT with those settings:
> 
> 4,2ghz - 200x21
> LLC off (so Vdroop on)
> QPI voltage 1,30
> Ram 1,64
> 
> Vcore:
> - In bios is set at 1,35
> - in windows idle cpu-z says 1,328v
> - under IBT max load it swings in between 1,296 and 1,312, mostly hovering around 1,304
> 
> Max temps are 70celsius, exactly like when running at 1,3375/1,344 LLC on (this cpu looks like has it's temp related more to clockspeed then to voltage, at least looking at the values i wrote down from my tests)
> 
> Does it look better?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna stress test it with a 200 cycles run
> 
> Btw, thinking about LLC off and high idle voltage, since LLC should be off according to intel spec, it makes me wonder if it is also supposed to be used together with other features which should be on according to these same intel specs, like speedstep for example, which would avoid the high idle voltage problem.
> 
> And another thing which makes me worrying a bit, is the high QPI frequency, according to cpu-z is 3600 atm, and it's set at it's lowest multi.
> Is it safe?


What do you mean by writting "stressing with 200 cycles run". What priority in IBT are you using?Youdont have to run 200cycles, its better to set priority on very high/maximum or custom (with high amount of ram memory)
Anyway voltages looks much better. What are Gflops in IBT?

l decided to try to lower my vcore and look


One CPU constant 1.29 the second one 1.305 idle/1.29 load;D I love this units! I was able to lower my IOH a lot, but my mem needed more juice(actually their stock voltage is 1.65 with 1600mhz/ i'm running 1750mhz with 9-9-9-27 1T)


----------



## Space Marine

I always run IBT at maximum stress level, but when i want to fast check stability i run 10 cycles of it, when i want to be sure to be rock solid i let it run few hundreds of cycle for like half a day.

My gflops at 4.2 200x21 are about 83,7, at 4.2 191x22 (also stable apparently) are about 81,9.

I tried to activate turbo, but apparently if i set my clock settings to manual, for being able to edit them, any turbo option disappear in the bios

What's the max QPI safe voltage and frequency on westmere?


----------



## intelchief

check this
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yes I realize that. But uncore is not locked on these Westmere Xeon's. Gulftown is based on Westmere-EP *but not the same as*. Gulftown's are the Enthusiast equivalent chips such as i7-970-990x and come with a different IMC and completely unlocked. They work slightly different then these Xeon's quite simply because the IMC is built differently in order to support ECC and two physical chips (Its not a identical chip thus does not over clock the same way). Slight differences means everything seemingly changes, haha. You can't use what you learned with your old Gulftown (not entirely anyway) because your not trying to overclock a Gulftown. On my board uncore is called UCLK and it is NOT locked on Westmere based Xeons (maybe on your board). I do not show multipliers such as 20x, or 6x or even 2x, etc in the UCLK section. In my Uncore settings (a.k.a UCLK), only frequencies such as 3047 Mhz is shown, which is exactly 2x of memory speed (which RAM is set to 1523 mhz). On these Westmere Xeon's it is OK to run up to and beyond 2x Uncore *so long as you don't go above the 1.35v* limit (PER INTEL ENGINEERS, the voltage is what matters not the uncore, which is why there is a million different Uncore freq settings to chose from, lol). The chips default uncore is 1.5x for safety concerns related to Intel's goal of protecting the IMC and simply carried over from Gulftown-Westmere and vice versa. However, as you raise the Xeon's uncore it appears to become more energy efficient and thus uses less voltage (ONLY on Westmere Xeon's, NOT I7's). If you think these chips are identical and thus have identical over clocking characteristics you would be wrong. On these chips you are supposed to use the 1.5x uncore ratio to start out with according to Intel. On 45nm yes it is 2x (but this is not needed to know here), but on Gulftown and Westmere chips it is 1.5x, but on Gulftown it is dangerous to run higher than 2x especially when your working with higher than 1.35v on QPI and VTT. But not so on Westmere Xeon's, because the IMC is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. If uncore is locked for you then there is something wrong with your board or bios, because I can guarantee that these Westmere Xeon's do NOT have a locked uncore. The ONLY thing locked on this chip is the CPU multiplier, and even that seems to vary from board to board for some odd reason. LOL
> 
> You are correct in trying to find a fix for your seemingly locked uncore but there is no reason to get rude with someone only trying to help you. *The only reason I stated what I stated is because it appears your trying to use what you learned with a Gulftown chip and that "might" (I'm not saying it will) get you in trouble with your new Xeon chip.* Xeon's are locked CPU multi chips but have a more energy efficient IMC thanks to different architecture, thus things have slightly changed. Gulftown i7's are unlocked all the way around and has an IMC built specifically for Desktop memory and the Enthusiast crowd... One can run up to 298 GB of RAM (Westmere-EP Xeon's) and the other (Gulftown i7's) is limited to something like 24 GB.
> 
> Now back to your Uncore problem. I have no clue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: it appears I said it is not dangerous to run the Xeon over 2x. This is NOT true, it is VERY dangerous to run it over 2x (even over 1.5x) *IF AND ONLY IF the voltage HAS surpassed 1.35v.* Example: You can run the Westmere's at 8000 mhz Uncore if you want to, so long 1.35v has not be broken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet you wont make it there though, haha. This explains why we have such a very long list of frequencies in the Uncore drop down (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense at all). I retain the right to be wrong though, but this is what I gathered from thousands of hours of reading tech material on this subject.


----------



## Space Marine

Great, that's pretty much clear







also i remember the 1,35v limit on the i7 920 too

At the moment im trying to interpret the crashes im having at 4,3.

at 196x22 im getting bsod124, which should be fixed trying an higher QPI (im at 1,30 atm so i should have room)

at 180x24 IBT hangs but the mouse still works. I remember on the Athlon64 it used to mean low vcore, but cant find any info on 1366. Being already at 1,35vcore set in bios i wonder if it's worth riskying.

btw at 4,2 with the 200x21 voltages it's stable also at 191x22 so i guess a crash on low vcore at 180 is gonna be there at 196 too

Also, what about clock skews? might they be any useful?


----------



## intelchief

look at mine example.

to reach 4.2Ghz i need 1.294 Vcore
to reach 4.3Ghz i need 1.329 Vcore.

the difference in games doesnt exists, only in benchmarks which heavily use CPU,i can see MARGINAL difference. And those 100mhz "costs" nearly 0,04V. In my opinion it's not worth so I decided to downclock my "buddies to 4.2Ghz. It's an awesome performance and i dont think that i wiil need more for now. maybe after cooling upgrade(im planing custom LC)

It's your decision if its worth or not, but u already at 1.35V. I would say that its already a lot of juice.


----------



## Space Marine

Ok some cool news









I maxed out CPU amplitude and managed to lower vcore 2 notches down, and qpi voltage 3 notches down.
Now im running 1,3375 vcore in Bios LLC off (so vdroop on) and 1,28125 Qpi voltage.

1,3375 vcore in Bios turns out to be 1,320v in idle, and 1,280-1,304 (peak) under load
Not much difference in the idle voltage, but way below in the load one.

I wonder if it's a safe voltage to keep 24/7


----------



## GENXLR

Second that, I'm at 700MV, could i bump 900MV and be okay?


----------



## Space Marine

i went directly to 1000









btw didnt found stability as i thought, it's just that IBT crashes are less likely. Are still happening so, not stable atm.


----------



## intelchief

you know hwat is the best thing for testing stabbility? games seriosuly. first IBT, then prime95 and then games


----------



## Rylen

Just pulled the trigger on a x5650 for $70. Gonna put it in my "HTPC" and aim for about 3.5Ghz only


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Just pulled the trigger on a x5650 for $70. Gonna put it in my "HTPC" and aim for about 3.5Ghz only


Nice


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Nice


Yah cant wait. Going in this Apple Mini sized HTPC.


----------



## Space Marine

x5670 for 70$? Sending you a PM soon









Btw some updates on the overclocking side:

after something like 75 different combinations of settings i must have lost some info in the process and couldnt find stability at any overclocked speed.
So pretty much i started over and found my rock solid 4ghz with those settings:

4,0 ghz - 191 x 21
LLC OFF
1,30 vcore (in bios) (1,272/1,280 under load)
1,2875 QPI
PLL 1,84
Amplitude Auto
HT off

Rock solid after 7 hours of IBT maximum, and 3 of IBT+unigine heaven (for testing GPU+CPU temps and consumption)
What i have learned so far about my cpu is that for running a bclk of 195 or higher it needs at least 1,30v QPI. Must be cache related.
Also going from 1,80 to 1,84 PLL gave me stability, so i guess that's also needed for high bclk values.
The more volts sent to the CPU, the less gflops i get at the same clock-bclk-multi values.
Gflops are higher with an higher bclk then with an higher clockspeed. It might be related to cache speed.

Btw i cant find any practical difference while using Company of heroes 2 benchmark, since im at 4ghz i keep getting the same fps. Might be that im GPU limited now (Radeon 6970).

I also found another likely stable set of values at 4,1ghz:

4,1 ghz - 187x22
1,31250 vcore (in bios) 1,264/1,288 under load
1,84 pll
1,28750 qpi
the rest same as before

I still dont like how high the vcore goes in idle, i might switch back to LLC on soon.

On another note, found 2 sticks of Samsung Wonder Ram for a decent price (68 euros shipping included), they are on my way







(crossing finger, knocking wood and metal







)
My trichannel 6gb are having problems lately (im gonna RMA them), and according to various tests on the net, dual channel vs tri channel difference is nearly non existant, so when i saw them i couldnt resist


----------



## Space Marine

I agree, but not all them, the only one which i found capable of doing this consistently is Arma3








I'll test it later next week for sure, having had ram problems lately testing now wouldnt give me consistent info on crashes being ram related or cpu related


----------



## OCmember

Have your minimum fps' risen?


----------



## Space Marine

up to 4ghz yes, then any combination of bclk higher then 182 and multi, 4,0 4,1 or 4,2 resulting frequency, gives always the same value, which is 37 min, 55avg, 91 max at full HD all details at minimum

Big jump anyway from the minimum of 7 i used to have with my old i7 920 at 3,8ghz


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> up to 4ghz yes, then any combination of bclk higher then 182 and multi, 4,0 4,1 or 4,2 resulting frequency, gives always the same value, which is 37 min, 55avg, 91 max at full HD all details at minimum
> 
> Big jump anyway from the minimum of 7 i used to have with my old i7 920 at 3,8ghz


What is your Uncore speed at?


----------



## Space Marine

it's 1,5x on my mem frequency, which is 8x on 191 bclk, which means 2292 i guess at 1,29375v QPI


----------



## gofasterstripes

What's all this about Amplitude - I get confused about that one. Is there an Intel spec for it? Does 1000mV help other people? Are you running it like that anyone?


----------



## Space Marine

By what i have found on the net, it should help on stabilizing overclocks cause it sets something like an higher limit to the minimum mW needed for making a clock signal count. (at least that's what i have understood)

Honestly im not sure, my bios talks about something totally different, saying that it should help on stabilizing an high bclk frequency.

At the moment im not using it anymore. Or more precisely, i left it on auto


----------



## gofasterstripes

Cheers. Any others with input?

I really think I should be able to go over 4.0, there must be a magic bullet.

What about CPU clock skew?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> What about CPU clock skew?


You don't need to mess with the CPU clock skew unless you are nearing 5GHz


----------



## Space Marine

i think that the "magic bullet" is more to be found in the combination of CPU PLL voltages and IOH voltages too, in the next days i'll make some tests in that sense

Btw what are ur settings at the moment? why cant you go higher just using vcore?

Clock skew should be a kind of added latency, gotta go look again on google.
Btw id say amplitude might be more useful to us then clock skew, i also remember it being used at very high frequencies

One sure thing i figured out today:

LLC off keep temps lower at the same clock speed, as far as 5 degrees, 65 vs 70, and load vcore is lower too. 1,296 vs 1,256. That's quite a big difference.
I think i can live with an high idle vcore, and might be able to add some powersaving feature later on for fighting that.


----------



## Rylen

My Windows 8 System Information says im running BIOS Version/Date: American Megatrends Inc. 0703, 2/24/2010

Will my Asus P6X58D Premium with the above BIOS work with a X5650/?


----------



## Space Marine

If it's the last bios it should
Btw id say that any bios supporting 6core gulftowns can support westmere too

Im using a vanilla P6T, so yours should be better too


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> i think that the "magic bullet" is more to be found in the combination of CPU PLL voltages and IOH voltages too, in the next days i'll make some tests in that sense
> 
> Btw what are ur settings at the moment? why cant you go higher just using vcore?


200x20= 4000 [Uncore 16x =3200] /// Vcc About 1.30 under load [Vtt 1.33v in BIOS]

A bit high, I think, eerk.

I'm running the machine at 3560 with around 1.23Vcc 1.26Vtt for a coupl of weeks, not missed a beat.

I kinda thought I'd be able to hit 4.4, or run around 3.8 24/7 on the sorta volts I'm using for 3.55.

I thought PLL boost was verboten, well, dangerous.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 200x20= 4000 [Uncore 16x =3200] /// Vcc About 1.30 under load [Vtt 1.33v in BIOS]
> 
> A bit high, I think, eerk.
> 
> I'm running the machine at 3560 with around 1.23Vcc 1.26Vtt for a coupl of weeks, not missed a beat.
> 
> I kinda thought I'd be able to hit 4.4, or run around 3.8 24/7 on the sorta volts I'm using for 3.55.
> 
> I thought PLL boost was verboten, well, dangerous.


are u with LLC off right?
i think that voltage is ok for daily usage, even if i wouldnt go past that.
Also if u have an higher multi u can try with some combination of 191x21 or lower bclk too and see if u can lower some of the voltages
Im using 191x21


----------



## gofasterstripes

LLC is on. I'll try to turn it off, but on my system it seems to help close the gap between idle and load voltages, and it seems that Vcc under load is what's holding me back.

191x21 works, but it only lets me drop Vtt, and that is with a lower Uncore speed too.


----------



## Space Marine

the fact that on bios is lower then under load with LLC on is strange, which power supply do you use?


----------



## gofasterstripes

700W Coolermaster.

http://www.coolermaster.com/service/support/model/RS-700-AMBA-D3/

Speedfan misreports the +12V rail [1.5V], but the 5V is dead on 5, and 3.3 changes from 3.31 to 3.28 when running and pausing BOINC [CPU+GPU].

I suspect it's just that the EX58-UD3R doesn't have a very beefy CPU power rail. The system doesn't crash unless I set the overclock too high. System is drawing<400W from the UPS.

Any other programs I should use to monitor?


----------



## svfusion

I just ordered mine.. I have an Asus Rampage II Extreme.. I couldn't get very good OCed with my D0 i7-950.. Fingers Crossed!


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> I just ordered mine.. I have an Asus Rampage II Extreme.. I couldn't get very good OCed with my D0 i7-950.. Fingers Crossed!


congrats! those are great CPU's!


----------



## scahwo

I have played with my X5650 a little bit, and found strange things.
The issue is, that if I ramp up the cpu clock, I get worse results. My rig is ASUS P6T (vanilla) + X5650 + Scythe Kotetsu + 3x2GB Kingston 1800-CL9 @1600-8-8-8-20 1.60V.

I use Stockfish chess engine quite a lot, so it is an obvious choice to test my setup.

1. X5650 @3.60-1.25V (18x200)
At this setup IBT runs at 62GF, the temp is 80-81 c
Stockfish calculates 13600 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6600 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 70 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.

2. X5650 @3.80-1.25V (19x200)
At this setup IBT runs at 60 GFlops, the temp is 82-83 C
Stockfish calculates 13300 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6300 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 72 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.

I can hit 4.0 (20x200) stable 7/24 with even worse Stockfish results. I found 3.6 GHz the fastest. Can you explain why I get -2% worse results at +6% higher clocks? The clocks seem to stay rock solid at the set level, no sign of any throttling in either IBT or Stockifish. And the results are consequently worse in IBT and in Stockfish with full and limited load as well.


----------



## svfusion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> I have played with my X5650 a little bit, and found strange things.
> The issue is, that if I ramp up the cpu clock, I get worse results. My rig is ASUS P6T (vanilla) + X5650 + Scythe Kotetsu + 3x2GB Kingston 1800-CL9 @1600-8-8-8-20 1.60V.
> 
> I use Stockfish chess engine quite a lot, so it is an obvious choice to test my setup.
> 
> 1. X5650 @3.60-1.25V (18x200)
> At this setup IBT runs at 62GF, the temp is 80-81 c
> Stockfish calculates 13600 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6600 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 70 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.
> 
> 2. X5650 @3.80-1.25V (19x200)
> At this setup IBT runs at 60 GFlops, the temp is 82-83 C
> Stockfish calculates 13300 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6300 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 72 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.
> 
> I can hit 4.0 (20x200) stable 7/24 with even worse Stockfish results. I found 3.6 GHz the fastest. Can you explain why I get -2% worse results at +6% higher clocks? The clocks seem to stay rock solid at the set level, no sign of any throttling in either IBT or Stockifish. And the results are consequently worse in IBT and in Stockfish with full and limited load as well.


Is your memory running at normal speeds? I know with my motherboard, when I OC, the memory clocks go way down and I have to manually set them..


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> Is your memory running at normal speeds? I know with my motherboard, when I OC, the memory clocks go way down and I have to manually set them..


exactly, it sounds like u got some multi on auto

On a side note a strange thing just happened to me: while starting up the pc again 10 minutes ago the cmos did reset itself to default saying that the overclock failed, but after reloading everything as it was before there are no signs of problems.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> I have played with my X5650 a little bit, and found strange things.
> The issue is, that if I ramp up the cpu clock, I get worse results. My rig is ASUS P6T (vanilla) + X5650 + Scythe Kotetsu + 3x2GB Kingston 1800-CL9 @1600-8-8-8-20 1.60V.
> 
> I use Stockfish chess engine quite a lot, so it is an obvious choice to test my setup.
> 
> 1. X5650 @3.60-1.25V (18x200)
> At this setup IBT runs at 62GF, the temp is 80-81 c
> Stockfish calculates 13600 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6600 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 70 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.
> 
> 2. X5650 @3.80-1.25V (19x200)
> At this setup IBT runs at 60 GFlops, the temp is 82-83 C
> Stockfish calculates 13300 kNodes/s using 12 threads, and 6300 kNodes/s using 4 threads. The temp reaches 72 C using 12 threads, sub 60 using 4.
> 
> I can hit 4.0 (20x200) stable 7/24 with even worse Stockfish results. I found 3.6 GHz the fastest. Can you explain why I get -2% worse results at +6% higher clocks? The clocks seem to stay rock solid at the set level, no sign of any throttling in either IBT or Stockifish. And the results are consequently worse in IBT and in Stockfish with full and limited load as well.


If you increase the voltage at those frequencies you will probably see the scores and performance increase - it seems that the CPU will slightly throttle when it is at the edge of stability.
Or - as mentioned above - it might be due to different memory timings.

Try slightly higher vCore voltages and see what results you get.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> Is your memory running at normal speeds? I know with my motherboard, when I OC, the memory clocks go way down and I have to manually set them..


My RAM would run on 9-9-9-24-88-1T on auto setting, but I have them manually set on 8-8-8-20-72-1T @1600MHz.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> If you increase the voltage at those frequencies you will probably see the scores and performance increase - it seems that the CPU will slightly throttle when it is at the edge of stability.
> Or - as mentioned above - it might be due to different memory timings.
> 
> Try slightly higher vCore voltages and see what results you get.










It was the solution, thanks.


----------



## scahwo

Do you have any idea, which software to use for controlling a PWM CPU fan on an ASUS P6T (vanilla) or P6TD Deluxe board on Win 8.1-64? The software downloaded from ASUS doesn't seem to work with 8.1, the newer version is not compatible with X58. Speedfan can only read the values, fan control doesn't work. If I try to change the CPU fan speed, it sets the nonexsistent system fan instead. Same applies for both motherboards.


----------



## GENXLR

you are using speedfan wrong

enter speedfans advanced config and find the fan control and switch it from smart fan 3 or 4 whichever it's on to manaual and you will gain fan speed control within speedfan over your board.


----------



## Myski

How does the X5650 compare to early i7 9xx series (920-950) in terms of power consumption clock to clock (mainly on idle or at light cpu load)?

I notice the TDP is down from 130W to 95W but knowing the TDP often has nothing to do with real idle consumption, do you have any power consumption benchmarks to look at?

Sorry if it has been asked before itt, but I'm still reading through.

I am considering replacing my 5 and half yo i7 920 (3,8 ghz) with X5650 to extend this never-ending-story of a rig just a bit further (until the unlocked skylake hits the shelves some time next year, probably) but am a bit worried of the power consumption as I prefer to run this setup 24/7. If it is at or below the 920 level clock to clock, it's fine for me.

And do you think the X5650 would be the best upgrade from i7 920 in terms of performance per price when I intend to overclock it?

And as a side note, do you see anything suspicious with these xeons being sold in China? Are there any known scams (apart the obvious case of not getting anything sent). Aliexpress has a lot of them listed and most sellers sell them individually with very reasonable intl shipping costs.

http://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?catId=0&initiative_id=SB_20150124151313&SearchText=xeon+x5650

What I am fearing is a chance of getting some early sample version instead of production chip or a complete dud of an overclocker but they do claim them to be taken off used server rigs so I'm a bit on the fence about taking the risk here. Overclocking can't be ever quaranteed but if they are standard production chips I can't see why they would be less good of a chance to get a decent chip than from Ebay or somewhere else.

And no, there seems to be no decent deals on ebay at the moment when adding shipping charges to Europe. The prices for cpus are good, sometimes even better than in Aliexpress but basically all US-based sellers ruin their international sales by sticking to that ebay-imposed ripoff program called global shipping (charging 30+ dollars for shipping a small letter, ridiculous) so the ebay is out of question for me, this was supposed to be a budget upgrade, remember.

Thank you in advance.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> you are using speedfan wrong
> 
> enter speedfans advanced config and find the fan control and switch it from smart fan 3 or 4 whichever it's on to manaual and you will gain fan speed control within speedfan over your board.


Thanks.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> And no, there seems to be no decent deals on ebay at the moment when adding shipping charges to Europe. The prices for cpus are good, sometimes even better than in Aliexpress but basically all US-based sellers ruin their international sales by sticking to that ebay-imposed ripoff program called global shipping (charging 30+ dollars for shipping a small letter, ridiculous) so the ebay is out of question for me, this was supposed to be a budget upgrade, remember.
> 
> Thank you in advance.


Have you tried on your local market? You will find a bunch of them. These were very popular server CPUs in the early 2010s, but the warranty of these rigs are gone, and they are dismatled in large quantities. I live in Hungary, and I bought 4 cpus off the local second hand market last month. If I would want to get another 20 tomorrow, that wasn't an issue at all.


----------



## Rylen

Yah maybe X99 next year is worth it. And in 5-6 years a 10-12 Core X99 Xeon will be going for around $100 lol


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> Have you tried on your local market? You will find a bunch of them. These were very popular server CPUs in the early 2010s, but the warranty of these rigs are gone, and they are dismatled in large quantities. I live in Hungary, and I bought 4 cpus off the local second hand market last month. If I would want to get another 20 tomorrow, that wasn't an issue at all.


Yes I have been eyeing local people selling their stuff at forums etc over few weeks but looks to me there are very few Xeons up for sale, all there seem to be are those i7 models that go for far higher price and few other people willing buy these Xeons but no one is selling. And there aren't many resellers carrying 2nd hand stuff around here tho and those who do usually stick to the low-end consumer grade hw.

I found some sellers in Aliexpress explicitly stating their cpus to be of B1 revision ie. the proper production batch and not samples so I think I'm giving it a try if I find a seller who accepts credit card payment for insurance.

Still looking for info on that power consumption though, and if there are any better x58 CPUs to consider with ~100$ budget or if the X5650 is the chip to go in that price range.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Where are you based, Myski?


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

My 5670 will only hit a max of 3.8ghz, anyone think an upgrade to x99 is worth it for overall performance gains and in games? Or is it probably better to wait for prices to fall a bit on ddr4 etc?


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Where are you based, Myski?


Near Helsinki, Finland. I think the problem is I don't know the right connections to businesses who mainly deal with other businesses and don't advertise to common folks and who might carry these kinda parts preowned. Last deal I was able to find on the local forums for x5650 closed half a year ago, went for 90 euros (~100 dollars or so) so I think the 75 dollars they're asking in China now is reasonable enough.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Myski, I bought from here. Maybe the postage isn't too much to you?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-OEM-2-66GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Server-Processor-CPU-/271431971344?pt=UK_Computing_CPUs_Processors&hash=item3f329b3210


----------



## Kommanche

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Myski, I bought from here. Maybe the postage isn't too much to you?
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-OEM-2-66GHz-Six-Core-SLBV3-Server-Processor-CPU-/271431971344?pt=UK_Computing_CPUs_Processors&hash=item3f329b3210


I bought from there too.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> Near Helsinki, Finland. I think the problem is I don't know the right connections to businesses who mainly deal with other businesses and don't advertise to common folks and who might carry these kinda parts preowned. Last deal I was able to find on the local forums for x5650 closed half a year ago, went for 90 euros (~100 dollars or so) so I think the 75 dollars they're asking in China now is reasonable enough.


Do not forget, that you will have to pay your local VAT (24%) for any used or new items above 22 EUR from outside the EU. Since the boom of the USD/EUR, I don't think it would be a good idea to get it fom China.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> My 5670 will only hit a max of 3.8ghz, anyone think an upgrade to x99 is worth it for overall performance gains and in games? Or is it probably better to wait for prices to fall a bit on ddr4 etc?


8 is 33% more than 6. Add the better single core clock to clock performance, the better overclocking capabilities of the i7s, and you have the question replied. 5 years cannot pass without a trace. Is it as cheap as a Westmere? No way. And it won't be ever. The new Xeons can't be overclocked at all. In four-five years the servers will be dismantled, but CPUs will worth nothing. The X99 desktop platform will stick to the i7s.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> 8 is 33% more than 6. Add the better single core clock to clock performance, the better overclocking capabilities of the i7s, and you have the question replied. 5 years cannot pass without a trace. Is it as cheap as a Westmere? No way. And it won't be ever. The new Xeons can't be overclocked at all. In four-five years the servers will be dismantled, but CPUs will worth nothing. The X99 desktop platform will stick to the i7s.


I was more on about the x99 6 core chips, not 8 core.. i'll not make a use for 8 cores and it's a bit too expensive for me.

I'm asking if a switch to x99 with a 5820k or 5930k is worth it over these x58 Xeons.


----------



## scahwo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> I was more on about the x99 6 core chips, not 8 core.. i'll not make a use for 8 cores.
> 
> I'm asking if a switch to x99 with a 5820k or 5930k is worth it over these x58 Xeons.


Ask yourself, if you really can make a use for 6 cores at all. If you are not into very cpu intensive applications, which can make a use of 8 cores as much as 6, than probably you should go for the 4 core Haswell platform. They run cooler, therefore have better overclocking capabilities, which is more important for games, then the +2/+4 extra cores, the Haswell-E can provide.

But if the 'make a use of' is more budget, than software related, then I would still wait for cheaper ddr4. The Westmere-EP has more raw cpu power then 4-core Haswell, but the 6-core Haswell-E doesn't offer so much extra performance for the extra dollar/euro.


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> Ask yourself, if you really can make a use for 6 cores at all. If you are not into very cpu intensive applications, which can make a use of 8 cores as much as 6, than probably you should go for the 4 core Haswell platform. They run cooler, therefore have better overclocking capabilities, which is more important for games, then the +2/+4 extra cores, the Haswell-E can provide.
> 
> But if the 'make a use of' is more budget, than software related, then I would still wait for cheaper ddr4. The Westmere-EP has more raw cpu power then 4-core Haswell, but the 6-core Haswell-E doesn't offer so much extra performance for the extra dollar/euro.


Hmm well, with regular Haswell doesn't it only overclock on average an extra 300-400mhz over Haswell-E? That's hardly going to make a difference unless going for benchmark scores..

So generally then, going from a x58 6 core Xeon to x99 6 core Haswell-E is not really worth the cost for performance alone, probably only the extra features it brings?


----------



## Space Marine

If u are starting already from an x58 platform just do the math:

70/100 euros (x58 6core) vs something more like 400/500 Haswell-E (cpu-ram-mb, eyeballing it , not even so sure, probably more).
Is it better? yes
Is it 4/5 times better? I don't think so
Do you need that increase in power even at that steep price? Well that's up to what you have to do.

For me it wasnt worth it. But in my case even the i7 920 was an upgrade (for a good price 1 year ago from a friend), i was on a phenom II x4 just 18 months ago lol.

One thing about my 6core is sure: Arma3 online wasnt really playable online on the 920 at 3,8ghz, now it is on the x5670 at 4ghz, and with a pretty crappy videocard too for today's standards (radeon [email protected]).
So for me it was a worthy upgrade, and it's gonna be even more if i can resell the 920 even for 40 or 50 euros.

Of course if it only would overclock better i would be even happier







Im gonna try again to push it when ill get the new ram (tomorrow likely)


----------



## Myski

Yes
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> So generally then, going from a x58 6 core Xeon to x99 6 core Haswell-E is not really worth the cost for performance alone, probably only the extra features it brings?


Like other posters said above, I think it is not worth it if you already have the x58 mobo which is by far the hardest part to find reasonably priced nowadays when they have long stopped making them and the prices for used parts have actually risen a bit (at least for some high-end mobos) and I think the steep decline in x58 i7 cpu prices at least here at local markets over the last year is connected to this. When there simply aren't enough cheap used x58 motherboards out there to meet the demand it obviously pushes the mobo price up and cpu price down because the shortage of mobos lessens the cpus potential value (compared to it's price otherwise dictated by raw performance) if it is very hard to find a compatible motherboard for it. I think it has gone to this because motherboard is usually much more unreliable part compared to cpu in terms of durability over time. Mobos start to randomly fail when they age but cpu takes serious abuse or some very very bad luck for a processor to die prematurely. That and the fact the market is sprayed with disassembled server chips when they rip the cpu off a server for resale but don't sell the server mobo since it is of no use for desktop user.

I consider the Xeon upgrade for 60-70 euros/dollars (minus the ~half of that you can get from selling your old 920/930) or so to be a no-brainer upgrade one could do without even a real need but just for the fun of it (the thing they call "future proofing" with newer hardware) when coming from 920 or so IF you already have the motherboard and tri-channel amount of ddr3. From the x58 to some newer platform there should really be a real need ie cpu limiting your current performance in applications you use to be justified to me because the price difference is great even for used hardware it can easily add up to 500-600e for a set of good mobo+cpu+quad set of ram and even if you count the resale value of 920 x58 set of same parts (totaling some 200e tops if you don't have some ultra high-end mobo or more than 12gb of ram) it's still a great cost.

Personally I am waiting for the Skylake at least before considering any bigger upgrades.


----------



## Rylen

Gonna install my X5650 tonight. Is there a guide I can follow to overclock on a PX658D Premium. (Or can someone help me)

My Ram is the Samsung Low Votl Stuff DDR3 1600 @ 1.35V

Looking for 3.8-4Ghz CPU and 1600-1800 RAM. And either 9-9-9-27 timings or 8-8-8-24

Some help would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Myski

Oh, I forgot to add one potential benefit that I noticed in theory with x5650 even if not using much heavily-threaded software.

The Xeon seems to offer hardware acceleration for AES encryption like the newer architectures from Sandy do but that is missing from Nehalem i7s. I don't know if the performance benefit is large enought to notice in normal use when using whole disk encryption but am curious to see.

Rylen, I don't have my chip yet and don't know how much you know about oc'ing but at least with i7 9xx they usually got better overclocking results with odd multipliers (19, 21 etc) for some reason. A fact often overlooked in OC guides but seems to be a rule of thumb at least with few Asus mobos and 920s I have seen. Would try that if not getting good results with even multipliers and the usual voltage tweaks.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Gonna install my X5650 tonight. Is there a guide I can follow to overclock on a PX658D Premium. (Or can someone help me)
> 
> My Ram is the Samsung Low Votl Stuff DDR3 1600 @ 1.35V
> 
> Looking for 3.8-4Ghz CPU and 1600-1800 RAM. And either 9-9-9-27 timings or 8-8-8-24
> 
> Some help would be greatly appreciated.
> ]


Didnt even get a chance to try and OC, it didnt work

my TV wouldnt display anything whatsoever. It was as if there was a problem with the HDMI connection. But that obviously wasnt the case because as soon as a i switched back to the i7 930 everything worked again.

Does that sound like Bios issue ? Or just a bad CPU?

My Windows 8 System Information says im running BIOS Version/Date: American Megatrends Inc. 0703, 2/24/2010


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Didnt even get a chance to try and OC, it didnt work
> 
> my TV wouldnt display anything whatsoever. It was as if there was a problem with the HDMI connection. But that obviously wasnt the case because as soon as a i switched back to the i7 930 everything worked again.
> 
> Does that sound like Bios issue ? Or just a bad CPU?
> 
> My Windows 8 System Information says im running BIOS Version/Date: American Megatrends Inc. 0703, 2/24/2010


I have that combo running at 4.2 GHz Prime stable. Settings are somewhere in the thread to find. Use latest bios *1501*


----------



## Space Marine

Do you guys think it's safe to run the RAM at 1866 or the IMC might be stressed too much?


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Do you guys think it's safe to run the RAM at 1866 or the IMC might be stressed too much?


Try - see if you can get it stable. On my GA-EX58-UD5 I can't get my six sticks stable at more than 1500MHz.


----------



## Space Marine

1t or 2t?
Did you try relaxing the timings?


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> I have that combo running at 4.2 GHz Prime stable. Settings are somewhere in the thread to find. Use latest bios *1501*


Used latest bios, cleared cmos and nothing again. I get no signal to the monitor at all. And I get no beep codes from the motherboard either (with 4 pin SPKR installed)

Yet everything works fine once I switch back to the i7 930


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Used latest bios, cleared cmos and nothing again. I get no signal to the monitor at all. And I get no beep codes from the motherboard either (with 4 pin SPKR installed)
> 
> Yet everything works fine once I switch back to the i7 930


Sounds like you weren't lucky with your purchase








Time to contact the seller I guess?


----------



## gooface

I am super tempted to buy one of these setups, it would replace my i7 870 PC in my sig.

I love the price of the CPU's, I just am worried how much it would cost for something like the SABERTOOTH X58 or something...would it be hard to find a board with features like the current board I have in my i7 870 PC? (Asus P7P55D-E Deluxe)

I love messing with older generation CPU's that still have punch to them (my 2nd pc was a 3.6ghz C2Q 9450 then I went to the 4.0ghz i7 870 for cheap)

Anyways I'd love to make the jump to one of these, how much is a board cost that isnt half bad that could run this? (rough ballpark) The CPU's are less than $100..

Thanks!


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Didnt even get a chance to try and OC, it didnt work
> 
> my TV wouldnt display anything whatsoever. It was as if there was a problem with the HDMI connection. But that obviously wasnt the case because as soon as a i switched back to the i7 930 everything worked again.
> 
> Does that sound like Bios issue ? Or just a bad CPU?
> 
> My Windows 8 System Information says im running BIOS Version/Date: American Megatrends Inc. 0703, 2/24/2010


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Sounds like you weren't lucky with your purchase
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time to contact the seller I guess?


Yep that was it!! An x5660 arrived today and it worked like a charm! I'm relieved "it wasn't me" and it was just a bad chip


----------



## intelchief

I was thinking that when youre OC'ing with multiplier(i mean using intel turbo technology) will give lower temps, voltages etc. i was using 24 multiplier and bclk = 175 mhz with 1.29V woltage(with turbo it was 4.21ghz)
today i tried higher BCLK with turbo off. 192mhz x 22 = 4,22Ghz All the voltages are the same BUT temps are lower (>5 degrees Celsius )


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Yep that was it!! An x5660 arrived today and it worked like a charm! I'm relieved "it wasn't me" and it was just a bad chip


Awesome!
Enjoy your beast


----------



## Wanderer1

Hello guys,

my name is Wanderer1 and i came to this thread because i need your help

This is my system
Asus Rampage II Extreme
Intel i7 920 D0 4.0Ghz
Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power
Corsair Vengeance 3x4 12gb 1600mhz cl9 1.5v triple channel Ram
Asus r7 265 2gb VGA

I need to ask you if the Xeon X5660 will work on my motherboard and if it is going to be compatible with my memory RAM.
I plan on getting a high end video card and i would like to get a more powerful CPU, without changing platform because i can't afford that right now.
So the Xeon 5660 sounds like a good idea and i would like to overclock it if it is going to work on my motherboard.

If the answer is positive, could you also link me some X5660 Xeon cpu from Amazon or ebay that you think is a good deal, because i have
no experience in buying items from those websites.

PS: I live in Europe.

Thanks a lot!


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> I was thinking that when youre OC'ing with multiplier(i mean using intel turbo technology) will give lower temps, voltages etc. i was using 24 multiplier and bclk = 175 mhz with 1.29V woltage(with turbo it was 4.21ghz)
> today i tried higher BCLK with turbo off. 192mhz x 22 = 4,22Ghz All the voltages are the same BUT temps are lower (>5 degrees Celsius )


Same voltages? Even QPI?

You got lucky


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Same voltages? Even QPI?
> 
> You got lucky


very lucky! after problems with X55XX xeons family, X5670 pn my board are flying;D all voltagesare the same (including QPI - in bios 1.275). But those temps, 72 on hottest core with air and case closed


----------



## Space Marine

Which cooling are u using?

I got a deal for a d15 at 80 euros shipped, but to this i guess i should add 15 for the socket support.
I wonder if it's worth to spend 90 euros for cooling a 100 euros cpu.
Maybe a d14 at 50 euros would be a better deal, price/performance related.


----------



## intelchief

I am using Prolimatech megahalems with 2 fans on every CPU. Maybe its beacuse my case is pretty big (Xigmatek elysium)


----------



## Space Marine

Also which one between a 280x and a 290x would be a better fit for the xeon?

Might get a 280x for 180 euros or a 290x for 260 euros


----------



## intelchief

290x is a pretty monster but well, i dont really know. I'm a Nvidia fan


----------



## gooface

hey all, I just got a x58 Sabertooth board... I am trying to decide between the X5670 and the X5660, there's like a $20 difference between the two, is it worth spending the extra cash?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> hey all, I just got a x58 Sabertooth board... I am trying to decide between the X5670 and the X5660, there's like a $20 difference between the two, is it worth spending the extra cash?


yes, better chance of 5670 being a better binned chip.


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Also which one between a 280x and a 290x would be a better fit for the xeon?
> 
> Might get a 280x for 180 euros or a 290x for 260 euros


Get the most powerful GPU you can afford. All that bottleneck talk is rubbish. If you aren't getting good GPU utilization it's either a low demand game or the problem exists between keyboard and chair. My FX worked my 290 just as hard as my xeon does. Main difference is better minimum frame rates than the FX.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> my name is Wanderer1 and i came to this thread because i need your help
> 
> This is my system
> Asus Rampage II Extreme
> Intel i7 920 D0 4.0Ghz
> Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power
> Corsair Vengeance 3x4 12gb 1600mhz cl9 1.5v triple channel Ram
> Asus r7 265 2gb VGA
> 
> I need to ask you if the Xeon X5660 will work on my motherboard and if it is going to be compatible with my memory RAM.
> I plan on getting a high end video card and i would like to get a more powerful CPU, without changing platform because i can't afford that right now.
> So the Xeon 5660 sounds like a good idea and i would like to overclock it if it is going to work on my motherboard.
> 
> If the answer is positive, could you also link me some X5660 Xeon cpu from Amazon or ebay that you think is a good deal, because i have
> no experience in buying items from those websites.
> 
> PS: I live in Europe.
> 
> Thanks a lot!


yes it will work.

this looks decent

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66GHz-6-Core-12MB-Cache-1333MHz-CPU-Processor-UK-Seller-/251811816529?pt=UK_Computing_CPUs_Processors&hash=item3aa1276451


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> I am using Prolimatech megahalems with 2 fans on every CPU. Maybe its beacuse my case is pretty big (Xigmatek elysium)


mine is an 800d, not rly a dwarf either


----------



## Wanderer1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> yes it will work.
> 
> this looks decent
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-2-66GHz-6-Core-12MB-Cache-1333MHz-CPU-Processor-UK-Seller-/251811816529?pt=UK_Computing_CPUs_Processors&hash=item3aa1276451


Hello,

thanks for the quick response. What is the main difference between the one you have linked and the 5660? Just their base clock speed?
Do both OC in the same levels?

Also is there such a thing as stepping in those xeon cpus? For example i7 920 d0 clocks better than c0, and so on.

Thanks for your help!


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> thanks for the quick response. What is the main difference between the one you have linked and the 5660? Just their base clock speed?
> Do both OC in the same levels?
> 
> Also is there such a thing as stepping in those xeon cpus? For example i7 920 d0 clocks better than c0, and so on.
> 
> Thanks for your help!


there are stepping but almost all xeon is stepping b1, i have yet seen a xeon with another stepping besides that.

5650 have 22 multi you can play with, 5660 has 23, 5670 has 24, and 5675 has 25 multi you can use. also higher the model number could mean better binned chip. no way was i able to do 4ghz on 1.2v on my old x5650, but possible and stable on my 5675.


----------



## Wanderer1

I see, then i guess i ll try to find the highest model possible. Sadly ebay.uk does not send to Greece, i think i ll have
to search in another website, damn..

Also do you think that my rampage 2 extreme will be able to oc that puppy to super high levels? Of course i know that depends also
on my cooler.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> I see, then i guess i ll try to find the highest model possible. Sadly ebay.uk does not send to Greece, i think i ll have
> to search in another website, damn..
> 
> Also do you think that my rampage 2 extreme will be able to oc that puppy to super high levels? Of course i know that depends also
> on my cooler.


well it really depends on the chip, like i said its a silicon lottery, some 5660 could perform better than some 5670, and vice versa, but generally the higher the model number the better the oc. the 5675 is the highest model before the TDP kicks up to 130watt from 95 watt, if that matters to you go with a 5675, otherwise there are 5680 and 5690 out there with even higher multi for you to play with,

but if highest you want to push is 4.7-4.8ghz stable without pushing behind 1.45v. get a 5675, at 4.7ghz you're already beating out alot of haswell and ivy in multi core situations.


----------



## Wanderer1

http://www.game-debate.com/motherboard/index.php?mot_id=25&cpuList=Asus%20Rampage%20II%20Extreme in this list i don't see xeon x5675.

So what you are saying though, is that the last low tdp xeon is the 5675 and anything higher than that uses same power as my 130w i7 920?


----------



## gofasterstripes

"1.45v"

Really? Who thinks this is a good idea? Looks pretty hairy to me! But I'm not happy about passing 1.31 loaded, am I just being a wuss? Who's running these chips that hard, over what timescale and with what cooling?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> http://www.game-debate.com/motherboard/index.php?mot_id=25&cpuList=Asus%20Rampage%20II%20Extreme in this list i don't see xeon x5675.
> 
> So what you are saying though, is that the last low tdp xeon is the 5675 and anything higher than that uses same power as my 130w i7 920?


yep, if it can run a 5650, it can run a 5675.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> "1.45v"
> 
> Really? Who thinks this is a good idea? Looks pretty hairy to me! But I'm not happy about passing 1.31 loaded, am I just being a wuss? Who's running these chips that hard, over what timescale and with what cooling?


http://valid.x86.fr/acac91

i had to put 1.43 to get that to pass ibt

i don't even think i run that hard, i know 3 other guys here that runs it at 1.45 constant.

and i'm using a megahalem


----------



## Wanderer1

does the r2ex support the 5675 though? I dont see it in the list that i linked earlier x,.x


----------



## kckyle

i honestly don't know who made that list, but it's fairly incomplete. but if it supports 5650, then i know for fact it will support 5675,

and if you're set on getting a cpu off that list, 5660 or a 5650 will do just fine, except you'll be limited in the multis.


----------



## Wanderer1

Ok gotcha i ll go with 5675 if i can find one.

Do you think with that xeon cpu i can hold off a complete platform change for a few more years?Mainly for gaming and video editing.
My i7 920 is still serving me just fine, but if i can get a better cpu for very little money then why not..


----------



## kckyle

even at stock these xeons can hold it's own against ivy bridge cpus, once you overclock it decent amount, you can compete against haswell in multi and some single core performance, so yeah you can probably hold off til skylake if the gaming industry doesn't release a huge game changer like the first crysis. but given how lazy the gaming industry has been with all the console running crap hardware, i highly doubt that's going to happen.


----------



## GENXLR

Second CPU is in. My X5670, currently on air at 4Ghz at just 1.3Vcore, passing IBT with 76Gflops. Getting ready for a Custom water loop and shooting for 4.4Ghz 24/7 Workstation







, will post more when the time comes


----------



## kckyle

1.3v for 4ghz is a bit high, you can probably get away with 1.25v


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> yes, better chance of 5670 being a better binned chip.


Ok, I got the x5670 coming then, I just got one for $115. Got a Sabertooth x58 and 12GB of RAM for $200, so its costing me $315, I hope it works great! I am going to sell my i7 870 setup and replace it with this.


----------



## kckyle

wow thats a great deal, sabertooth plus 12gb for only 200. you really capitalized on that one.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey - I might have asked this before, but:

CPU Differential Amplitude? Anyone used/bumped this to good effect?


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> wow thats a great deal, sabertooth plus 12gb for only 200. you really capitalized on that one.


Yeah it was too good to pass up, though its 6 sticks of 2gb, will that limit my overclock much? Should I sell the RAM and get 3x4GB?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey - I might have asked this before, but:
> 
> CPU Differential Amplitude? Anyone used/bumped this to good effect?


im not sure, where do you see that option in bios, is it a asus board? or gigabyte?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Yeah it was too good to pass up, though its 6 sticks of 2gb, will that limit my overclock much? Should I sell the RAM and get 3x4GB?


6 stick is gonna put a limit on ur ram mhz, but if you dont go over 1600mhz you're fine, and since test by kana shows going over 1600mhz for x58 doesnt show much difference in performance anyway, so its really irrelevant


----------



## Rylen

Only changes I made from default when overclocking is changing the BCLK to 180, changed the ram from auto to 1804Mhz, set CPU Voltage to 1.24, and changed RAM voltage from auto to 1.3625.

Total noob here. What other values should I change? Anything to lower temps besides CPU voltage lower? Should I lower the CPU Voltage a bit more?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Only changes I made from default when overclocking is changing the BCLK to 180, changed the ram from auto to 1804Mhz, set CPU Voltage to 1.24, and changed RAM voltage from auto to 1.3625.
> 
> Total noob here. What other values should I change? Anything to lower temps besides CPU voltage lower? Should I lower the CPU Voltage a bit more?


no that looks pretty good, good voltage for above 4ghz too. just run some stress test to see if stable


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> no that looks pretty good, good voltage for above 4ghz too. just run some stress test to see if stable


The pic was in the middle of Prime95 after like an hour


----------



## kckyle

yeah i noticed after i post


----------



## GENXLR

my X5650 needed 1.35V for just 4Ghz, idk if it will go that low on the X5670


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> my X5650 needed 1.35V for just 4Ghz, idk if it will go that low on the X5670


Wow that vcore is pretty high! but LLC is on or off?
And kckyle one is super low! are u also with LLC on or off?

My x5670 is weird: at 4ghz it runs pretty much at stock vcore, but if i want to go any higher than this i have to go up to 1,35vcore LLC off

Quote:


> CPU Differential Amplitude? Anyone used/bumped this to good effect?


Did some tests few pages before, but no useful info came out of it. Im gonna test it again soon.
Quote:


> I was thinking that when youre OC'ing with multiplier(i mean using intel turbo technology) will give lower temps, voltages etc. i was using 24 multiplier and bclk = 175 mhz with 1.29V woltage(with turbo it was 4.21ghz)
> today i tried higher BCLK with turbo off. 192mhz x 22 = 4,22Ghz All the voltages are the same BUT temps are lower (>5 degrees Celsius )


At which timing are you running your ram?
is HT on?


----------



## Space Marine

On a side note, my newly got Samsung 30nm ram are now running stable at 7 7 7 21 at 191x8








I did also try to run them at 1600, and memtest said it was possible, but IBT didnt like it.

In this case i think it's an IMC problem, because on my first run i erroneously tested 200x20 with auto ram timings and it was running fine at the same QPI voltage im running now at 191 (1,2875v), but as soon as i started setting up some decent timings (8 8 8), IBT failed, while memtest failsafe mode didn't.
So this also should prove that cache running at 2400mhz it's fine.

I wonder if there is a way to stabilize the IMC at 200x20 other than increasing QPI voltage.


----------



## GENXLR

My X5650 LLC is ON, on my X5670, LLC is OFF, and CPU Diff is at 900Mv.


----------



## Wanderer1

Ok im in the search for a 5660 or higher at this point. If you see anything on ebay/amazon or anywhere else please let me know. Sadly UK websites don't send to Greece, so i can't buy from there.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Wow that vcore is pretty high! but LLC is on or off?
> And kckyle one is super low! are u also with LLC on or off?
> 
> My x5670 is weird: at 4ghz it runs pretty much at stock vcore, but if i want to go any higher than this i have to go up to 1,35vcore LLC off
> Did some tests few pages before, but no useful info came out of it. Im gonna test it again soon.
> At which timing are you running your ram?
> is HT on?


yes!, u can see on SS which i posted. 6 cores 12 threads on every CPU. Really dont know why without Intel Turbo CPU's are colder


----------



## kckyle

for anything below 4.6ghz llc is on standard, but when pushing beyond 4.7ghz i had to turn on moderate amount of llc vdroop to get it to stable. otherwise it would just crash every 5 min.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Did some tests few pages before, but no useful info came out of it. Im gonna test it again soon.


Thanks.


----------



## Rylen

Just for fun

Catzilla Benchmark http://www.catzilla.com/showresult?lp=425714

3DMark http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/5719454


----------



## gofasterstripes

Guys, my 4GHz overclock that was stable [all night p95 and 20 passes IBT max] started crashing recently. What's going ok?

The pic above is after I dialled the Uncore back to 2800 and kept the uncore volts around 1.3, and I also bumped my Vcc from 1.312 to 1.32ish [flickers between 1.312 and 1.32x].

I have been running [email protected] for the last two weeks, with the system set to 3.55GHz 1.25 1.25 ish and it crashed twice yesterday at 4 [immediate grey screen, hard lockup]. So I got worried and tried IBT. At the previously stable settings it woudn't make it past 2xIBT, now after bumping volts to this it's not making past 10.

My voltages were already high for my speed, yet within safe limits, so I don't understand. I have also raised CPU clock drive to 1000mv _.

**** started to get odd after I tried to shoot for 4.4 using 1.37VVcc [loaded] and 1.355Vtt - it wouldn't work and the x18 uncore setting stopped working [no boot possible]. RAISING the uncore to x19 got it booting again, but now further problems.

Is the chip FUBAR?

Why?_


----------



## Space Marine

I remember something like that happening to my i7 920 c0, was stable at 4ghz first, then only at 3.8, then barely at 3.6.

Which was your vcore before?
LLC was on or off?
and which was your QPI voltage?

CPU clock drive is interesting, I also used it to 1000mv on the 920 which started exhibit this problem. I wonder if that stronger clock signal doesn't come at the big price of ruining the cpu

On a side note, i finally managed to get stable 200x20, it was a ram timing problem, setting them to 8 8 8 27 fixed any IBT crashes i had.
Vcore 1,30 in bios LLC off (idle more like 1,280, load 1,256)
QPI 1,2875
CPU PLL 1,84 (might try to lower this one down later on)


----------



## gofasterstripes

VCore ["Vcc"] was 1.312 loaded and is now around 1.32 loaded [+2 steps in the BIOS] - usually enough to stabilize an increase in frequency when I was ramping the overclock.

QPI/Uncore Voltage has not been set above 1.335 apart from a < 1 hour shot with it set to 1.355 that didn't work. Though this DID happen immediately before the x18 multi stopped working on my lower overclock [170 BClock setting, for 24x7 I wanted a reasonable boost at lower volts]

BIOS VCore setting was 1.35 with LLC on, but CPU-Z reports 1.312. LLC doesn't seem to eliminate VDroop, just reduce it, presumably as the EX58-UD3R is a budget board with less chunky VCore regulators so there's still deviation. Voltages reported deviate further as the frequency is increased, it seems consistant so I use it to reduce idle volts, as I have always tried to overclock using less that Intel's max stated voltages - I want "free" performance, ie without reducing the lifespan, whereas I know some people here would just aim for a frequency and don't care about how many volts they want to use or whether the lifespan of the chip is reduced.

I assume the board isn't the issue as I never had trouble with my i7 at 4 and that was an older and _more power hungry chip, so I am assuming the board can deliver the power, just that I need to go by the voltages shown in CPU-Z [actually, the board can report the "Current system configuration" including voltages reported as opposed to selected, and this matches CPU-Z when unloaded]

The CPU drive has only been increased above 800mV [default] for about 2 hours in total, I was under the impression this was a signal noise rejection setting, NOT actually an increase an a voltage applied. I have a seperate CPU PLL setting, and again, I have not raised that above 1.8V as I keep hearing that's a quick way to blow the chips. The board is a Gigabyte.

That i7 C0 - how long did it take to die?

Any help/ideas?

Thanks for thus far._


----------



## gooface

Lame, there's an x5675 now on eBay for the same price I just paid for my x5670... I just hope my x5670 does well


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah, its nice to have more Multis to work with, but it does not mean it will overclock any better. Id love 4.6, 4.8 or even 5.0, lol. 5ghz might insure I do not upgrade for a long long time, 2020 maybe. Or maybe it will allow me to use this board until it finally dies.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Bought two 5650s. We'll see which one works better. I'll keep the volts sane, and sell one.

I'll report my findings and maybe someone on here will want to buy [UK based] the "worse" chip, assuming it works well enough for them. I will not exceed 1.35 Vcc in CPU-Z, and will stay under 1.35 VTT in BIOS.

Do we agree that my 5660 is failing then?

Any advice before I repeat this process, I'd love to know if I went wrong, or if it was just a bad chip.


----------



## Wanderer1

Which xeon chip do you think is the best value for money choice when it comes to x58 xeon processors?

I see that 5650/60 quite a lot cheaper than x5675. Do you think the difference in performance is worth the money?

I would appreciate your input in this, because im struggling to decide what's the best choice :/


----------



## gofasterstripes

My 5660 sucked.


----------



## Wanderer1

Ok um so i plan on getting anything from x5650 up to x5675, the price matters to me because i can't afford a lot of money.

Now the problem is if the lower versions will overclock worse than the higher 5670 or 5675.

I saw this video, 



 is this even possible? The voltage seems too low and the frequency too high for a 5650.

I need your advice about this :/

Also any good deal links from ebay or whichever website would be much appreciated.

Thank you.

PS: I ll be using the asus rampage ii extreme motherboard.


----------



## kckyle

just because its a higher model doesn't mean it might perform better, again its a silicon lottery, but if you get a higher model you have a better chance of a better binned chip.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-X5675-Xeon-Six-Core-SLBYL-3-06Ghz-12M-6-40GTS-Processor-/371246150890?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item566ffeb4ea

this is the lowest i ever seen, i paid 180 only 3 months ago.


----------



## Wanderer1

Damn the seller does not send to Greece







why


----------



## scahwo

PSU is a big factor in overclocking success. I have replaced my PSU this week. I have a new, single 12V line Seasonic M12II instead of my (6 years) old S12II with split 12V lines (lower amps). I was unable to get the 4.4GHz (22x200) stable with my X5650 in a vanilla P6T, whatever I've tried. I went up to 1.42 volts, but no success, 4.0 (20x200) was all I can get. I haven't touched anything else beside the PSU. Now I can run the CPU 4.4 stable at 1.36V, and my 4.0 GHz load temps are also down by 2 C.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's a good point. In hoping that while mine is 5 years old, it never really goes above 400w draw and it's raited for 700, so fingers crossed it wasnt that.

Bloody good point though.


----------



## scahwo

I think it goes down to PSU ripple rather then sheer power.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes, but what I mean is mine's never been stressed, so I guess it's still performing well within its spec.

I hope.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scahwo*
> 
> PSU is a big factor in overclocking success. I have replaced my PSU this week. I have a new, single 12V line Seasonic M12II instead of my (6 years) old S12II with split 12V lines (lower amps). I was unable to get the 4.4GHz (22x200) stable with my X5650 in a vanilla P6T, whatever I've tried. I went up to 1.42 volts, but no success, 4.0 (20x200) was all I can get. I haven't touched anything else beside the PSU. Now I can run the CPU 4.4 stable at 1.36V, and my 4.0 GHz load temps are also down by 2 C.


Ouch! Those sound exactly like the "symptoms" my cpu is having: totally fine up to 4ghz, then voltage as to be so high for having it stable that is not worth it.
I'm using atm a Coolermaster Silent Pro M2 720w


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That i7 C0 - how long did it take to die?


missed that one!
it's not like it died, but i cant rly keep it at 3.8 anymore. From when i got it from a friend to when it started behaving this way, i'd say 8 months, maybe less but didnt notice it before.
It has never been a good clocker btw.


----------



## gofasterstripes

So when these two 5650s turn up, what's the best way to quickly eliminate the poorer one?

I was thinking set the volts to 1.25 [loaded] VTT/VCC and then ramp up the clocks individually [Core/Uncore] and see which one comes out on top? Then try to set them up to 4 and see what volts are required?

Or should I do it the other way and set for 200x20 and see which one likes less volts for that and then look back and do it for cache after?

Then pick the one with the lowest volts required?

Did we ever get a quickstart guide posted for settings, I worry I killed the 5660, but I don't know how!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh and is the consensus I should leave LLC off this time, then?


----------



## OCmember

So you switched PSU's to a single 12v rail with better ripple suppression and regulation?


----------



## cb750rob

Hi All nice thread...









Here's hoping I have got this right..... I have just bought a GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD3R and a Xeon X5660 off fleabay.

Having financial troubles so flogging my 2600k setup to raise cash and stumbled upon this thread while looking to find an alternative without losing too much performance after a little overclock.

Please tell me I got it right and this chip and motherboard combo will work together ok









Any advice welcomed for the setup


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's what I use... EX58-UD3r V1.6 with BIOS FK. I'll be very interested in how it goes for you as I'm having a little trouble getting a good overclock on mine.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That's what I use... EX58-UD3r V1.6 with BIOS FK. I'll be very interested in how it goes for you as I'm having a little trouble getting a good overclock on mine.


Cool. Well previously I have used fairly good asus boards when oc'ing. So a: never been on Gigabyte and b: This is not a "tier 1" board so will prove interesting.

Any obvious gotchas?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmmm.... not sure, I have had some issues with the names of things not matching other brands. The helpful thing in my case is that Miahallen's guides are written for Gigabyte so there's some pointers to be found.

To be honest dude, I'm not doing this as easily as I have in the past, not really sure why but the settings etc keep popping out of my head.

Maybe we can work together to ease the process, I'm quite keen to contribute back and share info.

The main issue I have had is the very steep rise in volts required to go beyond about 3.6GHz, and I also HAD my 5660 running at 4.0, but after a few weeks it's started crashing and when tested it's now failing IBT/Max. I was on about 1.32VCC [core] for 4GHz, and about 1.3 for Uncore/QPI [VTT].

I use CPU-Z to check the volts, it seems to me there's a large deviation between the BIOS voltage settings and the Windows [loaded and unloaded] voltages, even LLC doesn't bring it to the actual selected figure. The deviation increases as the frequency increases.

The board was a champ with my i7 920, hit 200MHZ Bclck with ease. Ran that for about 4 years and now moved on.

I figure my 5660 is on the way out, so I just ordered a pair of 5650s and I'm going to try again, I think that the 5660 was a bad chip, it sure didn't want to go over 4GHz.

You gonna work with me?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hmmm.... not sure, I have had some issues with the names of things not matching other brands. The helpful thing in my case is that Miahallen's guides are written for Gigabyte so there's some pointers to be found.


Do you mean bios settings?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> You gonna work with me? smile.gif


Yes Gofaster. Why not?

My kit should hopefully be here by the end of the week. The board is coming bundled with an i7950 so it should be intersting to compare some stuff.

I just really fancied the 12 thread hex core thing as I do a fair amount of video/dvd encoding and ripping and felt that this may be a good alternative to the 2600k.

I will be using all the other kit in my sig apart from the mobo and cpu. Hopefully it will play nice topgether.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Cool. And yes I did mean the BIOS settings names.

I think my new CPUs well be here Thursday or Friday, and I'll be working on it in the evenings, as I'm trying to write a dissertation! Don't need any more distractions in the day!

Laters


----------



## gofasterstripes

At 4 GHz I was running handbrake high profile with 256k stereo audio at about 130fps I think.


----------



## GENXLR

Yeah, Handbrake loves these CPU's


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That's what I use... EX58-UD3r V1.6 with BIOS FK. I'll be very interested in how it goes for you as I'm having a little trouble getting a good overclock on mine.


Gofaster, Sorry to bother you.
Does the FK bios recognise your X5660 cpu correctly as it is not in the HCL on gigabytes website?

I'm worried now....


----------



## gofasterstripes

No worries comrade









It does indeed work!

See this >>>>>


It looks like they didn't bother to update the list


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> No worries comrade
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does indeed work!
> 
> See this >>>>>
> 
> 
> It looks like they didn't bother to update the list


Thank you for that !!!!























Ok, I will let you know When kit arrives and you can pick my brains as to how it is going.

Interestingly, this also looks as though will make a reasonable hackingtosh too.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aye - that it does.

TBH I was always a Mac guy 'till I bought this machine/parts [since about 1990] so I bought the i7/UD3R combo to run OSX.

But, Windows 7 has slaked my thirst for "It just works" and without the hassle of the hacking required :

The only trouble I've every had with the machine has been this X5660 chip, which used to work and now seems degraded.

I am quite confused as to what the problem is, but it seems to be the Core and not the Uncore, as it'll pass IBT at 3-3.55 but fail at 4, even after bumping the volts above the setting that passed 20IBTmax previously, and, with the Uncore multi dropped and the volts held the same [reduced from 3200 down to 2400 or something].

Still failed IBT at 4.0 so unless the motherboard itself is on the way out then it's the Uncore.

PLEASE DEAR GOD IF ANYONE HERE THINKS OTHERWISE TELL ME BEFORE I WASTE A LOAD OF TIME TRYING OTHER CHIPS OUT!

Proptip:
The stupidly-placed GIGABYTE blue badges can be popped off of the heatsink giving substantially better cooling - as in this pic of my machine just now. The badges themselves make nifty case adornments


----------



## kckyle

i have a ud7, i think we have very similar if not the same bios. what is ur bios setting


----------



## gofasterstripes

kckyle:



rob - don't miss my previous post


----------



## kckyle

lol obviously yes.


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK - for the 4GHz/3200Uncore setting with 1600/8/8/8/24/1T RAM [rated at that 1600/8/8/8/24]:

Bios:




Actual:


Image above shows a boot then a quick IBT run to record volts/current with max load.

Bear in mind I also tested this setup with a much lower Uncore multi, and it still failed...but it didn't used to.
I then tested with the VCore boosted to around 1.328V loaded 100% [that was up two jumps in the BIOS - still crashed after about 15IBTs, maybe 2 hours tested]

I tested because I had two crashes at this setting out of the blue when I was hammering [email protected]/Handbrake rips alternately. Twice the screen went grey and the whole thing locked up utterly - had to hit reset.









I was always little suspicious of the chip to be honest - the volts required shot up FAST beyond 3.6 or so and the temp spread is pretty wide.


----------



## GENXLR

Your temperature spread is nothing. My cores are 12C apart. X5660? I guarantee you, you did something wrong in your settings.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmmm, but the settings are BIOS presets, so no details changed from the last time I used that config, and here it is loaded and still matching what I wrote down in my progress log as I set it up.

I don't mean to doubt your expertise, but I just don't see how it could happen. I don't need to go into the detailed setting pages shown above, I just hit F12 and select a preset template to load from the main BIOS screen.


----------



## GENXLR

Your QPI/VTT should be around 1.30-1.35, experiment

Your DRAM Bus is 1.5, not 1.66?
your IOH should be 1.2 and your ICH 1.3


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks for the input.

QPI is 1.335, less causes failure, but when I dropped the Uncore speed it didn't help, so I'm not sure it's the issue. I can test that while I type on my laptop tomorrow, yes.

DRAM is 1.5v as the RAM is 1.5v cards.

Can try 1.2 IOH, used that on my i7.

Thought ICH volts was HDD controller etc, not getting any read errors or trouble with peripherals, why would I change it ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Anyone else seen a grey screen with audio looping as a lockup? Freaks me out more than a blue screen!


----------



## kckyle

i use uncore of x21
pll at 1.84v


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks.

That's a lot of auto volts, maybe I should have a little more faith in Gigabyte









What volts do you get in Windows under load?

Thanks guys, all posts very much appreciated.


----------



## kckyle

the volts are always lower than what i put in bios.


----------



## Mike486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> That's a lot of auto volts, maybe I should have a little more faith in Gigabyte


Is your board newer or older than the chip? I think if the board is newer and designed with Xeon in mind rather than just 1366, I'd trust it more.

If it's older and was optimised for i7-9XX series then I'd be more dubious about leaving things on auto.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Seeing as scahwo brought the issue of PSU's to my attention....

I decided to check this area out:

Hmmmm - 12v rail at 4GHz with 80+% CPU Usage and around 70%GPU



12v rail at stock speeds: 1600MHz, 0.96v circa 1% CPU


5v Rail: Idling at stock:


Background noise - computer switched off:


Test setup...



I think I'm seeing 1-200mV ripple with peaks over 200mV in each direction. Now, assuming there's a good degree of error noise from outside sources, I'd still take this to mean +/- >100mV ripple, which looks pretty ****.

Anyone else tried this measurement?

Looks like a new PSU to me










This is getting much more expensive than I intended.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Another view - note the values along the bottom:


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Another view - note the values along the bottom:


Don't have access to an oscilloscope so cant give you any real world comparisons at the mo also my PS is different TX750w.

(this is not my area of expertise) But Johnnyguru showed @ 100mv ripple on my 12v rail so would your results be that far off whack??

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story2&reid=73

Like I said not my area so may be missing something here.

You in Bradford?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes, Bradford.

And I read this as 2-300v ripple. Is that wrong?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yes, Bradford.
> 
> And I read this as 2-300v ripple. Is that wrong?


That's what I would read it as. But this is not really my area. The fact that you have a £500 oscilloscope suggests to me that it may be more yours









I'm nr Blackburn about 50mls from you. If you can get your box here one evening next week you can try my power supply.

If you are doing an electrickery orientated uni course I would have thought that someone there would have a decent power supply you could borrow. At least then you can narrow down your fault criteria.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's a kind offer, but I seriously doubt I'll be able to get over - I don't drive, and the rig is 20Kg with a 900g cooler hanging off it









That 100mV ripple on the Corsair was for very high load, whereas in my case i was only pulling about 60% of my 12V rail, so mine is very poor [if that 300mV reading is accurate].

I think probably just that the PSU is quite tired. It makes me wonder if the reason the overclock has gone bad might be that the PSU is just on it's way out now, maybe the last couple of weeks hammering it with 400W draw [mostly on the 12v rail] has done it in.

This might also have something to do with the failure of my 470GTX, which started to go on the blink, much to my confusion. I blamed the TDR issue, but now, thinking of that 12V rail, it might have either become faulty, or just not been able to operate with lots of noise on the power rail. I'll see if the 5660 starts working correctly with a new PSU at the same settings. Maybe it'll open up a new range of frequencies, we'll see [not holding my breath].

Arse.

Well, I'm going to be inundated with PC parts...and I'll deffo have a 5650 for sale [there's two on their way to me].

I am doing a Masters, or sorts, more like a post graduate Design project, but **** me am I entering a whole new level of procrastination. I worked at the Uni over the summer, so have made friends with the staff and get to borrow stuff, sometimes. My undergraduate was a BSc In Product Design - bagged a 1st









I'll keep you updated.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I don't drive, and the rig is 20Kg with a 900g cooler hanging off it


LOL Cant imagine why you wouldn't want to drag that around on the excuse for public transport we have around here.... unfortunately, even though I drive nothing I do takes me in your direction otherwise Id offer to bring it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Well, I'm going to be inundated with PC parts... **** me am I entering a whole new level of procrastination.


There, that makes for better reading..... Well good luck with it.

Thesis or tinkering??? mmm hard choice.









My kit hopefully arrives tomorrow so will be a case of boxing up the sandy bridge platform to raise some cash and an excuse to play with the new (to me) stuff.

Will keep you posted of the results.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Coolio


----------



## kckyle

ayy i can't push past behind 4.8ghz, i really don't want to use more than 1.47voltage. kana what do you think


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> your IOH should be 1.2 and your ICH 1.3


I've never needed more than stock 1.1v IOH unless base clock was well over 200MHz, or I was using more than two GPUs, and have never seen a need for more than stock 1.1v ICH for anything that didn't involve PCI-E bus OCing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i use uncore of x21
> pll at 1.84v


Every LGA-1366 CPU I have ever used liked below stock CPU PLL volts. Somewhere between 1.3 and 1.6v was usually the sweet spot, in my experience.

However, I've never gone over 4.4GHz with a Westmere/Gulftown, and it's quite possible some parts may need more past this point.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> I've never needed more than stock 1.1v IOH unless base clock was well over 200MHz, or I was using more than two GPUs, and have never seen a need for more than stock 1.1v ICH for anything that didn't involve PCI-E bus OCing.
> Every LGA-1366 CPU I have ever used liked below stock CPU PLL volts. Somewhere between 1.3 and 1.6v was usually the sweet spot, in my experience.
> 
> However, I've never gone over 4.4GHz with a Westmere/Gulftown, and it's quite possible some parts may need more past this point.


I still dunno how your boards can go below 1.8, the minimum on the P6T is exactly 1.8v


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> I still dunno how your boards can go below 1.8, the minimum on the P6T is exactly 1.8v


Gigabyte was the only major maker of X58 boards that allowed below stock CPU PLL, which is one of the several reasons I strongly preferred them to ASUS, or any one else really, during that era.

My X58A-UD5 rev 2.0 outclassed my P6TD Deluxe in pretty much every way, and could get a good 100-200MHz more out of the same CPUs.

Unfortunately I had to learn the hard way that the opposite trend was generally true for the LGA-2011/X79 generation.


----------



## kckyle

gigabyte is king for the x58 platform, when i switch from my asus p6x58d to this ud7, i was able to get stable clock for clock but at much lower voltage, 24 phrase is no joke


----------



## Gohan_Nightwing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rezax58*
> 
> Just ordered an x5650. The ad said it's a slbv3 so I'm hoping that it's true and that I won't get a spicy one. Anyone know how to confirm once I receive it?
> 
> Now, what do I do with my I7 930? It's one of the best 930 chips out there....hmmm


Sorry. Just joining the party and have only made it thus far in the thread. Someone had suggested I upgrade my CPU to an X5660, and I was wondering what it means for a chip to be slbv3? I tried googling it but it didn't tell me much.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gohan_Nightwing*
> 
> Sorry. Just joining the party and have only made it thus far in the thread. Someone had suggested I upgrade my CPU to an X5660, and I was wondering what it means for a chip to be slbv3? I tried googling it but it didn't tell me much.
> 
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks!


SLBV3 is the spec code. I'm pretty sure all x5650s are SLBV3, but some models come in multiple spec codes that often designate different steppings.

http://ark.intel.com/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI#@ordering


----------



## kckyle

just a identification code, nothing to worry about, most of them are slbv3


----------



## Blameless

There was only one released Westmere-EP stepping, so only one spec code per model.

It's a big deal with some other series, some of which could have as many as three steppings and corresponding spec codes per model number.

For example, In the LGA 775 days I had two Xeon X3350s, one was a SLAX2 (C1 stepping), the other was a SLB8Y (E0 stepping). The E0s were, on average, much better, and my examples were no exception. When buying one of these chips, you want to know the spec code being sold, as just the model number says nothing about the stepping.


----------



## GENXLR

My old Foxconn Bloodrage and my Rampage III Extreme black were my BEST OC boards. My gigabyte boards honestly were bad, with the restart bug.


----------



## Space Marine

oh btw, i got sometimes this problem:

every 5 - 6 power on, the pc doesn't POST, and im forced to press the reboot button to make it post. Everything else is absolutely stable and fine, even after this POST problem.

What can cause it? How to fix it?

P.S: not sure if that's the definition of fake boot


----------



## GENXLR

for me that was caused by a Low PSU voltage.


----------



## Space Marine

720w coolermaster silent pro m2, its rly so much on the limit?
maybe that's why cant go much higher then 4ghz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Well, this may be a contributing factor. As it was brought up on the other page - I tested my 12V line and have found what looks like 300mV of noise/ripple - probably a big problem if it's really there; as the 12V line goes straight into the CPU and GPU regulation systems and may well come out the other side into the processors Vcore supplies!

I am just about to go and talk to one of the engineers at the Uni and see if they think I measured it correctly, and if poss to borrow a nearly new PSU and see the measurements are cleaner and if my sudden overclock instability could be caused by that.

Did you see the 'scope pictures on the previous page? That's a
http://www.coolermaster.com/service/support/model/RS-700-AMBA-D3/
700W Coolermaster.

How old is your PSU? I'm also going to email CM about mine, I think it _could_ be covered under warranty...maybe.

I think mine is about 5 years old, and the warranty on it is 5 years


----------



## Space Marine

Mine is 720w not 700, btw is no more in warranty but has been changed in the last year of warranty, about 2 or 3 years ago
so its 2 or 3 years old


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes, sorry, I wasn't clear enough: I mean the pics are from a 700W CM - model RS-700-AMBA-D3.

Yours is a later model I think.


----------



## Space Marine

I remember the performance of the 1st and the 2nd series to be quite different, the 1st series had quite a few problem.
now i dont have the equipment for testing the psu like u did, but from online reviews the ripple values on mine werent so bad!
But i guess i might just be on the limit with wattage! Which makes me worry btw, cause i wanted to upgrade to a 290x but that would mean another 100w more compared to my current [email protected]


----------



## gofasterstripes

Space marine - have you checked you MoBo battery voltage?
HWInfo seems to report mine, but if in doubt pop it out and lick it! If there's a distinct zingy tingle, it's probably OK. Otherwise, might need replacing.


----------



## Space Marine

Mmm never thought a battery could create problems. Not sure about the voltage, but in case of doubts i could change it anyway, got so many cr2032 at home that its not going to be a problem!
im out of town btw till next week

Btw how can the battery voltage be related? If it had problems wouldnt i see some kind of bios setting corruption or data loss?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have had issues with machines not starting when the battery was low, and it's certainly an easy one to test/fix


----------



## Xevi

*x5675 3.06Ghz*


----------



## Xevi

*x5680 3.33Ghz*









































































x5670 + x5675








.
x5680 + x5680 + x5690


----------



## gooface

First time Xeon X56xx overclocker here, what are the safe volt ranges for these chips/motherboards? (first time X58 overclocker as well)

Could someone give me some good starter volts and settings to mess with? I have the X5670 and Sabertooth X58. (specs listed in my sig under "West")

Thanks!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> First time Xeon X56xx overclocker here, what are the safe volt ranges for these chips/motherboards? (first time X58 overclocker as well)
> 
> Could someone give me some good starter volts and settings to mess with? I have the X5670 and Sabertooth X58. (specs listed in my sig under "West")
> 
> Thanks!


Not the same chip but the spec for the voltage range with these xeons are the same

http://ark.intel.com/products/47921/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5660-12M-Cache-2_80-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI?q=x5660

VID Voltage Range 0.750V-1.350V


----------



## gofasterstripes

@gooface: Wait for confirmation, but <1.35V Core/Uncore are, I think, the published maximums. Many people get 4GHz+ with those voltages [200*20 or 190*21] and some chips will go substantially higher. Uncore should stay at or below 3200MHz, and 1600MHz Ram is usually the max you can reliably drive.

@xevi: HOLY SHIZZLE - YOU MADE THOSE CHIPS SIZZLE. [srsly - how was that cooled, LN?]


----------



## Space Marine

Id say 1.30 vcore 1.28 qpi cpu pll somewhere in between 1.8 and 1.84
the rest at default
should be enought for 4 ghz without ht (with ht u might need 0.025 0.030 more vcore

Xevi, those clocks are impressive! Which cooling are you using?
also these x5680/90 are so costly! How much did u pay for them?


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> *x5680 3.33Ghz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> x5680 + x5680 + x5690


Wow


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think he should have used a "Deal With It" emoticon.....


----------



## kckyle

1.76v....and i'm not even wanting to go beyond 1.5v. i guess if i get more funds i'll get a 2nd chip just to push it.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> 1.76v....and i'm not even wanting to go beyond 1.5v. i guess if i get more funds i'll get a 2nd chip just to push it.


That was the first thing I saw. I was about to scold him But than I saw 5.6Ghz and was like "oh"


----------



## Mike486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> That was the first thing I saw. I was about to scold him But than I saw 5.6Ghz and was like "oh"


I guess if it's for a suicide-run, then why not? Unless he's using Liquid Nitrogen there's surely no way to keep that cool.

...and I wonder how long you could run the chip like that for (24/7 daily use) before it degrades beyond use.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Just to wind up "Mike"


----------



## Mike486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Just to wind up "Mike"


Yeah, well at least my GPU has 4gb of RA...ermm...never mind


----------



## Xevi

*x5670 2.93Ghz*






















































.


----------



## gofasterstripes

You can't "just leave this here", dammit!


----------



## Space Marine

Xevi do u noticed any correlation between higher multi capable cpus and higher overclock?
are they actually better binned or its just random?


----------



## kckyle

i think i'm at the phrase where i want my setup to do more of a marathon and see how long i can go before upgrading, rather than go high as you can and possibly burn out couple mosfet. going 6 years strong on a enthusiast setup is not bad


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah, looking at the power draw from my CPU at 4GHz / 1.32v the CPU power draw is 135w which is over the stock draw for any of the compatible chips that my motherboard is rated for, so it's not inconceivable that it's stressing the board out. I really hope a cleaner power supply lets me drop these volts.


----------



## Gohan_Nightwing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> SLBV3 is the spec code. I'm pretty sure all x5650s are SLBV3, but some models come in multiple spec codes that often designate different steppings.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI#@ordering


Noob question here. What is a step code and how does it impact a CPUs performance?

Thanks!


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> First time Xeon X56xx overclocker here, what are the safe volt ranges for these chips/motherboards? (first time X58 overclocker as well)


Depends on cooling and how long you intend to run it at the voltage.

Assuming you are looking for long term 24/7 use on anything from very good air to a modest custom loop, I'd stay below 1.4v on the core (1.35v if you want to be especially conservative) and 1.35v QPI/VTT. Gulftown/Westmere often don't like huge QPI/VTT volts anyway, so this is rarely a serious limiting factor.

My worst (and only remaining) Gulftown will do ~4GHz core /~3Ghz uncore with 1.28v core (full load), 1.275v QPI/VTT and 1.3v CPU PLL. Good samples (mostly later Xeons, but a few i7s) can do 4.4GHz with ~1.35v load.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gohan_Nightwing*
> 
> Noob question here. What is a step code and how does it impact a CPUs performance?
> 
> Thanks!


Steppings are revisions of processors within the same family. Generally, later steppings are bug/errata fixes, but sometimes they result in noticeably better average OCs vs. earlier steppings. More rarely, there are some new bugs or downsides introduced.

For example, Bloomfield (the 45nm LGA-1366 i7s and their Xeon counterparts) had two release steppings C0 and D0. The D0 parts average about 200MHz higher clocks on the same cooling. Another example is Sandy Bridge-E, which came in C1 and C2 steppings. The C1 had errata which made VT-d non-functional on them. The C2 stepping fixed this errata, but these parts also tended to be more fragile as far as the sort of voltage ranges they could sustain on VTT and VCCSA. Thus, some OCers prefer the C1s, while anyone who did serious virtualization wanted a C2.

The parts being talked about in this thread only had one release stepping (though there are some engineering samples with earlier, unreleased steppings).


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh dear.....

I have to wait for my PSU to be inspected first, d'oh.


----------



## Xevi

Two new X5680 for me EVGA SR-2


----------



## gofasterstripes

Xevi - seeing as you are obviously having great results with these chips, would you be so kind as to share a few tips about getting the best from them?

In my case, I want to run this long term, so any advice about settings that are suitable for that settup would be appreciated.

Thanks

Sam


----------



## Tritonk7

Hi guys. Acquired ASUS X58 Sabertooth and Xeon X5670? tell me what the maximum voltage on the percent can be given safely? In air and water. My validation http://valid.canardpc.com/kk0q41


----------



## Space Marine

And how much did you pay for the x5680s?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@ Triton: Look up









http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2860#post_23503150


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @ Triton: Look up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2860#post_23503150


I understand all that, I'm interested in whether degradation occurs CPU water stress on the core of 1.46 for example, VTT has a voltage of 1.275 . ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Intel's published maximums are for 1.35v core/uncore, if you go outside of those the chip will begin to degrade. How long it lasts is anyone's guess, but there are reports of people on this thread using 1.45 for extended periods, however, I'd be surprised if it's over a year.....

Based on what I have read, it's the uncore that is more fragile, so I'd be tempted to keep that below 1.35 and the core, well, maybe you could go a little higher.

Cooler is always better, I try to stay below 80C with all my overclocking, but, again there's no definite answer.


----------



## Tritonk7

Thank you, then leave on 24/7 4500 at a voltage of 1.376, I think it is quite safe . VTT 1.275 on 3600Mhz


----------



## Space Marine

Id not pass 75 degrees, these are not bloomfield c0s


----------



## gofasterstripes

Best of luck.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Why do you say that? I thought cMax was 100, so surely 80 is a safe margin? Or have I missed something?


----------



## kckyle

tj max technically is 100c, but realistically you don't want to push past 90c for long duration. it shortens the life span of the chip quite drastically.


----------



## Tritonk7

BH4 TEST for statistics


----------



## gofasterstripes

@kckyle - OK, sounds plausible so in that case <75 is probably sensible. Thanks.

@Tritonk7 - looks good, might even be able to drop a few milivolts - try it. Also some people suggest lower CPU PLL. If you get a stable overclock, try dropping the PLL - if it's still stable, you may drop a few degrees.


----------



## Tritonk7

on ASUS X58 sabertooth LLC dont correct workly with offset voltage . I put manual voltage and llc enabled for test . On 24/7 I put LLC AUTO and Offset voltage (


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have "Offset Voltage" options in my EX-58-UD3R BIOS - they appeared after an update. However, they are always greyed out.

What does it do? Reverse VDroop [ie raise core voltage under increased load]?
Anyone know how to make it work on my board? It sounds useful.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Intel's published maximums are for 1.35v core/uncore, if you go outside of those the chip will begin to degrade.


That's the VID range, which is not intended by Intel to be an indicator of what's safe for all parts. It's just the range of stock VIDs that are possible. Each sample is different and a rare few may degrade well below that level, while other may do fine quite a ways beyond it.

Officially, Intel will tell you that any voltage setting other than stock is potentially unsafe.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Why do you say that? I thought cMax was 100, so surely 80 is a safe margin? Or have I missed something?


TJmax is also based around stock parameters. The higher you clock a part, and the more voltage you give it, the colder it needs to be to have similar longevity.

Colder is always better. The rough rule of thumb for all kinds of electronics, is that every 10C you reduce temperatures you roughly double the life expectancy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> tj max technically is 100c, but realistically you don't want to push past 90c for long duration. it shortens the life span of the chip quite drastically.


Are you sure the TJmax for the Westmere is 100C?

The Gulftowns (the i7 equivalent) is only 91C and I don't have any Xeons on hand to double check. Could just be that the Xeons were given a higher rating.

Anyway, absolute TJmax is less relevant than distance to TJmax that the sensor actually reads. The more agressive the ocing and overvolting, the bigger you want the distance to tjmax to be.


----------



## Tritonk7

Yes , offset voltage makes the VDroop inactive , If I stay manual voltage , I have 1.38 constantly, But ,If i put offset and llc auto ,I have voltage 1.24~1.38


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmm, on my UD3R I always get vdroop, but enabling LLC reduces it somewhat. I don't think my board has very chunky regulators.

@blameless - you seem to know more about what you're talking about than me









So - when I come to differentiate between those two 5650s, the one that sets itself up with lower stock volts after "load optimized settings" may well be the cooler/better quality chip?

EDIT - RealtempGT Gives the TJMax as 100C for my 5660.


----------



## OCmember

Never trust software voltage readings, if you have terminals on the motherboard use a multi-meter


----------



## gofasterstripes

I sadly don't. But the readings for the PSU results were spot on according to my Picoscope, so that's confidence inspiring


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have "Offset Voltage" options in my EX-58-UD3R BIOS - they appeared after an update. However, they are always greyed out.
> 
> What does it do? Reverse VDroop [ie raise core voltage under increased load]?
> Anyone know how to make it work on my board? It sounds useful.


Enables the vcore to alter dynamically according to load. Our board has -Negative and +Positive values so can be added or taken off.

Currently running a stability bench in OCCT so cant look at bios to tell you what mine are and how to "un-grey" them

Give me half an hour









Quite pleased with my results so far today but does seem as tho its flakey much beyond this. May be the fact is 4+4 power phase on the ex58-ud3r


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hmm, on my UD3R I always get vdroop, but enabling LLC reduces it somewhat. I don't think my board has very chunky regulators.


Vdroop is generally not something you want to eliminate, and is only really influenced by the VRM quality on the cheapest of crap boards, or when pushing the boards VRM to near it's absolute limits.

Vdroop is an intentional part of the Intel power delivery specs designed to control transient spikes that invariably occur when leaving a high load. The problem with Intel's spec for OCers is that the stock load line is hideously excessive, resulting in enormous droop to account for the current pulled by OCed parts. This means that without LLC you need far higher idle voltage than necessary because the droop is much larger than actually needed to control these transients on a board with a high-end VRM.

LCC adjustments have improved in granularity over time, and it's not uncommon for boards to have 10 different steps now, but this was rare in the X58 days, and most boards had one or two settings for LLC.

The most usable LLC setting on my Gigabyte X58 boards has been Level 1. Level 2 is generally too much LLC, as is any setting that completely removes vdroop (or worse adds voltage), while the default "off" setting follows Intel spec and results in too much vdroop.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> So - when I come to differentiate between those two 5650s, the one that sets itself up with lower stock volts after "load optimized settings" may well be the cooler/better quality chip?


It could imply that it's the higher leakage part, which in turn may imply that it runs hotter at a given speed and voltage, but may clock higher. The only way to know for certain is to test them both.

It may seem counter intuitive at first, but lower leakage current usually implies less power, higher stock voltage, and a lower potential clock ceiling.

Lower stock volt parts do have some tendency to clocking higher, but also tend to need more exotic cooling as the volts climb.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> RealtempGT Gives the TJMax as 100C for my 5660.


Interesting. What does HWmonitor say? You may have to run it, then look at the HWmonitor.ini file it creates, which should list the TJmax reading in it's lookup tables.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Never trust software voltage readings, if you have terminals on the motherboard use a multi-meter


If you have access to the back of the board (such as with a tray cutout), you don't need any special terminals to measure all the input voltages. You just need a steady hand, so you don't short anything while probing around.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Great. It seems to me that the thing to do is to keep all downclocking options on and have a voltage kick only when needed. Then perhaps I can run 4.4 as a gaming setup


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice info there guys, thanks.

I'm not able to overclock anything till my PSU gets returned or replaced, CM are looking into it and i'll be using a spare a friend is sending me which is not renown for having a lot of grunt!

I look forward to tackling this with more knowledge









Cheers,

Sam


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have "Offset Voltage" options in my EX-58-UD3R BIOS - they appeared after an update. However, they are always greyed out..




CPU VCORE [Normal]

you can then add the value you require.

Hope that helps


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah, it may well. So what volts do you see in the OS vs the BIOS when you use that?

Eg I was setting 1.35 and getting 1.32 in the OS with LLC on.


----------



## Xevi

*
1.45v Air
1.55v Water
1.65v -60º
1.75v -115º
1.95v -193º

Possible:
Cool Boot ~90/95º
Cool BUG ~130/190º
*


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> 
> 
> CPU VCORE [Normal]
> 
> you can then add the value you require.
> 
> Hope that helps


Is this how you're showing <1v on once of those screencaps? Because the load wasn't there?

And overall - what do people reccomend, LLC on, LLC off or Dynamic?

I would _imagine_ dynamic from Stock at the speed you downclock too, with a dynamic value that raises to the stable voltage for your desired overclock would be the best way,?

EG if my 5660 runs at 1.1v stock for 3GHZ [high multi on standard FSB, no overclock, high load] and is stable with LLC on at 1.35 at 4.4 [when overclocked and locked to that frequency], then setting up dynamic to raise the volts from 1.1 to 1.35 and enabling all turbo functions [so could clock from, 12 to 22x200] would be the safest option in terms of longevity? Better than holding at 1.35 or more when idling?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Is this how you're showing <1v on once of those screencaps? Because the load wasn't there?


Yes

Here are my bios settings if they are any good to you:



Also in the "advanced cpu core features All the settings are enabled bar the bottom one. Protchet or some such







In the voltage section dynamic vcore is +0.08750v (sorry bit blurry)

Voltage under load in windows is:



And if someone can tell me how to "click to show images/spoiler alets" in posts that would be cool


----------



## cb750rob

Can I just say a massive

Thank You!!!

To Kana-Maru Especially and everyone who has contributed to the knowledge on this thread.

Even if I don't get any further with my overclock of 4.1-4.2 this still represents a massive value for what I have just bought the board and chip for.

And it pans the sh"t out of my 2600k in apps that can use it.

Thank you all so much.






























Overclock.net rules....... Some other forums suck @ss.... our gain you'r loss


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks to you too for explaining that dynamic voltage shizzle. I think I'll be using that for my next setup.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Thanks to you too for explaining that dynamic voltage shizzle. I think I'll be using that for my next setup.


No problems. That is what this forum seems to encourage.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Is this how you're showing <1v on once of those screencaps? Because the load wasn't there?
> 
> And overall - what do people reccomend, LLC on, LLC off or Dynamic?
> 
> I would _imagine_ dynamic from Stock at the speed you downclock too, with a dynamic value that raises to the stable voltage for your desired overclock would be the best way,?


LLC and dynamic voltage aren't mutually exclusive, but they can appear so on casual examination. The load line will be applied even to the dynamic VID.

When combining the two It's hard to know exactly what is going on with the voltage without testing at a variety of loads.

There is no real best way, unless saving power while idle is a major goal, but full manual voltage is the easiest to examine, test, and stabilize, at the lowest full load voltage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> EG if my 5660 runs at 1.1v stock for 3GHZ [high multi on standard FSB, no overclock, high load] and is stable with LLC on at 1.35 at 4.4 [when overclocked and locked to that frequency], then setting up dynamic to raise the volts from 1.1 to 1.35 and enabling all turbo functions [so could clock from, 12 to 22x200] would be the safest option in terms of longevity? Better than holding at 1.35 or more when idling?


I would not worry about idle voltage unless it's much higher than your load voltage. Idle CPUs draw so little current and generally run so cool, relative to full load, that degradation is going to be essentially nil, even with a relatively high idle vcore.

Dynamic is mostly for saving power and isn't guaranteed to make the CPU last longer as even 10mv more at load might result in faster overall degradation than 100mv more at idle. That said, if you can make dynamic work without delivering more load volts for the same clocks, go for it.

On a mostly unrelated tangent, have you compared odd and even multipliers on your setup? It's a near universal trend for LGA-1366 parts to clock better at odd multipliers.


----------



## Xevi

chip very bad


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> chip very bad


What's the load voltage on that OC?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> On a mostly unrelated tangent, have you compared odd and even multipliers on your setup? It's a near universal trend for LGA-1366 parts to clock better at odd multipliers.


I've always had no trouble running 200x20 on my board, and that was fast enough for my i7 at sane volts. With a Xeon, I may experiment further, and it's certainly going to be interesting to see what I can get out of the 3 chips I have now.

Quote:


> No problems. That is what this forum seems to encourage.


Aah yes, its a nice thing to have, that.

[Later edit]
Just been weighin' up those other two chips next door......still in the wrapper.....not easy to leave them there......I can see why it's tempting to get sucked into this.......
[tips fedora]

Goodnight all


----------



## Starbomba

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Vdroop is generally not something you want to eliminate, and is only really influenced by the VRM quality on the cheapest of crap boards, or when pushing the boards VRM to near it's absolute limits.


So Vdroop isn't such a big deal on high-end VRM's, like the RIIIE or the X58 Classy unless you're going subzero?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> So Vdroop isn't such a big deal on high-end VRM's, like the RIIIE or the X58 Classy unless you're going subzero?


Well, a higher end VRM is likely to be delivering a lesser portion of is maximum current and has power output regardless, so transients will be smaller. You won't need the same degree of droop to protect the processor.

Still no VRM can deliver perfect power, and totally eliminating vdroop is rarely wise or beneficial.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> then setting up dynamic to raise the volts from 1.1 to 1.35 and enabling all turbo functions [so could clock from, 12 to 22x200] would be the safest option in terms of longevity?


12 to 23x174 would give u the same 4.0Ghz Why not just do that instead? It's only the 24th multiplier on the X5660 that doesnt boost all 6 cores.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah I can do, but that will give me 1360MHz ram, whereas 200x8 gives 1600. I'll try it and bench, if there's no difference I may use that.

Do you think it'll require less QPI volts? I could also drop a QPI multiplier at 200 MHz, though I forget what the last multi that has is.


----------



## Tritonk7

My new Validation http://valid.canardpc.com/k4qlbh


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> My new Validation http://valid.canardpc.com/k4qlbh


Nice!!


----------



## Tritonk7

AIDA 64 CPU QUEEN 5000Mhz http://firepic.org/images/2015-02/06/mi2ibi89gh4a.jpg


----------



## gofasterstripes

*eyebrows shoot up*


----------



## kckyle

i don't think i'm comfortable pushing 1.5v on my setup, by the looks of it 5ghz is quite attainable at that voltage, however if anything goes wrong i don't have the funds to repair it or get another one.


----------



## Tritonk7

5220 Mhz http://valid.canardpc.com/kq21c1


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah I can do, but that will give me 1360MHz ram, whereas 200x8 gives 1600. I'll try it and bench, if there's no difference I may use that.
> 
> Do you think it'll require less QPI volts? I could also drop a QPI multiplier at 200 MHz, though I forget what the last multi that has is.


But if u do 174x23 for 4Ghz, can't u also do 174x10 for RAM to get u 1740mhz ram? U can on my RAM/motherboard


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah I can, just whether it's stable


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah I can, just whether it's stable


Its interesting because my setup goes all over the place with 20x200bclk =4ghz 1600mghz

yet is fine with 23x185bclk = 4.255ghz [email protected]

my memory ' 1850 is still 1t as well.

I reckon its the power phases on these more cost conscious boards with the lesser power phases

Still, happy enough much higher and I will be fighting temps on modest air anyway

Anyone got other suggestions?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Temporary PSU and Firepro

what happened to my vcore?
BIOS says 1.2, locked.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> Temporary PSU and Firepro
> 
> what happened to my vcore?
> BIOS says 1.2, locked.


EEEEK !!!









turn llc off

Did you load failsafe defaults??

If that is a "big box" type no name generic power supply get it out of there !! ....................

before it goes pop.


----------



## Blameless

If that voltage was real, chances are the CPU would already be dead or seriously degraded. Hopefully it's just a case of HWmonitor not knowing how to make sense of the sensor data on the board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aye - it's a Maplin Special which my friend sent me as a temporary, but it was in his i7 860/4.2GHz setup, so while it's a bit of a stinker it it should hold up a a few hours. Assuming the CPU and ATX connections are on different rails, it's rated at [2x12x18] 432W for two if its 4 12V/18A rails, so the 300 I draw without a GPU load [no PCIE connections on the Firepro 5900] should be stable.

Here's the scope signals from it at the CPU-Aux connections under 120W CPU load:




The measured noise is worse, but the actual ripple values look around 100mV better.

The magic smoke is still in the Xeon, so I am assuming changing the graphics card has caused the two hardware monitor programs to read the wrong bus value.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> If that voltage was real, chances are the CPU would already be dead or seriously degraded. Hopefully it's just a case of HWmonitor not knowing how to make sense of the sensor data on the board.


I agree Blameless. If it really were pumping 2v+ vcore it would already be toast. Or at least not long for this world.

However, why risk it? It is entirely possible the cpu could stand that abuse for a short lengh of time and the only time I have seen HWmon give spurious results is with faulty sensors on the mobo and we are working on the premise that the vcore sensors were working before ok and haven't changed.

It could also be a symptom of the supply about to go up.

I would also expect the vga card to release it's "magic smoke" first but nothing is certain in the world of unbranded PSU's

I have had a PSU let go on me before and it wasn't funny. - the mobo was oviously borked but none of the other components when transplanted into a new setup seemed 100% again.

If it were me I wouldn't risk it . Even at stock looking at that info let alone try any type of oc.









Good Luck









"EDIT" Also if you google that PSU there are plenty of customer reviews where it has let go so again, I wouldn't. - just my


----------



## gooface

On my X5670 at 4.2ghz I am only getting 56GFlops in Linx, is something wrong?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> On my X5670 at 4.2ghz I am only getting 56GFlops in Linx, is something wrong?


Sounds low to me, my x5660 @ 4ghz w 3x2gb mem @ 1440, gets 82-84Gflops.
Mine is average from what I have seen posted


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Sounds low to me, my x5660 @ 4ghz w 3x2gb mem @ 1440, gets 82-84Gflops.
> Mine is average from what I have seen posted


Am I running the application wrong? other than just running it at default what do you do? or is there something wrong with my overclock settings that would cause such a low score?


----------



## GENXLR

more vcore, not kidding


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> more vcore, not kidding


I raised it two notches from 1.3 to 1.31 and there was literally no difference. I get a 950 score in CINEBENCH R15 though... (which is decent from what I have seen) I dont really care about my GFlops in Linx, they dont really matter at all, as long as it can pass after running 10 or so its stable enough for me for that application.

My ultimate test is running Prime95 with Unigine Heaven maxing out my RAM, GPU, and CPU usage, and if it passes that after 14 hours, I call it a done deal.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> On my X5670 at 4.2ghz I am only getting 56GFlops in Linx, is something wrong?


Sounds like your Uncore is low I'm guessing somewhere in the low 2000MHz area


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sounds like your Uncore is low I'm guessing somewhere in the low 2000MHz area


nope I have it set at 3200Mhz and my RAM is at 1600mhz.


----------



## GENXLR

try running IBT with the setting custom and set memory to 3gb 3072mb


----------



## gofasterstripes

The figure also depends on whether hyper threading is on and the size of the test in IBT. But also try a small voltage bump, maybe test with 1.33 loaded volts?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> nope I have it set at 3200Mhz and my RAM is at 1600mhz.


what's your bclk?

Is your Turbo set to OFF?

What version of LinX are you running?

Make sure you are comparing apples to apples.


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> nope I have it set at 3200Mhz and my RAM is at 1600mhz.
> 
> 
> 
> what's your bclk?
> 
> Is your Turbo set to OFF?
> 
> What version of LinX are you running?
> 
> Make sure you are comparing apples to apples.
Click to expand...

Yeah my turbo is enabled, my bclk is 3200mhz. Its the latest linx 65 with the latest linpack.

Does turbo just effect benchmarks like linx? Or does it lower my performance overall? I get great scores in cinebench r15 at 4.2ghz. (950 points)

I have llc turned on, vcore at 1.325v and vtt set to 1.25v.

None of the c-states are off and no power saving settings are off like speedstep.

I have all my turbo and power saving settings enabled on my 5820k as well and it gets lower than 100GFlops in linx as well but runs fast and scores very well on other tests like it should.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That sounds correct, I score 929 at 4.0/3200/1600.

On a different subject... The mystery surrounding the vcore deepens....


----------



## GENXLR

bump your vtt to 1.3v and test again


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Yeah my turbo is enabled, my bclk is 3200mhz. Its the latest linx 65 with the latest linpack.
> 
> Does turbo just effect benchmarks like linx? Or does it lower my performance overall? I get great scores in cinebench r15 at 4.2ghz. (950 points)
> 
> I have llc turned on, vcore at 1.325v and vtt set to 1.25v.
> 
> None of the c-states are off and no power saving settings are off like speedstep.
> 
> I have all my turbo and power saving settings enabled on my 5820k as well and it gets lower than 100GFlops in linx as well but runs fast and scores very well on other tests like it should.


try turning every silly little thing off like C states, Turbo, Speed Step, power-saving features (that relate to the CPU) and see if that changes anything. on my i7 970 all 6 cores are at 4.2GHz all the time

The BCLK is the the fsb speed. e.g. my i7 970 is at 176x24(multi) which gives me ~ 4.2GHz, my Uncore is ~3500MHz (20x multi)


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> On my X5670 at 4.2ghz I am only getting 56GFlops in Linx, is something wrong?


LinX GFLOPS can be heavily influenced by problem size.

4.2GHz, with HT on, and a decent uncore/memory setup should be pushing ~80 GFLOPS at ~25000 problem size.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> nope I have it set at 3200Mhz and my RAM is at 1600mhz.


Not really related, but do note that you do not need 2x uncore MHz vs. DDR MT/s on Gulftown/Westmere. 1.5x is enough.


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> LinX GFLOPS can be heavily influenced by problem size.
> 
> 4.2GHz, with HT on, and a decent uncore/memory setup should be pushing ~80 GFLOPS at ~25000 problem size.
> Not really related, but do note that you do not need 2x uncore MHz vs. DDR MT/s on Gulftown/Westmere. 1.5x is enough.


if I keep my VTT at 1.25v and my uncore at 2x am I doing anything bad? (3200mhz) my RAM is 1600mhz and running at 1.65v.

My overclock is pretty stable as is with all those settings enabled, I dont really care about Linx numbers since I just use this PC for gaming and stuff so if regular benchmarks are not effected by using all the power saving stuff I dont really care to disable them since its all running fine as is.

Also I though the QPI is the new FSB on these cpus.


----------



## GENXLR

again, push your VTT to 1.3V, the run it and tell me your results


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> again, push your VTT to 1.3V, the run it and tell me your results


why? its stable as is, only thing that is reporting low is Linx, and like I said my 5820K scores low too in Linx.


----------



## GENXLR

you don't understand the X5600 Xeons well than. Mine is stable at lower voltages too, but it runs slower. By bumping voltages on this cpu in key parts, the speeds increase. my 4ghz X5650 kills it with 76Gflops. my 4Ghz X5670 gets 80 Gflops. 1.25Vtt is very low. 1.3V is still low. 1.35 is the limit


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> you don't understand the X5600 Xeons well than. Mine is stable at lower voltages too, but it runs slower. By bumping voltages on this cpu in key parts, the speeds increase. my 4ghz X5650 kills it with 76Gflops. my 4Ghz X5670 gets 80 Gflops. 1.25Vtt is very low. 1.3V is still low. 1.35 is the limit


I will try your theory and report back here in a few. (I was at 1.225v not 1.25v, I am testing 1.25v right now and seeing if there is a difference.

Edit:

from doing that I now get 57GFlops, not really a difference at all going to 1.25v from 1.225.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> I will try your theory and report back here in a few. (I was at 1.225v not 1.25v, I am testing 1.25v right now and seeing if there is a difference.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> from doing that I now get 57GFlops, not really a difference at all going to 1.25v from 1.225.


How about 1.3v with your VTT? Are you a little apprehensive about trying it?

With IBT 2.54v I get ~86.5 GFlops, try Intel Burn Test 2.54v Download Link


----------



## GENXLR

Why won't you just try 1.3V?


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Why won't you just try 1.3V?


If I try it should I lower my uncore from 2x? (3200)


----------



## OCmember

Gettin 91GFlops @ 4.3GHz core, 3.6GHz Uncore, same volts


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> If I try it should I lower my uncore from 2x? (3200)


My Memory speed is 1058MHz, my uncore is 3.6GHz. I think you'll be ok. I hear 4GHz Uncore is close to the limit for these 6 core 32nm chips


----------



## GENXLR

no, keep 2x with 1.3v, thats what i run 24/7. your chip can survive 1.35v at 2x as per intel spec


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> My Memory speed is 1058MHz, my uncore is 3.6GHz. I think you'll be ok. I hear 4GHz Uncore is close to the limit for these 6 core 32nm chips


Ok trying it now, my Vcore is 1.325v and now my VTT is 1.3v, with LLC enabled.

200x21, 3600mhz QPI, 3200 VTT testing now... I guess turbo turns off on these boards when you change the Clock ratio to a manual setting. I just have speedstep and the other default power saving stuff on now.

EDIT: ok with the settings above I am still stuck at 56 GFlops with LinX 0.6.5-11.2.1


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Ok trying it now, my Vcore is 1.325v and now my VTT is 1.3v, with LLC enabled.
> 
> 200x21, 3600mhz QPI, 3200 VTT testing now... I guess turbo turns off on these boards when you change the Clock ratio to a manual setting. I just have speedstep and the other default power saving stuff on now.
> 
> EDIT: ok with the settings above I am still stuck at 56 GFlops with LinX 0.6.5-11.2.1


So we are comparing the same thing, use Intel Burn Test, from the link I posted. You should be somewhere around mid 80's I don't have LinX ,,, unless you have a link for Linx


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So we are comparing the same thing, use Intel Burn Test, from the link I posted. You should be somewhere around mid 80's I don't have LinX ,,, unless you have a link for Linx


I got Linx from here:

http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/30530-latest-overclocking-programs-system-info-benchmarking-stability-tools.html

Direct link to file:

http://www.mediafire.com/download/63mo13dkm6tm0gm/LinX-0.6.5+%2811.2.1%29.zip


----------



## GENXLR

very strange. don't pass 1.3v, something is set wrong, what your memory timings and what is your speed again?


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> very strange. don't pass 1.3v, something is set wrong, what your memory timings and what is your speed again?


Here is my Bios settings: (with the VTT set to 1.225v)


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> if I keep my VTT at 1.25v and my uncore at 2x am I doing anything bad? (3200mhz) my RAM is 1600mhz and running at 1.65v.


There is nothing inherently wrong with this and those voltages should be safe long term.

One of the reasons performance sometimes improves with only voltage changes is because the L2 and L3 caches have ECC and if they are less than fully stable, they will have correctable errors that cost some performance without showing up as errors in tests.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*


You should increase that default TDP limit.

Your memory timings, including secondary and tertiary ones, are pretty loose. This may or may not be avoidable, but it could result in a somewhat lower than expected score.


----------



## OCmember

Just for kicks run IBT 2.54v from the link I provided


----------



## gofasterstripes

So, in my case what's happened is the BIOS voltage reading had gone wrong. It starts low, and then climbs.

I measured around the back of the regulators, and the voltages are similar to what they are supposed to be, around what the software used to report.

So

The question is, do I replace the PSU and the motherboard?
Or just check every voltage by hand?!








Thoughts?


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Just for kicks run IBT 2.54v from the link I provided


I ran it and didnt see any difference in score.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> I ran it and didnt see any difference in score.


Well atleast you are getting somewhere. Download HWinfo64 and run the summary only and see what your CPU and Uncore speeds are. Do you have HWinfo64?

sounds like something is throttling it and you are not running all 6 cores at 4.2GHz, like I said get rid of all that silly CPU junk (turbo, speed-step, etc etc etc) and run it old school style


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> LinX GFLOPS can be heavily influenced by problem size.
> 
> 4.2GHz, with HT on, and a decent uncore/memory setup should be pushing ~80 GFLOPS at ~25000 problem size.
> Not really related, but do note that you do not need 2x uncore MHz vs. DDR MT/s on Gulftown/Westmere. 1.5x is enough.


1.5 is the minimum for uncore on these Westmere chips, I have 3 systems all x5660, a Rampage3, a FTW3 and a P6T D V2 on two of my systems I can't post at 1.5 x ram uncore.
I have to be at least one click down from 2x or at 2x. Not sure why that is, so I just deal with it as it is.
I run 175 x 23 = 4ghz CPU at 1.3v and uncore at 1.3-1.35v depending on board. Ram is at 1440 8-8-8-23 1T or9-9-9-25. I get 82-85 gflops on all 3 systems
I can go lower on Vcore but I find at 1.3V gives the best results and my temps are low 50s with IBT with an AIO H80i H75, type water coolers
They run fully loaded 100% 24/7/365 running BOINC
I have had they running faster but don't see much better results in the programs I run and I want them to last a couple more years.


----------



## Schmuckley

ain't nothin wrong with that there


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> ain't nothin wrong with that there


you are referring to 56GFlops at 4.2GHz on an X5670 as "ain't nothin wrong with that there .." ? could you be more specific?


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> you are referring to 56GFlops at 4.2GHz on an X5670 as "ain't nothin wrong with that there .." ? could you be more specific?


Other than Linx, what other tests can you run on your CPU that can compare to mine? I got 950 on Cinebench R15, doesnt sound like my cores are downclocked on that test at all.

Also like I have stated before my 4ghz 5820k doesnt even score 100GFlops on Linx, so honestly I dont really see that as a red flag since my PC is fine with everything else.


----------



## GENXLR

Your ram, can you change the 2n group timming to 1N instead of 2N?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Other than Linx, what other tests can you run on your CPU that can compare to mine? I got 950 on Cinebench R15, doesnt sound like my cores are downclocked on that test at all.
> 
> Also like I have stated before my 4ghz 5820k doesnt even score 100GFlops on Linx, so honestly I dont really see that as a red flag since my PC is fine with everything else.


i'm sorry is that your other account because someone else posted what I quoted


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Your ram, can you change the 2n group timming to 1N instead of 2N?


I'm not sure changing the timings to 1n would account for roughly 30GFlops in IBT or LinX, hmm

Something else is definitely wrong somewhere.


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> i'm sorry is that your other account because someone else posted what I quoted


I'm talking about my main PC in my Sig. The one with the 5820K, it doesnt even get 100GFlops and its a 5820K @ 4ghz, but on all my other tests both PC's check out, do you see anything that might completely destroy my linx performance from my Bios? Anything that sticks out?


----------



## GENXLR

2T command rate and 1T command rate is a big difference. I cannot comment how big without rebooting my rig, which i can't I'm doing work atm.

Can you run Maxmemm?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> I dont really see that as a red flag since my PC is fine with everything else.


Same CPU at the same clocks getting over 30% less than everyone else in the same test is the sign of an issue somewhere.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> 2T command rate and 1T command rate is a big difference. I cannot comment how big without rebooting my rig, which i can't I'm doing work atm.


The difference on my Gulftown is about 3-4GFLOPS, not 20-25.


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Same CPU at the same clocks getting over 30% less than everyone else in the same test is the sign of an issue somewhere.
> The difference on my Gulftown is about 3-4GFLOPS, not 20-25.


True, but is Linx really a reliable test for benchmarks? Also what score should my 5820k be getting? shouldn't it be WAY over 100?


----------



## kckyle

i dont know about you guys but i just use cinebench r15


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> True, but is Linx really a reliable test for benchmarks?


It's not remotely real world, but it _is_ fairly repeatable and anomalous results mean something.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Also what score should my 5820k be getting? shouldn't it be WAY over 100?


I'm not certain, I haven't benched a 5820k with any of the LINPACK tests yet.

You may need a newer version of the Intel Math Kernel Libraries to take full advantage of the instruction sets available to Haswell-E. If you are using old builds, should only exceed a similarly clocked Gulftown by about 20-25%.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> On my X5670 at 4.2ghz I am only getting 56GFlops in Linx, is something wrong?


Don't worry about it. IBT GFlops is not a consistent measure of performance. The score depends a lot on the stress level/problem size/memory size used. Use it as a stability test only. Your cinebench score is fine so there's nothing wrong with your overclock.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Does any one have input on my motherboard issue?


----------



## GENXLR

Your board has a damaged probe most likely. You would need a new board to fix it, or a repaired board. A few of mine did that and read the cpu and other parts way out of line. Like 40K C for a temperature and even telling me my cpu voltage was 5.8V and another time .3v

also tried to tell me i was at 98Ghz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Gooface, do you have hyperthreading on or off? With IBT the output reads circa 80GF with it off, and circa 56 with it on on my system.

Cinebench r15 scores 930 at 4 GHz with ht on.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> It's not remotely real world, but it _is_ fairly repeatable and anomalous results mean something.
> I'm not certain, I haven't benched a 5820k with any of the LINPACK tests yet.
> 
> You may need a newer version of the Intel Math Kernel Libraries to take full advantage of the instruction sets available to Haswell-E. If you are using old builds, should only exceed a similarly clocked Gulftown by about 20-25%.


But his results are perfectly fine. People just give IBT GFlops without any setting. They are not really comparable. I just had a run @4.15G and I get 60 GFlops in IBT with standard setting, 73 GFlops in very high. At maximum it tries to use as much free ram as you have, and since everyone has a different amount of ram you are going to get wildly different scores.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Does any one have input on my motherboard issue?


What's going on with it?


----------



## OCmember

I'm going to run some Cinebench R15 tests. I use to use Cinebench R11.5 and scored a 11.70 @ 4.61GHz on this i7 970

CPU (Single Core) 131 @ 4.3Ghz
CPU (6 cores) 761 @ 4.3GHz
hmm, having trouble with the motherboard enabling HT


----------



## gofasterstripes

@OCmember

The vcore measurement is faulty, it doesn't reflect the actual voltage. I can measure it, and it seems stable, and similar to the settings in the BIOS, but with some vdroop evident.

I'm just wondering if it's the prelude to another failure, whether I should also replace the motherboard.... It's just all costing a lot more than I intended!


----------



## gofasterstripes

I hear good things about the EX58-UD5R, anyone want to sell me one in good condition? (UK)


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @OCmember
> 
> The vcore measurement is faulty, it doesn't reflect the actual voltage.


First of all how do you know this, and how are you measuring the vcore?


----------



## Trondster

GFlops from running Intel Burn Test:
If you have hyper threading _enabled_:
I get the highest GFlops score and highest temps from running it at Very High. Running IBT at Maximum gives quite a bit lower GFlops scores, but is a good stress test in addition to Very High. Very High to stress max temperatures, Maximum to test stability runs.

Running IBT with hyper threading _disabled_:
Maximum gives higher IBT scores and higher temps than Very High. Maximum seems to me to be a better stress test than Very High when hyper threading is disabled - both for heat and stability.
And - both Very High and Maximum give higher GFlops scores with hyper threading disabled than with HT enabled - especially Maximum.

So - if you have hyper threading enabled - run the test at Very High instead of Maximum if your goal is higher GFlops scores.

And - as mentioned above - if your CPU is on the breaking point of stability, you'll often get slightly higher GFlops scores from raising the vCore. Or for that matter from reboot to reboot.

From one of my previous posts:
Quote:


> I test both Very High and Maximum.
> Very High gives me the highest scores and highest temps with Hyper Threading enabled (low 80's GF, 63-69 deg C at VH and about 60 GF, 63-67 deg C at Max), while Maximum gives the highest scores with Hyper Threading disabled (90-91 GF at VH and 91-92 GF at Max).
> I use ten passes with Very High for a quick stability test, before I move on to 10 IBT Maximum and long runs of Prime95.
> The final test is gaming, but I have yet to see my computer unstable after passing IBT and Prime95.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> The score depends a lot on the stress level/problem size/memory size used.


Which is something we've already accounted for.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Gooface, do you have hyperthreading on or off? With IBT the output reads circa 80GF with it off, and circa 56 with it on on my system.


LINPACK scores are generally higher with HT off.

56 is still low for that problem size, on that CPU, with HT On.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> But his results are perfectly fine. People just give IBT GFlops without any setting. They are not really comparable. I just had a run @4.15G and I get 60 GFlops in IBT with standard setting, 73 GFlops in very high. At maximum it tries to use as much free ram as you have, and since everyone has a different amount of ram you are going to get wildly different scores.


We already specified a range of problem/memory sizes for him to use.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@OCmember
Round the back of the motherboard with a multimeter.

I have found vcc and vtt measuring spots.

The through mounted items are the voltage regulation, the bottom right hand pair is vtt, all the others seem tied for vcc.


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is something we've already accounted for.
> LINPACK scores are generally higher with HT off.
> 
> 56 is still low for that problem size, on that CPU, with HT On.
> We already specified a range of problem/memory sizes for him to use.


I always ran the test on maximum, when I get home today I will try it on Very High and see if the results change, i have HT on and Have been running it on maximum the whole time.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> I always ran the test on maximum, when I get home today I will try it on Very High and see if the results change, i have HT on and Have been running it on maximum the whole time.


In that case, there is probably nothing wrong. LINPACK GFLOPS decreases pretty rapidly past about 6GiB of memory use.

That said, I'd avoid using maximum, and manually set the memory/problem size. Maximum doesn't leave enough memory left over, while manual settings close to maximum are more useful for testing memory than the CPU itself. CPU load often peaks between the 20k and 30k problem size (roughly 3-6GiB of memory use).


----------



## gooface

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> In that case, there is probably nothing wrong. LINPACK GFLOPS decreases pretty rapidly past about 6GiB of memory use.
> 
> That said, I'd avoid using maximum, and manually set the memory/problem size. Maximum doesn't leave enough memory left over, while manual settings close to maximum are more useful for testing memory than the CPU itself. CPU load often peaks between the 20k and 30k problem size (roughly 3-6GiB of memory use).


Good, sorry for the confusion guys, I always wondered what I was doing differently that caused my lower scores on all my PC's. I appreciate the help and support.









TIL dont run Linx on max to see your Max GFlops.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @OCmember
> Round the back of the motherboard with a multimeter.
> 
> I have found vcc and vtt measuring spots.
> 
> The through mounted items are the voltage regulation, the bottom right hand pair is vtt, all the others seem tied for vcc.


that still does not make sense as to how you see a problem. i am going to assume the numbers from the multimeter don't match the ones in the OS via some voltage reading app. or from what you set in the bios. i will say this and that is that the multimeter is likely more accurate than what the app is telling you, or what you have it set to in the bios. my system is the same way. On my i7 970 rig, EVGA 760 A1 board, the VDIMM reads 1.620 via the multimeter. CPUID HWMonitor reads 1.635v. In the bios I have the VDIMM set to 1.59v The VTT is the same way, all numbers don't match but I trust what the Multimeter reads.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@OCmember

Yeah, I would, too. The question is: should I replace the motherboard before something else lets go? Or is the voltages reading system not a component of another system, remaining parts of which may yet fail?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @OCmember
> 
> Yeah, I would, too. The question is: should I replace the motherboard before something else lets go? Or is the voltages reading system not a component of another system, remaining parts of which may yet fail?


No, the multimeter is always the most accurate tool when you want to know the voltages. Your scenario is the same exact as mine. Bios and in OS software readings of the voltages are off/wrong. It's like this with the majority of other every motherboard out there


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> Good, sorry for the confusion guys


Yeah same here. I made some assumptions about what you doing that I probably should not have.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Bios and in OS software readings of the voltages are off/wrong. It's like this with the majority of other every motherboard out there


Software readings are normally close enough for me to rely on, provided I make sure the sensors are being interpreted correctly. I can only recall a handful of boards that weren't obviously defective where my multimeter and software that polled the sensors correctly varied by more than a few percent.

Note that what you set is often quite different that what you get. A lot of boards deliberately overvolt various areas a few percent. Still the sensors, when paired with the right firmware and software should match multimeter readings pretty closely.

It should also be noted that it is possible for the multimeter readings to be inaccurate if you measure a voltage source too far from it's destination, or if you are using the wrong ground. For example, one of my setups with a less than perfectly grounded case, reads 30mV difference between case ground and a ground wire on the PSU, or a ground on the motherboard.

Still, it's definitely good advice not to blindly rely on software reported voltages, even if they look close.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think I agree with you both.

Should I keep using the motherboard though? I guess I feel like a ud5 or ud7 would be able to power the chip better as well


----------



## OCmember

never EVER trust software. my VTT defaults to 1.20 in the bios and it reads this via the multimeter. i have .75v added to it which gives me around 1.28v via the multimeter, guess what it reads in the OS


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I think I agree with you both.
> 
> Should I keep using the motherboard though? I guess I feel like a ud5 or ud7 would be able to power the chip better as well


Ok, so we haven't convinced you about the voltages, how much do you want to spend on a "new" X58 board?


----------



## gofasterstripes

What do you mean haven't convinced? I'm wondering if you think the board might cause damage to the chip etc, not because of the reported volts, but because it's clearly somewhat unreliable.

I don't want to spend much, I think I can get a ud7 for £120, and sell the i7 it comes with. Sound like a good idea?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> What do you mean haven't convinced? I'm wondering if you think the board might cause damage to the chip etc, not because of the reported volts, but because it's clearly somewhat unreliable.
> 
> I don't want to spend much, I think I can get a ud7 for £120, and sell the i7 it comes with. Sound like a good idea?


Take all your readings from the multimeter and you'll be fine. My CPU VTT is 1.28v via the multimeter which is most accurate. When using something like CPUID HWMonitor the reading for my CPU VTT reports 1.35v. There is no fu*%ing way 1.35v is correct. Another example,,, again: my vdimm is set to 1.59v in the bios, in the os it reads 1.63v and on the multimeter reads 1.620v

The multimeter is the reading you always look at. The rest is not likely to be accurate

EDIT: when you say "_it's clearly somewhat unreliable_" you are referring to the voltage readings or something all together different?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Blameless
I'm measuring to the CPU backplate, in the picture.


----------



## OCmember

Reading voltages:

OS/Software = NEVER RELIABLE
BIOS = somewhat reliable
MULTIMETER = trust this reading


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @OCmember
> 
> The vcore measurement is faulty, it doesn't reflect the actual voltage. I can measure it, and it seems stable, and similar to the settings in the BIOS, but with some vdroop evident.
> 
> I'm just wondering if it's the prelude to another failure, whether I should also replace the motherboard.... It's just all costing a lot more than I intended!


Do you think the voltage regulation capacitors on the motherboard are getting weak? Is that what you are referring too? The only way to know if this has drooped over time is if you would of had to have recorded an accurate reading when the board was brand new. Or you could possibly see if default speeds and voltages make a more accurate difference


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Reading voltages:
> 
> OS/Software = NEVER RELIABLE
> BIOS = somewhat reliable
> MULTIMETER = trust this reading


Not always true and an over simplification regardless.

Both the BIOS and software inside an OS only report what sensors tell it. If the sensors are wrong both will be wrong. If the sensors are fine, either the BIOS or the OS readings could still be wrong, if there are firmware or software issues with the interpretation. Taking readings while inside the BIOS GUI/UEFI is of limited utility because you typically only have that fixed load to compare, where as you can get readings during any load from within the OS.

As for multimeter readings, it's possible to read what is supposed to be the same output voltage from different points on a board and get slightly different readings. It's also possible to use the wrong source for ground when taking measurements. Either of these can make the multimeter read a different voltage than what is actually reaching the CPU lands.

Once you have confirmed that you are using the correct voltage measurement points on the motherboard, and that multimeter readings from these points closely match whatever firmware and software combination you are using, across a spectrum of loads, there is no real need to continue going back to the multimeter, unless the firmware or software changes, or you suspect something has been damaged.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Not always true and an over simplification regardless.
> 
> Both the BIOS and software inside an OS only report what sensors tell it. If the sensors are wrong both will be wrong. If the sensors are fine, either the BIOS or the OS readings could still be wrong, if there are firmware or software issues with the interpretation. Taking readings while inside the BIOS GUI/UEFI is of limited utility because you typically only have that fixed load to compare, where as you can get readings during any load from within the OS.
> 
> As for multimeter readings, it's possible to read what is supposed to be the same output voltage from different points on a board and get slightly different readings. It's also possible to use the wrong source for ground when taking measurements. Either of these can make the multimeter read a different voltage than what is actually reaching the CPU lands.
> 
> Once you have confirmed that you are using the correct voltage measurement points on the motherboard, and that multimeter readings from these points closely match whatever firmware and software combination you are using, across a spectrum of loads, there is no real need to continue going back to the multimeter, unless the firmware or software changes, or you suspect something has been damaged.


I have heard this answer before and it is basically the detailed version of what I was saying


----------



## GENXLR

Please guys, clam down a bit. its obvious my 5$ harbor Freight VM is more accurate o.o


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Please guys, clam down a bit. its obvious my 5$ harbor Freight VM is more accurate o.o


your jokes bounce off my tin-foil hat


----------



## GENXLR

O_O Mother of god....

In all seriousness, Its hard to get good voltage monitoring MB's today. My old D5400XS had Solid Voltage monitoring. My Foxconn bloodrage did great as well.


----------



## OCmember

For heavens sakes


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'm going to run some Cinebench R15 tests. I use to use Cinebench R11.5 and scored a 11.70 @ 4.61GHz on this i7 970
> 
> CPU (Single Core) 131 @ 4.3Ghz
> CPU (6 cores) 761 @ 4.3GHz
> hmm, having trouble with the motherboard enabling HT


Got HT enabled
Cinebench R15 score:

CPU (6C/12T) 993 @ 4.3GHz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hi, yeah, I think you have the wrong end of the stick.... I know the meter is accurate, it's a good meter and I also compared it with the scope..... What I mean is:

do you think something else is going to go wrong with the motherboard?

I think I'm going to try and buy a ud7, well see how much they go for.

Anyone here using an EX58-UD7R? There's a v1 and a v2 on the bay, in thinking to go for the v2 because it's probably newer and 24phase power is probably not necessary, 16 phase on the v2 should suffice.


----------



## justgans

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BasTijs*
> 
> Uncore seems to be greyed out, but I found the problem. I had to set the RAM timings a bit less tight. Made a stable OC @ 4.4 after an evening of playing around:


Hi! Can u show your bios settings (voltages chapter)? I have the same mobo with X5650 and want to check some moments.


----------



## coolbho3k

Just found this X58 Xeon OCing craze. I've had my i7 980X for many years. I've been pushing it faster and faster gradually and it's currently running at 1.45v, 4.6 GHz stable… do you think it's worth trading it for a Xeon?


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coolbho3k*
> 
> Just found this X58 Xeon OCing craze. I've had my i7 980X for many years. I've been pushing it faster and faster gradually and it's currently running at 1.45v, 4.6 GHz stable&#8230; do you think it's worth trading it for a Xeon?


Keep the 980x.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hi, yeah, I think you have the wrong end of the stick.... I know the meter is accurate, it's a good meter and I also compared it with the scope..... What I mean is:
> 
> do you think something else is going to go wrong with the motherboard?
> 
> I think I'm going to try and buy a ud7, well see how much they go for.
> 
> Anyone here using an EX58-UD7R? There's a v1 and a v2 on the bay, in thinking to go for the v2 because it's probably newer and 24phase power is probably not necessary, 16 phase on the v2 should suffice.


ud7 owner right here


----------



## gofasterstripes

@kckyle

Which revision? Any thoughts before I have to flog my kidney to buy one?


----------



## kckyle

i have the 24 phrase one. this is the most stable overclocked board i have so far, way better than my p6x58d in terms of overclocking. thanks to the extra heatsink for the motherboard heatsink. the mobo temp for the chipset never exceeds 50c.

clock for clock it needs less voltage compared to my asus board, the only con i have issue with is the gap between the cpu socket and ram. not enough space for my megahalem's fan, but if you use a AIO its no problem. otherwise lets hope your ram is the low profile one.

the bios is so much more intuitive compare to the asus as well. if you can find one for a good price. sub 150, thn get it, otherwise UD5 and UD3 is basically the same.


----------



## coolbho3k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> Keep the 980x.


That's what I thought. But I can't join the X58 Xeon club







Not too happy with the volts I need to reach 4.6 right now which is the minimum OC I want or else I am upgrading to Haswell-E. I am running a 28 multiplier which I wouldn't be able to do with the Xeons though.


----------



## gooface

whats the normal range of vtt volts and vcore needed for 4ghz?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> whats the normal range of vtt volts and vcore needed for 4ghz?


depends of cpu but usually :
1.3v to 1.35v vcore
1.25 to 1.35v vtt depending on the cpu


----------



## GENXLR

Stabilization will be starting with me Monk. Soon as my ram is figured out, I want to lower voltages for efficency. What order would we need to do it in? VTT or Vcore first?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Stabilization will be starting with me Monk. Soon as my ram is figured out, I want to lower voltages for efficency. What order would we need to do it in? VTT or Vcore first?


might be easier vcore first...
it will get that figured out which is the base I think








You tried what I replied on your question for the RAM?


----------



## Trondster

The 980X basically is a hexacore Xeon - it would be just like my W3690 (W3680's and W3690's are unlocked).
1.45V is a tad high for the CPU, but a quite all right for 4.6GHz - a nice overclock - I doubt you'll go higher with another Xeon.


----------



## GENXLR

It'd be a waste to leave a highend cpu like that for a Haswell.... :/

Monk, I have not, Just trying to readyup. I have my rig ready to undergo changes soon as i finish chkdsk on some losers hdd


----------



## gooface

oddly IBT runs great on my system and instead of saying it passes after the last run it says failure, but Linx doesnt say this failure message... I say I trust Linx more than IBT on that... I dont get it though because on IBT it goes through all of the tests and even say the error if I choose one run.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> It'd be a waste to leave a highend cpu like that for a Haswell.... :/
> 
> Monk, I have not, Just trying to readyup. I have my rig ready to undergo changes soon as i finish chkdsk on some losers hdd


Well I'm running 2 Haswell (an i7 4790k and a Xeon E3 1246v3) and my 2 X5650 @ 4.6Ghz and I really see that the Westmere are getting old when I'm gaming and doing some tasks now... they are still good CPUs but they are getting 5 years old now


----------



## GENXLR

I know, But the upgrade, does it justify the price tag for the performance he's getting over his current system?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I know, But the upgrade, does it justify the price tag for the performance he's getting over his current system?


I missed that part... What do he want to get? if hes talking Haswell-E and DDR4 heck no... its like twice as expensive as my Z97 platform with DDR3 2400 for like 30% more performance


----------



## GENXLR

lol, i have no clue, just was saying it as it's a lil silly sometimes

Skylake-E looks beautiful


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> lol, i have no clue, just was saying it as it's a lil silly sometimes
> 
> Skylake-E looks beautiful


In my case it wasn't an upgrade but a full system I got







I was saving for a while... The Xeon E3 is used as a kind of fileserver / backup gaming rig #3 which I find now dumb as I also have a Proliant DL380 with a 24Tb StorageWorks MSA60 SAN I use as my Plex Server and storage server...







dumbass me


----------



## GENXLR

Most of my servers are still Poweredge 2950's, Love em!


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> oddly IBT runs great on my system and instead of saying it passes after the last run it says failure, but Linx doesnt say this failure message... I say I trust Linx more than IBT on that... I dont get it though because on IBT it goes through all of the tests and even say the error if I choose one run.


What error message - screenshot, please. And - run it both at Very High and Maximum.

What if you downclock a bit, or increase the voltage?
If IBT reports errors your system very likely just isn't stable.


----------



## loop16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Well I'm running 2 Haswell (an i7 4790k and a Xeon E3 1246v3) and my 2 X5650 @ 4.6Ghz and I really see that the Westmere are getting old when I'm gaming and doing some tasks now... they are still good CPUs but they are getting 5 years old now


Really in terms of what westmere is getting old espesially with xeon E3 in terms of raw performance???????????

It's CLEAR where is the 4 core Xeon E3 which can't be overclocked AND even haswell ep i7 5820k is far behind from the overclocked X5650
and if you want a cinebench test

and compare to i7 5820k this...



SO where exactly westmere is getting old??? because intel still USING THE SAME NAHALEM BASED ARC??? Or you mean due to chipset X58 lack of sata 3, usb 3 and pci-e 3? How many ALL of these affects performance 1-2% Really ont an issue

AND because THE MYTH OR better the SCAM of cpu bottleneck with 3 vgas setup in 4k gaming IF the performance of a westmere Xeon is not enough, exactly the performance of an i7 5820k won't be enough TOO
If you mean 7 fps will save the situation i cant continue i mean from 27 fps in westmere to 35 fps in haswell the geme is still unplayable and vice versa from 70 fps in westmere to 77 fps in haswell you won't tell the difference
P.S. i have also a i5 4670 too BUT is no where near in the high end X58 westmere despite the age, i m stil waiting to upgrade to a REAL NEW arc from intel like from conroe to nahalem NOT arcs refreshing and 5-10% per core performance which in real life is insignificant. AND thi is NOT only in intel in gpus area marketing hype is even worse
NEW GENerations from nvidia gtx 680 6 series, ok GTX 770 7 series
AMD the scam hd 7 series, so lets rename them to r9 xxx


----------



## Rylen

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8426/the-intel-haswell-e-cpu-review-core-i7-5960x-i7-5930k-i7-5820k-tested/6

Good comparison of 990X (Xeon Westmere Equivalent) vs latest cPU's

With a single card it's pretty much on pair with everything.

F1 2013 SLI Average: 4% slower than 4820K, 20% faster than Faster than FX9590, 25% Faster than FX8350
F1 2013 SLI Minimum: 3% slower than 4820k, 19% faster than FX9590, 28% faster than FX8350

Bioshock Infinite SLI Average: 2% slower than i7 3930K, 11% Faster than FX8350
Bioshock Infinite SLI Minimum: 25% Slower than 4770K, 30% Faster than 5930k, 50% faster than FX9590, 100% Faster than 4960X (this game cpu scales all over the place for min frames, same weird results with single GPU)

Tomb Raider SLI Average: Same on all CPU's
Tomb Raider SLI Minimum: Same on all CPU's

Sleeping Dogs SLI Average: Same as 4770k, 5% slower than 5960X, 7% faster than FX8350
Sleeping Dogs SLI Min: Same as 5820K, 14% Faster than FX8350

Battlefield 4 SLI Average: Same as 3930K, 8% slower than 5960X, 7% Faster than FX8350
Battlefield 4 SLI Min: Same as 3930K, 21% Faster than FX8350


----------



## coolbho3k

I just read about this. What is with the whole thing about X58 CPUs liking odd multipliers? I ask because I'm using an even multiplier on my 980X and I would like to try odd if it means I can push higher than 4.6 at my 1.45v or lower voltage a bit.

And wow, FX8350 is still slower than 990X, a 5 year old CPU. I wish AMD could be more competitive


----------



## coolbho3k

The main advantages of the newer archs are the new features of the chips. AVX, AVX2, and as you mentioned, PCIe 3.0, USB 3, etc... We are all missing out on. I am personally missing SATA 3 as the Marvell controller built into my R3E is trash but I have an old PCIe RevoDrive that is still decently fast as a boot drive. But I've been using my OC Westmere CPU for almost 5 years. Went from dual GTX 580s and 12 GB RAM on the decent stock cooler at stock speeds to dual GTX 980s and 24 gigs of RAM. The CPU is on a custom loop now and I have not felt a CPU bottleneck yet. You guys are right, it's probably more sensible to wait until Skylake-E or whatever comes after Broadwell-E.

Damn, keeping a high end CPU for 6-7 years... The $1000 I paid for the 980X doesn't seem that crazy now.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> Really in terms of what westmere is getting old espesially with xeon E3 in terms of raw performance???????????
> 
> It's CLEAR where is the 4 core Xeon E3 which can't be overclocked AND even haswell ep i7 5820k is far behind from the overclocked X5650
> and if you want a cinebench test
> 
> and compare to i7 5820k this...
> 
> 
> 
> SO where exactly westmere is getting old??? because intel still USING THE SAME NAHALEM BASED ARC??? Or you mean due to chipset X58 lack of sata 3, usb 3 and pci-e 3? How many ALL of these affects performance 1-2% Really ont an issue
> 
> AND because THE MYTH OR better the SCAM of cpu bottleneck with 3 vgas setup in 4k gaming IF the performance of a westmere Xeon is not enough, exactly the performance of an i7 5820k won't be enough TOO
> If you mean 7 fps will save the situation i cant continue i mean from 27 fps in westmere to 35 fps in haswell the geme is still unplayable and vice versa from 70 fps in westmere to 77 fps in haswell you won't tell the difference
> P.S. i have also a i5 4670 too BUT is no where near in the high end X58 westmere despite the age, i m stil waiting to upgrade to a REAL NEW arc from intel like from conroe to nahalem NOT arcs refreshing and 5-10% per core performance which in real life is insignificant. AND thi is NOT only in intel in gpus area marketing hype is even worse
> NEW GENerations from nvidia gtx 680 6 series, ok GTX 770 7 series
> AMD the scam hd 7 series, so lets rename them to r9 xxx


I'm sorry who are you?
I've been here on the X58 club for like 2 years now...
I have 2 x58 rigs with both X5650 @ 4.6 Ghz and I've been helping others with overclocking their rigs for a while now... First stop comparing this with benchmarks... there is a difference between benchmark and real life situation... I've seen a difference between my ageing X58 platform and my new Haswell platform and you can't say there is no performance gain... and yes you can overclock an E3 Xeon... I was able to get my bclk to 105.5 on my E3 1246v3... which puts it at 4.1 Ghz...
Then maybe fix your attitude problem dude... no need to get in here like I insulted you or something... I just said something general... nothing at all toward you personally...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coolbho3k*
> 
> The main advantages of are the new features of the chips. AVX, AVX2, and as you mentioned, PCIe 3.0, USB 3, etc... We are all missing out on. I am personally missing SATA 3 as the Marvell controller built into my R3E is trash but I have an old PCIe RevoDrive that is still decently fast as a boot drive. But I've been using my OC Westmere CPU for almost 5 years on dual GTX 980s and 24 gigs of RAM now and I have not felt a CPU bottleneck yet.


You can get a cool hardware based PCIe SAS/SATA raid controller of eBay under 150$ that will make your PC fly bud!


----------



## bill1024

I agree, AVX and AVX2 is missing and they sure do make a difference in what I do.
Besides gaming I run BOINC primegrid and the work units on my 3 x5660 at 4ghx take 26-29min.
On the new CPUs and the same work units at they are banging out units in 12-15min. That's a huge difference.
On my 4P 24 core AMD Opteron 2.1ghz, they take 1hr, on MY 4P 48 core at 1.8ghz they take 2+ hours. But Iam banging out 48 at a time not just six.
Going to sell a couple x5660 systems and upgrade in the spring. I will keep one for games and everyday use.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I'm sorry who are you?
> ..


----------



## coolbho3k

The new consoles support AVX, so maybe game engines will start to take advantage of AVX instructions toward the middle of their lifecycles. They can definitely use all the optimization they can get, being CPU starved. I hope games won't start requiring Sandy Bridge+ anytime soon as even a lot of enthusiasts are still on this platform.

As of right now I feel good about this platform though.


----------



## loop16

Who am i someone with the same hobby as you! i didn't insult you at all just i reply to your post nothing more and not any offence from me, may be due to english it's not my 1st language is more difficult to give correctly the consist of my words, i can't do this better and feel SORRY for that
My post is because i use benchmarks and the most popular of them to support my opinion, moreover i have a haswell setup to as my second internet rig with i5 4670k and beside is a teriible overclocker i am unable to see any advantage compared to my westmere gaming rig.
Yes you can add some mhz to a locked non k hawell with active bins and at the end of the day you have 400mhz more than max turbo frequency at best ok, to me not worth the effort for so little, anyway if you feel insulted from my post i ask sorry for that


----------



## kckyle

when developers actually start using AVX and AVX 2 as part of their programming, maybe i'll upgrade to a haswell, or skylake.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> Who am i someone with the same hobby as you! i didn't insult you at all just i reply to your post nothing more and not any offence from me, may be due to english it's not my 1st language is more difficult to give correctly the consist of my words, i can't do this better and feel SORRY for that
> My post is because i use benchmarks and the most popular of them to support my opinion, moreover i have a haswell setup to as my second internet rig with i5 4670k and beside is a teriible overclocker i am unable to see any advantage compared to my westmere gaming rig.
> Yes you can add some mhz to a locked non k hawell with active bins and at the end of the day you have 400mhz more than max turbo frequency at best ok, to me not worth the effort for so little, anyway if you feel insulted from my post i ask sorry for that


Then its all good sorry about that


----------



## gofasterstripes




----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*


Hattie McDaniel, lived to the age 57. First African American to ever receive an Oscar. Sidney Poitier was the second


----------



## kckyle

hm that silent heat pipe does actually make a difference for mobo cooling, not gonna lie it brought down the chipset by 6c, the ud7 rev2 uses a different set of instruction for mosfet and phrase, it basically cuts down to 2 sets of 8. when not using under load the mobo only uses 8 of the phrase and let the other 8 on standby. theoretically doubling the lifespan of the mobo.


----------



## gooface

hmm well I am going to settle at 4ghz for a little bit, I have been pushing this thing for over a week now and I am going to give it a break for a little bit.

4ghz is stable at 1.3v vcore and 1.25v vtt (200x20) my max temps are around 70c. I ran Linx for hours without fail and Prime95 for 12 hours without fail... good enough for me right now.

I tried 4.2ghz at 1.325v and I started getting x0a BSOD's... I really wanted 4.2ghz but I need a break for the moment, I just moved into my new house I just bought last month... I might try to get to 4.2ghz again in the near future... at 4ghz this is still a decent upgrade from the 4ghz 870 I was using before.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1515490 (870) Physics
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4050097 (x5670)

Physics Score 13800 vs 10017 on Fire Strike (my 5820K gets 15942 doing this at 4ghz)


----------



## gofasterstripes

@kckyle
Thanks for that.


----------



## Rylen

Here is my best 3DMark

CPU @ 4.56Ghz
GTX 970 @ 1453 and 7750


----------



## gofasterstripes

Personal best is a few hundred more, but I can't say with my hand on my heart it would never crash like that.

I hope a new mobo can set the bar a little higher









4GHZ and 7970 at 1180/1640


----------



## Space Marine

Some updates on my overclock









After 1 week of break, i started again to mess up with the clocks and voltages of my x5670, and came up with this:

4.2 Ghz Stable
200x21
HT OFF
Vcore in bios 1,34375v - Vcore idle cpuz 1,320v - Vcore load cpuz 1,296/1,304v LLC OFF
Uncore 3083mhz
QPI vtt 1,2875v
Ram 1600 7 8 8 21 1,5v
CPU PLL 1,8 (dialed back at default)
The rest is all at default voltage
Max temp is 71°C

For the sake of curiosity, i tried also 191x22 and 175x24, but with the same voltages those weren't stable. I guess whoever said that odd multipliers work better on x58 was right









Which also made me think that after all the x5670 is not that useful, compared to the x5660, cause it cant use the 23 multi
And is not a good deal either, compared to the x5650, cause it doesnt look like these do overclock any different, since all the x xeons seem to float around the same frequencies.

Anyway, i also found some more interesting infos while lurking around a pair of other forums.

According to this post
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041002225&postcount=321

most of the people here are being very conservative with voltages. His reasoning makes sense, even if, as always, it's just a speculation.
But it made me more confident about pushing to 4.4ghz if i can keep voltages lower around 1,36 (in bios) and decent temps
I will try btw to lower the vcore by playing with the amplitude settings. I want a definitive answer on it's usefulness

And this post
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041007096&postcount=340

gave me a better idea of how turbo is it supposed to be used while overclocking. Didnt know about Win Cooling Policy

Also, did some tests at 4,0 with HT ON and OFF on the games i play the most (arma 3, coh2) , HT off is even or faster then HT on, always. So no point for me in keeping it on.

P.S: On a side note, uncore freq influences a lot gflops results in IBT. Im now getting 90.1 GFs at 3000 uncore compared to the 86.1 i was getting at 2400


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Space Marine
Nice work soldier!
Unfortunately for me, when I took a multimeter to my system I found that my VTT was reading slightly OVER the BIOS voltage, so I worry that my uncore might be damaged, especially seeing as the stability faded somewhat.

Going to be away for a few days, and I hope when I come back they'll be a motherboard on its way...

See ya starside.


----------



## Tritonk7

Hi guys broke up memory up to 2000 MHz and 3700 MHz to uncore, memory operates at 1.6 volts, uncore at 1.275. Tell me, is it safe, will not die if CPU NB in the future?


----------



## GENXLR

no


----------



## gofasterstripes

^^^^what, lol

@Tritonk7
According to the information we have at this point, staying below 1.35v for vtt and vcc should be safe for long term use.


----------



## Tritonk7

Thanks guys. And then I was convinced of the opposite. So try the aftermath of 24/7 on a memory overclocking.


----------



## Space Marine

what's ur BCLK at 2000 mem?
did u increase any other voltage?

QPI is 1,275? wow that low for that uncore!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Space Marine
> Nice work soldier!
> Unfortunately for me, when I took a multimeter to my system I found that my VTT was reading slightly OVER the BIOS voltage, so I worry that my uncore might be damaged, especially seeing as the stability faded somewhat.
> 
> Going to be away for a few days, and I hope when I come back they'll be a motherboard on its way...
> 
> See ya starside.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> what's ur BCLK at 2000 mem?
> did u increase any other voltage?
> 
> QPI is 1,275? wow that low for that uncore!


BLC 205 Mhz ?Memory 2055 Mhz .Yes , 1.275 Uncore Voltage on 3700 Mhz . Timings stay 10-11-10-24 CR1T voltage memory 1.6 V


----------



## Space Marine

Are u on air or water at 4.5?
Ht enable or disable?
load vcore?
cool that ur board got the offset, on the p6t i can just set the vcore


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Are u on air or water at 4.5?
> Ht enable or disable?
> load vcore?
> cool that ur board got the offset, on the p6t i can just set the vcore


4500 Mhz on AIR , HT Enable ,Load Max Vcore 1.384

Vcore On CineBench


----------



## Space Marine

LLC is off or on? (vdroop on or off?)
which cooler are u using?
which temps are u getting under load?
sorry for so many questions but ur overclock is really interesting, id like mine to be able to run at 4.4 4.5 daily too!


----------



## loop16

Are you sure that r cpu is working right with x22 multi, to mine x5650 despite i m able to reach 4.8ghz with x22 multi

cpu does not scoring high in benchies but only @ 4.35 with bclk 220 and x20 multi and 2x uncore


because for such a high frequency you have 4.51 your cinebench score is not so high


----------



## bill1024

Reading the link to max voltage for the CPU.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Some updates on my overclock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, i also found some more interesting infos while lurking around a pair of other forums.
> 
> According to this post
> http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041002225&postcount=321
> 
> most of the people here are being very conservative with voltages. His reasoning makes sense, even if, as always, it's just a speculation.
> But it made me more confident about pushing to 4.4ghz if i can keep voltages lower around 1,36 (in bios) and decent temps
> I will try btw to lower the vcore by playing with the amplitude settings. I want a definitive answer on it's usefulness
> 
> And this post
> http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041007096&postcount=340
> 
> gave me a better idea of how turbo is it supposed to be used while overclocking. Didnt know about Win Cooling Policy
> 
> Also, did some tests at 4,0 with HT ON and OFF on the games i play the most (arma 3, coh2) , HT off is even or faster then HT on, always. So no point for me in keeping it on.
> 
> P.S: On a side note, uncore freq influences a lot gflops results in IBT. Im now getting 90.1 GFs at 3000 uncore compared to the 86.1 i was getting at 2400


This is the link I got from Intel that says 1.35 is max.
http://ark.intel.com/products/47921/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5660-12M-Cache-2_80-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI

Reading that link from [H], their 1333 club, it states 1.37v is max, and a overshoot of 50mv put you to a 1.42 as a safe CPU voltage. SO does the overshoot go away? I don't think so
If you set the CPUv to 1.42 you will have an overshoot to 1.47 That is well over 1.35 Set 1.45 then you're up to 1.50.
I myself want my chip to last a while. 75$ is not going to brake the bank but I hate pissing money down the drain.

Here is a write up by Kana Maru the OP of this thread
Read full post here
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information?showall=&start=1

Published: Monday, 15 December 2014 19:44
Written by Kana Maru

Westmere-EP & X58 Overclock Information
CPU Max Voltage & Power Guideline Misconception
All Pages

Page 2 of 2

Westmere-EP & X58 Overclock Info
CPU Max Voltage & Power Guideline Misconception

Alright we will address the most common misconception I've seen across the web. Time and time again X58 users will point to a commonly used example provided by Intel, stating that the max voltage for Westmere-EP is 1.4v. Meaning that as long as you set the CPU voltage to 1.4 or below you processor will be fine. This is simply not true and users constantly misunderstand how the CPU actually performs and how Intel designed the CPU. So let's get one thing correct 1.35v is recommended by Intel on their ARK pages. People spread 1.4v as the max incorrectly.

The reason 1.35v is the recommend voltage is because Intel said it is. Also one thing that is normally overlooked is the voltage spike. Voltage spikes can literally kill the CPU and\or the Motherboard + MB components. This is more prevalent by setting manual or dynamic vCore too high. Intel also included a feature that will hopefully prevent the CPU from frying [old tech]. If the CPU temperature is too high the processor will cause the PC to freeze or BSOD. Otherwise continued use at high temps will cause the CPU will degrade. Vdroop also helps preserve the CPU life. vDroop will allow the CPU to operate under load at a lower voltage while preventing or avoiding spikes that will surpass the voltage set[not manual] in the BIOS. If you have LLC [Load-Line Calibration] set to AUTO[depends on settings] or Enabled then vDroop is DISABLED. AUTO can vary so either use Enable or Disable. This means that you could unknowingly damage your CPU over time. Some motherboards handle LLC better or worse than others.

The voltage spike for the 45nm and 32nm is 0.05v. Actually the 45nm could be 0.06v IIRC. Have you ever wondered why your PC shows a BSOD or freezes when you start a benchmark\stability tool? Well one of the most overlooked issues was the voltages spiking past your manually set CPU voltage. Another reason could be that you didn't use enough vCore or several other settings. When your processor switches from an idle to load condition or vice versa, this can cause a spike. Well Intel states that the processor voltage spikes.

So why would Intel state that 1.4v is the max? Well Intel states this because 1.4v is the MAX VOLTAGE and they are respecting their own technology and guidelines. Now let's do the math with vDroop and the correct use of VID in mind: 1.35v +(spike)0.05v = 1.4v! Of course this is backwards, but I'm trying to explain everything so that you'll understand it. I'll probably write up a overclocking guide regarding the voltage if enough people demand one. Therefore, Intel is correct when they state 1.35v as the max.

Now the way enthusiast or overclockers pass this information is in the wrong context. They spread the information as if it is used to be the maximum CPU voltage set in the BIOS. Time and time again I've seen overclockers use this as an excuse to reach their favorite frequencies. For instance here is the "wrong" way to use this information using manual voltage: (BIOS)1.4v+(spike)0.05v = 1.45v! Now the biggest problem is that you are now much higher than Intels recommended voltage of 1.35v. 1.35v is the max for my processor and I'm using it as an example. Also when this 1.4v is passed around the net enthusiast ignore all of the voltage guidelines set by Intel. With that being said you can continue to ignore the guidelines and overclock the hell out of your CPU for all I care. Just know that Intel repeatedly states and knows that your CPU will degrade over time so don't be surprised.

Thanks to vDroop and other voltage regulation guidelines, Intel developed a guideline to prevent the voltage from spiking past the voltage set in the BIOS. Whenever you remove vDroop and voffset then overclock your CPU using manual voltage you aren't doing any favors for your CPU. Increasing the voltage is not the only answer to instability issues. Without vDroop and dynamic vCore there is practically nothing protector your CPU from negative and positive spikes. Users who run their gaming rigs with settings similar to what I just explained above will more than likely "lose" their stable overclocks over time due to degradation. Another overlooked issue is the time allowed for the voltage to spike. Long story short, if your voltage spikes for longer than the time allowed by Intel guidelines your PC will NOT be stable. This is crucial for high overclocks as the PC will unstable whenever you attempt to put a load on the CPU. So remember that voltage is not your only issue to worry about. There are other things that go behind the scene like negative and positive spikes. vDroop is a good thing so remember that. All of this information allows me to run fairly high overclocks while benefiting from the power saving features as well as the performance. Correctly overclocking your PC can extend the life of your server\workstation while allowing you to potentially lower your CPU temperature.


----------



## Xevi

http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2353770/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> What's the load voltage on that OC?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> What's the load voltage on that OC?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> What's the load voltage on that OC?


Ranking LinX 1.3vcore

My x5670 4388Mhz 1.3v
*My x5675 4.344Mhz 1.3v*
My x5680 #1 4.410Mhz 1.3v
My x5680 #2 4.433Mgz 1.3v

Oleeeee


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> LLC is off or on? (vdroop on or off?)
> which cooler are u using?
> which temps are u getting under load?
> sorry for so many questions but ur overclock is really interesting, id like mine to be able to run at 4.4 4.5 daily too!


LLC AUTO , Vdroop on , Deepcool Neptwin with 3 fans , and i have full tower with 230mm fans . Temp near 80 in heavy task ,In games i have near 54 degrees.


----------



## Rylen

I need some help with RAM timings auto aint cutting it. Dont know what to do


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> 
> I need some help with RAM timings auto aint cutting it. Dont know what to do


Are you using 1333 Samsung wonder ram? You are over 1900mhz it is rated 1333, that is a lot.
Can you lower it to 1400 and tighten the timings? Or try 10 10 10 31 if you want that high mhz..

Where are you trying to be with it?


----------



## Rylen

Yes it's Samsung "Wonder Ram"

Techpowerup got 2400mhz 11-11-11-28 with X79 chipset

http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Samsung/MV-3V4G3/7.html

At my current speeds i would be happy with 10-10-10-28, and delighted with 9-9-9-27.


----------



## bill1024

What is your voltage set at?
What have you tried so far?
Do you get blue screens? Freezes up.....
What is the best you have gotten to stable?
Multiplier, bclk, uncore speeds and all the voltages.
Give some background to help figure out what to try. As much info that you can think of may help.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> I guess whoever said that odd multipliers work better on x58 was right


From what I have read you often want to use even or odd multipliers depending on the max rated multiplier on your CPU - if it is odd; try odd, and if it is even, then try even. But I think it's more important for 45nm parts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Anyway, i also found some more interesting infos while lurking around a pair of other forums.
> 
> According to this post
> http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041002225&postcount=321
> 
> most of the people here are being very conservative with voltages. His reasoning makes sense, even if, as always, it's just a speculation.
> But it made me more confident about pushing to 4.4ghz if i can keep voltages lower around 1,36 (in bios) and decent temps
> I will try btw to lower the vcore by playing with the amplitude settings. I want a definitive answer on it's usefulness


That post refers to Intel specifications regarding quadcore 45nm chips (the extreme 900 45nm series) - the Xeons we use are 32nm hexacores, and have lower max voltage limits.

In table 2-6 of the documentation he refers to we can see that the absolute max Vcc for those CPU's are 1.55V. The normal "max" VID (table 2.7) for factory stock configuration for CPUs running at their rated speed is 1.375V.
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/core-i7-900-ee-and-desktop-processor-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

But: let's instead look at the hexacore 32nm part specifications:
For (for example) the 5600 series (like the x5650), that corresponding table (2.7) lists absolute max Vcc as 1.4V. The normal "max" VID (table 2.8) for stock voltage is 1.35V.
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/xeon-5600-vol-1-datasheet.pdf

Intels specs for the 32nm 900 extreme edition chips also have 1.4V as absolute max for the Vcc (with 1.375V as max stock voltage):
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/core-i7-900-ee-and-desktop-processor-series-32nm-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

The "global" max Vcc for the 32nm hexacores is _quite_ a bit lower. So - don't base your voltages on musings on a different make of CPUs.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Reading the link to max voltage for the CPU.
> This is the link I got from Intel that says 1.35 is max.
> http://ark.intel.com/products/47921/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5660-12M-Cache-2_80-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI
> 
> Reading that link from [H], their 1333 club, it states 1.37v is max, and a overshoot of 50mv put you to a 1.42 as a safe CPU voltage. SO does the overshoot go away? I don't think so
> If you set the CPUv to 1.42 you will have an overshoot to 1.47 That is well over 1.35 Set 1.45 then you're up to 1.50.
> I myself want my chip to last a while. 75$ is not going to brake the bank but I hate pissing money down the drain.
> 
> Here is a write up by Kana Maru the OP of this thread
> Read full post here
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information?showall=&start=1
> 
> Published: Monday, 15 December 2014 19:44
> Written by Kana Maru
> 
> Westmere-EP & X58 Overclock Information
> CPU Max Voltage & Power Guideline Misconception
> All Pages
> 
> Page 2 of 2
> 
> Westmere-EP & X58 Overclock Info
> CPU Max Voltage & Power Guideline Misconception
> 
> Alright we will address the most common misconception I've seen across the web. Time and time again X58 users will point to a commonly used example provided by Intel, stating that the max voltage for Westmere-EP is 1.4v. Meaning that as long as you set the CPU voltage to 1.4 or below you processor will be fine. This is simply not true and users constantly misunderstand how the CPU actually performs and how Intel designed the CPU. So let's get one thing correct 1.35v is recommended by Intel on their ARK pages. People spread 1.4v as the max incorrectly.
> 
> The reason 1.35v is the recommend voltage is because Intel said it is. Also one thing that is normally overlooked is the voltage spike. Voltage spikes can literally kill the CPU and\or the Motherboard + MB components. This is more prevalent by setting manual or dynamic vCore too high. Intel also included a feature that will hopefully prevent the CPU from frying [old tech]. If the CPU temperature is too high the processor will cause the PC to freeze or BSOD. Otherwise continued use at high temps will cause the CPU will degrade. Vdroop also helps preserve the CPU life. vDroop will allow the CPU to operate under load at a lower voltage while preventing or avoiding spikes that will surpass the voltage set[not manual] in the BIOS. If you have LLC [Load-Line Calibration] set to AUTO[depends on settings] or Enabled then vDroop is DISABLED. AUTO can vary so either use Enable or Disable. This means that you could unknowingly damage your CPU over time. Some motherboards handle LLC better or worse than others.
> 
> The voltage spike for the 45nm and 32nm is 0.05v. Actually the 45nm could be 0.06v IIRC. Have you ever wondered why your PC shows a BSOD or freezes when you start a benchmark\stability tool? Well one of the most overlooked issues was the voltages spiking past your manually set CPU voltage. Another reason could be that you didn't use enough vCore or several other settings. When your processor switches from an idle to load condition or vice versa, this can cause a spike. Well Intel states that the processor voltage spikes.
> 
> So why would Intel state that 1.4v is the max? Well Intel states this because 1.4v is the MAX VOLTAGE and they are respecting their own technology and guidelines. Now let's do the math with vDroop and the correct use of VID in mind: 1.35v +(spike)0.05v = 1.4v! Of course this is backwards, but I'm trying to explain everything so that you'll understand it. I'll probably write up a overclocking guide regarding the voltage if enough people demand one. Therefore, Intel is correct when they state 1.35v as the max.
> 
> Now the way enthusiast or overclockers pass this information is in the wrong context. They spread the information as if it is used to be the maximum CPU voltage set in the BIOS. Time and time again I've seen overclockers use this as an excuse to reach their favorite frequencies. For instance here is the "wrong" way to use this information using manual voltage: (BIOS)1.4v+(spike)0.05v = 1.45v! Now the biggest problem is that you are now much higher than Intels recommended voltage of 1.35v. 1.35v is the max for my processor and I'm using it as an example. Also when this 1.4v is passed around the net enthusiast ignore all of the voltage guidelines set by Intel. With that being said you can continue to ignore the guidelines and overclock the hell out of your CPU for all I care. Just know that Intel repeatedly states and knows that your CPU will degrade over time so don't be surprised.
> 
> Thanks to vDroop and other voltage regulation guidelines, Intel developed a guideline to prevent the voltage from spiking past the voltage set in the BIOS. Whenever you remove vDroop and voffset then overclock your CPU using manual voltage you aren't doing any favors for your CPU. Increasing the voltage is not the only answer to instability issues. Without vDroop and dynamic vCore there is practically nothing protector your CPU from negative and positive spikes. Users who run their gaming rigs with settings similar to what I just explained above will more than likely "lose" their stable overclocks over time due to degradation. Another overlooked issue is the time allowed for the voltage to spike. Long story short, if your voltage spikes for longer than the time allowed by Intel guidelines your PC will NOT be stable. This is crucial for high overclocks as the PC will unstable whenever you attempt to put a load on the CPU. So remember that voltage is not your only issue to worry about. There are other things that go behind the scene like negative and positive spikes. vDroop is a good thing so remember that. All of this information allows me to run fairly high overclocks while benefiting from the power saving features as well as the performance. Correctly overclocking your PC can extend the life of your server\workstation while allowing you to potentially lower your CPU temperature.


Ok, so if i understood correctly the 1,4v max absolute voltage limit is 1,35 + spike.
If i got LLC off the voltage i set in bios is the max spike the cpu can get, so that 1,35 limit with LLC off is actually 1,35 under load.

Am i correct?
Or the spike can happen also when idling?


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Ok, so if i understood correctly the 1,4v max absolute voltage limit is 1,35 + spike.
> If i got LLC off the voltage i set in bios is the max spike the cpu can get, so that 1,35 limit with LLC off is actually 1,35 under load.
> 
> Am i correct?
> Or the spike can happen also when idling?


I think so, yes.

Intel state that the CPU's can take a spike of a certain max voltage and duration (here 0.05V and 25 microseconds.

But - in this poster's humble opinion:
Intel doesn't state that all motherboards therefore automatically have spikes of 0.05V - and doesn't specifiy anything about any spikes with LLC disabled vs LLC enabled. (In fact I believe there isn't anything in the specifications about LLC enabled at all - the specification assumes no LLC.)
We do not know the actual magnitudes of voltage spikes from actual motherboards, neither with LLC enabled nor disabled.

What we do know is that Intel specifies a max voltage limit of 1.4V.

To be safe, I go for max voltage limits of:
LLC disabled: 1.4V idle, 1.35V load.
LLC enabled: 1.35V idle, 1.35V load.

Here's a previous post I made, comparing required voltages with and without LLC for a certain overclock:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2400#post_23300847


----------



## Space Marine

Yeah i remember reading your post about LLC
Honestly i dont know which one is better, but on my setup at 4ghz llc disabled was giving me a little bit lower load voltages, and so lower temps, so i went for that route.
I should retest it back at 4.2 btw


----------



## Trondster

I'd go for the LLC setting that gives you the lowest stable load VCore (and temps) at Intel Burn Test; IBT at Maximum with HT off and Very High with HT on.


----------



## Space Marine

btw, i just reread through old posts, and you linked quite a while ago this article:

http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/

in which they state that LLC on doesnt cause any spike

But, quoting from the article:
Quote:


> It is also possible that my scope's 50 microsecond refresh is too slow to capture the spike but I don't think that this is likely myself.


I dont know the source you are using, but you just wrote
Quote:


> Intel state that the CPU's can take a spike of a certain max voltage and duration (here 0.05V and 25 microseconds.


If that's true, the article is pretty much useless, cause the scope wasnt fast enough for actually seeing if there was a problem or not


----------



## Space Marine

Also, rethinking about my doubt about spikes happening during idle, it doesn't make sense, cause spikes happens during the transition from load to idle, or viceversa.

Taken from anandtech:




so this:
Quote:


> What we do know is that Intel specifies a max voltage limit of 1.4V.
> 
> To be safe, I go for max voltage limits of:
> LLC disabled: 1.4V idle, 1.35V load.
> LLC enabled: 1.35V idle, 1.35V load.


is definately correct







if we suppose the max spike with llc on to be 0.05, which is the most optimistic scenario btw, because the whole point of vdroop is to put a max limit to the spike which with llc on is uncontrolled

So in that prespective it looks safer to me with llc off, considering we can avoid the uncertainty of the spike size, and so remove one unknown variable from the scenario.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> btw, i just reread through old posts, and you linked quite a while ago this article:
> 
> http://www.overclockers.com/load-line-calibration/
> 
> in which they state that LLC on doesnt cause any spike
> 
> But, quoting from the article:
> I dont know the source you are using, but you just wrote
> If that's true, the article is pretty much useless, cause the scope wasnt fast enough for actually seeing if there was a problem or not


My source on the max duration and voltage on the overshoot is Intels own specification: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/xeon-5600-vol-1-datasheet.pdf - read 2.6.1 (Vcc Overshoot Specifications) and table 2-10. There we can see that the Vos_max is 50mV (0.05V) and that the Tos_max is 25 μs (25 microseconds).

They also specify (in 2.6.2) that overshoots of duration 10 ns or less can be ignored (10 nanoseconds = 0.01 microseconds), and that you thus should use a 100 MHz bandwidth limited oscilloscope.

So yes - the 50 microsecond oscilloscope used would be way too slow - even the maximum allowed overshoot duration is twice as fast as the oscilloscope could detect. To conform with the Intel spec you'd want a 100 MHz bandwidth limited oscilloscope - a 50microsecond oscilloscope would in comparison be bandwidth limited at only 20 kHz - too slow by a factor of 5000 (!).

The CPU they tested - E5200 - also has 25microseconds specified as the max overshoot: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/pentium-dual-core-e6000-e5000-datasheet.pdf

Edit: Hang on - I just read a comment on the article, made by the author:
Quote:


> A quick followup:
> 
> 50us is the width of the screen, the minimum spike time to capture is something like 50ns if I recall correctly, very short indeed.


So - the measurements (_if_ they did everything right) should actually be somewhat relevant. But - they should use a 10ns oscilloscope.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> is definately correct
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if we suppose the max spike with llc on to be 0.05, which is the most optimistic scenario btw, because the whole point of vdroop is to put a max limit to the spike which with llc on is uncontrolled
> 
> So in that prespective it looks safer to me with llc off, considering we can avoid the uncertainty of the spike size, and so remove one unknown variable from the scenario.


Sure.
But - comparing the numbers I ended up with from my own test:
I could run the CPU at 1.344-1.360V load / up to 1.360V idle with LLC enabled. Or - I could run it at 1.344-1.360V load / up to 1.408V idle with LLC disabled.

Would you rather, for my overclock on my CPU and my motherboard, have:
LLC enabled and up to 1.360V idle voltages with an unknown spike with a potentially higher spike delta?
- Or -
LLC disabled and up to 1.408V idle voltages with an unknown spike with a potentially lower spike delta?

And - would the max resulting spike of (1.360V + unknown high spike) be greater or lower than (1.408V + unknown lower spike)?

Sure - the spike delta is probably lower with LLC disabled, _but_ - you also have to take the higher idle voltage into account. You add an unknown variable, but again, if your CPU overclocks like mine, you add a known and much higher idle load voltage.


----------



## Space Marine

I wanted to answer with a long post but ended up going back to overclocking again









so i tried both LLC off and on at 4.2

well with llc off i get
1,34375 in bios - 1.328 idle - 1,304/1,288 load - 71 degree load

with llc on i get

1,30625 bios 1,312 idle/load - 76 (!!!) degree load

i guess my cpu doesnt like LLC at all









btw i cant get it stable at 4.3 with any safe voltages
i went up to 1.39v llc off in bios and it would still crash at 200x22, so i guess my cpu limit is 4.2 if i want it long term


----------



## OCmember

Is LLC also known as vdroop or is it all together something different? LLC sounds something like Spread Spectrum which when overclocking it is optimal/best to leave Spread Spectrum disabled.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is LLC also known as vdroop or is it all together something different? LLC sounds something like Spread Spectrum which when overclocking it is optimal/best to leave Spread Spectrum disabled.


load line calibration (LLC) Basically adds voltage to counter vdroop. But can do harm too

Top uck duck go result:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/24019-load-line-calibration-why-overclockers-should-care/


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is LLC also known as vdroop or is it all together something different? LLC sounds something like Spread Spectrum which when overclocking it is optimal/best to leave Spread Spectrum disabled.


LLC is load-line calibration.

The load line controls the degree of voffset and vdroop. It's a slope, measured in ohms, that reduces vcore (or input voltage in later setups) based on how much current the part is pulling. Leaving LLC off uses Intel's spec for droop, which can be rather excessive for quality boards and heavily OCed parts. Thus, LLC exists to override this.

The problem with LLC on most older platforms is that the granularity is often poor and the only settings available may not be so good. Generally, you always want some degree of vdroop to guard against transient spikes, but not any where near as much as Intel spec calls for (which requires huge idle voltage to counter). Generally, I prefer a setting of about 1/2 to 1/3rd of what Intel specifies, but a lot of LGA-1366 setups only have off/disabled (full Intel droop), or on/enabled (which is no droop at all, or even a slight rise). Gigabyte's X58 boards usually had two levels, in addition to disabled. If I recall correctly, Level 1 was the useful intermediate setting, while Level 2 essentially eliminated droop, which was less useful.


----------



## OCmember

Does this vary between motherboard makers? Or is it something directly from Intel? With my experience from this EVGA 760 A1 board my memories of LLC have faded away. My board doesn't have LLC it just has "with Vdroop" or "without Vdroop"

Props to XrayMan over at the EVGA forums for this explanation - Link
Spread Spectrum
"Engineers needed a method to keep their devices from overstepping this limit, so they started using spread-spectrum clocking in their devices. In theory, spread-spectrum clocking means that the tone is varied so that the clock signal varies continuously around the desired frequency. For example, for a 1 GHz processor, the frequency might be 999.5 Mhz at one moment in time and 1.0005 GHz at another. Doing this constantly causes the power of the tone to be "spread" out more over a broader band of tight frequencies centered at the desired tone."


----------



## bill1024

"with Vdroop" or "without Vdroop"
Without vdroop is the same as LLC enabled, that is what my EVGA FTW3 has.
I have mine set to no vdroop but my CPUv is 1.3 and it runs 24/7 100% load 175x23=4ghz 50c-55c temps
I would think as each core finishes a work unit and starts a new there must be a unload and load on that core.
But it has been running like that quite a while. All of mine are set around the same and all seem to be doing well.

These systems are some workhorses for sure.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Does this vary between motherboard makers? Or is it something directly from Intel?


The default load-line is official spec from Intel that board makers must follow to achieve compliance with Intel's VRM specifications.

LLC implementations and nomenclature vary from board maker to board maker, model to model, and occasionally even with firmware version.

As bill1024 has stated, your board has load line-calibration, it's just limited to one setting i.e. "without vdroop"...not particularly useful.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> I wanted to answer with a long post but ended up going back to overclocking again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so i tried both LLC off and on at 4.2
> 
> well with llc off i get
> 1,34375 in bios - 1.328 idle - 1,304/1,288 load - 71 degree load
> 
> with llc on i get
> 
> 1,30625 bios 1,312 idle/load - 76 (!!!) degree load
> 
> i guess my cpu doesnt like LLC at all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw i cant get it stable at 4.3 with any safe voltages
> i went up to 1.39v llc off in bios and it would still crash at 200x22, so i guess my cpu limit is 4.2 if i want it long term


Which test did you run? Intel Burn Test at Very High?
My own comparison tests (that all needed to pass) were IBT VH*10, IBT Max*10 and 12hrs Prime95. And - I tried to pass all three with the lowest possible VCore.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> The default load-line is official spec from Intel that board makers must follow to achieve compliance with Intel's VRM specifications.
> 
> LLC implementations and nomenclature vary from board maker to board maker, model to model, and occasionally even with firmware version.
> 
> As bill1024 has stated, your board has load line-calibration, it's just limited to one setting i.e. "without vdroop"...not particularly useful.


Thank you both for the explanations


----------



## gofasterstripes

I really don't get the confusion about LLC... Just set it to a level that gives a close approximation to the BIOS voltages, perhaps with some droop if you're running a turbo multi so that you can sustain a higher frequency on one or two cores, which will then drop when the others load up (though to a lower maximum).

If you can get away without it, go for it, but on my UD3R the deviation between the BIOS and real life voltages were to high for me to leave it drooping (disabled).


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> Which test did you run? Intel Burn Test at Very High?
> My own comparison tests (that all needed to pass) were IBT VH*10, IBT Max*10 and 12hrs Prime95. And - I tried to pass all three with the lowest possible VCore.


same here, lowest possible load vcore, on IBT Max*20
The temp increase could be seen even during the 1st cycle run
Considering it's winter, 76° for me is too high, during summer ambient temp here can go up to +15/17 from the current temp at home


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I really don't get the confusion about LLC... Just set it to a level that gives a close approximation to the BIOS voltages, perhaps with some droop if you're running a turbo multi so that you can sustain a higher frequency on one or two cores, which will then drop when the others load up (though to a lower maximum).
> 
> If you can get away without it, go for it, but on my UD3R the deviation between the BIOS and real life voltages were to high for me to leave it drooping (disabled).


You cant get it cause from what u are saying "just set it to a level..." i guess ur board allows u to choose a level of llc/vdroop.








on my board it's just on or off, full or nothing.









On a side note, which is the max safe uncore frequency in your opinion guys?
And what about the max safe mem frequency? (i got sammy magic ram, so i should be able to go up to 2000 if i want to)


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> same here, lowest possible load vcore, on IBT Max*20
> The temp increase could be seen even during the 1st cycle run
> Considering it's winter, 76° for me is too high, during summer ambient temp here can go up to +15/17 from the current temp at home


If you have Hyper Threading enabled - try Very High too - it will likely give even higher temps...


----------



## Space Marine

No, my HT is disabled, i tested on and off in the games i use and i was losing a pair of fps when it was on, for higher temps and higher voltage.
Definately not worth it for me


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Space Marine
On the UD3R there's only one setting (LLC ON/OFF), and it's around half way to eliminating vdroooooooooop


----------



## Poisoner

http://valid.x86.fr/kmh033

Not sure how far I continue to take this. I tested IBT on high overnight and it passed but I've yet to marathon stress test.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/kmh033
> 
> Not sure how far I continue to take this. I tested IBT on high overnight and it passed but I've yet to marathon stress test.


If the machine doesn't do critical tasks then skip the marathon stress tests.. games will find errors just the same as 100% loading on the machine plus that wears the life down on the motherboard..


----------



## Rylen

Got room for more?

X5660: 4.35Ghz @ 1.304 Voltage (bit higher in BIOS)
Samsung DDR3: 1890Mhz 9-9-9-27 @ 1.36 Voltage


----------



## marcchep

Hey guys,
should I buy the x5660 or the x5670 for 10 bucks more?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> If the machine doesn't do critical tasks then skip the marathon stress tests.. games will find errors just the same as 100% loading on the machine plus that wears the life down on the motherboard..


I second this, especially on the "game can find errors"!
Not all games though, most of the games will run just fine, but some not, for me the games that catches errors for me are - Battlefield 4, COD:AW & Far Cry 4.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Hey guys,
> should I buy the x5660 or the x5670 for 10 bucks more?


higher model means higher possibilities of a better binned chip. so yes i would say spend the extra 10.


----------



## Rylen

@ 1.32V


----------



## marcchep

For me, Battlefield 4 catches errors after 30 minutes, that Prime95 does not catch after an hour.


----------



## marcchep

I know, it all depends on the chip I get, but do you think I will be able to get +4.5ghz out of the X5670. My rig is watercooled.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> For me, Battlefield 4 catches errors after 30 minutes, that Prime95 does not catch after an hour.


I used to use GTA4 for the same purpose...


----------



## Space Marine

Arma 3 also takes about 20 30 mins to catch instabilities, especially on crowded servers


----------



## Tritonk7

Hello. Noticed that if you put FSB above 200 MHz, the computer after hibernation does not wake up. Tell me, is there a solution to this problem?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> Hello. Noticed that if you put FSB above 200 MHz, the computer after hibernation does not wake up. Tell me, is there a solution to this problem?


Let me guess, you are using a SSD as boot drive, right?
I bet mechanical drive won't have this problem.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Let me guess, you are using a SSD as boot drive, right?
> I bet mechanical drive won't have this problem.


Yes , I have boot SSD .


----------



## Space Marine

Oh, about bclk, does it make sense to go higher then 200?
the other day i realized its not an fsb, its just a base frequency which get multiplied, as long as the multis go high enought it should be fine
is it that correct?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> Yes , I have boot SSD .


IIRC, i have read it some where saying SSD should not be used to put into sleep mode, that's why i have stop doing that now.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> IIRC, i have read it some where saying SSD should not be used to put into sleep mode, that's why i have stop doing that now.


Are you saying that you need to give up sleep mode?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> Are you saying that you need to give up sleep mode?


Yes.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I didn't have any problems with sleep on a Crucial m500/x58 combo.

Hibernation can be disabled to save space (hiberfile.sys is as big as your RAM I think).

Sleep always worked fine.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Yes.


good, and will do


----------



## JonMS

Hey this is right up my alley! I have two rigs:
Sabertooth x58
X5660 @ 4.2GHz
AMD R9 280X

And a HP Z800 WITH

2 Intel Xeon X5680 3.46GHz
12GB ram for now
2 AMD R9 280Xs

Bought into the x58 platform when it first dropped and haven't seen a reason to upgrade other than my 12c/24t build which I did rather inexpensively.


----------



## TheN00bBuilder

Noice! I have a Z820 with 2x X5660s.


----------



## JonMS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheN00bBuilder*
> 
> Noice! I have a Z820 with 2x X5660s.


Z820s are LGA2011 socket and X5660 are 1366. You must be magical


----------



## TheN00bBuilder

Whoops. Z800 then. I forgot about it. :/. You can see the full specs under the Delta IV Heavy. And 5650 should be a 5660, my bad.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Z800 is 1366, aye.


----------



## cobovo

*To Kana Maru*
hello man, So impressive results on X58. But i have some questions:
1. Run CPU on 4.8Ghg have much long can used? Only for benchmark or u use this frequency for 24/7 work?
2. If i want build machine for render on X58 (in my case is ASUS RAMPAGE II Extreme +X5670). The maximum speed will depend on acceptable height voltage... Must be in norms for 24/7 use (1.35V for 24/7 or i can push more voltage maybe 1.4_1.42V as you)
3. For overclock you use Absolute mode or Offset mode? And please pick all your setting for this rig.
Thx and apologize if this questions will be in this treads before.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> *To Kana Maru*
> hello man, So impressive results on X58. But i have some questions:
> 1. Run CPU on 4.8Ghg have much long can used? Only for benchmark or u use this frequency for 24/7 work?
> 2. If i want build machine for render on X58 (in my case is ASUS RAMPAGE II Extreme +X5670). The maximum speed will depend on acceptable height voltage... Must be in norms for 24/7 use (1.35V for 24/7 or i can push more voltage maybe 1.4_1.42V as you)
> 3. For overclock you use Absolute mode or Offset mode? And please pick all your setting for this rig.
> Thx and apologize if this questions will be in this treads before.


4.8ghz is requires too much voltage for 24/7, at 1.35v you can do 4.5ghz 24/7, the recommended voltage is below 1.35.


----------



## Trondster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> 4.8ghz is requires too much voltage for 24/7, at 1.35v you can do 4.5ghz 24/7, the recommended voltage is below 1.35.


..But whether your chip can do 4.5GHz at 1.35V is highly dependent on the silicone lottery. Mine runs at [email protected]~1.35V.


----------



## 1Quickchic

After reading many pages of this thread I am so tempted to want to overclock my x58 that I have set up as as a server and to also edit pictures on, which I have actually been gaming on since my 4790k rig is taken apart and waiting on my loop. But I just don't know, mainly because of these reasons and I would like to hear opinions o it please. 1. I am using an MSI big bang MB with corsair 12gb of 1600 and a i970 chip. I had originally bought a x5670 but I couldn't get it to work so I dumped it back on eBay to get the 970, but I am starting to think it may just have been a bios conflict and the bios just needed to be updated, which I did because it didn't recognize either of my raid cards, but as of now the bios is current to what MSI has listed, so now after reading a bit I am considering getting an x5660 or another x5670 to try my luck, in this rig I have a Corsair H100i AIO to cool the processor as I wanted to keep it fairly quite. So opinions?

as for the rest of the stuff in the case, if it matters I am using a single EVGA gtx 580 3gb vid card, the OS is on 2 Kingston 120gb SSD in raid 0 ,with 2 WD 250gb in rain 1 for backing up the OS and for restore points and it has 5 additional hard drives for storing my vids, music, pictures and any and everything else. Its all powered by a EVGA 850g2 PSU


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1Quickchic*
> 
> After reading many pages of this thread I am so tempted to want to overclock my x58 that I have set up as as a server and to also edit pictures on, which I have actually been gaming on since my 4790k rig is taken apart and waiting on my loop. But I just don't know, mainly because of these reasons and I would like to hear opinions o it please. 1. I am using an MSI big bang MB with corsair 12gb of 1600 and a i970 chip. I had originally bought a x5670 but I couldn't get it to work so I dumped it back on eBay to get the 970, but I am starting to think it may just have been a bios conflict and the bios just needed to be updated, which I did because it didn't recognize either of my raid cards, but as of now the bios is current to what MSI has listed, so now after reading a bit I am considering getting an x5660 or another x5670 to try my luck, in this rig I have a Corsair H100i AIO to cool the processor as I wanted to keep it fairly quite. So opinions?
> 
> as for the rest of the stuff in the case, if it matters I am using a single EVGA gtx 580 3gb vid card, the OS is on 2 Kingston 120gb SSD in raid 0 ,with 2 WD 250gb in rain 1 for backing up the OS and for restore points and it has 5 additional hard drives for storing my vids, music, pictures and any and everything else. Its all powered by a EVGA 850g2 PSU


I'm pretty sure Westmere-EP Xeons work with the latest bios but the Uncore will be locked @ 20x so overclocking will be limited. I think it would be best to just stick with your i7 970.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheN00bBuilder*
> 
> Noice! I have a Z820 with 2x X5660s.


Awesome I want one of those modular adaptable sockets Z820 too, where can I find one?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I'm pretty sure Westmere-EP Xeons work with the latest bios but the Uncore will be locked @ 20x so overclocking will be limited. I think it would be best to just stick with your i7 970.


that depends on the mobo. i can do 21 or 22 on ud7


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> For me, Battlefield 4 catches errors after 30 minutes, that Prime95 does not catch after an hour.


Every test and sub test is going to stress different components differently. Which is why you can never rely on just one.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Oh, about bclk, does it make sense to go higher then 200?
> the other day i realized its not an fsb, its just a base frequency which get multiplied, as long as the multis go high enought it should be fine
> is it that correct?


~222 is the practical limit on most LGA-1366 setups because the lowest QPI multiplier hits 8GT/s at this point and most CPUs (and X58 chipsets) cannot handle the QPI being at this speed. There is a mod that can be done to allow higher, and a handful of boards/CPUs don't have this limit, but most will have great difficulty remaining even vaguely stable past 222-223MHz BCLK.

Lower BCLK, with a few exceptions, is usually better because it allows lower QPI speeds and QPI performance is essentially irrelevant on a single socket platform.

With the mid and high-end parts, more than 200 BCLK is almost never needed to reach peak 24/7 clocks.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I'm pretty sure Westmere-EP Xeons work with the latest bios but the Uncore will be locked @ 20x so overclocking will be limited. I think it would be best to just stick with your i7 970.


I get 23 on all 6 cores, and 24 on 3 or less cores


----------



## Rylen

I think I'm done making changes lol. How's it look?


----------



## Agonist

I swapped out my MSI X58 gda45 for my Gigabyte X58A-UD3R 2.0.
Went from an unstablish 4.2 to stable 4.6.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Schweeet








12 phase V2 UD3R power









My V2 UD7 should be here tomorrow...finally.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> that depends on the mobo. i can do 21 or 22 on ud7


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> I get 23 on all 6 cores, and 24 on 3 or less cores


I'm talking about the *UNCORE* Multi not the cpu multi. Uncore is the Northbridge freq.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I'm talking about the *UNCORE* Multi not the cpu multi. Uncore is the Northbridge freq.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trondster*
> 
> ..But whether your chip can do 4.5GHz at 1.35V is highly dependent on the silicone lottery. Mine runs at [email protected]~1.35V.


Ok still on 1.35V is be base for overclock my chip. What value for QPI/DRAM? 1.35V voltage is be norm or less?
I see most people use or recommend to use Absolute mode for overclocking...I think "Offset mode" when use to overclock has more loyalty to chip in idle. Or we have some issue with this mode...
Thx again.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Every test and sub test is going to stress different components differently. Which is why you can never rely on just one.


For me, Battlefield 4 works better then 2 hours of Prime95 or Intel Burn Test


----------



## gofasterstripes

Report:




Some things I have found out [may be of interest to those pondering the 56x0 question [Which model is better?]:]

5650 [2 of] "SLBV3" - Costa Rica
5660 [1 of] "SLBVG" - Malay

Process - Load Optimized Defaults for each chip

5650:1
BIOS Volts Selected: 1.206
BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.184
Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 35-36C
DRAM Volts: 1.56

5650:2
BIOS Volts Selected: 1.225
BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.225
Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 36C
DRAM Volts: 1.56

5660:1
BIOS Volts Selected: 1.225
BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.206
Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 33C
DRAM Volts: 1.52

Thoughts?

Which 5650 should I try to overclock first? [Cooling=CNPS 10X Extreme]

@cb750rob - Hello Mate







Should be able to start messing again soon. How's your rig running?


----------



## Tritonk7

I have x5670 Malay


----------



## marcchep

Try the first one first


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> I have x5670 Malay


Interest... i have 2ps x5670 Costa Rica what better Malay or Costa Rica?








And first result from one chip. Can do 4.4Ghg from 1.36V( in Absolute mode) or 1.38-1.39V (in Offset mode than +0.27500 when i set below value i had bsod 124)... QPI?/Dram 1.35V too.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Report:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some things I have found out [may be of interest to those pondering the 56x0 question [Which model is better?]:]
> 
> 5650 [2 of] "SLBV3" - Costa Rica
> 5660 [1 of] "SLBVG" - Malay
> 
> Process - Load Optimized Defaults for each chip
> 
> 5650:1
> BIOS Volts Selected: 1.206
> BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.184
> Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 35-36C
> DRAM Volts: 1.56
> 
> 5650:2
> BIOS Volts Selected: 1.225
> BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.225
> Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 36C
> DRAM Volts: 1.56
> 
> 5660:1
> BIOS Volts Selected: 1.225
> BIOS Reported Status Volts: 1.206
> Idle Temp W Stock Cooler: 33C
> DRAM Volts: 1.52
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Which 5650 should I try to overclock first? [Cooling=CNPS 10X Extreme]
> 
> @cb750rob - Hello Mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be able to start messing again soon. How's your rig running?


good lord how muh u paid for that


----------



## Space Marine

any way to check if its costarica or malay without having to remove the heatsink?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@kckyle
Some, but I am going to sell the UD3R, and at least one of the CPUs. The whole thing went a bit wrong, started with just a CPU, had to change the PSU as it was playing up, still was unstable when it wasn't to start with.

I thought I'd buy two 5650s to ensure I got good one, no messing (really need this machine working ASAP). Having done all that the mobo went funky (vcore reading), so that's been replaced too.

Almost wished I stayed with the i7!

Also changed the cooler as the bottom of it isn't flat (no temp readings on uncore), and before all this I'd recently changed GPU and upgraded to 12GB of RAM!

Sometimes it all goes wrong..... But at least the case is still the same!

@Space Marine I don't think so, but I doubt it makes a difference. If there's some software that can read the SLBxx code, maybe from that you can infer?

It's the volts/frequencies I'm more interested in.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Report:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @cb750rob - Hello Mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should be able to start messing again soon. How's your rig running?


Ooh! Shiny!









Its going well thanks dude. I cant seem to get stable past 185 blck though I have been trying to use the x21 multi with turbo features off and a higher bclk to get 4.2ghz but it wont play ball.

Don't know if I have just reached the limit of what it will do with the ram n stuff.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob
What are you trying to do with the RAM? There's not a lot to be gained by running the RAM faster than 1200/7/7/7/20.

[NB you know you can divide the stock delay values by the frequency to give a constant that can be used to recalculate your delay/timing values if you change the frequency, ie if sticker values are 7/24 @1333 you'd get .5251* and .1800*, so if you change to 1600 you'd calculate 1600*.1800 = 28.8 and therefore you'd need a timing value of 29*1600 to maintain the same throughput from the RAM]

There's more to this, but it's a start









*record more digits for a more accurate answer.

Perhaps progress...


----------



## cb750rob

Ta for that 'faster









What I have is this which is rock solid and good temps:



That is with turbo features on so the multi will go up to 24. x185 bclck. But my understanding is that the 24x multi is only applied to 1 core

Am I correct in saying that with turbo enabled all six cores only work at a maximum of 21x or is it 23x ?

I was chasing a 4.2ghz overclock on all 6 cores whicha was 21 multi x 200 bclk with turbo off based on the assumptions above.

but I cant get it stable for the life of me.

Can anyone shed light into whether I am a: correct re the turbo thing and b: poss give suggestions


----------



## gofasterstripes

While I thank about that.

QPI PLL Volts anyone? Default is 1.1, can I use 1.3? I seem to remember it should match QPI Volts?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> While I thank about that.
> 
> QPI PLL Volts anyone? Default is 1.1, can I use 1.3? I seem to remember it should match QPI Volts?


Don't know dude. Thats a nice looking board tho....

Those power phases should keep things really solid.

And usb3 sata 600 wow


----------



## coolbho3k

I've still been running 1.45 v. Yolo???


----------



## gofasterstripes

Haven't tried the SATA 3 yet, I think it's an added-in controller and not a real chipset one, so probably not very fast. USB 3 should be a boon though!

The 5660 really doesn't wasn't to be stable, just tried sticking a 5650 in (number 1, as previous)


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob
I think the UD3r allows 23x6core. Watch the multi in Realtemp during IBT.

Those GFlop scores seem slightly low, if you can try VTT or VCC at a slightly higher voltage, maybe the score increases?


----------



## coolbho3k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Haven't tried the SATA 3 yet, I think it's an added-in controller and not a real chipset one, so probably not very fast. USB 3 should be a boon though!
> 
> The 5660 really doesn't wasn't to be stable, just tried sticking a 5650 in (number 1, as previous)


My Marvell SATA 3 sucks














I get better random read/writes on SSD with the native SATA 2!!!

I do use it to run my 2x 1 TB HDDs in RAID 0 though. Not much performance difference with the native chipset for HDDs. And I can't run RAID with the Intel chipset because it somehow conflicts with my RevoDrive RAID.

There's also a JMicron SATA 2 port on my R3E. Never used it though.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob
What is your uncore frequency?

I'd stay at or below 1.315vcc in BIOS, my UD3R was pushing over the correct uncore volts, and something messed that 5660 up after a while!

@coolbho3k
1.45 QPI PLL??! For what frequencies?


----------



## coolbho3k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> I think the UD3r allows 23x6core. Watch the multi in Realtemp during IBT.
> 
> Those GFlop scores seem slightly low, if you can try VTT or VCC at a slightly higher voltage, maybe the score increases?


I never understood why higher voltages would result in a more stable GFlops in IBT. But it happens for some reason.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> What is your uncore frequency?
> 
> I'd stay at or below 1.315vcc in BIOS, my UD3R was pushing over the correct uncore volts, and something messed that 5660 up after a while!
> 
> @coolbho3k
> 1.45 QPI PLL??! For what frequencies?


No, 1.45 vcore I meant







I don't remember what my QPI PLL was, I'll check. I'm at 4.6 GHz.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @coolbho3k
> 1.45 QPI PLL??! For what frequencies?


Is too much. I recommend used does not exceed the value of 1.35V when frequency is 4.4Ghg Huge voltage on QPI can kill DraM controller in chip.


----------



## gofasterstripes

If your vtt volts are a tiny bit too low the cache ECC will correct the errors, but at a slight cost of time.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If your vtt volts are a tiny bit too low the cache ECC will correct the errors, but at a slight cost of time.


I only used the specs from Intel for *Gulftown* But if you have more information please share. maybe some links...


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> What is your uncore frequency?
> 
> I'd stay at or below 1.315vcc in BIOS, my UD3R was pushing over the correct uncore volts, and something messed that 5660 up after a while!


QPI - 6.73ghz
Uncore - 3740

voltages:
Qpi/vtt - 1.175v (auto)
cpu pll - 1.8v (auto)
pcie - 1.5v (auto)
Qpi Pll - 1.1v (auto)
Ioh core 1.1v (auto)
ICH I/O 1.5v (auto)
ICH core 1.1v (auto)

Cant find anything for Uncore voltage in the bios any other way I can tell?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Haven't tried the SATA 3 yet, I think it's an added-in controller and not a real chipset one, so probably not very fast. USB 3 should be a boon though!
> 
> The 5660 really doesn't wasn't to be stable, just tried sticking a 5650 in (number 1, as previous)


No X58 has built in SATA3 or USB3 anyway so its an addon chip, probably a marvell 91xx chipset...


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> No X58 has built in SATA3 or USB3 anyway so its an addon chip, probably a marvell 91xx chipset...


This According to bit-tech review:

_The GA-X58A-UD7 is one of the fastest X58 motherboards in our Media Benchmarks at its BIOS defaults, achieving an overall score of 2,080 points. Its minimum frame rate of 31fps in Crysis is a touch on the slow side, but when overclocked this rose to 41fps, which is a far more respectable frame rate.

We did however measure a significant performance difference between the various SATA controllers on the board, which is worth bearing in mind when setting up your drives. For example, while the ICH10R Southbridge and Marvell 9128 controllers read at an average of 245/246MB/sec respectively the Gigabyte SATA2 ports are much slower, reading at just 177MB/sec.

Therefore, despite having ten internal SATA ports, only eight of these are really worth using. Given that eight SATA ports will be enough for anything bar a server, you have to wonder why Gigabyte included its own controller in the first place.
_

So hopefully ok.... Are you needing more than eight sata ports Gofaster?


----------



## kckyle

i use all my sata ports, even though its slower, it doesn't make a difference for hdd. it's not like you guys are using 10 ssd or something.


----------



## coolbho3k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If your vtt volts are a tiny bit too low the cache ECC will correct the errors, but at a slight cost of time.


That actually makes good sense to explain why a low VTT voltage would result in a lower Linpack score, all else being equal.


----------



## dotagaming

Hey guys,

just stumbled upon the whole X58 situation and I'm pleasantly surprised that I probably haven't reached the end of the road yet!
It's not like the system is slow or anything but I could use some extra CPU power.
The games I play are not really demanding on GPU, in fact the game that I play the most (Kerbal Space Program) is heavily limited by CPU.

I've been rocking this system for 5 years now and the only thing I added was the SSD:

MB: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
CPU: i7 950 @ 3.8
Cooler: Noctua NH-U12P SE2
RAM: 6GB-Triple-Kit Corsair TR3X6G1600C8D DDR3
GPU: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 460 OC
PSU: 500W Enermax Modu87+
SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 240 GB
Case: Lian Li PC-B25FB

Is an upgrade to a Xeon X5650 a good idea? Would run me 100 bucks. I'll maybe get some new cooling as the machine is quiet loud due to stock case fans. I was thinking of getting an AIO watercooling solution like the Corsair H90 and reusing the CPU fans for the case.

What do you all think?


----------



## cb750rob

So what should I be looking for qpi/vtt voltage?


----------



## kckyle

no ur noctua is great, don't replace it with a pos AIO.

as for fans, get a fan controller and run the fans at 40 percent.

yes the 5650 is worth it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Sadly on that MoBo one of the retaining tabs for the SATA sockets is broken, so I only have 5 native SATA ports I trust, but luckily I only have 5 drives I need connected









Looks like I have got 4.0 dialed in again with 5650 #1, this time at 1.296VCC and 1.315VTT, brought QPI PLL back down to 1.2V now.

@cb750rob
Yes you can change your Uncore Voltage - you listed it







It's "QPI/Vtt Voltage"

I'd take if off auto if I were you, it might be using over-the-top-values. The voltage next to it is the stock/optimised value, not the value in effect, I think. To be safe, try setting it to 1.175 and see if you're still stable. At a guess, for that Uncore frequency it's pushing a much higher [potentially unsafe] voltage.

Sorely temped to try an see how high I can push these chips







1.4+ Vcc should see a pretty hefty bump, maybe 4.6....

But I was planning on selling a chip, and if I roast another one I won't be able to


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> just stumbled upon the whole X58 situation and I'm pleasantly surprised that I probably haven't reached the end of the road yet!
> It's not like the system is slow or anything but I could use some extra CPU power.
> The games I play are not really demanding on GPU, in fact the game that I play the most (Kerbal Space Program) is heavily limited by CPU.
> 
> I've been rocking this system for 5 years now and the only thing I added was the SSD:
> 
> MB: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
> CPU: i7 950 @ 3.8
> Cooler: Noctua NH-U12P SE2
> RAM: 6GB-Triple-Kit Corsair TR3X6G1600C8D DDR3
> GPU: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 460 OC
> PSU: 500W Enermax Modu87+
> SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 240 GB
> Case: Lian Li PC-B25FB
> 
> Is an upgrade to a Xeon X5650 a good idea? Would run me 100 bucks. I'll maybe get some new cooling as the machine is quiet loud due to stock case fans. I was thinking of getting an AIO watercooling solution like the Corsair H90 and reusing the CPU fans for the case.
> 
> What do you all think?


Have a look at this:
http://ark.intel.com/compare/47922,37150,77780,47921,52586

In the last 12 months I have gone from amd phenom II x6 @4ghz to a sandy bridge [email protected] back "down" to this x5660k @4.3ghz.

The intel chips definitely feel snappier than the phenom but tbh I can't really tell the difference between the sandy bridge and the Xeon.

If you take into account that the Xeons are 32nm 95w parts they run comparatively cool for a six core with hyper-threading you can have a think about the cooling. I run a macho rev.b which isn't quite tier 1 air-cooling and quiet as anything.

I guess it depends what you want out of it. I am enjoying my gaming and marveling at my convert-x to DVD/Handbrake runs and cinebench scores give me a warm fuzzy feeling lol









EDIT: and Xeons are coming in at about the same price as thuban x6's if you have a look around.
You have the board I would say go for it and enjoy a few more years out of your platform. X58 may have been damn pricey when it came out but it's looking pretty good value now...


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Sadly on that MoBo one of the retaining tabs for the SATA sockets is broken, so I only have 5 native SATA ports I trust, but luckily I only have 5 drives I need connected
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like I have got 4.0 dialed in again with 5650 #1, this time at 1.296VCC and 1.315VTT, brought QPI PLL back down to 1.2V now.
> 
> @cb750rob
> Yes you can change your Uncore Voltage - you listed it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's "QPI/Vtt Voltage"
> 
> I'd take if off auto if I were you, it might be using over-the-top-values. The voltage next to it is the stock/optimised value, not the value in effect, I think. To be safe, try setting it to 1.175 and see if you're still stable. At a guess, for that Uncore frequency it's pushing a much higher [potentially unsafe] voltage.
> 
> Sorely temped to try an see how high I can push these chips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.4+ Vcc should see a pretty hefty bump, maybe 4.6....
> 
> But I was planning on selling a chip, and if I roast another one I won't be able to


@Gofaster
How is the thesis going??









What would you say are safe margins for the "Uncore voltage" ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Don't ask, and 1.315 in BIOS, unless you get a multimeter on it and confirm 1.335 doesn't overdo it (1.35+ will break it). I can show you where to measure, go back a few pages to my pictures of the back of my old motherboard, you'll see.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Sadly on that MoBo one of the retaining tabs for the SATA sockets is broken, so I only have 5 native SATA ports I trust, but luckily I only have 5 drives I need connected


Food for thought..... Would a couple of cable ties solve that? I presume you are just worried about it coming adrift.

eg:


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's a good idea, but actually I'm short of those small ties, I need one to help stop my 7970 drooping!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That's a good idea, but actually I'm short of those small ties, I need one to help stop my 7970 drooping!


place a 140mm fan under it?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> no ur noctua is great, don't replace it with a pos AIO.
> 
> as for fans, get a fan controller and run the fans at 40 percent.
> 
> yes the 5650 is worth it.


I have had great luck with the AIO water coolers. I am running Corsair H70, H80I, H90 and a H100.
I have been picking up refurbished units from Newegg for between 39-49$.
All my x5660 and my 1045T hexcore systems run 10-17c cooler than the 212s they replaced. They run quiet and keep my CPUs cool..

2600 pages of people who mostly have said good things.

http://www.overclock.net/t/612436/official-corsair-hydro-series-club


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have had great luck with the AIO water coolers. I am running Corsair H70, H80I, H90 and a H100.
> I have been picking up refurbished units from Newegg for between 39-49$.
> All my x5660 and my 1045T hexcore systems run 10-17c cooler than the 212s they replaced. They run quiet and keep my CPUs cool..
> 
> 2600 pages of people who mostly have said good things.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/612436/official-corsair-hydro-series-club


some people set their profile to view a different amount of posts at once and this can change the number of pages seen, e.g. for this thread I only see 264 pages

just saying


----------



## bill1024

Thanks, I did not see that setting before. I thought it was kind of odd to have so few posts on one page.

I suppose like anything, people have good or bad luck on a product. If you go to any manufacturers site you will see many complaints.
People are more likely to complain than write a post telling how good it worked.
From what I have seen Corsair, if there is a problem, they replaced parts that were damaged from their products.As they should!


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> some people set their profile to view a different amount of posts at once and this can change the number of pages seen, e.g. for this thread I only see 264 pages
> 
> just saying


hahahaha
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have had great luck with the AIO water coolers. I am running Corsair H70, H80I, H90 and a H100.
> I have been picking up refurbished units from Newegg for between 39-49$.
> All my x5660 and my 1045T hexcore systems run 10-17c cooler than the 212s they replaced. They run quiet and keep my CPUs cool..
> 
> 2600 pages of people who mostly have said good things.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/612436/official-corsair-hydro-series-club


AIO is great if you have a tight environment, however i see no added benefit of using AIO over a highend cooler, unless you desire atheistic over noise/reliability

noise- my friend has a h80i, i know cause i installed it for him, and you can always hear the pump going on and off every 4 mins while idling on facebook, thats quite annoying. on a high end air cooler, you only hear the fans, and not to mention high end air coolers can function even with the fans off, thats what i do when i'm idling.

reliability- the more parts you have the higher chance of failure, that is pure probability and physics, air cooler have 1 part, the heatsink, while AIO have the pump, tube, and the radiator. and if it leaks it will take ur whole system with it.

and that is why i stick with high end air coolers.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Thanks, I did not see that setting before. I thought it was kind of odd to have so few posts on one page.


I use to get tired of hitting the next page button too often until I found out I could see more posts per page - what a relief!

welcome


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can I get some quotes from contributors to this thread about high Vcc [NOT Vtt, not doing that again].

Who's been running >1.35Vcc [loaded]?

What value are you using, for how long and for what frequencies?

Just a couple of lines, for the lazy ones









Ta


----------



## cb750rob

@gofasterstripes

Seem to have it stable @1.3ghz on all six cores with turbo on. You were correct about the x23 multi on all cores









That's with 1.315v Uncore/vtt voltage. Do you think that will be ok for 24/7 use?



Gflops score looks higher/more consistent too but I wonder whether that has more to do with the fact that the machine has been idling a while after login while I was making coffee and got all of its startup malarky out of the way and then I ran IBT.

@KcKyle
Bit harsh on the all in ones there dude.









I think the problem is that "Decent" Air-cooling has come on in leaps and bounds in the last few years and people don't realize. Especially if you have only previously used non "top-tier" air. eg: a "212" (no-offence).

Indeed my own experience with my now departed [email protected] is that the Macho.rev.b I have now performed pretty much on par with a Swiftec Apogee XT Waterblock mcp350 pump and 360 rad. I will concede that the fans I had on the rad were probably only mediocre as although they were corsar they were not SP models. But the real life resulting temps I have seen are pretty similar.

That's not to say the 212 does not have it's place (at a budget) but I will concede that if you haven't tried a recent Tier 1 air cooler recently they really are worth a look.

@bill1024
Doyll over in the Air cooing section loves a debate on AIO's vs high end air....







He and Ciarlatano both have plenty of data and reviews to back this up.

Anyway, Bill I am just saying that it may be worth considering because as Kyckle has pointed out there are advantges to air. Personally for me I am glad I moved back over. My case fans are now the noisy component where as before I couldnt hear them over the pump and rad fans. Just my







before I go dangerously


----------



## gofasterstripes

That should be safe, but see if you can reduce the volts over time, when you have a minute or 20









Consistent scores are because the machine had done the start-up stuff, it was the peak score that looked a little low - hence the "edge of stability" questioning.


----------



## cb750rob

Thought that may be the case. Have tried a lower Uncore but it isn't stable. Still TBH I'm happy with this now. It's not a bad over-clock by any standards and I can't afford to throw any more money at it at the moment..

It'll be interesting seeing how far you can push your chips on that X58A. Wonder whether all that extra power regulation/phases stuff helps you get higher. Just out of interest did you try your old 5660 in it?

EDIT: If you want to pm me your addy I am quite happy to send you some cable ties lol. I have hundreds if the things left over from a cabling job.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The 5660 is knackered. Didn't work in this board either. I'm going to bundle it with the UD3 and sell them cheap as stable at stock but no more.

Not tried beating the 5650 up yet, but it is stable at 4/3200 at 1.3/1.315 cc/TT, which is lower than the 5660 was in the UD3R.

Really now, I just need to use it for work. I'll try to drop the volts for 4 in my spare time, when it's fully optimised at 4 I'll go higher I'll try higher frequencies with that chip at safe volts, and then I'll repeat with the other 5650 and keep the better one in. I have 4 with all cstates etc working now too.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The power delivery will help higher overclocking speeds, give lower volts for the same speed and also the board shares the load between phase groups, so it's going to last longer.

I hope!


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The 5660 is knackered. Didn't work in this board either. I'm going to bundle it with the UD3 and sell them cheap as stable at stock but no more..


"Fleabay Listing: pampered life, never overclocked, elephant free home etc..... See my other items: "Blown up phase change unit spare/repairs" -








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Really now, I just need to use it for work. I'll try to drop the volts for 4 in my spare time, when it's fully optimised at 4 I'll go higher I'll try higher frequencies with that chip at safe volts, and then I'll repeat with the other 5650 and keep the better one in. I have 4 with all cstates etc working now too


Yeah. Now I am mostly happy with mine next weeks procrastination is a mavericks or yosemite Drive. Only potential fly in the ointment I see there is my HD7850.
Care to join? Linux dual boot is just too easy lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

Rubber band 7970 suspension


You can keep OSX, ta. Win 10 for free for me.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Rubber band 7970 suspension


Ha! very Ghetto. Old skool tech love it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That reminds me:

@Xevi


----------



## cb750rob

Confused









Where's the xeon? lol


----------



## Xevi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That reminds me:
> 
> @Xevi
> ...












Mí eVga SR2 ...has passed away!



























It took 11 months to the tibia and fibula broken



























But thank God, I Talked to her orthopedist, have permission for cycling!









CycloCross adapted to Road

















Track Strava:
https://www.strava.com/activities/255701994


----------



## gofasterstripes

Wow, man that looks mighty painful!

Well done for getting out on the bike again though! How did it happen?


----------



## EvilMonk

That got to hurt








I got the 5 metatarsus in the left foot crushed while I was on vacation hiking in the Argentinian Andes a couple years ago... I had to hike 2 km down a rocky trail before we could drive all the way to the nearest town with an hospital to get me a proper X-Ray to find out I had to get a cast for the next 2 months... You had way worst than what I had... Must have been a hell of a pain to deal with ouch :s


----------



## jabjab90301

Where I can find a X5660? Ebay?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jabjab90301*
> 
> Where I can find a X5660? Ebay?


Thats where 99% of us found ours


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> @gofasterstripes
> 
> Seem to have it stable @1.3ghz on all six cores with turbo on. You were correct about the x23 multi on all cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's with 1.315v Uncore/vtt voltage. Do you think that will be ok for 24/7 use?
> 
> 
> 
> Gflops score looks higher/more consistent too but I wonder whether that has more to do with the fact that the machine has been idling a while after login while I was making coffee and got all of its startup malarky out of the way and then I ran IBT.
> 
> @KcKyle
> Bit harsh on the all in ones there dude.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the problem is that "Decent" Air-cooling has come on in leaps and bounds in the last few years and people don't realize. Especially if you have only previously used non "top-tier" air. eg: a "212" (no-offence).
> 
> Indeed my own experience with my now departed [email protected] is that the Macho.rev.b I have now performed pretty much on par with a Swiftec Apogee XT Waterblock mcp350 pump and 360 rad. I will concede that the fans I had on the rad were probably only mediocre as although they were corsar they were not SP models. But the real life resulting temps I have seen are pretty similar.
> 
> That's not to say the 212 does not have it's place (at a budget) but I will concede that if you haven't tried a recent Tier 1 air cooler recently they really are worth a look.
> 
> @bill1024
> Doyll over in the Air cooing section loves a debate on AIO's vs high end air....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He and Ciarlatano both have plenty of data and reviews to back this up.
> 
> Anyway, Bill I am just saying that it may be worth considering because as Kyckle has pointed out there are advantges to air. Personally for me I am glad I moved back over. My case fans are now the noisy component where as before I couldnt hear them over the pump and rad fans. Just my
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> before I go dangerously


yeah i tend to get carried away a bit when it comes to this debate, since so many ppl are giving out mis leading info on them i only see fit to straighten out the truth. alot of ppl think they are basically getting a custom loop cooling level just cause it has tubes and liquid for 1/3 of the price.


----------



## GENXLR

I loved my Megahalems and my Venomous X's


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I loved my Megahalems and my Venomous X's


i been trying to find a pretty good excuse or any reason to get a d14 or d15. but this megahalem just don't give up, even when i overclock to 4.6ghz running burn test and it doesn't go above 75c under stress.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> yeah i tend to get carried away a bit when it comes to this debate, since so many ppl are giving out mis leading info on them i only see fit to straighten out the truth. alot of ppl think they are basically getting a custom loop cooling level just cause it has tubes and liquid for 1/3 of the price.


I beg your pardon, but where am I misleading anyone?
I have great success with my AIO coolers and took notes on exactly what temps were before and after the installation.
Every refurbished unit I received was packaged like new in perfect condition. Paying between 39-49$ each was a great deal.
My coolers have all been quiet, sorry you got a loud one, I thought I had a loud one but it turned out the be the fan. It didn't like to be run upside down and vibrated.
I do not need you to straighten me out thank you.
Every thing I said was fact, you say they are junk is opinion. I never said they were as good as a closed loop.
I can not hear the pumps over the fans, but my systems never sit idle.
Don't really feel like getting in a pissing match with you but to say the coolers do not work is an all out lie.
Or maybe it is your opinion, and we all know about opinions.


----------



## GENXLR

The truth is AIO coolers alot of the time perform similar to a mid air cooler. I prefer Air cooling by far unless we need overkill cooling with a chiller involved.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I beg your pardon, but where am I misleading anyone?
> I have great success with my AIO coolers and took notes on exactly what temps were before and after the installation.
> Every refurbished unit I received was packaged like new in perfect condition. Paying between 39-49$ each was a great deal.
> My coolers have all been quiet, sorry you got a loud one, I thought I had a loud one but it turned out the be the fan. It didn't like to be run upside down and vibrated.
> I do not need you to straighten me out thank you.
> Every thing I said was fact, you say they are junk is opinion. I never said they were as good as a closed loop.
> I can not hear the pumps over the fans, but my systems never sit idle.
> Don't really feel like getting in a pissing match with you but to say the coolers do not work is an all out lie.
> Or maybe it is your opinion, and we all know about opinions.


i apologize if you took my comments as it was directed at you, but if you were to re-read my last reply, you will notice your name was not once mentioned, i know my statement might perceive to lead you to that conclusion but you were not the recipient. my point was to all the corsair fanboys who thinks their h55 is superior than similar air cooler at the same price point. or their h100i is better than a d14/15/SA

that being said, since you pointed out my statements are my opinions, i would think it only fair to point out your statements are also opinions, not facts.

your AIO(if you feel like im singling you out just read this as "all AIO') is basically a ticking timebomb, just waiting for the coolant to evaporate/leak/pump issues. just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it will never happen.

in any case, buying a refurb AIO is the worst purchase, at least with a new unit you get 5 years of warranty/collateral damage coverage should anything leaks. with a refurb you save 20-30 bucks and cheat yourself out of 4.9 months of warranty/collateral damages, and after 90 days your on your own.

i see AIO not as a improvement or solution to high end air cooler, but more of a side step in terms of computer evolution. since it the current AIO gives no performance benefits over a proven air cooler.

again these are my opinions, but i believe i make valid points and my opinions holds enough ground.

edit:
and in the end, my goal is not to make personal attacks on members here, i'm merely to enlighten these who does not have all the information when making a cooling purchase. everytime i see a which cooler thread newbie AIO fanboys jumps in and suggest h80i or h100i as a default format for cooling. and my goal is trying to change this behavior.


----------



## bill1024

No problem, you pointed things out as you see it. It was all negative as if everyone who has one will blow up. Everyone sees things differently.
The thing is this whole thread is about taking chances.We are overclocking, over volting and running our CPUs at [email protected] 4v is a timebomb.
Buying used CPUs and used boards and most likely used ram is a risk,
Water cooling is always a risk, 39$ refurb or a 400$ custom loop. I would think since an AIO is factory made there maybe a better chance of no leak than one the average computer geek puts together not being a mechanic and being used to working with tubing and pipe fittings. I have heard of way more leaks with custom than AIO, but again we mostly hear of complaints on forums and not the good things that happen. Hardly ever see posts that say I love xyz product, we get xyz sucks.

As far as noise I have mine as an exhaust and it puts 100% of CPU heat out of the case and my GPUs push their heat out the back, my case stays cool with out a dozen fans blowing. It's quiet to me, but the I like fan noise. In one of my rooms with several servers running I am in geek heaven.
There are pluses and minuses to everything we do in life.
The new high end coolers I have seen are big and ugly, but that is my opinion. I am sure they aren't cheap either.

I have CM 212s on my overclocked AMD 4P48 core server board and the CPUs run coo mid 50cl, 100% load primegrid, they are not bad coolers.
Not as good as the best out there I'm sure but at one time remember they were very good vs what's out there.

If you have a high end cooler air and want to run some tests to see how well things work I am game. Just have to get the room temps the same.
I would love to see the differences with the new air coolers.

The refurbs I bought all have 1 year warranty. Most every time I have had a part fail it's been with in a few weeks. But that's my luck.


----------



## bill1024

edit:
and in the end, my goal is not to make personal attacks on members here, i'm merely to enlighten these who does not have all the information when making a cooling purchase. everytime i see a which cooler thread newbie AIO fanboys jumps in and suggest h80i or h100i as a default format for cooling. and my goal is trying to change this behavior.

Wait a min so now, I am a newbie AIO fanboy huh? I was building computers before you were born.








LOL


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> No problem, you pointed things out as you see it. It was all negative as if everyone who has one will blow up. Everyone sees things differently.
> The thing is this whole thread is about taking chances.We are overclocking, over volting and running our CPUs at [email protected] 4v is a timebomb.
> Buying used CPUs and used boards and most likely used ram is a risk,
> Water cooling is always a risk, 39$ refurb or a 400$ custom loop. I would think since an AIO is factory made there maybe a better chance of no leak than one the average computer geek puts together not being a mechanic and being used to working with tubing and pipe fittings. I have heard of way more leaks with custom than AIO, but again we mostly hear of complaints on forums and not the good things that happen. Hardly ever see posts that say I love xyz product, we get xyz sucks.
> 
> As far as noise I have mine as an exhaust and it puts 100% of CPU heat out of the case and my GPUs push their heat out the back, my case stays cool with out a dozen fans blowing. It's quiet to me, but the I like fan noise. In one of my rooms with several servers running I am in geek heaven.
> There are pluses and minuses to everything we do in life.
> The new high end coolers I have seen are big and ugly, but that is my opinion. I am sure they aren't cheap either.
> 
> I have CM 212s on my overclocked AMD 4P48 core server board and the CPUs run coo mid 50cl, 100% load primegrid, they are not bad coolers.
> Not as good as the best out there I'm sure but at one time remember they were very good vs what's out there.
> 
> If you have a high end cooler air and want to run some tests to see how well things work I am game. Just have to get the room temps the same.
> I would love to see the differences with the new air coolers.
> 
> The refurbs I bought all have 1 year warranty. Most every time I have had a part fail it's been with in a few weeks. But that's my luck.


all components decompose, it's simple chemistry. sooner or later the coolant in the AIO will dry out or evaporates, and you won't notice it til your cpu's temp skyrockets.

perhaps your perspective on what is quiet and what is loud is different from mine, i have very sensitive hearing, therefore i don't even want to hear my case fan if i don't have to.

we are all taking risk when we overclocking computer, but having an AIO is a unnecessary risk that i see no benefit of having. having ram dies out or cpu dies out or mobo is one thing, they don't take out other components with it. when a AIO leaks, you can kiss whatever it leaks on good bye. on top of all the cons i listed it also have to use more power for the pump, even at idle.
the only upside i see of having an AIO is better atheistic and if you have a really tiny case with not much room for a decent air cooler.

my mega is on bar with h75, we can try to get same ambient temp but i really don't see the need to since there are tons of benchmarks already floating around on here, alot of people already proven that d15 performs as good if not better than an h100i or h105 or whatever 240mm rad corsair offers.

i agree with the plus and minus to everything in life, but having an AIO just doesn't make sense to me. the con far outweighs the pros, there is literally no performance nor noise benefit of having a AIO.

and if you wanna throw politic in the equation, asatek, the maker of corsair's AIO, if you have been building computers for that long than u should know they are the ones responsible for swiftech and other companies being banned in the U.S market. because of them actual effective liquid coolers, which stats show them being better than high end air coolers, aren't possible to be purchased by consumers. instead we are stuck with asatek's numerous rendition in different clothing from cooler master, corsair, etc.

again what someone buys is totally up to their decision, but they should know what they getting themselves into before taking the plunge.


----------



## GENXLR

I still avoid AIO coolers as they are very cheaply built, look at some of the fittings. I mean even Apple is a great example with the watercooled G5's that are factory, but leaked like crazy. At least with a custom loop, if it leaks, it's ur fault for being stupid, and not the person who sold it to you.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I still avoid AIO coolers as they are very cheaply built, look at some of the fittings. I mean even Apple is a great example with the watercooled G5's that are factory, but leaked like crazy. At least with a custom loop, if it leaks, it's ur fault for being stupid, and not the person who sold it to you.


custom loop leak is generally down to user error. i don't overclock high enough to warrant a custom loop NOR do i have the funds. i just dropped 300 bucks on calculus physic and calculus textbooks nevermind a custom loop


----------



## GENXLR

My X5670 is getting a Loop, but my X5650 shall remain on air.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'm working on reducing volts today.

Brought Vtt down from 1.295 to 1.215 and it's still passing IBT standard









Also nudged Vcc down to 1.32 (1.296-1.28 loaded). Temps fallen about 3c with the fan lower too! Next, all day soak test.

Either my previous board or chip was a lemon!

My views on water: if Apple couldn't do it right, I'm not going to bother, thanks.
Having said that, I do have a 150l fish tank with an external filter. And that doesn't leak!

Thinks.....

Maybe I should buy a water block and pump and plumb the CPU into the tank?


----------



## bill1024

When I worked at IBM main plant, we had 1000-1500 ton chillers pumping chilled water to the raised floors to cool the computer systems and for environmental A/C.
12,000BTU in a ton, 3 tons will cool the average size house.
There were 1.25in flexible water lines all over the place under the raised floors. When one of those broke, talk about a water leak. Water would find its way down a couple floors!!!
Some buildings had baby 50-150 ton chillers for the raised floors. This was back in the early 80s, when a raised floor went down it cost IBM hundreds of thousands of dollars a hour.
They even used water right from the Hudson river in the winter to cool the systems on the raised floor.
Water cooling on a massive level!! Been around a long time too..

I looked at the D15 115$ the new CM 212+ same price. The D15 weighs 3 pounds? That thing is HUGE.
To each their own. The AIO are much better than what they were when they first came out, they sell hundreds of thousands of units.
They warranty them and will pay for parts if there is any damage. There must be a lot more working well than fail, or they could not afford to sell them if the lose money on them.
I am willing to take the chance, no way I would put that huge air cooler in my system, even if they gave it to me for free.

Any way good luck in your studies and good luck with all your future builds.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quick one:

I have set my QPI PLL to 1.14, which seemed sensible, a small bump seeing as I'm running QPI overspec [7200MHz]

This is safe/normal, right?


----------



## gofasterstripes

In passing,
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/
this is really useful primer.

NB- We're on Westmere EP, not Westmere, so be a little extra careful of the Uncore Volts


----------



## Myski

Finally got my X5650 (from China) few days ago, been running some crude testing over the last days to test the rough quality of the CPU as well as the level of degrade of my old parts. Cause they really are old, close to 6 years of running 24/7.

Asus P6T deluxe (version 2)
Corsair Dominator 8-8-8-24 (12GB total, 2 sets of 3*2GB each so technically they are "mixed memory", all of same model but different batch .. like the 6 blocks was not enough stress for IMC by itself







)
Corsair TX750W PSU (version 1)
ATI HD5450 or some passive cooled crappy card (used when benching to reduce excess heat and rule out possible gpu instability with OC'd "real" cards)

I am going to try memory-first approach this time, mainly because of the potentially problematic RAM combination I have and the mystery mobo quality after all these years (been running the same pretty conservative OC of 3,8GHz on i7 for years and not changing anything).

So I am trying to find maximum BCLK the memory and mobo can handle with very low cpu multi (15) first, and get memory OC'd or at least stable with the max stable BCLK and only after then adding the "real" overclock ie. raising the cpu multiplier to 19 probably and find the vcore needed.

I have been able to get relatively stable-looking BCLK of over 200 with cpu multiplier of 15 (so no overclocking beyond bit over 3GHz yet, but only the BCLK testing). Found out that the amount of VTT (QPI/DRAM in this ASUS mobo) needed for BCLKs go up sharply when going over 200 BCLK. About 1,3v VTT needed when hovering at ~205 BCLK or getting memory errors. Currently trying to see if I could get a stable 211 BCLK with 2:8 memory (16xx MHz) at all 6 sticks of RAM. This seems to require ~1,35v of VTT (QPI/DRAM) which I recall being the highest sane voltage for 24/7 use ie. no immediate IMC degrading..?

Got the above setting for about 7hrs prime blend stable before freezing, added a little bit of VTT voltage (to 1,35v flat) and loosened the memory timings a little and now trying again if I could get it stable enough to go on with adding the CPU multi and vcore for the final OC.

Am I missing something or is there no way to set the CPU multi beyond 20 with this board. The 22 multi is possible to put into the multiplier field but does not stick for even the first core or so. Only 20 max? In fact the whole turbo selector seems to be missing from the bios (it was there with the i7 and could be even locked for permanent usage.. weird?). Not a big issue because I won't be using even multipliers in any case.

Cannot say anything of the chip quality itself yet, since haven't really OC's anything besides the BCLK and memory but I think this chip will be temp-limited like most chips are on air cooling, so we will probably never see the "real" capability of this chip since I have no plans to water cool.


----------



## Poisoner

Turbo multiplier depends on your board. On my eVGA x58 classified 3 it stays at 22 even when all the cores are pegged as far as I can tell. It used to only stay at 21, I'm not sure what I flipped to get it stuck at 22.


----------



## Myski

Ok, thank you for the info so I think it is not possible to set it beyond 20 with this board then.

One thing I have already noticed when burning through the tests in search of bclk, the temps are far from even between cores.

There is over 10 degree difference between the hottest and coolest cores under prime load.

I initially thought I had made a bad heatsink installation and knew I had used a bad leftover thermal paste for a fact, so I bought better paste, took the HS off and reapplied carefully with liquid pro metal paste (only using the thinnest layer needed to cover the whole heatspreader, about 1/5th of the syringe) and it did work in a way .. my absolute temps sure did drop ~10c across the cores, but the difference between cores was still there, and the very same cores were still running hotter/cooler than before. Uneven heatspreader most likely? I did not notice this sort of variation with the previous cpu despite using the same heatsink, so I believe the heatsink is flat enough.

The heatsink I am using is Scythe Mugen 2 (not rev b.) with scyther gentle typhoons at push-pull (full 1800rpm at benching).

Very likely I will have to lap the heatspreader to bare copper if this is the case, because the temps for the hottest cores are not promising even now when the multi is only 15 (3,2GHz), they are running at about ~70c in prime while the other few stay at ~60c which seem to me more normal at the static 1,25 vcore I am using at this point.


----------



## gofasterstripes

10C spread seems to be normal. 70C at 1.25V isn't bad, I'm around 70 at 1.28 [CNPS 10x Extreme].

If Turbo has gone missing its probably incomplete compatibility. Are you on the latest BIOS?

As for method, I tried the most careful and elaborate method possible, and needed up exactly where I started, 200*20 (core) and *16(uncore/qpi), no turbo and the same volts as my i7 for everything except VCore and VUncore.

If I were you I'd start by setting x20 and x16core/uncore, 150 FSB and 1.3v for core and Uncore and 1.8V CPU PLL.

Use the same other settings for the voltages as you used on your i7 for the same BCLCK that was stable. I'd check with others if you have high QPI PLL Settings before applying them.

Then bring your bclk up.

If you can hit 200, try reducing volts, starting with Uncore/Vtt.

Core Volts seem to shoot up above about 4GHz, so most people leave it around 4-4.4.

Stay at or below 1.3 Uncore! Stay below 1.32 Core, and if you can verify with a multimeter, do it. My UD3R V1.6 was applying an overvolt to Uncore (1.33 set, 1.37 delivered) and my 5660 broke! If in doubt stay low on Uncore/QPI/QPI PLL!!

Test with IBT standard, and for final testing IBT Max and Prime95 Blend.

Gaming is also a good test, especially of your PSU/motherboard.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> When I worked at IBM main plant, we had 1000-1500 ton chillers pumping chilled water to the raised floors to cool the computer systems and for environmental A/C.
> 12,000BTU in a ton, 3 tons will cool the average size house.
> There were 1.25in flexible water lines all over the place under the raised floors. When one of those broke, talk about a water leak. Water would find its way down a couple floors!!!
> Some buildings had baby 50-150 ton chillers for the raised floors. This was back in the early 80s, when a raised floor went down it cost IBM hundreds of thousands of dollars a hour.
> They even used water right from the Hudson river in the winter to cool the systems on the raised floor.
> Water cooling on a massive level!! Been around a long time too..
> 
> I looked at the D15 115$ the new CM 212+ same price. The D15 weighs 3 pounds? That thing is HUGE.
> To each their own. The AIO are much better than what they were when they first came out, they sell hundreds of thousands of units.
> They warranty them and will pay for parts if there is any damage. There must be a lot more working well than fail, or they could not afford to sell them if the lose money on them.
> I am willing to take the chance, no way I would put that huge air cooler in my system, even if they gave it to me for free.
> 
> Any way good luck in your studies and good luck with all your future builds.


They had the same setup in the IBM building I was working at back in the days when I was working for them as a sys admin for IBM - GBS Canada. The whole server floor was cooled with piping that was working as a big heat exchanger system with pumps and systems to heat the building... Its really cool to see technology at work in everyday life


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 10C spread seems to be normal. 70C at 1.25V isn't bad, I'm around 70 at 1.28 [CNPS 10x Extreme].
> 
> If Turbo has gone missing its probably incomplete compatibility. Are you on the latest BIOS?
> 
> As for method, I tried the most careful and elaborate method possible, and needed up exactly where I started, 200*20 (core) and *16(uncore/qpi), no turbo and the same volts as my i7 for everything except VCore and VUncore.
> 
> If I were you I'd start by setting x20 and x16core/uncore, 150 FSB and 1.3v for core and Uncore and 1.8V CPU PLL.
> 
> Use the same other settings for the voltages as you used on your i7 for the same BCLCK that was stable. I'd check with others if you have high QPI PLL Settings before applying them.
> 
> Then bring your bclk up.
> 
> If you can hit 200, try reducing volts, starting with Uncore/Vtt.
> 
> Core Volts seem to shoot up above about 4GHz, so most people leave it around 4-4.4.
> 
> Stay at or below 1.3 Uncore! Stay below 1.32 Core, and if you can verify with a multimeter, do it. My UD3R V1.6 was applying an overvolt to Uncore (1.33 set, 1.37 delivered) and my 5660 broke! If in doubt stay low on Uncore/QPI/QPI PLL!!
> 
> Test with IBT standard, and for final testing IBT Max and Prime95 Blend.
> 
> Gaming is also a good test, especially of your PSU/motherboard.


Thanks for the input. It seems that I have to step back with the uncore anyway, just had a prime crash near 12h mark (although it was getting gradually better, from 1h to 7h to 12h when all I did was upping the uncore voltage). The 211 bclk is probably too much for whole ram set to be kept stable with uncore under 1,35v.

Maybe I'll try to settle with the 200 bclk and the uncore under 1,30v. The problem with that is it calls for 20 cpu multi if trying to keep it at 4GHz which I very much would like to, and if these Xeons are anything like the i7s I've tested the even multi will need much higher vcore for stability, and I am worried about the temps since they will most likely creep to 80 degrees in prime if I have to raise the vcore much from 1,25v.

E: Yes, latest bios (1202)

E2: One problem with this board is the QPI PLL voltage (or whatever it is named) can't be independently controlled. Or it has some really weird name and I am not able to recognize it. If it is tied to some other value that may explain some "weird" unstabilities since it seems to be important to fine-tune according to most guides I have found about overclocking x58 platform.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Not sure about this even/odd business.

Whenever I try *21 with the same volts as *20 it fails, and with my last board 190*21 was the same Core volts as 200*20.

Maybe it's worth a retry?


----------



## Rylen

I got 16,624 Physics score @ 4.8 Ghz.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4121611

Damn impressive for a 5 year old CPU


----------



## marcchep

That is a great score. What Vcore are you using for 4.8Ghz?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Rylen
What volts for 4.8?

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4118092
14,000 at 4.0


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> That is a great score. What Vcore are you using for 4.8Ghz?


i think 1.44 if I recall.

I only did it to top my scores lol, not my 24/7 OC.

24/7 is 4.4ghz @ 1.32


----------



## gofasterstripes

How long have you been running that VCore, Rylen?


----------



## Myski

Speaking of temps in my previous post, what kind of temperatures would be considered "too much" when stress-testing. I am aware of the Intel recommended maximum of 81 or so but what do you think could be considered causing obvious instability issues caused by heat?

Because I ran my old i7 through 16+ hours of blend testing with max temps of almost 90 degrees and it did well, no crashing because of heat that is. Of course I lowered the settings for 24/7 use after that.

Having read the topic backwards someone said the 32nm Xeons are more prone to become unstable by heat, do you think vcore levels that give max temps in the low 80's when doing testing will become counter-productive, by increasing the probability of crashing due to heat rather than adding stability?

For long time usage it is too much, of course but forgetting the degrade effect and only considering immediate stability issues what do you think?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I was told <75C


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> How long have you been running that VCore, Rylen?


1.44? Just long enough to run some benchmarks lol

It's back to 1.32 or 1.33 now


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can someone actually quote the Max. die temp according to Intel. I was just reading the datasheet, and I didn't see die temp listed, only casetemp.


----------



## Myski

At least I just shaved few degrees off with table fan blowing towards my semi-open testbench that is just a sad old case frame without case fans.









Enough for me if it will keep the temps at high 70's so I can run some tests without heat affecting the immediate stability.


----------



## jabjab90301

Is there a particular Ebay seller that is reliable for a x5660?
Also, I checked to see if this chip is compatible with my Rampage 3 Formula and it is not listed. Is anyone running it on a Rampage 3 Formula.


----------



## bill1024

It will work on the Rampage boards. I have the Rampage3 Gene. Works fine.
You may need to update the bios to the newest one for it to work.


----------



## bill1024

I would buy from a computer parts recycler like this.Better chance of it not being abused by overclocking/testing.
I see the prices are going up on the x56xx chips.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SLBV6-INTEL-XEON-SIX-CORE-X5660-2-8GHz-12MB-6-4GT-s-PROC-/131184537717?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e8b353075


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jabjab90301*
> 
> Is there a particular Ebay seller that is reliable for a x5660?
> Also, I checked to see if this chip is compatible with my Rampage 3 Formula and it is not listed. Is anyone running it on a Rampage 3 Formula.


Buy from one with a high seller feedback score that made a lot of sales in the past and you should be fine.
Preferably a seller in the US... I prefer to buy from sellers in the US even if I'm in Canada... Just easier if something happens. You might save a couple $ buying from China but if something happens its less hassle to deal with someone in the US if you need to return it


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I would buy from a computer parts recycler like this.Better chance of it not being abused by overclocking/testing.
> I see the prices are going up on the x56xx chips.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/SLBV6-INTEL-XEON-SIX-CORE-X5660-2-8GHz-12MB-6-4GT-s-PROC-/131184537717?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e8b353075


That is exactly who i got my 5660 from. I dont know why "Make an Offer" is an option, he wont budge like $2 from his asking price lol. But i am happy with the chip.

I specifically ordered from him because he's about 30 miles from me, so i figured i can get the chip quickly. The chip arrived the next day


----------



## bill1024

nevermind


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have a theory about these chips, it goes like this.

Intel was looking to optimise/bin the chips based on the frequencies they were going to sell them at: 3-3.5Ghz. Across those frequencies they wanted to sell different chips, at different price with different characteristics. Cheap, fast, low power consumption etc.

Their process gave chips with various characteristics, leaky, hot, cold, low idle draw, low full use draw ACCROSS THAT FREQUENCY RANGE.

Therefore, they could have binned the chips with the model numbers we know, based on very different performance envelopes to those we are using... 4GHz+, power draw be dammed.

5650s are more leaky, or hotter. so they set them to <3Ghz, but they got a lot of them from the process.

5660/5670s were less leaky, perhaps, and ran cooler at 3-3.2. They might however not be any faster at 1.3v

The top end chips, well I guess they were more optimised for higher speeds, maybe they were the best quality. But they were made with exactly architecturely the same design, and so still may perform to a broadly similar level.

Lastly we have the previous usage to consider, and what we do know is that usually the frequency that the processor operates at corrosions closely to the voltage and therefore the temperature of the chip.

In that case, the lower binned chips will have had less strain overall over their previous lives.

Those are likely to be the cheapest to purchase for us now.

And finally it would seem sensible to surmise the very highest binned chips, with the lowest power consumption would have been the most expensive to purchase, and do it seems more likely that they would have been installed in better motherboards, and perhaps have been taken the most care of in their lives, because of outlay.

However, while they might still be the most expensive, even now, they are probably still worth it.... If you have the cash.

Just my tuppence, it's a bimodal distribution


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> When I worked at IBM main plant, we had 1000-1500 ton chillers pumping chilled water to the raised floors to cool the computer systems and for environmental A/C.
> 12,000BTU in a ton, 3 tons will cool the average size house.
> There were 1.25in flexible water lines all over the place under the raised floors. When one of those broke, talk about a water leak. Water would find its way down a couple floors!!!
> Some buildings had baby 50-150 ton chillers for the raised floors. This was back in the early 80s, when a raised floor went down it cost IBM hundreds of thousands of dollars a hour.
> They even used water right from the Hudson river in the winter to cool the systems on the raised floor.
> Water cooling on a massive level!! Been around a long time too..
> 
> I looked at the D15 115$ the new CM 212+ same price. The D15 weighs 3 pounds? That thing is HUGE.
> To each their own. The AIO are much better than what they were when they first came out, they sell hundreds of thousands of units.
> They warranty them and will pay for parts if there is any damage. There must be a lot more working well than fail, or they could not afford to sell them if the lose money on them.
> I am willing to take the chance, no way I would put that huge air cooler in my system, even if they gave it to me for free.
> 
> Any way good luck in your studies and good luck with all your future builds.


mate your comparing apples to oranges. ur comparing cheaply made AIO with tiny plastic pump to industrial sized chillers,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> That is exactly who i got my 5660 from. I dont know why "Make an Offer" is an option, he wont budge like $2 from his asking price lol. But i am happy with the chip.
> 
> I specifically ordered from him because he's about 30 miles from me, so i figured i can get the chip quickly. The chip arrived the next day


really? i got him to lower 15 bucks on mine lol


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jabjab90301*
> 
> Is there a particular Ebay seller that is reliable for a x5660?
> Also, I checked to see if this chip is compatible with my Rampage 3 Formula and it is not listed. Is anyone running it on a Rampage 3 Formula.


Thhis is who I got mine fom:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/forgiventhrumercy/m.html?item=131416688072&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562

may be worth keeping an eye on him

night all


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK, nearly at the end of the road with this chip, 5650#1-

Stable: Core:200*<=20 / Uncore:*16 // VCC:1.296-1.28v LLC off (1.319 BIOS) / VTT: 1.215 BIOS // 1.8PLL // QPI PLL 1.14 // IOH 1.2

Temps:<65 (cold room, H/E Air)

I tried 4.2/4.4 with 3600 uncore, no luc even when bumping the volts up a big chunk. Don't really see the point, 4.4 is going to be 3-10% faster for synthetics and games, not a lot of point if I have to hit it with over 1.35v!

For my next trick I'll put 5650/2 on and see if it boots with those settings, then see what it will do around them.


----------



## Myski

I got mine at least relatively stable (16h prime blend without errors or crashes) and temps mostly ~70c flat (mid to high 70's in quick 2hrs of small fft and linx just to see the max temps) with the following settings:

20x200 for core speed, 1.26 VCORE in bios (LLC enabled, +-0.01 in cpu-z)
1.28v VTT in bios
1.84v PLL
1.16v IOH
QPI PLL I don't know, been trying to search google, no one seems to know what it is called in this mobo's bios or if it is tied to some other setting or always forced to auto
QPI link speed left to auto (cpu-z shows 3600MHz)
RAM was set to slack at 1200MHz or so and loose timings (10-10-10-26-2T) to save VTT voltage needed and possible problems with this heavy set of sticks.

I will test later if there is room to drop any of the voltages (VTT not since it errors in linx at any lower setting with all 12GB even with loose settings), there maybe some small overhead in VCORE and those little things (PLL, IOH) but that is fine tuning.

And I may try to get the RAM running at its rated specs (1600MHz would be just available with 200 bclk) and tighten the timings a bit IF the VTT allows but I think it will need to be upped beyond 1.30v for that. Maybe one of the two, tight timings at 1200MHz or loose timings at 1600MHz would be possible with 1.30v max but we'll see.

Another reason to avoid much higher VTT voltages (besides what gofasterstripes said previously) are the board temps. I don't have ir thermometer available but the northbridge, southbridge and RAM heatsinks were all MUCH hotter when I was testing for the max bclk and the RAM was going at almost 1700MHz/9-9-9-24 and VTT 1.35 set in bios (real value unknown). All three heatsinks were very hot to touch and I suspect that could have contributed to that bsod 12 hours into prime. This time they were just lukewarm and ran 16 hours without issues before I stopped the test.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Thhis is who I got mine fom:
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/forgiventhrumercy/m.html?item=131416688072&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562
> 
> may be worth keeping an eye on him
> 
> night all


I got mine from this guy too! Great Seller!


----------



## Odesos

I got lost at reading all these posts so I will ask directly instead.

I intend to build a cheap system for 3D Rendering and was thinking if 2 X5660 can be overclocked and if yes what motherboard I should use? Can the Dell or HP motherboards to be used? If not which motherboard you would suggest me to use?

PS. The EVGA SR-2 has disappeared of the face of earth I cannot find it anywhere!!!


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Odesos*
> 
> I got lost at reading all these posts so I will ask directly instead.
> 
> I intend to build a cheap system for 3D Rendering and was thinking if 2 X5660 can be overclocked and if yes what motherboard I should use? Can the Dell or HP motherboards to be used? If not which motherboard you would suggest me to use?
> 
> PS. The EVGA SR-2 has disappeared of the face of earth I cannot find it anywhere!!!


The SR-2 is really the only good OCing option for 2P LGA-1366. Most other boards don't have any where near the range of options needed to get a really worthwhile OC.


----------



## marcchep

I believe there is one board that Supermicro made, i think it is called Supermicro X8DTL-i that is also suitable for overclocking these CPUs. Supermicro definately made a mainboard which can be used for OCing dual X5660, but I am not sure if it is the board I mentioned.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Odesos*
> 
> I got lost at reading all these posts so I will ask directly instead.
> 
> I intend to build a cheap system for 3D Rendering and was thinking if 2 X5660 can be overclocked and if yes what motherboard I should use? Can the Dell or HP motherboards to be used? If not which motherboard you would suggest me to use?
> 
> PS. The EVGA SR-2 has disappeared of the face of earth I cannot find it anywhere!!!


only the sr2 allow u to overclock, if you can only get a hp or dell mobo, thn i suggest get x5680 or 5675 since they are clocked decently high stock as it is.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> only the sr2 allow u to overclock, if you can only get a hp or dell mobo, thn i suggest get x5680 or 5675 since they are clocked decently high stock as it is.


Yup kckyle is right, and its the only option that won't cost you 2 arms and both balls since the X5690s are bloody expensive


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Yup kckyle is right, and its the only option that won't cost you 2 arms and both balls since the X5690s are bloody expensive


I'm seeing some low to 200's for the x5690s


----------



## kckyle

get it if you want but your not gonna do 5ghz 24/7 lol


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> get it if you want but your not gonna do 5ghz 24/7 lol


Well not close to it and not without an SR-2 if he wants to run an overclocked SMP system while keeping both his balls


----------



## OCmember

ok, wait a minute, no one here (me) is spending money on an x5690 - lol

200$ is a great deal since at the time I was looking for this X5660 it was priced ~ 250$, now the x5690 is 200$

I didn't spend 250$ on this 5660 rather I got a deal which I can't remember,,, might of been around 149


----------



## OCmember

AND DON'T TEMPT ME!

lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

Report

5650/1
4,400 [22x200] / 3600 = 1000Cinebench R15 = 1.41V loaded
4,000 [ " ] / 3200 = 927 = 1.31V loaded

Delta 8%

I know what I'm going to keep using......


----------



## marcchep

What do you guys think about the Asus P6T6 WS Revolution?


----------



## kckyle

its a marvelous board, if the price is right go for it. but i still think gigabyte did a better job on power delivery and stability on the x58 platform.


----------



## marcchep

I can get it for 125$, so I should go for it?


----------



## kckyle

yep thats a good price, get it.


----------



## marcchep

Ok thanks, will do


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Ok thanks, will do


lucky dog!


----------



## Space Marine

Anyone here used a Supermicro x8sti-b with a 6core and overclocked it? how's it working?

On a side note, i reached now:

4.2 ghz 200x21 1,34v llc off
2000mhz DDR3 2x4 9 10 10 28
uncore 3000 vtt 1,29v

and i think that might be my final 24/7 overclock! 4.4 is out of range on any voltage which i consider safe
uncore could go up to 3400 but at 1,325v and im not sure it's worth the increase in voltage, also considering the stress on my imc cause of the ram speed.

So i might settle down this way, maybe playing a bit with some tighter ram timings.

In future ill also test the various pll voltages and see if any of these helps on lowering vcore of 1 or 2 notches
And then i'll look for a nh-d14 or better, just cause here summer is really really hot

On a side note, i realized my p6t vanilla is likely stable at 220bclk, and maybe even higher (didnt push it to the limit), but that's not much helpful for anything


----------



## gofasterstripes

That seems sensible, Marine.

Out of interest, can you run Cinebench R15&#8230;? I'd be curious to know how your setup compares, you have+200 core and -200 uncore vs mine.


----------



## Space Marine

yeah i can, but the thing is that my HT is off so i guess the result will be off too
btw in IBT max i get 90,2 gflops

edit: at 3200 uncore i get 90.7, at 3400 91.4


----------



## gofasterstripes

Those figures are very odd, the difference is different, if you get my drift.

Did it settle on those after 10 minutes+? I wonder if the first was taken while the machine was still starting up?


----------



## Space Marine

Yes is like 5 seconds after a fresh restart at around 7000 mb of free ram (set at maximum), and between 20 to 50 cycles
whats ur result?


----------



## gofasterstripes

86 I think... Can't reboot, backing up


----------



## Space Marine

That fits then, +200mhz core have always been around 3 or 4 gflops for me, depending on ram timings, while 200 uncore have always been around 0.5 to 1 gflop


----------



## DR4G00N

It's alive!









Board is rev 1.0 so i'll have to do some soldering for my xeon to work unfortunately


----------



## gofasterstripes

Think I might try that other chip tonight....


----------



## marcchep

What soldering do you have to do? Post some pics, others might be interessted to


----------



## DR4G00N

Here's some pic's (not mine)
(Same spots for the E759, E760 & E762)

Above cpu socket:


Top-right of northbridge


After soldering those it should work.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Deeply weird. What does that actually do? Aside from making it work with a Xeon...


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Here's some pic's (not mine)
> (Same spots for the E759, E760 & E762)
> 
> Above cpu socket:
> 
> 
> Top-right of northbridge
> 
> 
> After soldering those it should work.


I sorta got where to solder in the top pic, now I finally understand where the second spot is, thanks!

Have the 760 A1 Rev 1.0 - it's a nice board, my AHCI firmware is sort of flakey and screws up the SATA ports sometimes - system could be running smoothly for months straight and one day it stops working


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Here's some pic's (not mine)
> (Same spots for the E759, E760 & E762)
> 
> Above cpu socket:
> 
> 
> Top-right of northbridge
> 
> 
> After soldering those it should work.


Would those work by doing a bridge with a conductive ink pen?
I always wondered that, since its a tricky move for people not used with soldering. One of my friends is always making me solder his boards and I'm really starting to get fed up of doing that. If I can get him to buy a conductive ink pen to do those in the future then I'll just tell him to do that


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Would those work by doing a bridge with a conductive ink pen?
> I always wondered that, since its a tricky move for people not used with soldering. One of my friends is always making me solder his boards and I'm really starting to get fed up of doing that. If I can get him to buy a conductive ink pen to do those in the future then I'll just tell him to do that


Apparently there is some window fixer that you can buy from Auto Zone that does the trick too


----------



## gofasterstripes

Report:
Chip #2 no faster. Well, it will hit 4.1GHz at 1.312/1.296V, but 205BCLK seems to not marry up well with [email protected] as 3D mark score is consistently 150-odd lower [despite the expected physics score bump].

Like the other one it won't quite hold 4.4 stable, and I can't use the *21 multi. On this board, as on the last, it's 20, or 22 with turbo. No way to get *21









I'm going to see if it's going to stay cooler at 4.0 - 8 hrs prime blend for the same volts.....


----------



## Rylen

What chip


----------



## chinesestunna

Are you sure it's just shorting the pins? My research from eVGA's forums shows you have to move the R538 to R539 which are the SMD resistors. I did it on my E758 board and worked like a charm


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> It's alive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Board is rev 1.0 so i'll have to do some soldering for my xeon to work unfortunately


Just wanted to throw my 2 cents here on these pictures.

The north-bridge heat-sink is bent in your pictures. I have the exact same board and mine was bent. It's still slightly bent. I attempted to straighten it some. While you dont have to fool with yours i would recommend you watch your temps on it. Maybe use some temp monitoring software. If you have issues with temps and stability you may want to investigate and see if you can correct the heat pipes better.

Mine was like yours and i got it mostly straight example below:


----------



## Poisoner




----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Report:
> Chip #2 no faster. Well, it will hit 4.1GHz at 1.312/1.296V, but 205BCLK seems to not marry up well with [email protected] as 3D mark score is consistently 150-odd lower [despite the expected physics score bump].
> 
> Like the other one it won't quite hold 4.4 stable, and I can't use the *21 multi. On this board, as on the last, it's 20, or 22 with turbo. No way to get *21
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to see if it's going to stay cooler at 4.0 - 8 hrs prime blend for the same volts.....


You probably have average chips.. 1.33-35 is normal for 4.4GHz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> You probably have average chips


- Yeah, well, your mum!









OK, seriously, I'm sure they're average [though 5650#2 is running about 5C cooler*], that's not what I asked.

_What I asked was:_

Is anyone running 1.35Vcc+ 24/7?
For how long has this been running?
What are the idle/load volts?
What are the temps/cooling config?

*The heatspreader had a couple of flaws in it so I did drag it over a piece of sandpaper a couple of times, it might be that too.


----------



## cobovo

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Can I get some quotes from contributors to this thread about high Vcc [NOT Vtt, not doing that again].
> 
> Who's been running >1.35Vcc [loaded]?
> 
> What value are you using, for how long and for what frequencies?
> 
> Just a couple of lines, for the lazy ones
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ta


1. Yes, i use my chip X5670 >1.35Vcc. Running at 4.4GHg with 1.39V (at loading and 1.23 at idle with Offset mode).
2. I answered on this question in the first answer.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Cheers dude.

How long has it been set up like that? Max temps?


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Cheers dude.
> 
> How long has it been set up like that? Max temps?


Use as long as needed for render)))
Cooling with Noctua NH-D14. Max temp stabilized at 20 minute after start render. As usually temp stay as 64-67 most hot core.
And little detail Vtt or QPI/Dram i used 1.27V for 3200MHg Uncore and 7200MHg QPI speed.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks again. Any others?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> - Yeah, well, your mum!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, seriously, I'm sure they're average [though 5650#2 is running about 5C cooler*], that's not what I asked.
> 
> _What I asked was:_
> 
> Is anyone running 1.35Vcc+ 24/7?
> For how long has this been running?
> What are the idle/load volts?
> What are the temps/cooling config?
> 
> *The heatspreader had a couple of flaws in it so I did drag it over a piece of sandpaper a couple of times, it might be that too.


Hah









By Vcc do you mean Vcore? Mine is set constantly/static/24-7 @ 1.34v I recently just set Windows 7 Power Options to 'Power Saver' and my bios Speed Step option set to enabled. I use to have my cores at 100% all the time until recently. Did it for about a year. Idle temps were in the mid 30*c. Now with the Power Options set to 'Power Saver' and Speed step on the idle temps are mid to high 20*c - side case open, Ambient temps ~70*f ,,, The Power envelope now changes. Use to be 130w constantly now with speed step enabled and the power options set to power saver it fluctuates from 33.75w - 130w (Core i7 970) My X5660 idles at 17.74w according to CPUID but that machine is set for low power usage hence the stock clocks


----------



## gofasterstripes

I do mean vcore, yes.

Thanks for that!


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Hah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By Vcc do you mean Vcore? Mine is set constantly/static/24-7 @ 1.34v I recently just set Windows 7 Power Options to 'Power Saver' and my bios Speed Step option set to enabled. I use to have my cores at 100% all the time until recently. Did it for about a year. Idle temps were in the mid 30*c. Now with the Power Options set to 'Power Saver' and Speed step on the idle temps are mid to high 20*c - side case open, Ambient temps ~70*f ,,, The Power envelope now changes. Use to be 130w constantly now with speed step enabled and the power options set to power saver it fluctuates from 33.75w - 130w (Core i7 970) My X5660 idles at 17.74w according to CPUID but that machine is set for low power usage hence the stock clocks


Interest story, but Dude asked who use Vcore or Vcc more than 1.35V. You understand this or not? I am sorry from brute repost but tired at your boasting.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I do mean vcore, yes.
> 
> Thanks for that!


The 1.350v Intel stated limit is the only draw-back for those Xeons. It's not why I have a Core i7 970 though. Motherboard compatibility issues


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Interest story, but Dude asked who use Vcore or Vcc more than 1.35V. You understand this or not? I am sorry from brute repost but tired at your boasting.


Sorry if it came off that way. But I have almost a similar situation. I honestly did run my system at 100% for about a year.


----------



## DR4G00N

Here's my solution to the hot northbridge:


Now time for some oc'ing!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Here's my solution to the hot northbridge:
> 
> 
> Now time for some oc'ing!


Congrats!


----------



## marcchep

I would complain about it not looking to great, but I know no better way to get that northbridge cooler


----------



## gofasterstripes

Looks fine. You may wish to support your graphics cards at the power end though, they look a little droopy - try to take the load off the slots









One of my last pics on the thread was an easy way to do this - you just need a black [vulcanised/synthetic rubber band].

Oh, also, I forget the figure, but the x58 chip is good for over 100C I think, so don't stress too much!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> I would complain about it not looking to great, but I know no better way to get that northbridge cooler


I also got this with it for a more long term solution. I'll be putting it to use once I get my wc'ing loop.


----------



## OCmember

If that fan doesn't cool it enough just rest a 120 or 140mm fan on the GPU. It won't hurt it.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Looks fine. You may wish to support your graphics cards at the power end though, they look a little droopy - try to take the load off the slots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my last pics on the thread was an easy way to do this - you just need a black [vulcanised/synthetic rubber band].


It just looks that way from the angle I took the pic from, they really aren't drooping. The msi cards have a uni-sink over the entire pcb so they can't really bend.


----------



## DR4G00N

Damn, these things oc like a dream








I'm currently at 3.82GHz 22x174 @ 1.225v and I haven't changed anything but the bclk







http://valid.x86.fr/qkp5qc
Temps peak at 44c on the hottest core.

Edit: Got it to 4.01GHz 22x183 @ 1.275v, +25mV vtt. Temps are 49c on the hottest core.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@DR4G00N Awesome temps and very low volts too. Nice. Uncore speed?

Also - here's a funny thing I've noticed. If I run IBT at boot time, I get slightly HIGHER scores than after 30 mins or so, and if I leave it longer again, the same happens.

Pic.: [T2B - after 3 min, after 30 min and after a few hours]



IBT is Standard with HT on. Temps stay below 70.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @DR4G00N Awesome temps and very low volts too. Nice. Uncore speed?
> 
> Also - here's a funny thing I've noticed. If I run IBT at boot time, I get slightly HIGHER scores than after 30 mins or so, and if I leave it longer again, the same happens.
> 
> Pic.: [T2B - after 3 min, after 30 min and after a few hours]
> 
> 
> 
> IBT is Standard with HT on. Temps stay below 70.


Uncore is (12x) 2190MHz. This board works really well with this cpu.








I could bump the PWM switching freq up to 1333KHz (Currently @ 800KHz) to maybe lower the vcore some at the expense of higher VRM temps.

Weird thing with IBT, maybe it's because over time windows loads more things onto the cpu.

What's your cpu running at? I'm getting ~50 GFLOP/s in IBT.


----------



## Myski

This is slightly off-topic but thought I'd ask it here first if someone has been having same issues, before I make a new topic.

As is well known the "P6T-" board bioses are almost universally cross-flashable between different models and I thought I'd give it a try to see if some of the other bioses gives better OC results (voltage differences, more options etc.) and tried to flash newest official P6T WS PRO bios into my P6T deluxe v2 using afudos engineering version but it outright *refused to erase my old (newest stock) bios* before even trying to write the new one (which it read and verified at the beginning without problems).

The afudos halts at 3% erasing the old bios, "could not erase block". Looks like it erased nothing, not even 3% since I can reboot without issues.

I thought I'd made some mistake and read all the info related to topic I could spending hours googling, no go. I found no obvious user errors. Tried all the following:

- Reverted current bios settings to defaults, cleared cmos, removed battery etc.
- Tried flashing with different versions of AFUDOS engineering version (2.29, 2.36, some 3rd version I can't recall)
- New .rom file is named short enough
- Tried even flashing the same newest stock bios again with Asus's native EZ Flash bios updater found inside stock bios, process I've done many times before with success. Same here, refused to erase current bios ("Error occurred during erase..." at the very beginning of erasing the old one).

What the heck. Is almost looks like my bios chip is write-protected somehow. Is there such possibility with P6T boards? Or is my bios chip/eeprom broken/corrupt in some weird way that prevents the updating but the current one still functions normally?

I found numerous references to this issue via google, but *every* other case I came across had some sort of user error involved (and was solved by the checklist steps above). Not mine, and this is starting to frustrate me.

The only guy I think really had the same issue I am having now was Narremans from this forum http://www.overclock.net/t/662236/official-the-asus-p6x58d-premium-e-thread/5440#post_22467564 from that post forward and looks like he found no solution, even tried a new bios chip which refused to boot at all.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @DR4G00N Awesome temps and very low volts too. Nice. Uncore speed?
> 
> Also - here's a funny thing I've noticed. If I run IBT at boot time, I get slightly HIGHER scores than after 30 mins or so, and if I leave it longer again, the same happens.
> 
> Pic.: [T2B - after 3 min, after 30 min and after a few hours]
> 
> 
> 
> IBT is Standard with HT on. Temps stay below 70.


It takes about twenty minutes before it gets close to as hot as it will get.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> It takes about twenty minutes before it gets close to as hot as it will get.


Sure, but the point here is it's not thermal throttling. So what is it?
Quote:


> maybe it's because over time windows loads more things onto the cpu.


Seems most likely, but a little odd, as the machine is really not doing anything much!
Quote:


> What's your cpu running at? I'm getting ~50 GFLOP/s in IBT.


That's 200*20 with 3200 Uncore and RAM at 1600/8/8/8/24.

For any IBT comparison you really need to get the settings exactly the same, including whether Hyperthreading is on or off. Better comparisons are Cinebench and Game benches for CPU and CPU/GPU tandem benches.


----------



## marcchep

To me, Myski, this does look like there is a problem with the Bios chip. What if you bought a P6T WS Pro Bios chip?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> The afudos halts at 3% erasing the old bios


The chip's probably going faulty, then [as posted above]. It would not be the first time I've seen it.


----------



## scriblit

I got my x5660 last Monday!

ASUS P6T Deluxe v2 (bios 1202)
X5660 REV B1
Coolermaster 212 Evo+ stock fan
6x1GB 1333 crucial green led tracer (7.7.7.24)
2X WD Black Caviar raid0
ASUS STRIX GTX 970



blk / 182
VCORE/ 1.35
PLL / 1.8
QPI / 1.35
IOH / 1.2
ICH / 1.3
load line enabled

DRAM Voltage 1.66
8/8/8/24 1t
FSBRAM 2:8 = 1451

SpeedStep and TurboMode enabled
C-states and C1E enabled

Nothing is disabled! I simply set the voltages.
Now my ram was a bit more tricky using 1333 instead of 1600. A nice little boost atleast..
I am running P95 as I write this waiting for jobs to finish since I am using gimps.
No issues thus far. I only wish I had newer crucial led ram that was faster I bet I
would be able to get a bit more performace from my setup. Altough I do only have the 212 evo and the cooling is
ok but not great. Perhaps its time for a delta pwm fan? I keep telling myself dude you have headphones you wont hear it.
I could use it on a radiator later. Anyone ever use a delta 1212de pwm fan before? Its rated at 252 cfm I just hope it wouldnt run at
100% all the time. My gtx970 is set at 60% fan and I can hear my drives plugging away at 4K it is a bit annoying waiting for stuff.
Next part will be a sumsung 850 pro or 850 evo. I wont even care that ich10r can't use the drives max throughput I'll save power and get rid of all that fast seeking.
And honestly I'll most likley ditch mechanical drives all together as I have never had more than 300gb of stuff at any point in time.
I was looking into plextor's m6e and m7e as the P6T has a pcie 2.0 4x slot. Seems a bit overkill and I think I'll get better 4k from one or two 850's


----------



## marcchep

I had a similar problem with an Asus P5K-VM/S board, where it would not let me replace the Bios, not even the stock one.


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> To me, Myski, this does look like there is a problem with the Bios chip. What if you bought a P6T WS Pro Bios chip?


That's what I am trying next.

I'll probably first remove the current chip and try crossflashing it tomorrow with external bios programmer since the local computer store offers that kinda service at very reasonable price and that would help narrow down if the chip is busted. If the flashing goes fine with external programmer it would still be cheaper and faster than buying new chip, and if not they will not charge anything.

I am a bit worried about the possibility of chip flashing ok with external programmer and then not booting at all when placed on a mobo, or the new replacement chip doing the same because that's what Narremans was experiencing with his new pre-programmed replacement chip. No boot at all, black screen, and the "broken" old chip booted fine but would not erase.

Strange problem, very strange.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Part of it's worn out. It's not that strange for a flash chip.

You'll get it sorted, I'm sure


----------



## Myski

Ok then I'll better get a new chip anyway. Dumb question but would it work if I just buy a pre-programmed replacement bios chip for the WS Pro mobo (there are lots of sellers on ebay) and swap it in so no need to flash it myself?

The cross-flash is proven to be compatible for sure, but just making sure there's not something done differently when the chip is programmed with external programmer and then plugged in. I am not very familiar with this low level stuff.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Neither am I. However I recently rescued a friend's machine by finding a dead board on eBay with the same BIOS chip (there were three slightly different shapes/mountings of BIOS chip used on that board).

We stuck it in, and that was that! Fixed. £20, 15 mins, done.

YMMV.

Perhaps see if someone can lend you one to test it with?


----------



## DR4G00N

Pushed it a bit further but it needed a fair amount of voltage to get stable.

4.19GHz 22x191 @ 1.3375v, +50mV vtt.
Memory @ 1524MHz 9-9-9-24 1T, Uncore @ 2286MHz
Temps peaked at 55c on the hottest core.

http://valid.x86.fr/wy3mlk


----------



## gofasterstripes

Report:
X5650 #2 might actually be a lot better in one way..... voltage.



Here's it at 4.0 on 1.248v! If It's really stable like this that's around 400MHz faster than the other one will do at that voltage. In fact, it's so low and cool I'll run it at that 24/7 if I can.

@Kana-Maru
Assuming it's stable at this setup [above], any ideas why I seem to need 1.4v for 4.4GHz? Any other settings I should try to fiddle? Currently I'm on 1.8v CPU PLL, 1.2v IOH, 1.14v QPI PLL as well.


----------



## loop16

why not leaving vcore in auto with llc enabled?
vcore will bump to 1.34~35, and toy ll be easily hit 4.4, and its TOTAL safe due to you re in safe zone according to intel
http://ark.intel.com/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI


----------



## gofasterstripes

@loop16

We've had several discussions about this. The consensus seems to be 1.35v is the limit for a very good reason - regulator overshoot will probably push that to 1.4, and then there's the issue of how accurate the software voltage readings are.

In other words, if you apply 1.35 in Software you're likely delivering >1.4v in real life. Which may be fine, or it may not. But as this is a mission-critical machine, I'd rather not blow another chip!

Also, it seems that I was needing 1.4v [software] to hit 4.4, so that's waaaaay to high, in theory....

But I am curious, hence the questions about who is running >1.4v


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> Ok then I'll better get a new chip anyway. Dumb question but would it work if I just buy a pre-programmed replacement bios chip for the WS Pro mobo (there are lots of sellers on ebay) and swap it in so no need to flash it myself?
> 
> The cross-flash is proven to be compatible for sure, but just making sure there's not something done differently when the chip is programmed with external programmer and then plugged in. I am not very familiar with this low level stuff.


Are you totally sure that any p6t is crossflashable?
i got a p6t vanilla, which bios do u suggest me to try?


----------



## loop16

To my xeon 
i have 4.35Ghz 1.34 according to cpuz with all voltages in auto for a year total stable, aida 64 occt intel burn test and prime, and all its fine


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice. For some reason I need 1.42 to do that, I think something's set wrong!


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice. For some reason I need 1.42 to do that, I think something's set wrong!


Im on your same boat, i wonder whats the difference, except silicon lottery.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> To my xeon
> i have 4.35Ghz 1.34 according to cpuz with all voltages in auto for a year total stable, aida 64 occt intel burn test and prime, and all its fine


would u mind to post all ur settings? Pll, ich and ioh included


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Are you totally sure that any p6t is crossflashable?
> i got a p6t vanilla, which bios do u suggest me to try?


I have not yet tried it myself since my bios chip seems to be crapped (reasons unrelated) and new one should arrive next week but I read a lot of this crossflashing and it should work according to several sources. The P6T series boards seem to be basically almost the same board across models on a hw level, and many features disabled on cheaper models were only done so with a restricted bios version intended for that model and of course some controllers were physically not soldered to the board etc.

http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=669 This is what explained it quite well to me.
http://linas.16mb.com/asus-p6t-deluxe-crossflash-to-asus-p6t-ws-pro/ Specific example.

I don't exactly know about recommendations but the following crossflashings were mentioned multiple times in multiple sources:

- P6T SE flashed to P6T vanilla [to enable SLI option, it is there on a hw level, only disabled with crippled stock bios]
- P6T (any model? mostly deluxes what I've seen) flashed to P6T WS Pro [to disable turbo multi throttling when going over cpu tdp, so enabling turbo multi for all cores on full load which usually helps overclocking quite a bit, and to enable voltage offset options] <-- this is what I am going to try, will report results next week
- P6T ? flashed to P6X58D Premium [to enable QPI slow mode for some obscure benchmark runs, seems to uselessly slow in performance in real world usage]
- P6T deluxe v2 flashed to deluxe v1 [at least on earlier bioses back in 2009 some reports of better overclocking results, some voltage differences etc. but I don't know if it is needed anymore since the 0006 "overclocking bios" was released for 45nm cpus]

To me the P6T WS Pro bios seems to offer the best options for overclocking on 32nm chips.The next week I can say if it works for me, and I think it _should_ work for vanilla P6T, too according to what I've read but I can be wrong on this one since I don't have that board and cannot try for myself.

The known downside with the P6T WS Pro bios is the Marvell storage controller on board gets disabled (IDE+eSata controller at least, possibly the onboard raid too) together with onboard Firewire contoller but I don't use those anyway. There are some reports of at least one of the native PCI (the plain PCI, not PCI-e) slot also going out of commission but I'll see about that next week.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> I have not yet tried it myself since my bios chip seems to be crapped (reasons unrelated) and new one should arrive next week but I read a lot of this crossflashing and it should work according to several sources. The P6T series boards seem to be basically almost the same board across models on a hw level, and many features disabled on cheaper models were only done so with a restricted bios version intended for that model and of course some controllers were physically not soldered to the board etc.
> 
> http://kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=669 This is what explained it quite well to me.
> http://linas.16mb.com/asus-p6t-deluxe-crossflash-to-asus-p6t-ws-pro/ Specific example.
> 
> I don't exactly know about recommendations but the following crossflashings were mentioned multiple times in multiple sources:
> 
> - P6T SE flashed to P6T vanilla [to enable SLI option, it is there on a hw level, only disabled with crippled stock bios]
> - P6T (any model? mostly deluxes what I've seen) flashed to P6T WS Pro [to disable turbo multi throttling when going over cpu tdp, so enabling turbo multi for all cores on full load which usually helps overclocking quite a bit, and to enable voltage offset options] <-- this is what I am going to try, will report results next week
> - P6T ? flashed to P6X58D Premium [to enable QPI slow mode for some obscure benchmark runs, seems to uselessly slow in performance in real world usage]
> - P6T deluxe v2 flashed to deluxe v1 [at least on earlier bioses back in 2009 some reports of better overclocking results, some voltage differences etc. but I don't know if it is needed anymore since the 0006 "overclocking bios" was released for 45nm cpus]
> 
> To me the P6T WS Pro bios seems to offer the best options for overclocking on 32nm chips.The next week I can say if it works for me, and I think it _should_ work for vanilla P6T, too according to what I've read but I can be wrong on this one since I don't have that board and cannot try for myself.
> 
> The known downside with the P6T WS Pro bios is the Marvell storage controller on board gets disabled (IDE+eSata controller at least, possibly the onboard raid too) together with onboard Firewire contoller but I don't use those anyway. There are some reports of at least one of the native PCI (the plain PCI, not PCI-e) slot also going out of commission but I'll see about that next week.


Yeah, the P6T WS Pro option seems very interesting, i also suffered the throttling of the multiplier on turbo multis, and offset voltage would be great to limit vdroop a bit.
Im not using neither the raid neither the ide controllers, maybe just the PCI slot gone might be a problem for me (i got 1 pci card, but if its just 1 slot going bad, i could switch it to the 2nd one).

Problem is, if i set the offset in the crossflashed bios, is it actually real? i mean its gonna be applied on the board for real? cause while similar the p6t vanilla is not the same, has only 8+2 vrm


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can't you just use a multimeter on it?


----------



## OCmember

@gofasterstripes how are the volt readings with your new board? Is there a difference between the software readings and the multimeter readings?


----------



## loop16

I ll post a screenshot from my bios settings later due to i m working now but u wont notice something wow in my settings As i posted above ALL my voltages are in auto, bclk 218 multi x20 and uncore 3048 if i remember right, (uncore x1.8) and llc enabled


----------



## DR4G00N

I find that Cpu-z's voltage readings are usually quite close to what they actually are (On the EVGA boards at least).
For me Cpu-z says 1.329-1.341v (jumps between the two), the voltage measured by my mutimeter is 1.335v loaded with it set at 1.3375v in the bios.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Can't you just use a multimeter on it?


i dont have a multimeter


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I find that Cpu-z's voltage readings are usually quite close to what they actually are (On the EVGA boards at least).
> For me Cpu-z says 1.329-1.341v (jumps between the two), the voltage measured by my mutimeter is 1.335v loaded with it set at 1.3375v in the bios.


Can you please specify what voltages you are talking about


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> i dont have a multimeter


they are like 20$ at Home Depot, Lowes, or any hardware store. pick one up


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Can you please specify what voltages you are talking about


Core Voltage.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Core Voltage.


Core voltage. aka Vcore, and Vcc


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> they are like 20$ at Home Depot, Lowes, or any hardware store. pick one up


do u also know of a visual guide on using it on a motherboard?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> do u also know of a visual guide on using it on a motherboard?


On your particular motherboard? No, but I've been searching for a schematic of the board... no luck so far. But the use of one on a board is simple. The negative cable gets grounded, and the red goes to the desired voltage terminal. Disclaimer: I ground my black cable to one of the screws that hold the motherboard to the computer case.

Forgive my poor photography skills:


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> @gofasterstripes how are the volt readings with your new board? Is there a difference between the software readings and the multimeter readings?


Not measured yet as I'm so far away from the limits


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Not measured yet as I'm so far away from the limits


interesting, ill take a look at the board, maybe ill find those spots there too


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> ill take a look at the board


Wut?

Do we have the same board? I forget, sorry. I don't think there's a proper measuring points on the UD7/5







Probably could poke around the back of the socket a bit, but it's all densly packed there so a bit dodgy to do it!


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Wut?
> 
> Do we have the same board? I forget, sorry. I don't think there's a proper measuring points on the UD7/5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably could poke around the back of the socket a bit, but it's all densly packed there so a bit dodgy to do it!


i got a p6t, dunno if there are measuring points at all


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://gigabytedaily.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/gooc-2010-worldwide-final-bios-release.html

I think this shows the voltage read points for the GA-EX58A-UD7 Version 2







I'll measure ASAP and report.

EDIT:

QPI PLL Measure point:
http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/9472/qpipllsmallsmall.jpg

EDITEDIT - modified board name for google indexing/helping others find the thread.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> http://gigabytedaily.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/gooc-2010-worldwide-final-bios-release.html
> 
> I think this show the voltage read points for the UD7 V2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll measure ASAP and report.


I wonder if it would be safe to assume the points behind the CPU area, pointed out in the link, are universal with all 1366 chips (or it could be board specific, hmm)


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I wonder if it would be safe to assume the points behind the CPU area, pointed out in the link, are universal with all 1366 chips


I doubt it, it depends very much on the layout of the board. Maybe if your board looks the same it's worth a try?

But, hey it's easy to verify. Just set your Vcc and Vtt to the highest value you use, test the points, write down the values, they should correspond closely to what you set in the BIOS.

Then set them to the lowest voltages you use [underclock?] and test again. Again, they should show close to the BIOS values and be very different from last time [so you're not measure something else].

Lastly, set one high and one low [overclock CPU, stock clock Uncore/QPI] and check they are very different from one another and that, again, they match what you selected.

That should be a fairly foolproof way to verify you're measuring the right values


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I doubt it, it depends very much on the layout of the board. Maybe if your board looks the same it's worth a try?
> 
> But, hey it's easy to verify. Just set your Vcc and Vtt to the highest value you use, test the points, write down the values, they should correspond closely to what you set in the BIOS.
> 
> Then set them to the lowest voltages you use [underclock?] and test again. Again, they should show close to the BIOS values and be very different from last time [so you're not measure something else].
> 
> Lastly, set one high and one low [overclock CPU, stock clock Uncore/QPI] and check they are very different from one another and that, again, they match what you selected.
> 
> That should be a fairly foolproof way to verify you're measuring the right values


That's a good test and cross-check method

Ah, I just visually checked. It's gotta be board specific.

The orientation of the pic is CPU on top, PCI-E slots underneath, mem slots to the left

( EVGA 760 A1)


(Gigabyte UD7)









I would also think that if the multimeter would slip and complete the connection between two of the points it might cause havok, hah


----------



## loop16

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Im on your same boat, i wonder whats the difference, except silicon lottery.
> would u mind to post all ur settings? Pll, ich and ioh included


Here is my mobos settings



Mobo is Asus P6TD Deluxe with the latest bios


----------



## Razroid

Ayyy I finally got my build up that has a X5650 and a Rampage III Extreme, I've been looking around but I cannot seem to find any overclocking guides for the X58 Xeons, could someone point me in the right direction as to where I should start?

Also, how high do you guys reckon my chip can go? I was aiming for 4.5Ghz


----------



## gofasterstripes

I've covered the basics recently. Try going back through my posts.

It seems as though most of the chips are maxing out about 4-4.4 with safe volts. If you're on water it may help.

We have the same GPU - benchmark comparisons will be in order when you're done!

Good luck, and Moore be with you


----------



## Razroid

Yeah I'm on a 360 + a 240, the temps at stock are great









How high are the "safe volts" ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Razroid*
> 
> Ayyy I finally got my build up that has a X5650 and a Rampage III Extreme, I've been looking around but I cannot seem to find any overclocking guides for the X58 Xeons, could someone point me in the right direction as to where I should start?


Congrats!

What info are you looking for within those guides? voltage? other settings?

EDIT: what type of stock temps do you have? Ambient temps?


----------



## DR4G00N

I started bumping up the uncore, the speed gains were quite noticeable in Cinebench R15.









(12x) 2190MHz: 887 points

(16x) 3049MHz: 940 points

(18x) 3438MHz only got a little higher at 952 points

(20x) 3820MHz BSOD

Bumped up the cpu to 4.3GHz 22x196 @ 1.35v & uncore to (18x) 3528MHz, it got a score of 985 points.


----------



## Razroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Congrats!
> 
> What info are you looking for within those guides? voltage? other settings?
> 
> EDIT: what type of stock temps do you have? Ambient temps?


Probably on how to overclock on x58, I've only done ivy multiplier overclocking (easy enough) and 775 overclocking (raising bclk and voltage)

Voltage settings for people that have reached 4.5 would be nice and how high I should go on the voltages.
Also, what about the voltages of the other motherboard components?
I've also read that raising bclk affects PCI-E and Ram? how do I combat that issue?

31-40 at idle, 50 at 100% load for stock

Ambient right now would be 30.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Razroid*
> 
> Probably on how to overclock on x58, I've only done ivy multiplier overclocking (easy enough) and 775 overclocking (raising bclk and voltage)
> 
> Voltage settings for people that have reached 4.5 would be nice and how high I should go on the voltages.
> Also, what about the voltages of the other motherboard components?
> I've also read that raising bclk affects PCI-E and Ram? how do I combat that issue?
> 
> 31-40 at idle, 50 at 100% load for stock
> 
> Ambient right now would be 30.


I'll address the basics that have been covered here starting with the Xeon chips Vcore/Vcc/Core-voltage ceiling stated by Intel is 1.350v

With my motherboard the Vtt is referred to as CPU VTT and this you keep *within* .50v of the DRAM voltages. e.g. 1.65v Dram / 1.20v CPU VTT. The ceiling limit for the CPU VTT is 1.35v. My board's bios defaults the CPU VTT to 1.20v A good time to raise the CPU VTT is when you are in the early 4GHz range. As an example my CPU VTT is set at 1.30v for 4.4GHz usage

Your other concerns about the bclk effecting the PCI-E I'm not too familiar with. I've read and heard things about their interaction but I've never seen it as an issue on my machine. I've heard if you have your PCI-E clocked that it can mess with the hard drives including SSD drives. I'm not sure of the parameter boundaries that this starts to take in effect. Some people have problems at 101MHz PCI-E while others don't see problems till 115MHz

There are guides out there to follow so take mine like a grain of salt. I've found a great guide for my board, and honestly I think the voltage info could cross over onto other boards. You can poke around this article and get some general descriptions of things like CPU PLL, QPI PLL, etc etc. if you are interested in that type of stuff and how it works.

Good Luck and let us know how it goes









EDIT: Oh, simply raise your BLCK for overclocking


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I started bumping up the uncore, the speed gains were quite noticeable in Cinebench R15.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (12x) 2190MHz: 887 points
> 
> (16x) 3049MHz: 940 points
> 
> (18x) 3438MHz only got a little higher at 952 points
> 
> (20x) 3820MHz BSOD
> 
> Bumped up the cpu to 4.3GHz 22x196 @ 1.35v & uncore to (18x) 3528MHz, it got a score of 985 points.


That's awesome!

I think the general consensus is that closing in on 4GHz is the Uncore limit


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'll address the basics that have been covered here starting with the Xeon chips Vcore/Vcc/Core-voltage ceiling stated by Intel is 1.350v
> 
> With my motherboard the Vtt is referred to as CPU VTT and this you keep *within* .50v of the DRAM voltages. e.g. 1.65v Dram / 1.20v CPU VTT. The ceiling limit for the CPU VTT is 1.35v. My board's bios defaults the CPU VTT to 1.20v A good time to raise the CPU VTT is when you are in the early 4GHz range. As an example my CPU VTT is set at 1.30v for 4.4GHz usage
> 
> Your other concerns about the bclk effecting the PCI-E I'm not too familiar with. I've read and heard things about their interaction but I've never seen it as an issue on my machine. I've heard if you have your PCI-E clocked that it can mess with the hard drives including SSD drives. I'm not sure of the parameter boundaries that this starts to take in effect. Some people have problems at 101MHz PCI-E while others don't see problems till 115MHz
> 
> There are guides out there to follow so take mine like a grain of salt. I've found a great guide for my board, and honestly I think the voltage info could cross over onto other boards. You can poke around this article and get some general descriptions of things like CPU PLL, QPI PLL, etc etc. if you are interested in that type of stuff and how it works.
> 
> Good Luck and let us know how it goes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Oh, simply raise your BLCK for overclocking


Youre stable @ 4.4Ghz with VCORE set to 1.30 in BIOS?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> Youre stable @ 4.4Ghz with VCORE set to 1.30 in BIOS?


CPU VTT and CPU Vcore are two completely different things according to the terminology used by my motherboard maker.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> CPU VTT and CPU Vcore are two completely different things according to the terminology used by my motherboard maker.


I see, what was Vcore at?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rylen*
> 
> I see, what was Vcore at?


Well I have an i7 970, not a Xeon. 1.345v Vcore. ~ 1.345v Vcore is about what my X5660 needs for 4.3-4.4GHz in my Asrock board


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well I have an i7 970, not a Xeon. 1.345v Vcore. ~ 1.345v Vcore is about what my X5660 needs for 4.3-4.4GHz in my Asrock board


Yeah thats about the normalish high average my 2 xeons need as well at 4.6 ghz







good voltage there


----------



## Razroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'll address the basics that have been covered here starting with the Xeon chips Vcore/Vcc/Core-voltage ceiling stated by Intel is 1.350v
> 
> With my motherboard the Vtt is referred to as CPU VTT and this you keep *within* .50v of the DRAM voltages. e.g. 1.65v Dram / 1.20v CPU VTT. The ceiling limit for the CPU VTT is 1.35v. My board's bios defaults the CPU VTT to 1.20v A good time to raise the CPU VTT is when you are in the early 4GHz range. As an example my CPU VTT is set at 1.30v for 4.4GHz usage
> 
> Your other concerns about the bclk effecting the PCI-E I'm not too familiar with. I've read and heard things about their interaction but I've never seen it as an issue on my machine. I've heard if you have your PCI-E clocked that it can mess with the hard drives including SSD drives. I'm not sure of the parameter boundaries that this starts to take in effect. Some people have problems at 101MHz PCI-E while others don't see problems till 115MHz
> 
> There are guides out there to follow so take mine like a grain of salt. I've found a great guide for my board, and honestly I think the voltage info could cross over onto other boards. You can poke around this article and get some general descriptions of things like CPU PLL, QPI PLL, etc etc. if you are interested in that type of stuff and how it works.
> 
> Good Luck and let us know how it goes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Oh, simply raise your BLCK for overclocking


Thank's for the great guide :3

I'm currently on 4.2GHz (190x22) at 1.3v stable(mostly)(I hope)(haven't bsod'd yet







)

QPI Link?
Do I need to tweak other things like UCLK?
What about ram speed? I have 1866MHz ram and the intel ark site says the chip only supports up to 1333MHz?
Tweaking on other motherboard components? (IOH?)


----------



## marcchep

Have you gotten a X5650, X5660 or X5670?








Btw, my P6T6 WS Revolution arrived today, have to wait for the Cpu to arrive though.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Razroid*
> 
> Thank's for the great guide :3
> 
> I'm currently on 4.2GHz (190x22) at 1.3v stable(mostly)(I hope)(haven't bsod'd yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> QPI Link?
> Do I need to tweak other things like UCLK?
> What about ram speed? I have 1866MHz ram and the intel ark site says the chip only supports up to 1333MHz?
> Tweaking on other motherboard components? (IOH?)


How you are testing stability? For me IBT and prime95 didn't work. On evga forum guy said that the best option is to stress CPU with CPU:OCCT (small data set)

i had 1.29 V which was stable in prime(24h!!) and IBT(30 passes of maximum stress lvl) but OCCT crashed. Had to increase vcore to 1.305 and Vtt to 1.3V with (4.2Ghz with Turbo x24 and 4,38Ghz with Turbo x25 (one core)


----------



## Razroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Have you gotten a X5650, X5660 or X5670?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, my P6T6 WS Revolution arrived today, have to wait for the Cpu to arrive though.


X5650!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> How you are testing stability? For me IBT and prime95 didn't work. On evga forum guy said that the best option is to stress CPU with CPU:OCCT (small data set)
> 
> i had 1.29 V which was stable in prime(24h!!) and IBT(30 passes of maximum stress lvl) but OCCT crashed. Had to increase vcore to 1.305 and Vtt to 1.3V with (4.2Ghz with Turbo x24 and 4,38Ghz with Turbo x25 (one core)


I stress test with some GTA IV









(nah, I use furmark's cpu burn)


----------



## intelchief

Nice method

try OCCT, better way
Wondering, we both have 4.2Ghz but i have that speed with Turbo multiplier and u with BCLK. Can u make Cinebench r15 test?

What is your memory timings and frequency?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Maybe if you have very small Vcc divisions in the BIOS (I think I have 0.0065) then it would be prudent to select the voltages one notch about the lowest that passes a stability test?

I do.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Also, yes cinebench please.

Maybe someone should make a spreadsheet?


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Maybe if you have very small Vcc divisions in the BIOS (I think I have 0.0065) then it would be prudent to select the voltages one notch about the lowest that passes a stability test?
> 
> I do.


i did that. But real voltage bumped from 1.294 to 1.305(on both processors)


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Razroid*
> 
> Thank's for the great guide :3
> 
> I'm currently on 4.2GHz (190x22) at 1.3v stable(mostly)(I hope)(haven't bsod'd yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> QPI Link?
> Do I need to tweak other things like UCLK?
> What about ram speed? I have 1866MHz ram and the intel ark site says the chip only supports up to 1333MHz?
> Tweaking on other motherboard components? (IOH?)


I'm not 100% sure about QPI Link speed only because with my board I really can't adjust much with those settings:

Options for QPI



The first two settings offer 'Enabled' or 'Disabled'

The last setting offers this:



I've just left it on Auto

Now that we are through what my board says about QPI Link speed, what does your board say? I'm curious because motherboard terminology is not universal with all motherboard makers.

I'm not sure what UCLK is. Do you mean Uncore?

The ram is fine, no need to worry about the speed just as long as it's stable and doesn't effect your overclock then you are fine.

My board defaults the IOH to 1.100v, I've set it to 1.200v based on the info from the Anandtech article I linked here it is again.

A briefing over IOH from the article based on the EVGA Classified:

_IOH VCore: Input/Output Hub voltage uses a 1.10V base. Stock values usually suffice for 24/7 overclocking even when using multiple graphics cards; we had no problems in reaching a stable 200 BCLK X20 for 4GHz CPU speed. For more extreme QPI frequencies this voltage will need to be increased. For 3D benchmarking past 220 BCLK we used 1.45V. We needed 1.50V to reach 239 BCLK. Values over 1.50V failed to POST or locked up in the OS; use only as much voltage as you need_


----------



## Razroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Nice method
> 
> try OCCT, better way
> Wondering, we both have 4.2Ghz but i have that speed with Turbo multiplier and u with BCLK. Can u make Cinebench r15 test?
> 
> What is your memory timings and frequency?


I'll get to then when I get home later in the day








Uhh timing?
The stock frequency would be 1866Mhz, not sure what it is running right now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'm not 100% sure about QPI Link speed only because with my board I really can't adjust much with those settings:
> 
> Options for QPI
> 
> 
> 
> The first two settings offer 'Enabled' or 'Disabled'
> 
> The last setting offers this:
> 
> 
> 
> I've just left it on Auto
> 
> Now that we are through what my board says about QPI Link speed, what does your board say? I'm curious because motherboard terminology is not universal with all motherboard makers.
> 
> I'm not sure what UCLK is. Do you mean Uncore?
> 
> The ram is fine, no need to worry about the speed just as long as it's stable and doesn't effect your overclock then you are fine.
> 
> My board defaults the IOH to 1.100v, I've set it to 1.200v based on the info from the Anandtech article I linked here it is again.
> 
> A briefing over IOH from the article based on the EVGA Classified:
> 
> _IOH VCore: Input/Output Hub voltage uses a 1.10V base. Stock values usually suffice for 24/7 overclocking even when using multiple graphics cards; we had no problems in reaching a stable 200 BCLK X20 for 4GHz CPU speed. For more extreme QPI frequencies this voltage will need to be increased. For 3D benchmarking past 220 BCLK we used 1.45V. We needed 1.50V to reach 239 BCLK. Values over 1.50V failed to POST or locked up in the OS; use only as much voltage as you need_


It says roughly the same thing (auto, "slow mode", some speeds for you to choose)

UCLK would mean uncore clock, yes, what do I set this to?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Razroid*
> 
> UCLK would mean uncore clock, yes, what do I set this to?


There is a limit on the lowest you can set it. I've read that with the Xeons the lowest you can go is 1.5x the memory speed. e.g. if you have your DRAM at 1000MHz then the lowest it can be set to is 1500MHz. My DRAM is at 1100MHz but I run my Uncore at 3300MHz. You will run into stability issues before your Uncore reaches 4000MHz most likely.


----------



## OCmember

Well I broke down and bought the Xeon X5690


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well I broke down and bought the Xeon X5690


----------



## OCmember

Instead of Faces of Meth, they should have Faces of Xeons, lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

As an experiment !!

LLC level 2, 1.26IOH 1.5CPUPLL // 23* to 22* [all threads]



Will pass cinebench, but not IBT.

This is why I was asking after Vcc points. I have the impression I can go pretty high on Vcc without buggering anything up.....but I could be wrong









Also - and this is a funny one:

Every time I start RealTempGT, it disables the CPU turbo! [ie for the above overclock I'll fall back to 4.0, not 4.4.
There is a "disable turbo" button, but when I toggle that - the machine instantly crashes. Wut?
I think it started happening after I tried the Disable Turbo button the first time, but I can't get it to stop happening. Turbo works again after I quit the App.

Any ideas as to how to fix it?


----------



## intelchief

175 x 24 (175 x 25 for one core) 4,2(all cores)/4,36(one core on each cpu), Vcore 1.305, CPU VTT 1.3

1750mhz memory (still working on timings) and 3500 uncore



Still working on some voltages but CPU's are FULLY stable. Prime 95 large data set 24 hours stable, IBT 20 passes of maximum stress level(on all threads) and what is the most important OCCT CPU small data set fully stable for 6hours

@gofasterstripes about the Turbo - check windows power settings


----------



## gofasterstripes

Wow! That's a hell of a score...

Enjoy!


----------



## gofasterstripes

@intelchief
What should I be looking for? Max CPU state is 100% with CoreTemp running. I was hoping opening it set it to 90 or something, but no.

Am I mssing* something?

*


----------



## intelchief

yeah, it should be 100% so it is working good. Did u try to reinstall realtemp?

maybe its your CPU not stable and thats the reason of crash of app


----------



## DR4G00N

Just got a irql_not_less_or_equal BSOD @ 4.3GHz 1.35v









I guess it's time to start tweaking the CPU & QPI PLL voltages and various other settings to see if I can get it fully stable.

Edit: Unable to get 4.3GHz stable with 1.35v so I guess i'll stick with 4.19GHz. I did bump the ram freq up some to 1910MHz 2:10, going to try dropping the multi and increasing the bclk to obtain the max freq for the ram. I was able to get this kit to 2330MHz 9-13-13-34 1.65v on my old amd build so I still have a lot of headroom before the ram becomes the limitation.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> maybe its your ... not stable and thats the reason of crash of app


yup, if any of those little sensor apps crash or boot up obnoxiously fast it's usually a sign of an instability somewhere. apps like CPUz, HWinfo64, HWmonitor, RealTempGT, etc.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmmm. System is otherwise stable! Ticking the box marked "disable turbo" when the turbo was already disabled shouldn't crash it should it?


----------



## intelchief

Did u test your CPU with OCCT(CPU:OCCT and small data set). I mean try for at least 4-5 hours


----------



## Myski

I had some weird stutter with cpu-z window when stress-testing. All other windows moved normally but that window was laggy to drag around. Didn't crash though, and haven't checked if it does that on stock clocks when at 100% load. Those settings were prime stable for 16+ hours and linx for all the few hours I bothered to run + about a week of normal usage now without crashes.

Things got suddenly very boring when I can't test the bios crossflash before the replacement chip arrives (any day now, I hope).

I also found a confirmation that the stock bios in P6T dlx won't let the uncore drop under 2x not even on Xeons, someone at hardforum was having the same issue and they said it is because of some missing microcode for the 32nm cpus in these mobos, so maybe that does count as incompatibility, albeit a minor one. And maybe it, too, could be fixed with the crossflash.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@intelchief

It's passed 8 hours of small FFTs in Prime and IBT Max 10 loops.

Oh, and several days of BOINC 100%

I've never tried OCCT, I thought it was Linpack, like IBT?

@Myski
That lag is probably because it is polling the hardware busses. Try it on stock.


----------



## Tritonk7

uncore 4000 Mhz


----------



## intelchief

I also never tried but one guy form egva forum said that for the newer CPUs OCCT is much better in detecticng errors.

OCCT have two options for stressing CPU, one is CPU:OCCT(try with this one) and other CPU:Linpack


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> uncore 4000 Mhz


Nice! I stand corrected!









What type of voltages are you using for 4GHz Uncore/"North Bridge"


----------



## Rylen

4.3Ghz @ 1.3 Vcore in BIOS. Passed ITB on Very High, temps do get kinda high, it's 75F in my house right now. ITB failed @ 1.29375 Vcore. Should i bump up the Vcore one more setting to be extra safe, next setting is probably 1.30625 or something around there.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> I also found a confirmation that the stock bios in P6T dlx won't let the uncore drop under 2x not even on Xeons, someone at hardforum was having the same issue and they said it is because of some missing microcode for the 32nm cpus in these mobos, so maybe that does count as incompatibility, albeit a minor one. And maybe it, too, could be fixed with the crossflash.


Im using a P6T vanilla with 2000 ram and 3000 uncore, 1.5x uncore multi, totally stable, last bios, so whoever said it was totally wrong, if he was refering to the entire P6T series.
And there isnt any other incompatibility either, with the vanilla version.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Rylen

If you want to be "safe" I'd step back a notch. Maybe 4100? Those temps are the among highest I've seen people post, so you're on your own a bit in terms of user reports.

I'd guess you can go down to 1.27 - 1.275v at 4.1, an probably pass IBT Max at 82C or so. Which is still hot









IRL You're not going to notice the difference. <10% synthetic, <5% in gaming.


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Im using a P6T vanilla with 2000 ram and 3000 uncore, 1.5x uncore multi, totally stable, last bios, so whoever said it was totally wrong, if he was refering to the entire P6T series.
> And there isnt any other incompatibility either, with the vanilla version.


Then I may have to try P6T vanilla bios if WS Pro doesn't cut it









Don't know why it is missing from dlx v2 stock bios then, or I have simply missed it.


----------



## Space Marine

do u mind to post a photo of the settings u are using in the bios? it sounds like a strange bug, maybe it's just some setting messed up


----------



## Myski

Can do, I'll take a picture next time I boot.

Edit: Ok, now I feel genuinely stupid. The uncore multi was not locked at 2x memory speed, it was only that my memory speed was so low (1200MHz, left there when doing core speed testing and putting the memory out of the way) the uncore could not go lower than 2x that (2400Mhz). Same 2400MHz could be held when rising the mem clocks to 1600MHz so 1,5x multi applies.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Nice! I stand corrected!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What type of voltages are you using for 4GHz Uncore/"North Bridge"


for 4000 MHz have to 1.35 and above, for 3800 MHz - 1.3 -1.325, for 3600 is already necessary to 1.25 -1.275, these Range, with no significant difference, that of 3600, that 4000 MHz, but the CPU miserably







4000 MHz tried an experiment


----------



## Space Marine

U are lucky, mine needs 1.325 for just 3400


----------



## Tritonk7

On 24/7 i have 3600 mhz uncore , because lower voltage uncore


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> U are lucky, mine needs 1.325 for just 3400


What MB u are have?May be the case in the motherboard.


----------



## intelchief

Guys, about the Uncore remember that:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yes I realize that. But uncore is not locked on these Westmere Xeon's. Gulftown is based on Westmere-EP *but not the same as*. Gulftown's are the Enthusiast equivalent chips such as i7-970-990x and come with a different IMC and completely unlocked. They work slightly different then these Xeon's quite simply because the IMC is built differently in order to support ECC and two physical chips (Its not a identical chip thus does not over clock the same way). Slight differences means everything seemingly changes, haha. You can't use what you learned with your old Gulftown (not entirely anyway) because your not trying to overclock a Gulftown. On my board uncore is called UCLK and it is NOT locked on Westmere based Xeons (maybe on your board). I do not show multipliers such as 20x, or 6x or even 2x, etc in the UCLK section. In my Uncore settings (a.k.a UCLK), only frequencies such as 3047 Mhz is shown, which is exactly 2x of memory speed (which RAM is set to 1523 mhz). On these Westmere Xeon's it is OK to run up to and beyond 2x Uncore *so long as you don't go above the 1.35v* limit (PER INTEL ENGINEERS, the voltage is what matters not the uncore, which is why there is a million different Uncore freq settings to chose from, lol). The chips default uncore is 1.5x for safety concerns related to Intel's goal of protecting the IMC and simply carried over from Gulftown-Westmere and vice versa. However, as you raise the Xeon's uncore it appears to become more energy efficient and thus uses less voltage (ONLY on Westmere Xeon's, NOT I7's). If you think these chips are identical and thus have identical over clocking characteristics you would be wrong. On these chips you are supposed to use the 1.5x uncore ratio to start out with according to Intel.
> 
> You are correct in trying to find a fix for your seemingly locked uncore but there is no reason to get rude with someone only trying to help you. *The only reason I stated what I stated is because it appears your trying to use what you learned with a Gulftown chip and that "might" (I'm not saying it will) get you in trouble with your new Xeon chip.* Xeon's are locked CPU multi chips but have a more energy efficient IMC thanks to different architecture, thus things have slightly changed. Gulftown i7's are unlocked all the way around and has an IMC built specifically for Desktop memory and the Enthusiast crowd... One can run up to 298 GB of RAM (Westmere-EP Xeon's) and the other (Gulftown i7's) is limited to something like 24 GB.
> 
> Now back to your Uncore problem. I have no clue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: it appears I said it is not dangerous to run the Xeon over 2x. This is NOT true, it is VERY dangerous to run it over 2x (even over 1.5x) *IF AND ONLY IF the voltage HAS surpassed 1.35v.* Example: You can run the Westmere's at 8000 mhz Uncore if you want to, so long 1.35v has not be broken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet you wont make it there though, haha. This explains why we have such a very long list of frequencies in the Uncore drop down (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense at all). I retain the right to be wrong though, but this is what I gathered from thousands of hours of reading tech material on this subject.


----------



## JonMS

Sabertooth X58
Xeon X5660
Have it at 4.5GHz @ 1.34v

Have a separate machine with:
2x Xeon X5680 (no OC







HP board)
Benchmark on the HP http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4188721


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Guys, about the Uncore remember that:


I've heard mixed opinions on this but everyone agrees on one thing and that's not to go over 1.35v for the Uncore/ULCK

EDIT: plus I think there is a point that raising your uncore/ulck past a certain speed the returns start to diminish. In my experience this was around 36-3700MHz and then scores from Cinebench started to hit a plateau. It may be related to how fast your Core speed is but i'm not sure though but it seems the Uncore/ULCK/Northbridge can be a choke point along the data communication pathway


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> What MB u are have?May be the case in the motherboard.


P6T vanilla, 8+2 VRM, yeah might be.


----------



## Myski

I have uncore at 3200MHz now (vtt 1.28v, P6T dlx v2) with all memory slots loaded and I am happy with that since I don't plan going over 200bclk anyway. There was a steep demand for more vtt voltage when going over 200 bclk.

It may need a few notches more voltage when tightening the memory settings, but should still stay safely under 1,35v.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> I have uncore at 3200MHz now (vtt 1.28v, P6T dlx v2) with all memory slots loaded and I am happy with that since I don't plan going over 200bclk anyway. There was a steep demand for more vtt voltage when going over 200 bclk.
> 
> It may need a few notches more voltage when tightening the memory settings, but should still stay safely under 1,35v.


That is what my board eventually settled on. Currently 1.31v at 20x200 and 3200 UCLK (2x). For the longest I ran one notch below 2x uncore, but then decided to just round everything off, lol. Its been solid for me.


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Rylen
> 
> If you want to be "safe" I'd step back a notch. Maybe 4100? Those temps are the among highest I've seen people post, so you're on your own a bit in terms of user reports.
> 
> I'd guess you can go down to 1.27 - 1.275v at 4.1, an probably pass IBT Max at 82C or so. Which is still hot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IRL You're not going to notice the difference. <10% synthetic, <5% in gaming.


Im not too worried about the temps really, in 3dmark it only reaches about 55.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Fair enough









Does your graphics hardware exhaust out of the case then?


----------



## Razroid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Also, yes cinebench please.
> 
> Maybe someone should make a spreadsheet?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Nice method
> 
> try OCCT, better way
> Wondering, we both have 4.2Ghz but i have that speed with Turbo multiplier and u with BCLK. Can u make Cinebench r15 test?
> 
> What is your memory timings and frequency?


Here you go, sorry for the absence, I was really busy











And here are my settings



Should I increase my uncore voltage and uncore clock? One step above for memory clock would be in the 2000MHz range, my memory is rated at 1866MHz, 1.5v. What about memory timing?


----------



## Rylen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Fair enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does your graphics hardware exhaust out of the case then?


It's the pic in my avatar. No it doesn't. All together the case has two 140mm intake fans, one 120mm and two 80mm exhaust fans.

Btw the CPU did get warmer with that Monster Hunter Demo just now, it reached 65c.


----------



## NguyenAdam

What is the ideal price for a X5660 that clocks to 4.67? Got an offer pending atm, but I don't know how much to ask for.


----------



## Space Marine

It all depends from the voltage used for 4.6 i'd say, and also from the uncore max freq and qpi vtt.

On a side note, anyone here is using 6 ram modules in trichannel at 1T command rate?
Is it even possible?

Got a good deal on 4 sammy wonder ram modules to add to my current 2, and couldnt resist.


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> It all depends from the voltage used for 4.6 i'd say, and also from the uncore max freq and qpi vtt.
> 
> On a side note, anyone here is using 6 ram modules in trichannel at 1T command rate?
> Is it even possible?
> 
> Got a good deal on 4 sammy wonder ram modules to add to my current 2, and couldnt resist.


I'm using 6 modules.of Kingston Hyper X 1600mhz (1.65v) in Triple channel (three per one CPU)

Whats more i'm using them with divider 2:10 (bclk 175), so i have 6 modules, 1750mhz, 9-9-9-28 1T with 1.61V


----------



## Myski

Well, got my new pre-flashed bios chip today, tried booting, nothing but classic symptoms of bad bios flash, no post, black screen.

Since I dont have hw programmer, I tried flashing the new chip to stock p6t dlx v2 bios via asus crashfree bios system that is supposed to repair bad, bricked bios flashes by scanning all drives for correct .rom and flash it to chip. Did not work, tried the original mobo driver disc that contains the .rom, nothing, thought it would be too old version to identify xeons anyway, so tried the same with newest stock bios (1202) written to both usb stick and cd rom, even renamed the .rom to same as it was on the original driver disc to help identifying it, nothing just black screen.

Did a quick search, found a lot of ppl having the same issue with this "crashfree bios 3" utility and started to wonder if anyone has ever used the tool succesfully, is it even supposed to work like that, because it sounds a bit strange, how could it reflash a bad flash if there is only one physical bios present (and it is bad for some reason). The dual-bios system gigabyte et al uses sounds reliable but this not so much.

Yes, I can exchange the chip for one pre-flashed to stock bios for this board, wait a few more days and then try reflashing it myself like I should have done in the first place, but all in all this is not promising at all. Since there should be no reason why the pre-programmed crossflash should not work (?), if the crossflash itself is proven to work, it makes me worry my mobo is simply going bad and it is not related to bios chip itself.

E: Since I don't have a hw programmer but have two chips, one that boots but would not erase (see previous posts) and one that is supposed to be ok but won't boot (the new chip) I tried the hotflashing method aka. booting to afudos flasher with my old bios chip, and swapping the bios chip to new one without powering down the computer and tried to force-flash the new "bricked" chip in afudos.

That went fine all the way to erasing the new chip (unlike the old chip which refused to erase), but this time the afudos refused to WRITE sector 0x00010000, hanging at the very same 3% point the old chip was stuck at erasing (the same sector).

Yes, I could be unlucky enough to have 2 defective bios chips that hang at the same sector, other erasing it and the other writing it, but what are the odds for that, really?

The weirdest part being it actually works just fine, apart from this bios-related issue.

E2: Just noticed the guy having the same issue also had a failure to boot at all with a new bios chip.

http://www.overclock.net/t/662236/official-the-asus-p6x58d-premium-e-thread/5460#post_22483336

Would have been nice to hear if he did find out the cause, since that was clearly the same problem I am having, but he seems to have left the forum.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> I'm using 6 modules.of Kingston Hyper X 1600mhz (1.65v) in Triple channel (three per one CPU)
> 
> Whats more i'm using them with divider 2:10 (bclk 175), so i have 6 modules, 1750mhz, 9-9-9-28 1T with 1.61V


Thanks for the info, even if i dunno if it gives any indication since u have 2 CPUs


----------



## tbob22

I'm having a strange issue with my x5670 and memory.

220mhz BCLK is required for 2200mhz ram. No post at anything lower.. At 2000mhz ram, 200mhz BCLK is required.
As a test I set the BCLK to 103mhz, 133mhz, 155mhz, etc and set the ram to 1866mhz (or as close as I could get), no post at the same voltages as 220/2200mhz.

1333mhz works at 133mhz
1600mhz works at 160mhz
1866mhz works at 186mhz
2000mhz works at 200mhz
2200mhz works at 220mhz
and so on..

So to get my ram up to the rated 2400mhz I'd need a 240mhz BCLK, I haven't been able to get the board past 220mhz so far.
I also reset the bios and just set the ram to 1600mhz and no post.

I have tried two x5670's and they both act exactly the same.. I've never seen anything quite like this, both my 920 and w3520 will run the ram at 1600mhz at 133mhz BCLK no problem.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'm having a strange issue with my x5670 and memory.
> 
> 220mhz BCLK is required for 2200mhz ram. No post at anything lower.. At 2000mhz ram, 200mhz BCLK is required.
> As a test I set the BCLK to 103mhz, 133mhz, 155mhz, etc and set the ram to 1866mhz (or as close as I could get), no post at the same voltages as 220/2200mhz.
> 
> 1333mhz works at 133mhz
> 1600mhz works at 160mhz
> 1866mhz works at 186mhz
> 2000mhz works at 200mhz
> 2200mhz works at 220mhz
> and so on..
> 
> So to get my ram up to the rated 2400mhz I'd need a 240mhz BCLK, I haven't been able to get the board past 220mhz so far.
> I also reset the bios and just set the ram to 1600mhz and no post.
> 
> I have tried two x5670's and they both act exactly the same.. I've never seen anything quite like this, both my 920 and w3520 will run the ram at 1600mhz at 133mhz BCLK no problem.


I hope your motherboard has access to more than one memory ratio. If your goal is 2400 MHz, you can try a BCLK of 200 with a 6:1 ratio, or one higher than the one you've been trying. You will probably also have to loosen timings, possibly increase VTT or DRAM voltage. Personally, I would focus on running your memory in the 1866 MHz neighborhood with the tightest timings possible.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I hope your motherboard has access to more than one memory ratio. If your goal is 2400 MHz, you can try a BCLK of 200 with a 6:1 ratio, or one higher than the one you've been trying. You will probably also have to loosen timings, possibly increase VTT or DRAM voltage. Personally, I would focus on running your memory in the 1866 MHz neighborhood with the tightest timings possible.


I'm currently running it at 2000mhz 1.65v 9-10-9-24 (200x22) UCLK is at 3200mhz. All is well at this speed, but on my old i7 860 I could run 2400mhz 11-12-11-31 no problem.

This board/cpu can run 220mhz BCLK, 3800mhz UCLK, and ram at 2200mhz 10-11-10-29 with 1.35 VTT without any problem.

This is some other kind of issue. I tried many UCLK/Ram speed combinations, bringing UCLK speeds down to ~2ghz and up to 3.8ghz and the ram down to 1000mhz and up to 2400mhz. If the ram is more than 10x the speed of the BCLK it just won't post with these x5670's.

With the ram at 2400mhz the minimum UCLK is 3600mhz, this shouldn't be an issue if the IMC can handle it, but I'm more focused on the the other issue right now, 1600mhz should work fine with a 133mhz BCLK.

Maybe it is just something with this board.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'm currently running it at 2000mhz 1.65v 9-10-9-24 (200x22) UCLK is at 3200mhz. All is well at this speed, but on my old i7 860 I could run 2400mhz 11-12-11-31 no problem.
> 
> This board/cpu can run 220mhz BCLK, 3800mhz UCLK, and ram at 2200mhz 10-11-10-29 with 1.35 VTT without any problem.
> 
> This is some other kind of issue. I tried many UCLK/Ram speed combinations, bringing UCLK speeds down to ~2ghz and up to 3.8ghz and the ram down to 1000mhz and up to 2400mhz. If the ram is more than 10x the speed of the BCLK it just won't post with these x5670's.
> 
> With the ram at 2400mhz the minimum UCLK is 3600mhz, this shouldn't be an issue if the IMC can handle it, but I'm more focused on the the other issue right now, 1600mhz should work fine with a 133mhz BCLK.
> 
> Maybe it is just something with this board.


I read here that if your uncore frequency is less than double your memory frequency, you need to loosen up your round trip latencies in order to find stability. I have seen that you will get the most out of your system if your uncore is double your RAM. This is one of the reasons I suggest underclocking to the 1866 MHz area and tightening timings. You'll have similar, possibly better, performance.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I read here that if your uncore frequency is less than double your memory frequency, you need to loosen up your round trip latencies in order to find stability. I have seen that you will get the most out of your system if your uncore is double your RAM. This is one of the reasons I suggest underclocking to the 1866 MHz area and tightening timings. You'll have similar, possibly better, performance.


Yeah I've tried that, 3200mhz UCLK with the ram 1600mhz.. Still no post unless the BLCK is 160mhz+.

1600mhz 7-8-7-21 at 2x (3200mhz UCLK) is significantly slower than 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 at 1.6x (3200mhz UCLK) in both aida64 and cinebench.

I'll give 1866mhz at 2x a try and see how it does in benches.

Edit: sorry miscalculated something


----------



## tbob22

Ran aida64 at a few settings (best of three tests). They are quite random, but there are a few to compare. My conclusion is that UCLK has a much bigger impact than ram speed. Ram speed seems to have a pretty big impact on the Copy test. The divider didn't seem to make any noticeable difference. Of course timings are important too, which is why 2200mhz didn't fair so well.

I ended up with 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t and the UCLK at 3600mhz as I can keep my VTT under 1.3v that way.


Spoiler: Ram Testing



RAM 1864mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4092mhz -186x22
UCLK 3728mhz

Read 27801
Write: 23640
Copy: 31440
Latency: 52.8

RAM 2045mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4080mhz 186x22
UCLK 3681mhz

Read: 28981
Write: 22960
Copy: 34026
Latency: 50.3

RAM 2200mhz 10-11-10-27 1t
CPU 3960mhz 220x18
UCLK 3728mhz

Read: 28210
Write: 23442
Copy: 33659
Latency: 51.5

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz

Read: 29210
Write: 23882
Copy: 33550
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3600mhz

Read: 28426
Write: 22520
Copy: 33357
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz

Read: 27082
Write: 20065
Copy: 32599
Latency: 53.4

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz

Read: 27047
Write: 23803
Copy: 28107
Latency: 51.5

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz

Read: 25682
Write: 20039
Copy: 27113
Latency: 52.8

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 2400mhz

Read: 22255
Write: 15330
Copy: 26401
Latency: 59.4


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Ran aida64 at a few settings (best of three tests). They are quite random, but there are a few to compare. My conclusion is that UCLK has a much bigger impact than ram speed. Ram speed seems to have a pretty big impact on the Copy test. The divider didn't seem to make any noticeable difference. Of course timings are important too, which is why 2200mhz didn't fair so well.
> 
> I ended up with 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t and the UCLK at 3600mhz as I can keep my VTT under 1.3v that way.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ram Testing
> 
> 
> 
> RAM 1864mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
> CPU 4092mhz -186x22
> UCLK 3728mhz
> 
> Read 27801
> Write: 23640
> Copy: 31440
> Latency: 52.8
> 
> RAM 2045mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
> CPU 4080mhz 186x22
> UCLK 3681mhz
> 
> Read: 28981
> Write: 22960
> Copy: 34026
> Latency: 50.3
> 
> RAM 2200mhz 10-11-10-27 1t
> CPU 3960mhz 220x18
> UCLK 3728mhz
> 
> Read: 28210
> Write: 23442
> Copy: 33659
> Latency: 51.5
> 
> RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 3800mhz
> 
> Read: 29210
> Write: 23882
> Copy: 33550
> Latency: 50.4
> 
> RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 3600mhz
> 
> Read: 28426
> Write: 22520
> Copy: 33357
> Latency: 50.4
> 
> RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 3200mhz
> 
> Read: 27082
> Write: 20065
> Copy: 32599
> Latency: 53.4
> 
> RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 3800mhz
> 
> Read: 27047
> Write: 23803
> Copy: 28107
> Latency: 51.5
> 
> RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 3200mhz
> 
> Read: 25682
> Write: 20039
> Copy: 27113
> Latency: 52.8
> 
> RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
> CPU 4000mhz 200x20
> UCLK 2400mhz
> 
> Read: 22255
> Write: 15330
> Copy: 26401
> Latency: 59.4


Its pretty impressive that u can keep 3600 uncore at less then 1.3 vtt and 2000 ram
i need 1.32 vtt for 3400 uncore and 2000 ram too
whats ur vcore? And your clock speed? On which board?
and what's ur ram voltage? with how many modules?


----------



## Space Marine

sorry double posting


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Its pretty impressive that u can keep 3600 uncore at less then 1.3 vtt and 2000 ram
> i need 1.32 vtt for 3400 uncore and 2000 ram too
> whats ur vcore? And your clock speed? On which board?
> and what's ur ram voltage? with how many modules?


It's in my sig. I'm running at 4.4ghz/1.325vcore on a P6T Deluxe V2. 1.28VTT, Uncore is at 3600mhz. Three 8gb Viper 3 modules at 2000mhz 1.64v.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I feel like I should upgrade my memory, but I'm not sure if I'll stick with triple channel. I know triple channel kits are in extremely short supply, but I know I can match a single stick with a dual channel kit for triple channel if I really want it. I currently have six 2 GB sticks capable of extremely tight timings. I've been looking for CAS 6 kits of any size and they don't seem to exist anymore. I really just want to increase my RAM capacity while occupying fewer slots and a 2 x 8 GB kit would be perfect for that. It's just a matter of waiting for the right deal to come along. I've been somewhat loyal to Mushkin considering all three kits I have purchased have been from them, but my current job doesn't pay as well as my old one and value is king of my world at the moment.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I feel like I should upgrade my memory, but I'm not sure if I'll stick with triple channel. I know triple channel kits are in extremely short supply, but I know I can match a single stick with a dual channel kit for triple channel if I really want it. I currently have six 2 GB sticks capable of extremely tight timings. I've been looking for CAS 6 kits of any size and they don't seem to exist anymore. I really just want to increase my RAM capacity while occupying fewer slots and a 2 x 8 GB kit would be perfect for that. It's just a matter of waiting for the right deal to come along. I've been somewhat loyal to Mushkin considering all three kits I have purchased have been from them, but my current job doesn't pay as well as my old one and value is king of my world at the moment.


Yeah, that's what I did. I now have an extra stick I've gotta get rid of, luckily I got a good deal on the two kits.


----------



## bill1024

I am pretty sure if you use two 8gb kits, four 4gb sticks you are still running triple channel.
It will be triple channel for the first 12gb then dual channel for the last stick.
Or something real close to that. I do believe all x58 boards are like that.
Read the manual memory section as to what slots you have to populate.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I am pretty sure if you use two 8gb kits, four 4gb sticks you are still running triple channel.
> It will be triple channel for the first 12gb then dual channel for the last stick.
> Or something real close to that. I do believe all x58 boards are like that.
> Read the manual memory section as to what slots you have to populate.


Yeah, if I run two sticks in the first slot and one in each of the other two slots it runs that way but performance takes a hit.

24gb is plenty for me. I rarely ever used all of my 16gb unless I was editing huge files in Photoshop, which I don't do too often.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I am pretty sure if you use two 8gb kits, four 4gb sticks you are still running triple channel.
> It will be triple channel for the first 12gb then dual channel for the last stick.
> Or something real close to that. I do believe all x58 boards are like that.
> Read the manual memory section as to what slots you have to populate.


I would rather fully utilize two channels rather than having three running in triple channel and one in single channel.


----------



## thomasz

*Dear friends, I have done something really *COOL* about 2P LGA1366 platform. Here is the CPU-Z validation page. Help yourselves to find out what is cool. I will explain my work some time.*


----------



## OCmember

Oh I am just fascinated


----------



## marcchep

Yeah, I said you could do that on one Supermicro board, but nobody wanted to listen


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> *Dear friends, I have done something really *COOL* about 2P LGA1366 platform. Here is the CPU-Z validation page. Help yourselves to find out what is cool. I will explain my work some time.*


That is just freaking awesome bud!!!! congrats and let us know more about that amazing build please!!!!








Whats the form factor of the X8DTT board?


----------



## cobovo

It is motherboard for server.That maybe like this *2U Intel Dual-CPU 6026TT Twin2-Server*
But any way is *COO*L news!!!
So wait on description for mod. I really need this!!!


----------



## Tritonk7

Hi.Will this motherboard ASRock X58 Deluxe LGA 1366 work with this processor x5650?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> Hi.Will this motherboard ASRock X58 Deluxe LGA 1366 work with this processor x5650?


Almost positive it will. I'm running a Xeon in my Asrock X58 Extreme board.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My GC-Extreme came in today so I took the liberty of reseating my heatsink. Unfortunately, my temperatures are about the same (80-82 on four cores, 72-73 on the other two). I'm going to try switching one of my to fans to exhaust from intake and see how that affects things. I'm beginning to think it's about time to invest in a new CPU cooler.


----------



## enios

Hi all









I have posted a thread in the Memory section but got no answer, and figured I'd have a better luck here.

so I have the EVGA FTW3 X58 motherboard and a Xeon 5675 CPU.

I am still awaiting delivery of my CPU.

do you think buying 3 or 6 of these 8GB sticks would work for me?

I'd love to have 24GB or 48GB of RAM, and it would make me keep my PC for 2 or 3 more years at least (I also got a new MX100 256GB SSD and a GTX 970 to replace my aging 6950 1GB)

I plan to overclock the CPU to 4 or 4.5GHz.

I guess a 1.5V RAM is better than my current 1.65V?


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> Hi all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have posted a thread in the Memory section but got no answer, and figured I'd have a better luck here.
> 
> so I have the EVGA FTW3 X58 motherboard and a Xeon 5675 CPU.
> 
> I am still awaiting delivery of my CPU.
> 
> do you think buying 3 or 6 of these 8GB sticks would work for me?
> 
> I'd love to have 24GB or 48GB of RAM, and it would make me keep my PC for 2 or 3 more years at least (I also got a new MX100 256GB SSD and a GTX 970 to replace my aging 6950 1GB)
> 
> I plan to overclock the CPU to 4 or 4.5GHz.
> 
> I guess a 1.5V RAM is better than my current 1.65V?


Buy a triple channel set. I had a set of those that worked for AM3+ but my x58 board hated them.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> *Dear friends, I have done something really *COOL* about 2P LGA1366 platform. Here is the CPU-Z validation page. Help yourselves to find out what is cool. I will explain my work some time.*


I can barely read it from the phone, but if it is what it seems to be its amazing!
How did u do that? Bios mod or hardware mod?

We really want here the full explanation u know


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> Buy a triple channel set. I had a set of those that worked for AM3+ but my x58 board hated them.


that's getting extremely difficult nowadays









if you think it's a lottery to buy 3 or 6 different modules, I could try to get a quad-channel kit.

My motherboard can run 4 sticks in Dual Channel, I don't care too much about Triple Channel (after finding reviews like this one)

Or buy 8 sticks and sell 2.

EDIT: would ECC RAM work better with the Xeon?


----------



## Poisoner

Newegg and eBay have plenty of triple channel kits,


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> Newegg and eBay have plenty of triple channel kits,


Newegg doesn't have very many. The selection on eBay isn't exactly that robust either.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> Newegg and eBay have plenty of triple channel kits,


I can't buy from Newegg unfortunately.
I'll check ebay


----------



## utking

Hi guys! Welcome aboard a new member of the xeon club, lol









I'm almost done reading all the pages in this thread, and wow it's a lot of good info! So thanks to all for that one!









Now here is my problem!

I have an Xeon X5660 on a P6TDeluxe motherboard, i crossflashed the bios from a p6x58d-e motherboard to get the voltage offset option. And a few other things.

Now this is working as intended, however. When i'm stresstesting with IBT, my CPU doesn't increase it's multiplier to max, it hovers areound 21-22x., this gives me a score of 69 Gflops.

But in OCCT it goes straight to 23x. Which then gives me 4,55 ghz, voltage is then around 1,35vcore, is this safe btw? and how much higher can i take this? Temps are around 69-70c on Air under full load.

My chips is stable at 4,6 ghz at 1,32 vcore fixed voltage. But to avoid BSOD on lower loads, i had to increase offset voltage, so it's higher than it's supposed to be. But i guess that's a tradeoff for lower noise and power draw









My bios settings are:

BCLK: 198
Multi: 23
Xtreme power enabled.
Speedstep On
DRAM : 1593 or something








UCLK: around 3200.
CPU PLL 1.8
QPI/VTT 1.3v
LCC: Off
CPU Differental amplitude: 800mv
CPU clock skew 100
IOH clock skew 100
spread spectrum disabled.
C states disabled.
DRAM voltage is 1.65v

Memory timings is 8,8,8,24 1T.

Hmm, i think that was about it.

Anyone have any ideas, or tips and tricks?

Thanks all, and great thread!!


----------



## intelchief

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Hi guys! Welcome aboard a new member of the xeon club, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm almost done reading all the pages in this thread, and wow it's a lot of good info! So thanks to all for that one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now here is my problem!
> 
> I have an Xeon X5660 on a P6TDeluxe motherboard, i crossflashed the bios from a p6x58d-e motherboard to get the voltage offset option. And a few other things.
> 
> Now this is working as intended, however. When i'm stresstesting with IBT, my CPU doesn't increase it's multiplier to max, it hovers areound 21-22x., this gives me a score of 69 Gflops.
> 
> But in OCCT it goes straight to 23x. Which then gives me 4,55 ghz, voltage is then around 1,35vcore, is this safe btw? and how much higher can i take this? Temps are around 69-70c on Air under full load.
> 
> My chips is stable at 4,6 ghz at 1,32 vcore fixed voltage. But to avoid BSOD on lower loads, i had to increase offset voltage, so it's higher than it's supposed to be. But i guess that's a tradeoff for lower noise and power draw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My bios settings are:
> 
> BCLK: 198
> Multi: 23
> Xtreme power enabled.
> Speedstep On
> DRAM : 1593 or something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UCLK: around 3200.
> CPU PLL 1.8
> QPI/VTT 1.3v
> LCC: Off
> CPU Differental amplitude: 800mv
> CPU clock skew 100
> IOH clock skew 100
> spread spectrum disabled.
> C states disabled.
> DRAM voltage is 1.65v
> 
> Memory timings is 8,8,8,24 1T.
> 
> Hmm, i think that was about it.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas, or tips and tricks?
> 
> Thanks all, and great thread!!


Check Windows Power settings. Try to change to Maximum performance


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Hi guys! Welcome aboard a new member of the xeon club, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm almost done reading all the pages in this thread, and wow it's a lot of good info! So thanks to all for that one!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now here is my problem!
> 
> I have an Xeon X5660 on a P6TDeluxe motherboard, i crossflashed the bios from a p6x58d-e motherboard to get the voltage offset option. And a few other things.
> 
> Now this is working as intended, however. When i'm stresstesting with IBT, my CPU doesn't increase it's multiplier to max, it hovers areound 21-22x., this gives me a score of 69 Gflops.
> 
> But in OCCT it goes straight to 23x. Which then gives me 4,55 ghz, voltage is then around 1,35vcore, is this safe btw? and how much higher can i take this? Temps are around 69-70c on Air under full load.
> 
> My chips is stable at 4,6 ghz at 1,32 vcore fixed voltage. But to avoid BSOD on lower loads, i had to increase offset voltage, so it's higher than it's supposed to be. But i guess that's a tradeoff for lower noise and power draw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My bios settings are:
> 
> BCLK: 198
> Multi: 23
> Xtreme power enabled.
> Speedstep On
> DRAM : 1593 or something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UCLK: around 3200.
> CPU PLL 1.8
> QPI/VTT 1.3v
> LCC: Off
> CPU Differental amplitude: 800mv
> CPU clock skew 100
> IOH clock skew 100
> spread spectrum disabled.
> C states disabled.
> DRAM voltage is 1.65v
> 
> Memory timings is 8,8,8,24 1T.
> 
> Hmm, i think that was about it.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas, or tips and tricks?
> 
> Thanks all, and great thread!!


what about clock skew and differential amplitude? What brought you to set them up this way?


----------



## kckyle

nvm


----------



## gradis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I would rather fully utilize two channels rather than having three running in triple channel and one in single channel.


Look up the manual of x58 boards because I think you are confused how the triple channel mode works

a1 [
a0 [
b1 [
b0 [
c1 [
c0 [

single channel is 1 memory in slot a0

duel channel is 2 memory's in slot a0 and b0

triple channel mode in 'these configurations'

a0, b0, c0
a0, a1, b0, c0
a0, a1, b0, b1, c0
a0, a1, b0, b1, c0, c1

so as long as you got all the 0's filled it will run in triple channel memory.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gradis*
> 
> Look up the manual of x58 boards because I think you are confused how the triple channel mode works
> 
> a1 [
> a0 [
> b1 [
> b0 [
> c1 [
> c0 [
> 
> single channel is 1 memory in slot a0
> 
> duel channel is 2 memory's in slot a0 and b0
> 
> triple channel mode in 'these configurations'
> 
> a0, b0, c0
> a0, a1, b0, c0
> a0, a1, b0, b1, c0
> a0, a1, b0, b1, c0, c1
> 
> so as long as you got all the 0's filled it will run in triple channel memory.


I bought my motherboard secondhand. It didn't come with a manual. I would assume the three in x0 slots would run in triple channel and whatever is leftover would not. At least it makes sense in my mind. Regardless, the performance difference between double and triple channel is not very much. I wonder having A0, A1, B0 and C0 populated would compare to having A0, A1, B0 and B1 populated.


----------



## thomasz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> *Dear friends, I have done something really *COOL* about 2P LGA1366 platform. Here is the CPU-Z validation page. Help yourselves to find out what is cool. I will explain my work some time.*


Dear friends, thanks for your interest in my rig. As you can imagine, I did some hardware modding on the server board to unleash its overclocking potential.



The secret of overclocking on *ANY* 2P LGA1366 server board has been discovered by a few Chinese enthusiasts for quite a while. Surprisingly, this has not been broadcasted much in the English-speaking world. I simply followed their tutorial and verified it on my server board.

Here I would like you OCNers' advice: is it ethically / legally proper to tell you this secret or guide you to the original tutorial on OCN?

Your opinion will be appreciated.


----------



## Poisoner

Why would it be illegal or unethical?


----------



## Firehawk

I don't see that there would be any problem with it, people mod products on here all the time. PM a Mod to be sure, but as long as its not something illegal it should be fine.

I would suggest you make a thread by itself, though, and link it here instead of just putting the info here.


----------



## kckyle

go right ahead i see no reasons why not


----------



## gradis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I bought my motherboard secondhand. It didn't come with a manual. I would assume the three in x0 slots would run in triple channel and whatever is leftover would not. At least it makes sense in my mind. Regardless, the performance difference between double and triple channel is not very much. I wonder having A0, A1, B0 and C0 populated would compare to having A0, A1, B0 and B1 populated.


dunno but its worthy of a test. Not sure if it make much of a difference but I had to clarify. Need to clean my pc soon







so il have a look. Manual can be d/l. mine is a msi but I have to assume what is on this will be standard on x58 with regards to memory channels.

+ post the mod. Why the hell not?


----------



## bill1024

Triple channel from the Rampage manual: A1 B1 C1 and A1 B1 C1 A2 and A1 B1 C1 A2 B2 C2
Dual Channel A1 B1

The slots from the CPU close to farthest: A2 A1 B2 B1 C2 C1 That is, black red black red black red

I was wrong about the triple channel first 3 sticks with the 4th stick being single channel.
What I said about memory over being single channel was this. When you put different size memory in the same channel say 2 4 8 gb for 14gb
The board will take the smallest stick, 2gb and map 2gb from each stick, (6gb) in triple channel. The other memory (8gb) will run in single channel mode.
Who would do that? I don't know, but that is how the book says it will work.

I know it's not best practice, but I have had great luck mixing mem that is close to being the same.
I have 3 sets of Gskil 2x2gb sets 6gb. two sets are 777 xx and one is 888 xx.Blue reapers if I remember right. I manually set the timings to 787 xx and let them run.
Did the same with some hyperX blu/red series. Two sets of two and one set of two 4gb sticks. So I made two sets of three, for 12gb each. Only one was 1333mhz the others 1600mhz, 999 25
Manually set them to 1400 777 23 and they are working fine.
But I am not real fussy trying to get every last mhz. I used what I had laying around and picked up off ebay.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> what about clock skew and differential amplitude? What brought you to set them up this way?


A short read about CPU clock skew can be found here: http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?2163-Overview-of-Clock-Skew

It helps somewhat on around 200 blck for me









And Cpu differential amplitude increases the amplitude of the differential clock signals to make them less susceptible to noise. This can also help at the upper end of blck.

Next thing i will try is to increase my pcie. But i will check out the maximum performance settings too.

Also, how high can i go with the Qpi link on this cpu? is running it at 3400 too high? this will go over 2x my memory but does it damage anything?


----------



## Vipu

Got 5670 yesterday and atm have 4,2ghz @ 1,32 I think.
Not sure if this is stable enough yet.

When prime crashes what does that mean? Not enough volts?
Thats what it have been doing and I have been increasing volts.

Also is my temps too much?
I got macho cpu cooler in Define R5 case with 2 fans total, 1 front, 1 back.
Temps get to a bit over 80C max in prime/ibt.
5 cores have those temps and 1 core always have almost 10C less.

Did I put maybe too much thermal paste or something?
Or could it be very uneven cpu?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Got 5670 yesterday and atm have 4,2ghz @ 1,32 I think.
> Not sure if this is stable enough yet.
> 
> When prime crashes what does that mean? Not enough volts?
> Thats what it have been doing and I have been increasing volts.
> 
> Also is my temps too much?
> I got macho cpu cooler in Define R5 case with 2 fans total, 1 front, 1 back.
> Temps get to a bit over 80C max in prime/ibt.
> 5 cores have those temps and 1 core always have almost 10C less.
> 
> Did I put maybe too much thermal paste or something?
> Or could it be very uneven cpu?


There's two voltages you'll tweak during overclocking: core voltage and uncore voltage. I'm not sure what your BIOS will label them. Your uncore voltage will be dependent on your BCLK as it will affect uncore and RAM. Core voltage is also affected by BCLK, but is more dependent on your CPU frequency. As a general rule of thumb, you'll require less core voltage with a higher multiplier and lower BCLK.

Your temperatures sound in line with mine. If your uncore voltage is already maxed out at 1.35 V, then you'll want to incrementally increase core voltage. There's a delicate balance between performance and heat. Only you can decide what is acceptable for your system.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> A short read about CPU clock skew can be found here: http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?2163-Overview-of-Clock-Skew
> 
> It helps somewhat on around 200 blck for me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Cpu differential amplitude increases the amplitude of the differential clock signals to make them less susceptible to noise. This can also help at the upper end of blck.
> 
> Next thing i will try is to increase my pcie. But i will check out the maximum performance settings too.
> 
> Also, how high can i go with the Qpi link on this cpu? is running it at 3400 too high? this will go over 2x my memory but does it damage anything?


So it helped you only with Bclk stability? not with cpu frequency stability or lower vcore?
Was hoping for the latter, cause my board can go quite high with bclk but using lot of vcore

3400 shouldnt be too high as long as qpi vtt is 1,35v max or (possibly) lower


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Dear friends, thanks for your interest in my rig. As you can imagine, I did some hardware modding on the server board to unleash its overclocking potential.
> 
> 
> 
> The secret of overclocking on *ANY* 2P LGA1366 server board has been discovered by a few Chinese enthusiasts for quite a while. Surprisingly, this has not been broadcasted much in the English-speaking world. I simply followed their tutorial and verified it on my server board.
> 
> Here I would like you OCNers' advice: is it ethically / legally proper to tell you this secret or guide you to the original tutorial on OCN?
> 
> Your opinion will be appreciated.


Man, this forum is full of mods, that's actually the reason why im registered here, just go ahead and post it


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> So it helped you only with Bclk stability? not with cpu frequency stability or lower vcore?
> Was hoping for the latter, cause my board can go quite high with bclk but using lot of vcore
> 
> 3400 shouldnt be too high as long as qpi vtt is 1,35v max or (possibly) lower


TBH I haven't tried my bclk alone, so it might help just for the frequenzies







try it for yourself, it can't do much damage


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *intelchief*
> 
> Check Windows Power settings. Try to change to Maximum performance


Changing Power options didn't fix much, it still defaults to x21, with cpu temperature 65c. Voltage is then 1,24vcore.

However OCCT keeps it at x23, why doesn't IBT do this?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> TBH I haven't tried my bclk alone, so it might help just for the frequenzies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> try it for yourself, it can't do much damage


Unluckily i already tested the amplitude, and didnt help with frequency or vcore.
800mV for some reason where making the errors coming out later in IBT but they were still coming out. Maybe it's useful for those people who want to bench only for a short period of time

Havent made any tests on the clock skew instead


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Clock skew and differential amplitude are meant for extreme overclocks where the clock signal will get dirty. You shouldn't need to use either below 5 GHz.

Turbo mode kept getting disabled by RealTemp GT for me. I manually turned it off in the INI file so opening it wouldn't reduce my multiplier in Windows. Finding that actually took me several restarts. I would open CPU-Z and RealTemp GT instantly and my multi would always drop from 24 to 22. After much frustration, I finally opened one thing at a time: CPU-Z first to make sure my BIOS settings were sticking, then RealTemp GT several seconds later. That's when I witnessed my multiplier dropping and researched the issue. It's an option RealTemp GT enables by default.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Clock skew and differential amplitude are meant for extreme overclocks where the clock signal will get dirty. You shouldn't need to use either below 5 GHz.
> 
> Turbo mode kept getting disabled by RealTemp GT for me. I manually turned it off in the INI file so opening it wouldn't reduce my multiplier in Windows. Finding that actually took me several restarts. I would open CPU-Z and RealTemp GT instantly and my multi would always drop from 24 to 22. After much frustration, I finally opened one thing at a time: CPU-Z first to make sure my BIOS settings were sticking, then RealTemp GT several seconds later. That's when I witnessed my multiplier dropping and researched the issue. It's an option RealTemp GT enables by default.


Hmm thanks, i tried that but it keeps dropping, i guess it's throttling due to high wattage. Or heat.

At around 68c it drops down. Is there any way to disable this? everything is working perfect except for this lol.

Thanks!


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Hmm thanks, i tried that but it keeps dropping, i guess it's throttling due to high wattage. Or heat.
> 
> At around 68c it drops down. Is there any way to disable this? everything is working perfect except for this lol.
> 
> Thanks!


what's your motherboard?


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> what's your motherboard?


P6tDeluxe v1, crossflashed to p6x58d-e. This was to get offset voltage, i know i can flash to the p6 ws pro to get tdp limit off, but then i loose offset voltage, bah what to do?


----------



## marcchep

If you ask me, I would rather lose the offset voltage, to get MAX POWER


----------



## thomasz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Dear friends, thanks for your interest in my rig. As you can imagine, I did some hardware modding on the server board to unleash its overclocking potential.
> 
> 
> 
> The secret of overclocking on *ANY* 2P LGA1366 server board has been discovered by a few Chinese enthusiasts for quite a while. Surprisingly, this has not been broadcasted much in the English-speaking world. I simply followed their tutorial and verified it on my server board.
> 
> Here I would like you OCNers' advice: is it ethically / legally proper to tell you this secret or guide you to the original tutorial on OCN?
> 
> Your opinion will be appreciated.


Thanks for your suggestions. I will write a new thread showing my rig and explaining the mod. The whole rig is a big project, for it involves circuit modding, psu modding, heatsink modding, case modding, etc. And it is far from finish yet. I planned to test two Xeon X5690's to see if they can break 4.5GHz, but now I am running into bit budget shortage. Here is how the rig looks like at the moment.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> If you ask me, I would rather lose the offset voltage, to get MAX POWER


Well yeah, i tried to get the best from both world, and flashed the bios from Rampage iii extreme, and bricked my board lol


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Well yeah, i tried to get the best from both world, and flashed the bios from Rampage iii extreme, and bricked my board lol


Are the P6 boards and Rampage similar at all? If not, then it wasn't a smart idea. I remember when I had my old 775 setup, I thought my motherboard as a Rampage Formula, but it was actually a P5E. It was kind of upsetting because I thought I was getting a great deal on eBay, but instead I was getting an average deal. Looking back on my first posts, it's kind of crazy how much I've learned in the last seven years.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Thanks for your suggestions. I will write a new thread showing my rig and explaining the mod. The whole rig is a big project, for it involves circuit modding, psu modding, heatsink modding, case modding, etc. And it is far from finish yet. I planned to test two Xeon X5690's to see if they can break 4.5GHz, but now I am running into bit budget shortage. Here is how the rig looks like at the moment.


dont forget to put the link here too


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Well yeah, i tried to get the best from both world, and flashed the bios from Rampage iii extreme, and bricked my board lol


Dang, that did not work well. So you got no X58 board now?


----------



## Space Marine

I just discovered that my Asus U3S6 usb3+sata card wasnt actually working properly since when i pushed the overclock, and managed to made it work back again setting pci-ex freq at 101 and ioh voltage at 1.2 (they were both ad default)

But now i got a problem i don't know exactly how to solve: the card works fine with usb2 devices, detect usb3 devices too, but doesnt want to run them at usb3 speeds, but just at usb2 ones.

I dunno if it's still overclock related or driver/software related. Any idea?


----------



## GENXLR

You never really want to touch PCI-E speeds. ever really. Chances are you can run at 100 with 1.2v ICH and 1.4 or 1.3 IOH


----------



## Vipu

I have my 5670 stable at 4,2ghz with 22x multi, 1,33 vcore and turbo off.
Today I tried to put turbo on and it crashed almost instant I started game.
Does turbo need more vcore or how can I make it stable too?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> You never really want to touch PCI-E speeds. ever really. Chances are you can run at 100 with 1.2v ICH and 1.4 or 1.3 IOH


it's 101 instead of 100, since the athlon64 era it's often suggested for better overclocking, i dont think its gonna be a big deal, btw i had already planned to lower them too
btw my ICH is at default


----------



## Carrotsfart

Hey all,

I'm completely green when it comes to overclocking, but I've just realized I can get my hands on both the DX58SO and the DX58SO2, I was looking around for a processor and the x5660's seem to be going pretty cheap, so I'm contemplating pulling the trigger on that.

My question is, are the Intel boards good enough to warrant the investment? If so, should I hold out for the SO2 or will the SO do the job well enough? I know it's possible to OC them, but how difficult would it be for a complete newby to make a stable OC on one? Am I dreaming too big for my first attempt?

I'm asking about these boards specifically, because other than Ebay, I can't seem to find any 1366's for sale anywhere and my 'daily driver' is a Q9400, hence the desire to upgrade.

Any input would be appreciated! thanks!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't know anything about those boards, but overclocking is relatively easy. It just takes a little time and patience. You can take shortcuts and copy another person's settings, but you'll have a much better understanding of your system and its limits if you so things "correctly." There's a lot of guides available on the internet. I'd link one, but I'm on my phone right now. Memtest86+ is running because i had a memory error while i was at work. Fingers crossed I don't need new memory.


----------



## loop16

NO absolutely NO from my use of Dx58so it is the worst mobo for x58 platform, it has design faults, You have to forget o/c if you want to have a working mobo
Check this
https://communities.intel.com/message/92754
https://communities.intel.com/thread/3430?start=15&tstart=0
If you re boring to read the most common issue acording to this mobo is if you o/c r cpu, you re able to use r computer pass stress tests gaming etc, but when u power off r comkputer bios, will return in tis default values, this is hapening because an option which bios have "failsafe watchdog", BUT if you disable it and save settings you have serious possibilities to brick r mobo due to, in the restart you have black screen , like bios bad flash.
Even with the latest bios there is not any solution to this, AND intel after all these years says there are not suppoted anymore, like if you made the mistake to buy one go an f***


----------



## Carrotsfart

Thanks for the reply, I haven't bought either of the boards I mentioned, I'm able to acquire them for free, I was asking whether either were any good.

Doing a quick search, i'm finding a few people complaining about the boot issue you mentioned with the SO board, but nothing for the SO2 board, other than memory running at below it's rated speeds. Assuming neither of these boards are any good, I don't think I can find another LGA 1366 MoBo to use at a reasonable price, so it means my project is dead in the water.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Thanks for the reply, I haven't bought either of the boards I mentioned, I'm able to acquire them for free, I was asking whether either were any good.
> 
> Doing a quick search, i'm finding a few people complaining about the boot issue you mentioned with the SO board, but nothing for the SO2 board, other than memory running at below it's rated speeds. Assuming neither of these boards are any good, I don't think I can find another LGA 1366 MoBo to use at a reasonable price, so it means my project is dead in the water.


Try looking in the marketplace of forums, there you do not have those ridiculous Ebay fees and mostly people that know what they are talking about. I got a P6T6 WS Evolution for 120 bucks.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> NO absolutely NO from my use of Dx58so it is the worst mobo for x58 platform, it has design faults, You have to forget o/c if you want to have a working mobo
> Check this
> https://communities.intel.com/message/92754
> https://communities.intel.com/thread/3430?start=15&tstart=0
> If you re boring to read the most common issue acording to this mobo is if you o/c r cpu, you re able to use r computer pass stress tests gaming etc, but when u power off r comkputer bios, will return in tis default values, this is hapening because an option which bios have "failsafe watchdog", BUT if you disable it and save settings you have serious possibilities to brick r mobo due to, in the restart you have black screen , like bios bad flash.
> Even with the latest bios there is not any solution to this, AND intel after all these years says there are not suppoted anymore, like if you made the mistake to buy one go an f***


wow that sucks badly

Btw, anyone here is using a Phanteks PH-TC14PE?

What are your temps loaded and at which clock and voltage? On which board?

Might get a good deal on it, was wondering if upgrading from a zalman cnps10x performa was worth it


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Thanks for your suggestions. I will write a new thread showing my rig and explaining the mod. The whole rig is a big project, for it involves circuit modding, psu modding, heatsink modding, case modding, etc. And it is far from finish yet. I planned to test two Xeon X5690's to see if they can break 4.5GHz, but now I am running into bit budget shortage. Here is how the rig looks like at the moment.


and i just traded some stuff for an SR2, i wonder how difficult your mods would be for people to perform. I am using quad gpus so i think i have to go with an SR2 or one of the server boards that has a plethora of PCIE slots. Thank you for sharing your project and hope to see a thread soon


----------



## thomasz

No problem! SR-2 is always the king, for sure. My modding involves soldering and desoldering 0402 SMT resistors, which isn't easy, but I am sure many OCNers are proficient at it.


----------



## thomasz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Thanks for your suggestions. I will write a new thread showing my rig and explaining the mod. The whole rig is a big project, for it involves circuit modding, psu modding, heatsink modding, case modding, etc. And it is far from finish yet. I planned to test two Xeon X5690's to see if they can break 4.5GHz, but now I am running into bit budget shortage. Here is how the rig looks like at the moment.


Folks, I have been working on the rig a bit more. With decent quality server memories, the machine simply ran beyond my wildest expectation. Here is my final result: bclk = 181.7 MHz. That translates into 2.91 GHz from the original 2.13 GHz (37% up). Beyond that the number won't crank up any further. So I am pleased to finish here.


----------



## thomasz

Add a picture:


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thomasz*
> 
> Add a picture:


Do you have wattage numbers before and after by chance?


----------



## thomasz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Do you have wattage numbers before and after by chance?


The wall input idle wattage throughout 133-167MHz is around 108W. I didn't check the load wattage...


----------



## Davyboy

Hey guys, first post here, and I'm so glad that I found this forum.

I built this current rig back in 09, and I'd been running a D0 i7 920 the whole time, but my dad just built a new rig on the X99 platform with a 5820K i7 hex core, so I started hunting around online to see if there was anything I could do to extend the life of this rig a little more, and that's what brought me to this site.

I managed to snag myself a Xeon X5660 off the Bay for £62 + postage, I never ever thought to look for a possible upgrade for X58 until I saw this thread and I am so glad that I have.

Currently I've got it running at 4.3GHz with 1.283v vCore and 1.240v QPI/DRAM using a TRUE heatsink with 2 fans in push/pull, and I can now have my RAM (Corsair Dominator GT 6GB) running slightly above their rated speeds with the same tight timings as well, with my 920 I could only get the RAM to run at 1603MHz, 9, 9, 9, 24, 1N, but now they're running at 1875MHz, 7, 8, 7, 20, 1N, I've ran Intel Burn Test using Maximum RAM and it passes that with flying colours, the temps reach about 75 max on the hottest core, but when I'm gaming the chip rarely goes higher than 55c.

I had been planning on saving up money to make a switch over to the X99/5820K/DDR4 platform, but I'm just going to buy myself a 12GB set of RAM and a new graphics card (think I'm going to grab a GTX970) as I personally think that the X99 wouldn't be worth spending all that money on, not now that I have this Xeon, it's definitely given this trusty old rig a new lease of life that's for sure!!!



I'm going to get my water cooling gear looked out and see how much more speed I can squeeze out of this chip, I can get it to boot into Windows at 1.36vCore, 1.3v QPI, would tinkering with any of the other voltage settings allow me to try lower vCore and QPI voltages?

I'm using a Rampage II Extreme motherboard.

Anyway, sorry for the long winded first post here, I'm just happy to have managed to get such a decent upgrade to my system for the price I did.

:edit:

I forgot to ask, but has anyone else got an issue with not being able to select the 22nd CPU multiplier?

For some reason when I type 22 into the BIOS it just goes up to 23 instead, I have the C states, Turbo mode and all that other stuff turned off, and I have the very latest BIOS installed for my motherboard too.

Thanks


----------



## kckyle

x5660 doesn't do even number multi very well, just as x5650 doesn't do odd number, and it goes on like that

wish ur in the state. i'm selling 3x4gb dominator rams


----------



## Davyboy

Ahh, that's a bummer man, I would've snapped them up.

Thanks for the info on why I can't select the 22x, I wondered why it wouldn't let me choose it.


----------



## kckyle

no problem, u'll have no problem finding good deals on 8gb sticks for sure


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Ahh, that's a bummer man, I would've snapped them up.
> 
> Thanks for the info on why I can't select the 22x, I wondered why it wouldn't let me choose it.


22x is a turbo multiplier. 4.3ghz is nothing to be ashamed of though.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

You're all wrong. The X5660 doesn't have a 22x multiplier. Its turbo multipliers are 23 on all cores, 24 on two.


----------



## marcchep

Are the X56xx stocks running out? The X5650 on the german Ebay went from 90€ to 120€ in two weeks!


----------



## stinart

Hello guys ,

can anybody confirm if gigabyte UD5 X58a rev 1.0( with latest bios) works with xeon 5600 series? According to that list , it should not support it , but one guy there , managed to run a x5650 with his rev 1.0 UD3R which is not officially supported too and runs the same bios as mine (F8a). I mean there is no reason that it should not run on a UD5 rev 1.0 too (same bios ,same chipset ,same "official" restrictions) Any info?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Are the X56xx stocks running out? The X5650 on the german Ebay went from 90€ to 120€ in two weeks!


Dollar went up over Euro, close to 1:1 change, and probably most of those sellers are importers anyway

Didn't expect them to be so high btw! Definately now the board prices should go down, with CPUs being so expensive they are not so useful anymore


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Dollar went up over Euro, close to 1:1 change, and probably most of those sellers are importers anyway
> 
> Didn't expect them to be so high btw! Definately now the board prices should go down, with CPUs being so expensive they are not so useful anymore


Now, the X5670 is now only 10€ more expensive than the X5650


----------



## enios

I received my X5675 and it's up and running at 3.44GHz on my EVGA FTW3 (E768) motherboard









I will try to test how high I can overclock it once I find a nice guide, and the time to follow it.


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stinart*
> 
> Hello guys ,
> 
> can anybody confirm if gigabyte UD5 X58a rev 1.0( with latest bios) works with xeon 5600 series? According to that list , it should not support it , but one guy there , managed to run a x5650 with his rev 1.0 UD3R which is not officially supported too and runs the same bios as mine (F8a). I mean there is no reason that it should not run on a UD5 rev 1.0 too (same bios ,same chipset ,same "official" restrictions) Any info?


I'm no expert on this, but I'm pretty sure it'll work fine if you've got the latest BIOS.

On my Rampage II Extreme I was pushing my OC and it didn't like the settings so it switched over to the 2nd BIOS chip and it wouldn't let me boot past the POST, it came up saying to update my BIOS to get full potential out of this chip or something along those lines. (2nd BIOS chip must still have the original BIOS that the board shipped with).

@Enios, overclocking these chips is fairly simple, if you've had any experience with the i7s on X58 then it's pretty much the same process, I found it easier to clock this 5660 than I did my 920.
I think if your board is able to support the 6 core i7s it will accept these Xeons, it doesn't say anything on the Asus website about the RIIE supporting Xeons, but mine is running like a charm.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> @Enios, overclocking these chips is fairly simple, if you've had any experience with the i7s on X58 then it's pretty much the same process, I found it easier to clock this 5660 than I did my 920.


I never really overclocked my 920, my temps at stock speed were too high (40 to 50°C just in idle) and it discouraged me.

the Xeon is much cooler though, 25-30°C in idle, 45-50°C max, even after Intel Burn Test.

I am planning to follow this guide : http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/


----------



## bill1024

If you follow that guide, I recommend keeping the CPU and uncore voltage at 1.35 or below.
Also the temp I would keep below 81.3c Just to be safe and keep the processor from degrading.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20X5660%20-%20AT80614005127AA%20%28BX80614X5660%29.html


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> If you follow that guide, I recommend keeping the CPU and uncore voltage at 1.35 or below.
> Also the temp I would keep below 81.3c Just to be safe and keep the processor from degrading.
> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20X5660%20-%20AT80614005127AA%20%28BX80614X5660%29.html


thank you, I will follow your recommendations









I did not start yet, if you know of a better guide, I would be happy to look at it.


----------



## spdaimon

I'm eager to get my third X58 system up. Bought a pretty much bare-bones system from a friend. Has a i7-930 with Zalman 10X Performa on it. Not sure how it will it perform, but looks like its as good as the Hyper 212+. Going to check if the BIOS version before plopping a X5660 in it. Only thing stopping me is this fractured hip..


----------



## Davyboy

I'm in the process of testing my rig with my new 12GB set of RAM along side my 6GB set, I had to change my overclock settings though as the system would power on and off 3 times before it finally booted into Windows with the RAM running at 1874MHz, so I've got it running at 1650MHz now and I'm running Intel Burn Test using 12GB of RAM, it's taking ages though but it's done 5 runs successfully so far.

Can someone explain the Gflops thing though, as it seems when I have HT enabled I only get 60,000+ Gflops at 4.3GHz, but with HT off it hits about 93,000+. :/

Enios, what cooler are you using on your chip?


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Enios, what cooler are you using on your chip?


I use Noctua NH-D14.
I replaced the stock fans with the newer NF-A15 PWM and NF-F12 PWM, and recycled the NF-P14 in front of the cooler (to pull the hot air pushed by the other two fans outside my ACTS 840 case), and the NF-P12 in front of the HDD cage.

I am finally happy with its performance, now that I removed the (U)LNA adapters, applied a new thermal paste, and of course went from a 130W 45nm i7-920 to a 90W 32nm Xeon.


----------



## Davyboy

They are chunky coolers, your 920 idle temps were 40/50c with one of those fitted?

I went through several 920s to get a good one, and one of them had really high temps too and I was unable to clock it past 3.6GHz as the temps were way too high.

Though this Xeon I have now runs a lot cooler, idle temperatures are around 27 to 30c, and they hit the mid 70s when I'm running 100% load at 4.3GHz.

I'm definitely going to be digging out my water cooling gear and putting it onto water cooling though, as I know I'll be able to achieve higher clocks.

I've booted into Windows at 5GHz with it and validated with CPUZ.

I'm on my phone right now but that's a photo of my chip at 5GHz.

I'm stumped about the Gflops reading in IBT, why is it lower when HT is on, I've tested it on a 5820K at the same clock speeds and they get like 160,000Gflops!

I've just completed 10 passes with 18GB installed and I was only getting 53,000 Gflops with this Xeon, I'm sure my 920 got more than that.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> They are chunky coolers, your 920 idle temps were 40/50c with one of those fitted?


yes, however, it was partially my fault, I used (U)LNA adaptors and forgot I did.
they slow down the fans so the cooler is not as efficient anymore.
and perhaps I didn't apply the thermal paste properly.

it's all good with the new Xeon though, I get a minimum of 20°C or so on one core.
Idle between 25°C and 30°C on all cores.


----------



## enios

Is it correct to say that if I get my BCLK to 200, which would give me a 4.6GHz overclock on my X5675 (23x), that I can keep the RAM at 1'600MHz with a 2:8 ratio?
So even for such a high overclock, I would not need more than the 1'600 DDR3 RAM which I already have?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> Is it correct to say that if I get my BCLK to 200, which would give me a 4.6GHz overclock on my X5675 (23x), that I can keep the RAM at 1'600MHz with a 2:8 ratio?
> So even for such a high overclock, I would not need more than the 1'600 DDR3 RAM which I already have?


the math is correct, but 4600 is highly unrealistic


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> the math is correct, but 4600 is highly unrealistic


I know, I took an extreme example just to make sure that I actually don't need to buy a better RAM (I have 1'600MHz DDR3 RAM)
But I am certainly hoping for 4GHz at least.


----------



## Davyboy

I don't really overclock my RAM, though I am pretty sure that anything running faster than 1333MHz on these chips is classed as an overclock even if your modules are rated at a faster speed as 1333MHz is the rated speed of the IMC on the processor.

1600MHz is fine though, let me know how you get on with the chip at 4.6GHz, what do you plan on using for stress testing for stability?

Edit

4.6 does seem a lot especially being new to overclocking, I'd be aiming for a stable 4GHz first which I am fairly positive you can get with ease.

I like to tinker with my voltages to try and get them as low as possible without my rig becoming unstable, it is a tedious process, and I haven't really got round to doing it with this chip yet as I want to wait until I have it watercooled before I push it past 4.3GHz, it appears to be stable enough here though.


----------



## enios

don't worry, I just took an extreme example to make sure I understand how RAM frequency works with X58









I have a good cooler, Noctua NH-D14, and I would be happy to get 4GHz.
shouldn't be too difficult on a 90W 32nm Xeon.
I will follow this guide: http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> They are chunky coolers, your 920 idle temps were 40/50c with one of those fitted?
> 
> I went through several 920s to get a good one, and one of them had really high temps too and I was unable to clock it past 3.6GHz as the temps were way too high.
> 
> Though this Xeon I have now runs a lot cooler, idle temperatures are around 27 to 30c, and they hit the mid 70s when I'm running 100% load at 4.3GHz.
> 
> I'm definitely going to be digging out my water cooling gear and putting it onto water cooling though, as I know I'll be able to achieve higher clocks.
> 
> I've booted into Windows at 5GHz with it and validated with CPUZ.
> 
> I'm on my phone right now but that's a photo of my chip at 5GHz.
> 
> I'm stumped about the Gflops reading in IBT, why is it lower when HT is on, I've tested it on a 5820K at the same clock speeds and they get like 160,000Gflops!
> 
> I've just completed 10 passes with 18GB installed and I was only getting 53,000 Gflops with this Xeon, I'm sure my 920 got more than that.


18 gb on 6 modules?
at which speed and timings?
how much qpi vtt are you using?
how much dram voltage?
did u have to modify anything else for making stable the 6 modules working together?


----------



## Davyboy

Hey man, I'm running my old Corsair Dominator GT 6GB 1866MHz modules along with the 12GB GT 2000MHz modules.

When I first installed them I had my 1866MHz sticks running at 1874MHz, and I just fired the 12GB set in and fired it up but my computer went into a power on/off cycle 3 times then it would boot fine, so I altered Bclk to 205, CPU multi on 21, then the RAM to 1645MHz (My BIOS doesn't work with RAM dividers as such you just choose the speed, if you've owned an Asus X58 board you'll know what I mean).

My vCore needed to be at 1.29v and I have QPI at 1.28v, all the other voltages are on auto, I'll take some pictures of my settings tomorrow man, I got through running 12000MB with IBT with no trouble at all.

The IMC on these Xeons must be a whole load better than the i7 920 D0, as I could never get my 1866MHz modules to run any faster than 1600MHz, but I can populate every single slot with 2 completely different sets of RAM and have them running at 1645MHz (I think that's what it was) no problem.

However, I've been doing some tinkering as I wasn't happy with that low Gflops reading from IBT, so I'm just running the 12GB set of RAM at 2005MHz (dropped Bclk down to 200) and my chip is now at 4.2GHz and I'm getting around 65,000+ Gflops now, I've seen a load of people say to NEVER use two different sets of RAM as you'll run into trouble, but I've been mixing RAM for years in my systems, sometimes completely different brands of RAM, all you need to do is set the timings manually, my 1866 stuff is 7-8-7-20, and the 2000MHz is 9-10-9-27 so I just used the looser timings from the 2000MHz sticks and it runs just fine with tall 6 modules at 1645MHz and CPU @ 4.3GHz.

And I just left my DRAM voltage at 1.65v as it was before, I will pop the sticks back in tomorrow and load the BIOS profile I saved for the 6 modules then run some more tests and take screenshots to show you, and my BIOS settings too.

Edit

See how the Uncore is supposed to be set to twice that of your RAM speed, has anyone here successfully got their uncore to run at 4GHz?

My rig refuses to boot if I try set it to 4GHz


----------



## chessmyantidrug

There's nothing necessarily wrong with mixing memory, it just makes it harder to run your system optimally. I really want to swap out my six 2GB sticks for three 4GB sticks, but I can't find anything with tight enough timings to get me to pull the trigger.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> There's nothing necessarily wrong with mixing memory, it just makes it harder to run your system optimally. I really want to swap out my six 2GB sticks for three 4GB sticks, but I can't find anything with tight enough timings to get me to pull the trigger.


how tight of a timing do you need. i can run 777 18 1600mhz on my 8gb crucial lp.


----------



## Davyboy

I know, but there's so many forums online where people say to never mix and match RAM, I've yet to have any issues and I've been doing it for years, with mixed brands, speeds and latencies, normally I'd set the RAM speed to match the slowest modules and then use the timings from whichever stick has the loosest ones, and it seems to work just fine.

This time though, these sticks had to all be ran below their rated frequency, but still 1645MHz with all 6 slots populated and a 4.3GHz OC isn't a bad result at all, I did expect to have more trouble configuring my BIOS, but I didn't need to do much messing around to get it all to work.

I'm not sure what I want to do, I'll never actually use 18GB RAM, I grabbed the 12GB set as they were cheap and I couldn't turn them down, so I either run all 6 sticks @1645MHz or just the 12GB @ 2005MHz, I'll need to do some proper testing with both configs to see which will give me the best results, though to be honest I don't think I'd actually notice any real world difference, the board just looks nice with all 8 slots populated!!!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> how tight of a timing do you need. i can run 777 18 1600mhz on my 8gb crucial lp.


Is that one, two or four sticks? I can run 6-7-6-18 at 1600 MHz on my 12GB. I'm running 7-8-7-20 at 1800 MHz currently.


----------



## kckyle

two sticks at the moment, was thinking about getting a 3rd one but dont see a reason to go above 16gb since my home premium doesn't even recognize above that.

i'm doing this at 1.35v, if i push it to 1.5v i'm pretty sure your setting is achievable on mine


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Oh, 8 GB sticks. I thought you meant 8 GB total. Maybe all the lower voltages I see on RAM today is one of the reasons timings are looser.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> the math is correct, but 4600 is highly unrealistic


I wouldn't say 4600 is unrealistic if you have a decent chip. My chip is bench-able at 4.6 at 1.4v, but my cooling can't keep up. 1.35v/4.5ghz is stable and my cooling can keep it under 80c loaded.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I wouldn't say 4600 is unrealistic if you have a decent chip. My chip is bench-able at 4.6 at 1.4v, but my cooling can't keep up. 1.35v/4.5ghz is stable and my cooling can keep it under 80c loaded.


I see that you have 24GB of RAM... how many sticks are you using? 6 4GB sticks or 3 8GB sticks?


----------



## Space Marine

Ok guys, i need some ideas cause i got a problem im struggling to solve:

I had 2x4gb sticks of samsung magic ram, and bought another 4 used, to run on the board.

At first i couldnt figure out the voltage needed for running them ad default, and setting it in auto my board set them up at 1.6 for 3 sticks and 1.66 for 6 sticks.

Problem is that no matter what, when i run 6 sticks it crashes my overclock around the 10th run of IBT max (each run lasts 20 minutes at 4.2 ghz with 24gb of ram).

When i tested them in pairs, 2 couples of sticks passed 20 runs of IBT max (for a total of about 80 minutes fine at 1,5v), another couple passed it at 1,56 volts. Im not sure if i can define them 100% working with that amount of testing.

Im gonna test them reverting all the settings at default, but it's gonna take me about 20 hours to finish 20 ibt runs.

What can it be? i keep getting 0x18 Bsod when it crashes.

Also which program do you guys use for testing ram?
The memtest86+ version im using, when used in multithread mode, for some reason after a while stops the test. It doesnt lock up, neither it does hang, it just stops. In single thread mode instead is fine, but it takes so long for testing that is not so feasible with 24gbs


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> I see that you have 24GB of RAM... how many sticks are you using? 6 4GB sticks or 3 8GB sticks?


Three 8gb sticks


----------



## tbob22

Edit: sorry double post


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Three 8gb sticks


thanks for your answer, that's very encouraging, I am considering getting 3 or 6 8GB sticks myself and wasn't sure if it was compatible.
I get it should work now that I have a Xeon that officially handles a lot more than 24GB.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> thanks for your answer, that's very encouraging, I am considering getting 3 or 6 8GB sticks myself and wasn't sure if it was compatible.
> I get it should work now that I have a Xeon that officially handles a lot more than 24GB.


I'd definitely do 3 sticks if possible, 6 sticks will put more load on your IMC and could impair your OC.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Ok guys, i need some ideas cause i got a problem im struggling to solve:
> 
> I had 2x4gb sticks of samsung magic ram, and bought another 4 used, to run on the board.
> 
> At first i couldnt figure out the voltage needed for running them ad default, and setting it in auto my board set them up at 1.6 for 3 sticks and 1.66 for 6 sticks.
> 
> Problem is that no matter what, when i run 6 sticks it crashes my overclock around the 10th run of IBT max (each run lasts 20 minutes at 4.2 ghz with 24gb of ram).
> 
> When i tested them in pairs, 2 couples of sticks passed 20 runs of IBT max (for a total of about 80 minutes fine at 1,5v), another couple passed it at 1,56 volts. Im not sure if i can define them 100% working with that amount of testing.
> 
> Im gonna test them reverting all the settings at default, but it's gonna take me about 20 hours to finish 20 ibt runs.
> 
> What can it be? i keep getting 0x18 Bsod when it crashes.
> 
> Also which program do you guys use for testing ram?
> The memtest86+ version im using, when used in multithread mode, for some reason after a while stops the test. It doesnt lock up, neither it does hang, it just stops. In single thread mode instead is fine, but it takes so long for testing that is not so feasible with 24gbs


Have you tried lowering your ram speed? With 6 sticks you are probably going to need more VTT to run higher clocks. I'd stay under 1.35v VTT for 24/7.

I usually let memtest run for ~12 hours or so. 3-4 passes should be fine.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'd definitely do 3 sticks if possible, 6 sticks will put more load on your IMC and could impair your OC.


I currently have 4 4GB sticks (dual channel mode), would be nice to have 24GB, so I might get 3 8GB sticks.
I even wonder if the 16GB sticks would work (but they're not economically interesting, price per GB is way too high compared to 8GB sticks)


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> I currently have 4 4GB sticks (dual channel mode), would be nice to have 24GB, so I might get 3 8GB sticks.
> I even wonder if the 16GB sticks would work (but they're not economically interesting, price per GB is way too high compared to 8GB sticks)


Yeah who knows. I haven't seen any non-ecc 16gb sticks around anyway.


----------



## Davyboy

Enios, which board did you say you had again?

Because you can run 4 modules in tri channel on several boards, with my old Gigabyte UD5 and my RIIE you put the 3 sticks in the regular slots for tri channel, then put the 4th one in the slot nearest the cpu socket like this.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Enios, which board did you say you had again?
> 
> Because you can run 4 modules in tri channel on several boards, with my old Gigabyte UD5 and my RIIE you put the 3 sticks in the regular slots for tri channel, then put the 4th one in the slot nearest the cpu socket like this.
> http://cdn.overclock.net/e/ec/600x387px-ece8148a_DDR3TRIDUALCHANNEL.jpeg


Yeah good point, not quite full tri-channel but it is faster than dual.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Have you tried lowering your ram speed? With 6 sticks you are probably going to need more VTT to run higher clocks. I'd stay under 1.35v VTT for 24/7.
> 
> I usually let memtest run for ~12 hours or so. 3-4 passes should be fine.


Yeah, i tested them even at lower then their default speed (1200) still bsod
I tried increasing qpi vtt to a bit, but it didnt help


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Yeah, i tested them even at lower then their default speed (1200) still bsod
> I tried increasing qpi vtt to a bit, but it didnt help


Strange. Did you try all of the slots in pairs? Maybe one has a bit of dust in it.

Also, it'd be a good idea to drop down to stock speed so you can take your OC out of the equation.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Enios, which board did you say you had again?
> 
> Because you can run 4 modules in tri channel on several boards, with my old Gigabyte UD5 and my RIIE you put the 3 sticks in the regular slots for tri channel, then put the 4th one in the slot nearest the cpu socket like this.


I have the EVGA FTW3 (E768)
The manual does not seem to indicate that you would get triple channel with 4 sticks, so I simply followed the recommendation to get dual channel with 4 sticks.
https://www.evga.com/support/manuals/files/132-GT-E768.pdf
Although it could work I guess, but I'd have to test and run benchmarks and see if there is any difference, and I am frankly too lazy because my cooler is the Noctua NH-D14, and it covers some of the sticks so I have to remove it whenever I move the sticks









I also found few links comparing Dual to Triple channel, and it seems like the difference in performance is small. So using the 4th stick seems worth losing triple channel.
example: http://www.overclock.net/t/681697/the-truth-about-i7-1366-memory-both-dual-channel-vs-tri-channel


----------



## Davyboy

Yeah, I don't really think you'd notice any difference, I just wanted to let you know that it is possible to run 4 modules in tri channel.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Have you tried lowering your ram speed? With 6 sticks you are probably going to need more VTT to run higher clocks. I'd stay under 1.35v VTT for 24/7.
> 
> I usually let memtest run for ~12 hours or so. 3-4 passes should be fine.


yeah i lowered them but no luck
now im testing everything at default
12 hours or 3/4 passes? Cause if i test 1 stick at time it should be much faster then 12h


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> yeah i lowered them but no luck
> now im testing everything at default
> 12 hours or 3/4 passes? Cause if i test 1 stick at time it should be much faster then 12h


Well whatever you feel comfortable with, I'd do 2 passes minimum and try each slot separately. If that all passes then try 3 sticks and add one stick at a time until it fails.


----------



## Davyboy

Testing large amounts of RAM is a lengthy process!

Hope you can get it sorted, when I first built my x58 rig I was using an old Zalman cooler that I bought the 1366 bracket for, there was no backplate for the cooler, and I was having BSODs, and times I'd boot up and only 4GB out of 6 was being detected, I RMAd my RAM and bought a 3GB kit to test and only 2GB would show and the bluescreens kept happening, my original RAM got sent back to me with no faults found, so I returned the mobo to Gigabyte only to get it sent back as they weren't experiencing any of the issues I was.

Anyway, the problem actually turned out to be the heatsink, it must have been putting a strain on the board around the socket area causing pins in the socket to not make a proper connection, as soon as I fitted a new heatsink the problem disappeared, that had me baffled for months, pulling my hair out over that, really frustrating, I never ever thought a cooler could do something like that.

Also another thing to check for is bent pins in the cpu socket.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Strange. Did you try all of the slots in pairs? Maybe one has a bit of dust in it.
> 
> Also, it'd be a good idea to drop down to stock speed so you can take your OC out of the equation.


U know, i didnt think about dust!
as soon as ill finish the memtest il check it out


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Testing large amounts of RAM is a lengthy process!
> 
> Hope you can get it sorted, when I first built my x58 rig I was using an old Zalman cooler that I bought the 1366 bracket for, there was no backplate for the cooler, and I was having BSODs, and times I'd boot up and only 4GB out of 6 was being detected, I RMAd my RAM and bought a 3GB kit to test and only 2GB would show and the bluescreens kept happening, my original RAM got sent back to me with no faults found, so I returned the mobo to Gigabyte only to get it sent back as they weren't experiencing any of the issues I was.
> 
> Anyway, the problem actually turned out to be the heatsink, it must have been putting a strain on the board around the socket area causing pins in the socket to not make a proper connection, as soon as I fitted a new heatsink the problem disappeared, that had me baffled for months, pulling my hair out over that, really frustrating, I never ever thought a cooler could do something like that.
> 
> Also another thing to check for is bent pins in the cpu socket.


Yep, that is a pretty common issue. Mounting the cooler after the board is attached in the case would probably reduce the likelihood of the cooler bending the board.

Missing ram is usually due to incorrect ram settings, a bad connection to the cpu, bent pins, an issue with the cpu, or bad ram.

The only way to know is to try things until you (hopefully) find the problem.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yep, that is a pretty common issue. Mounting the cooler after the board is attached in the case would probably reduce the likelihood of the cooler bending the board.
> 
> Missing ram is usually due to incorrect ram settings, a bad connection to the cpu, bent pins, an issue with the cpu, or bad ram.
> 
> The only way to know is to try things until you (hopefully) find the problem.


Btw my ram is not missing, its just bsod-ing


----------



## Davyboy

That could still be down to a bad cpu connection, bent pins or anything else mentioned above.

Like I said when I built mine way back my rig would blue screen constantly, and when I could get it to boot that's when some RAM would be missing, and I was getting errors in P95 and memtest kept failing too.

I'd be checking the cpu socket for bent pins, it'd be worth checking out, at least you get to reseat the chip again at the same time.


----------



## enios

I have my older memory kit still lying around, unused.

Mushkin REDLINE 3x2GB Kit, DDR3-1600, [email protected]

back when I bought it, it was one of the best memory kits for overclocking on X58.

Is it worth anything more than the average 50$-60$ I see on ebay for 6GB kits?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

That's a really good kit. I have two myself. I currently have mine overclocked to 1800 MHz running 7-8-7-20 1T timings. I paid a small fortune for these sticks, but they're really good. Knowing what I know now, probably not worth what I paid.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> That's a really good kit. I have two myself. I currently have mine overclocked to 1800 MHz running 7-8-7-20 1T timings. I paid a small fortune for these sticks, but they're really good. Knowing what I know now, probably not worth what I paid.












they were not cheap for me neither, but I never overclocked them, and ended up replacing them with 4 4GB sticks to get more RAM.

with X58 boards being in demand right now, I think I will try my luck on ebay.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I thought about doing that myself, but I don't feel like driving to Dallas to pick up an i7-4790K bundle. Maybe in early May when I drive down there to see The Avengers 2 in IMAX.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> They are chunky coolers, your 920 idle temps were 40/50c with one of those fitted?
> 
> I went through several 920s to get a good one, and one of them had really high temps too and I was unable to clock it past 3.6GHz as the temps were way too high.
> 
> Though this Xeon I have now runs a lot cooler, idle temperatures are around 27 to 30c, and they hit the mid 70s when I'm running 100% load at 4.3GHz.
> 
> I'm definitely going to be digging out my water cooling gear and putting it onto water cooling though, as I know I'll be able to achieve higher clocks.
> 
> I've booted into Windows at 5GHz with it and validated with CPUZ.
> 
> I'm on my phone right now but that's a photo of my chip at 5GHz.
> 
> I'm stumped about the Gflops reading in IBT, why is it lower when HT is on, I've tested it on a 5820K at the same clock speeds and they get like 160,000Gflops!
> 
> I've just completed 10 passes with 18GB installed and I was only getting 53,000 Gflops with this Xeon, I'm sure my 920 got more than that.


Holly fawk....


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Holly fawk....


LoL, thanks!!!









This wasn't even really tweaking much at all, like I said once I get the chip water cooled using a custom loop I will start tinkering with things properly, I reckon I should be able to get 5GHz out of this chip at least, can't grumble for £62.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My Nepton 140XL came in the mail today. Time to go through the irritating process of removing my motherboard because the tray doesn't give me access to the backplate. Hopefully this doesn't take me too long. I will report back when I have new temperatures.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Turns out this thing doesn't quite fit in either top fan mount in my case. The motherboard is too close. I guess I'm going to have to get creative.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> LoL, thanks!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This wasn't even really tweaking much at all, like I said once I get the chip water cooled using a custom loop I will start tinkering with things properly, I reckon I should be able to get 5GHz out of this chip at least, can't grumble for £62.


Those are some nice clocks. I think I could get similar clocks out of my chip if I was brave enough to push those kind of voltages through it.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I had to route the tubes through one fan hole and mount the radiator on top of my case. I have one fan inside and one outside oriented as intake fans. Unfortunately, my temperatures didn't improve by very much. Maximum temps were 78/77/70/70/77/77. I guess between 2 C and 4 C is quite a bit, but I was hoping for a little more than that. I tried 24x185, but I had a blue screen during the third run on IBT. I dropped uncore ratio a little bit and my system froze during the fifth run. I'm beginning to think I'm limited by having all six RAM slots populated. Temperatures were just fine stress testing at 4.44 GHz, but I already had VTT at 1.35 V.

I plan on buying a Phanteks Enthoo Pro eventually, which should be able to house this radiator much better than my NZXT Tempest.


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Those are some nice clocks. I think I could get similar clocks out of my chip if I was brave enough to push those kind of voltages through it.


I'd reckon so as well, I got there with no issues, those voltages are a bit on the high side though, but like I said I never tried to tinker with anything to get that speeds.

Hey chess, when I built my dads old X58 system several years ago, he'd bought the old H50 corsair AOI watercooling solution, and I had it mounted up on the top of his case, but when I ran anything that put a strain on the processor the temps were ridiculous, so I moved it down off the top and fitted to the rear of the case and that lowered the temps by quite a bit.

I have all the bits except a top for my DDC and tubing from when I had my whole system on WC ages ago, so I'm going to order some tubing and a top then get this chip onto water, I've got the Watercool HeatKiller CPU block, a TFC 240 X-Changer rad which is really thick, and enough fans to run it in push/pull, though I'm already getting really good temps with just the air cooler installed, I just hope that I see a nice difference in temps by doing the switch, otherwise it'll just be a hassle!!


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Btw my ram is not missing, its just bsod-ing


First things first, if you're adding more ram to your already overclocked system, you should be doing it at DEFAULT CLOCKS. What is stable with one setup is not guaranteed to be stable with another. Adding ram puts more load on the IMC which in turns means you'll almost definitely need more QPI/Vtt volts, but its possible your current clocks won't ever be stable with it.

The other reason you want to install them at default speeds is to make sure they work. Install them and boot. If everything looks fine, run Memtest. If there's problems then you need to start looking into hardware issues. Either the sticks are bad, or dust, or whatever else. Once that's complete and clear then you can worry about overclocking again.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> First things first, if you're adding more ram to your already overclocked system, you should be doing it at DEFAULT CLOCKS. What is stable with one setup is not guaranteed to be stable with another. Adding ram puts more load on the IMC which in turns means you'll almost definitely need more QPI/Vtt volts, but its possible your current clocks won't ever be stable with it.
> 
> The other reason you want to install them at default speeds is to make sure they work. Install them and boot. If everything looks fine, run Memtest. If there's problems then you need to start looking into hardware issues. Either the sticks are bad, or dust, or whatever else. Once that's complete and clear then you can worry about overclocking again.


I just finished to memtest each one of the sticks (3 passes, 2 hours each) no errors, so i guess i can safely say they are working fine at default clock

I'll mount them all back again, make 3 passes with all the sticks installed. With 24gb its gonna take many many hours


----------



## loop16

Due to is very annoying to me reading different posts from users which even they ignore some parameters or even they do just for trolling, i ll put some benchmarks of the most famous of them like cinebench r11&15, super pi, and some aida 64 benches just to show an oc/ed Xeon [email protected] is able to offer the same leve of performance of i7 5820k and x99 platform AT ITS STOCK FREQUENCY AGAIN AT ITS OWN FREQUENCY for reference of i7 benches i use the rusults i found from here http://www.overclockers.com/asrock-fatal1ty-x99x-killer-review/

First cinebench r 11.5 i7 5820k scores 10.46

xeon X5650 @4.4 scores 11.27


cinebench R15 i7 5820k scores 969

xeon [email protected] scores 1015

at super pi i7 5820k CLOCKED @ 4.4 fifnishes !m @8.17sec

DUE to i havent stock super pi score for Xeon X5650, to achieve the same level of performance as i7 5820k has i clocked it @4.8Ghz not fully stable and scored 8.4 sec in 1M


Some aida 64 benches from 4.5 version which consists i7 5820k








THE ONLY PARAMETER WHICH I MENTION HERE IS RAW CPU performance PLEASE don;t start about consumption etc, AS you can see above Xeon is faster in almost aLL benchmarks from i7 5820k at its stock clocks ONLY when it is clocked @4.4 (exception only in super pi) (stock i7 5820k needs 11.2 sec for 1M), SO XEON can maximize ANY GPU IN ANY resolution, otherwise NOT EVEN i7 5820K is able to do this SO it needs to be overclocked, XEON X5650 CAN NOT keep up with i7 5820 when it is overclocked


----------



## SwatCat2112

Hi,
i'm new and thanks to this thread i just got my x5660 (thanks Kana-Maru).
i started OC it and it seems its stable at:

core speed :4416 mhz
multi: x23
bus speed: 192 mhz
qpi:3456 mhz
core voltage: 1.424V
max temp: 55c

are these numbers fine for 24/7?


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SwatCat2112*
> 
> Hi,
> i'm new and thanks to this thread i just got my x5660 (thanks Kana-Maru).
> i started OC it and it seems its stable at:
> 
> core speed :4416 mhz
> multi: x23
> bus speed: 192 mhz
> qpi:3456 mhz
> core voltage: 1.424V
> max temp: 55c
> 
> are these numbers fine for 24/7?


Turn yor voltage down asap.

It's dying! YOUR RIG IS DYING (slowly though)


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SwatCat2112*
> 
> Hi,
> i'm new and thanks to this thread i just got my x5660 (thanks Kana-Maru).
> i started OC it and it seems its stable at:
> 
> core speed :4416 mhz
> multi: x23
> bus speed: 192 mhz
> qpi:3456 mhz
> core voltage: 1.424V
> max temp: 55c
> 
> are these numbers fine for 24/7?


thats way too much voltage for 4.4ghz, you only need 1.35-1.4, 1.3 if you got a really good chip


----------



## SwatCat2112

ok, turn down the voltage and blck
now the numbers are:

core speed: 4277 mhz
multi: x23
bus speed: 185 mhz
qpi:3347 mhz
core voltage: 1.330V
max temp: 48c

feeling stable as well, are this numbers fine for 24/7?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SwatCat2112*
> 
> ok, turn down the voltage and blck
> now the numbers are:
> 
> core speed: 4277 mhz
> multi: x23
> bus speed: 185 mhz
> qpi:3347 mhz
> core voltage: 1.330V
> max temp: 48c
> 
> feeling stable as well, are this numbers fine for 24/7?


definately better! Llc off or on? Ht off or on?


----------



## SwatCat2112

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> definately better! Llc off or on? Ht off or on?


ht: on
llc: something like "intel something/intel recommendation" don't quite remember


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loop16*
> 
> 
> THE ONLY PARAMETER WHICH I MENTION HERE IS RAW CPU performance PLEASE don;t start about consumption etc, AS you can see above Xeon is faster in almost aLL benchmarks from i7 5820k at its stock clocks ONLY when it is clocked @4.4 (exception only in super pi) (stock i7 5820k needs 11.2 sec for 1M), SO XEON can maximize ANY GPU IN ANY resolution, otherwise NOT EVEN i7 5820K is able to do this SO it needs to be overclocked, XEON X5650 CAN NOT keep up with i7 5820 when it is overclocked


It's kinda obvious that this would be the case, I've played with my dads 5820K and it shreds my X5660 to pieces.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

@loop16, please stop telling us what we already know. It's a waste of your time to post it and our time to read it. Repeating yourself isn't doing anyone any favors.


----------



## loop16

Who r u that you patronizing what i ll post here, i you dont like them you can ignore them, instructions only to r friends not to me


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'm the one the posts are directed at because I keep saying to stop using gaming to compare X58 and X99. So instead, you show one-sided benchmarks (that we've already seen) and then clarify that an overclocked i7-5820K would smoke one of these Xeons, which again we already know. Why dilute the thread with pointless discussion?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I'm the one the posts are directed at because I keep saying to stop using gaming to compare X58 and X99. So instead, you show one-sided benchmarks (that we've already seen) and then clarify that an overclocked i7-5820K would smoke one of these Xeons, which again we already know. Why dilute the thread with pointless discussion?


Agreed. It's no surprise that a $350+ CPU outperforms a $70 CPU.


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> @loop16, please stop telling us what we already know. It's a waste of your time to post it and our time to read it. Repeating yourself isn't doing anyone any favors.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> They are chunky coolers, your 920 idle temps were 40/50c with one of those fitted?


That's an understatement! I bought one to see what all the fuss was about. I thought it was going to be no bigger than my beloved Hyper 212+.







Boy was I wrong. It blocks the first PCIe slot, but I have no problem fitting GSkill RipJaw X RAM under it. It keeps the 4930K around 60C even at 4.3Ghz and is fairly quiet. I can't compare the two since the 212+ doesnt fit the 2011 socket (although I believe there is a kit from CM to do that), I am pretty sure just from the NH-D14's mass that it will beat the 212+ by a fair margin.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

When I first saw my 212+ I was thinking I will have to take a dremel to the side of my server case, lol. But surprisingly the case side still slides on, albeit touching the cooler but none the less it still goes on. lol, I can only imagine a cooler bigger then that.


----------



## kckyle

i want a d15, but the price tag... not to mention my mega is no slouch..


----------



## spdaimon

Yeah, I wasn't too happy with the price, but I used my Amazon Rewards to pay most of it. Its more wide than tall. Its fitting just fine in my Antec P182. Anyway, we need to get back to talking about OCing our Xeons. Hopefully the other X58 thread does the same.








I won't be able to do that for a while until my leg heals. Can't move my rigs around to work on them.


----------



## kckyle

after my last bios crash i'm a bit more hesitant to push my rig in terms of oc. plus even at stock nothing pushes it.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'm reseating my Nepton tonight in an effort to get better temperatures. If I do, I'll push for 4.5 GHz.


----------



## marcchep

I am waiting for my X5670 to arrive, should be here early next week. I just hope the previous owner of the P6T6 WS Revolution did as I told him and updated the Bios.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I tightened the screws down on the Nepton 140XL block and temperatures dropped a few degrees all around: 75/74/66/67/72/73 during five runs of IBT. This _almost_ makes me want to takes out one of my triple channel kits and push for a higher overclock. Almost ...


----------



## Space Marine

I think i solved my ram problems, and im on my way up again. 4ghz stable atm.








Also switched to a phanteks ph-tc14pe, and that can be seen from temps, but i think i have to reseat it cause i suspect thermal paste placement wasnt optimal.

Luckily this cooler looks like much easier to remount then my old cnps10x









One thing is for sure, looks like my 24gb 6 sticks require more vcore then before for being stable at 4.2. I still havent regained stability at that speed. Which is actually kind of strange because my current 4.0ghz overclock, starting from scratch, ended up on the exact same values which were when i had only 8gb. And i was expecting more QPI, not more vcore, at 4.2.

Also i experimented with turbo: it looked promising at first, but when the clock goes high wattage throttling kicks in on my board, lowering down multi, and in practice it doesnt let me pass 4ghz anyway. On lower speeds was working fine btw, up to 3.8ghz. It's a bios limitation i think


----------



## sultanofswing

Still waiting on my X5675 to get here, Should be here this coming up Tuesday. I decided to put a Corsair H100i on my current i7 950 just to see if it would do 4ghz stable with HT on. Right now I am running 1.35v for a 200bclk and a 20 multi. Temps are around 33c at idle and hit around 66c full load using prime 95 or Aida 64 in a room that sits at 22c.

So this is a good thing, It means my board will do 200 Bclk without issues and once I get the X5675 in the machine temps will be even better.

I decided to pick up the H100i as it's pretty cheap, When I get the Xeon in I plan to jump ship from the H100i and go with a full water cooling setup from EK more than likely.


----------



## cobovo

What do you guys think about the X5650 ES? This chip be not well for overclock? Right?


----------



## sultanofswing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> What do you guys think about the X5650 ES? This chip be not well for overclock? Right?


From what I have read in this thread and a few other Xeon threads is to skip the Engineering Sample chips, Most of them turn out to be poor clockers. I bought a X5675 as the consensus seems to be it is one of the better overclockers.


----------



## burntheskies

I see some units on ebay for 125$ ish- i just dont know if my board is a good enough board. (p6t LGA 1366 not deluxe)
as i see more of the overclockers use at least a sabertooth on the 58 platform. i had a deluxe but it died due to a psu 8 pin fail.









does anyone have any information as to the SLBYL designation on the listing?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The X5675 has the advantage of having higher multiplier than the X5650, X5660 and X5670. It might not necessarily overclock _better_ but it should be _easier_. You'll have more options with which to work. Your actual ceiling likely won't be any different.


----------



## Alfshizzle

What's the 'safe' full load (prime 95) temp of the x5660?


----------



## SwatCat2112

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alfshizzle*
> 
> What's the 'safe' full load (prime 95) temp of the x5660?


don't know about prime95 but as x5660 alone its 81.3°C (from intel).
for reference, myself with water cooled and OC i hit on prime95 full load 50c.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My personal limit was 90, but I got worried if temperatures climbed above 85.


----------



## intelchief

Why do u have so high temps? On my mobo i have two X5670 and the hotter CPU reaches maximum 74(during stress, in games max 56). 4,2ghz @ all cores 1.31V 1.3Vtt 3500 uncore.

Both cooled with Prolimatech megahalems. No AC in the room, case closed. IDLE 16(sensor damaged?)- 30


----------



## kckyle

prolimatech megahalems cools really well, my cpu only reaches 90+ when im pushing like 4.7ghz


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'm not sure why my processor ran so hot when I my TRUE cooling it. I suspect there wasn't adequate pressure. At 4.32 GHz with CPU-Z reporting 1.336V core voltage, the hottest core was 82 during IBT. I wasn't comfortable pushing things any further because my hottest core crept north of 85. With my Nepton 140XL, my hottest core was around 78. I reseated the block and made sure to tighten the nuts down all the way for maximum pressure and my hottest core hovers at 74 and touches 75. I haven't bothered stress testing at a lower voltage.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alfshizzle*
> 
> What's the 'safe' full load (prime 95) temp of the x5660?


Never went above 68 on mine, its lapped and cooled by a h110 in push / pull. I always try to keep those CPU cool and under the 75 celsius limit, so far so good









Still its another things on my Proliant 1U G6 servers, these things are getting hot under load... I always get scared when they get over 80c


----------



## OCmember

X 5675 info


----------



## Alfshizzle

I'm pushing 1.46v vcore through my x5660 ATM for 4.7ghz ht on, I'm also running 1.3v for 3600mhz uncore + 3x4gb 1600 c7 @ 1.7v. Mines also lapped and so is the noctua nh-d14 that cools it. I'm seing 85c after an hour of prime small fft's. But it only hits around 54c when gaming/ using it for what I would normaly use it for, I'm not bothered if it dies as they are cheap enough to replace, I'm thinking of getting a w3690 anyway as rumor has it they have an unlocked milti?

Thanks for replys!


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alfshizzle*
> 
> I'm pushing 1.46v vcore through my x5660 ATM for 4.7ghz ht on, I'm also running 1.3v for 3600mhz uncore + 3x4gb 1600 c7 @ 1.7v. Mines also lapped and so is the noctua nh-d14 that cools it. I'm seing 85c after an hour of prime small fft's. But it only hits around 54c when gaming/ using it for what I would normaly use it for, I'm not bothered if it dies as they are cheap enough to replace, I'm thinking of getting a w3690 anyway as rumor has it they have an unlocked milti?
> 
> Thanks for replys!


Yeah the W3690 does have an unlocked multi, unlocked RAM multiplier as well.


----------



## burntheskies

I have a 950 in the p6t deluxe is it that much a difference in performance?
seems like there is more than one chip that can go in this board considering the socket
can a W3690 work on a p6t board? would probably use it for 3d rendering / sims

sorry for so many only question


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *burntheskies*
> 
> I have a 950 in the p6t deluxe is it that much a difference in performance?
> seems like there is more than one chip that can go in this board considering the socket
> can a W3690 work on a p6t board? would probably use it for 3d rendering / sims
> 
> sorry for so many only question


yeah all lga1366 i7s and xeons are supposed to work with latest bios (probably even without the latest bios but just to make sure update to latest bios) i have a p6t as well with a x5650 and used l5640, l5639, x5670 and a x5620 on it


----------



## enios

Hi all,
I managed to get my X5675 stable at 4.3GHz on my EVGA FTW3 E768 motherboard.
It's the rig in my signature: EVGA GTX 970 SSC, 4x4GB 1600MHz Mushkin Redline RAM, Crucial MX100 SSD and several HDDs.

Stable for me means surviving 3 passes of Intel Burn Test at Maximum.

at 4.4GHz, it crashes/reboots/BSOD when I run the test, and at 4.5GHz, it crashes/reboots/BSOD when I login to Windows 8.1
but it POSTs fine.

So now I am running it at 4GHz, it gives lower temps. Unfortunately, it crashes if I enable Turbo and/or CxE Function.
With VDroop, I can maybe run it at 3.8GHz.

Anyone sees anything I could try to get to 4.5GHz or higher?
Or get Turbo to work at 4GHz?

here are my settings for the stable 4.3GHz overclock:
SpeedStep: enabled
Turbo: disabled
CxE Function: disabled
HT: enabled

Without VDroop
CPU VCore: 1.35V
CPU VTT Votlage: +175mV
DIMM Voltage: 1.65V (stock voltage for my RAM kit)
IOH VCore: 1.15V
PWM Frequency: 933KHz
other votlages: Auto
(I will lower the voltages if I keep the CPU at 4GHz)

CPU Multiplier: x23
BCLK: 187 for 4.3GHz
CPU Uncore: x12 (so 2248MHz for 4.3GHz CPU)
PCIe Frequency: 100

Memory:
2:8, 1498MHz at 4.3GHz (my memory is rated at 1600MHz)
timings: same timings as the XMP profile timings
so the ram is slightly underclocked.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Can you not manually set the 25x multiplier in BIOS? You won't be able to set 26x because that's the turbo for two cores while 25x is turbo for all six. Try 25x175 if you can, drop it to 25x172 if you don't find stability.


----------



## enios

thanks for your quick answer.
I am not sure I can on my EVGA board









highest I can enter is 23 (standard multiplier for the X5675).

if I enable Turbo, it somehows displays 24 or 25 in the bios (can't remember) when it calculates the Target CPU Frequency, but the manual input (CPU Clock Ratio) is still limited to 23, and I am not sure the 24/25 applies to all cores.

perhaps I can lock it to 24 or 25 if I disable SpeedStep? I will try later.

or am I misunderstanding how Turbo works?


----------



## enios

am I missing something really obvious? Is it possible to force a multiplier higher than the standard 23x for the X5675, on all cores, on my EVGA board?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Your processor doesn't have a 24x multiplier.

The way I was told to use the turbo multiplier before I realized I can set mine manually was set the CPU ratio to auto, turn on SpeedStep and then the Turbo Boost option became available. I'm not sure how it works on EVGA boards, but you could try that. Your system will utilize the highest multiplier possible, which should be 25x in your case, 26x on two cores.


----------



## enios

thanks for your answer.
I never fully understood this feature, I thought it only boosted one or two cores, but I will give it a try, and monitor each core frequency while running the Intel Burn Test.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

If you use RealTemp or RealTemp GT to monitor your core temperatures, it has an option enabled by default to disable turbo. You can disable this before opening whichever you use by editing the .ini file in its directory. Keeping that option enabled gave me so many headaches.


----------



## enios

thanks for saving me an unnecessary headache


----------



## enios

ok, it seems to be working but I am not sure.
is there any way to monitor the speed of each core?

OpenHardwareMonitor seems to not be updating/reporting it properly.

CPU-Z requires you to open a separate instance for each core and I don't know if what it's showing me is correct.


----------



## Davyboy

I personally don't like my temps to go above 80c, though with my old 920 when I put it back on air with it clocked to 4.2GHz my load temps would be in the 90s, when I took my 920 out to install my X5660 the bottom of my chip was all discolored in some areas which I assume was caused from running it with those high temps.


----------



## OCmember

Sounds like your CPU VTT is too high. What is the stock VTT stock setting? And are you using the board terminals or giving us bios readings or readings from inside the OS?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> ok, it seems to be working but I am not sure.
> is there any way to monitor the speed of each core?
> 
> OpenHardwareMonitor seems to not be updating/reporting it properly.
> 
> CPU-Z requires you to open a separate instance for each core and I don't know if what it's showing me is correct.


If you don't have C-states enabled, then you should only have to monitor the first core. Your multiplier should only fluctuate among 23x, 25x and 26x. RealTemp GT will also show your multiplier and base clock.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> If you don't have C-states enabled, then you should only have to monitor the first core. Your multiplier should only fluctuate among 23x, 25x and 26x. RealTemp GT will also show your multiplier and base clock.


thanks for your help, I appreciate it









I do have C-states disabled.
it seems to be working!
It's running at 4.4GHz (177x25) and when I ran a benchmark, I got results comparable to the 4.4GHz 192x23 overclock that was not stable.

I might even have room for 4.5GHz, I'll keep pushing.

however, I never see the multiplier fluctuating in CPU-Z, it's locked at 25x.

thanks again for your help


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey, long time no see guys









Any ideas why I might be seeing such low volts on my HW monitor Min values?



Is it because I'm running the Gigabyte Dynamic Energy Saver utility?

I still get really odd lockups sometimes, but the machine will pass as much gaming, IBT or Prime95 as I can throw at it. BOINC tends to crash it real easy.

Lockups are 0x3B, so I have boosted Vcc to 1.28, but I kinda worry it's not really the core volts otherwise it wouldn't pass?

I would disable DEC, but it's tied to the alternating of the power phases this board* supports, and I would like to prolong the life of the machine.

*EX58A-UD7r V2


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> Hi all,
> I managed to get my X5675 stable at 4.3GHz on my EVGA FTW3 E768 motherboard.
> It's the rig in my signature: EVGA GTX 970 SSC, 4x4GB 1600MHz Mushkin Redline RAM, Crucial MX100 SSD and several HDDs.
> 
> Stable for me means surviving 3 passes of Intel Burn Test at Maximum.
> 
> at 4.4GHz, it crashes/reboots/BSOD when I run the test, and at 4.5GHz, it crashes/reboots/BSOD when I login to Windows 8.1
> but it POSTs fine.
> 
> So now I am running it at 4GHz, it gives lower temps. Unfortunately, it crashes if I enable Turbo and/or CxE Function.
> With VDroop, I can maybe run it at 3.8GHz.
> 
> Anyone sees anything I could try to get to 4.5GHz or higher?
> Or get Turbo to work at 4GHz?
> 
> here are my settings for the stable 4.3GHz overclock:
> SpeedStep: enabled
> Turbo: disabled
> CxE Function: disabled
> HT: enabled
> 
> Without VDroop
> CPU VCore: 1.35V
> CPU VTT Votlage: +175mV
> DIMM Voltage: 1.65V (stock voltage for my RAM kit)
> IOH VCore: 1.15V
> PWM Frequency: 933KHz
> other votlages: Auto
> (I will lower the voltages if I keep the CPU at 4GHz)
> 
> CPU Multiplier: x23
> BCLK: 187 for 4.3GHz
> CPU Uncore: x12 (so 2248MHz for 4.3GHz CPU)
> PCIe Frequency: 100
> 
> Memory:
> 2:8, 1498MHz at 4.3GHz (my memory is rated at 1600MHz)
> timings: same timings as the XMP profile timings
> so the ram is slightly underclocked.


I have the FTW3 with a x5660 I can only lock in 21x in the bios but when all 6 cores are at 100% the 23 multi kicks in.
Your CPU VTT is a little high. 1.35 is considered max.,The stock setting on that board is 1.2 so if you add +175mv puts you at 1.375 , +150 would be 1.35 +200=1.4 and so on.
Also if your mem is at 1498mhz you can raise your uncore to 2x the ram speed = 3000mhz
My board seems to like the higher uncore, at 1.5x ram speed my board has issues.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have the FTW3 with a x5660 I can only lock in 21x in the bios but when all 6 cores are at 100% the 23 multi kicks in.
> Your CPU VTT is a little high. 1.35 is considered max.,The stock setting on that board is 1.2 so if you add +175mv puts you at 1.375 , +150 would be 1.35 +200=1.4 and so on.
> Also if your mem is at 1498mhz you can raise your uncore to 2x the ram speed = 3000mhz
> My board seems to like the higher uncore, at 1.5x ram speed my board has issues.


thank you for your help









by issues, do you mean that you had crashes/bsod when uncore was 1.5x and they disappeared at 2x?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> thank you for your help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by issues, do you mean that you had crashes/bsod when uncore was 1.5x and they disappeared at 2x?


Yes, even my Asus boards like the higher uncore. Plus you will get better scores running Intel burn test for what it's worth.
Also if you're using a water cooling you have to put a fan on that huge heatsink there by the CPU. That thing gets real hot with out airflow.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Table 3-2. Intel® X58 Express ChipsetThermal Specification
Parameter Value
Tcase_max 100 °C
Tcase_min 5 °C
Tcontrol 95 °C

Don't worry too much









p13
http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/doc/design-guide/x58-express-thermal-design-guide.pdf


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Yes, even my Asus boards like the higher uncore. Plus you will get better scores running Intel burn test for what it's worth.
> Also if you're using a water cooling you have to put a fan on that huge heatsink there by the CPU. That thing gets real hot with out airflow.


I can confirm, I got a better Cinebench (6.5% better) just by going from 1.5x to 2x uncore just now







thanks again.
I'll try upping it a little. 3'500Mhz maybe?

I think I know what you mean, must be "Temperature 2" in OpenHardwareMonitor, it goes up to 70°C on my board with the overclock.
Not using watercooling though (Noctua NH-D14), and have 8 fans in my ATCS 840 case (including the 2 on the CPU cooler)
it's nowhere near the temp I had on my older SLI E758 board though, that was really high.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Table 3-2. Intel® X58 Express ChipsetThermal Specification
> Parameter Value
> Tcase_max 100 °C
> Tcase_min 5 °C
> Tcontrol 95 °C
> 
> Don't worry too much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> p13
> http://www.intel.co.uk/content/dam/doc/design-guide/x58-express-thermal-design-guide.pdf


great, thanks for info, good to know


----------



## bill1024

With out airflow over that heat sink I would lose hard drives. The drive would just vanish and I get an error.
When it cooled off and I reboot the drive is ok. Stock speed it was not too bad, but with it OC it was not happy being hot.
I like to keep that temp around 50c give or take. Plus I found the cooler that was it would make the CPU cooler by a degree or two.
Any way good luck with your build.


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> With out airflow over that heat sink I would lose hard drives. The drive would just vanish and I get an error.
> When it cooled off and I reboot the drive is ok. Stock speed it was not too bad, but with it OC it was not happy being hot.
> I like to keep that temp around 50c give or take. Plus I found the cooler that was it would make the CPU cooler by a degree or two.
> Any way good luck with your build.


thanks again for all your help








I will keep that in mind.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The cooler the better, of course, I was just saying the chipset is pretty tough.

Bill, at a guess the solder under yours is not good.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enios*
> 
> thanks for your help, I appreciate it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do have C-states disabled.
> it seems to be working!
> It's running at 4.4GHz (177x25) and when I ran a benchmark, I got results comparable to the 4.4GHz 192x23 overclock that was not stable.
> 
> I might even have room for 4.5GHz, I'll keep pushing.
> 
> however, I never see the multiplier fluctuating in CPU-Z, it's locked at 25x.
> 
> thanks again for your help


You would only see 26x on a very light load. If the system asks too much from your processor, it only uses 25x. The advantage to using the higher multiplier is you use a lower base clock, which in turn allows you to use a lower voltage compared to a similar overclock with a lower multiplier and higher base clock. The downside is a higher base clock gives you better overall system performance since uncore and other things are also affected by base clock.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Also if your mem is at 1498mhz you can raise your uncore to 2x the ram speed = 3000mhz
> My board seems to like the higher uncore, at 1.5x ram speed my board has issues.


For lower uncore ratios, you need to manually loosen round trip latency since the two are tied to each other. Lower uncore ratios tighten round trip latency. I only suggest running an uncore ratio less than double your memory ratio if it would put uncore over 4000MHz.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The cooler the better, of course, I was just saying the chipset is pretty tough.
> 
> Bill, at a guess the solder under yours is not good.


All three of my x58 systems are water cooled,(just cpu) so there is no airflow over the NB cooler heatsinks.
I had to add fans to every system I used the water coolers. The boards are designed to get airflow from the stock Intel HS fans.

Thanks chess..... for the tip about the uncore and ram.


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> For lower uncore ratios, you need to manually loosen round trip latency since the two are tied to each other. Lower uncore ratios tighten round trip latency. I only suggest running an uncore ratio less than double your memory ratio if it would put uncore over 4000MHz.


I can't seem to get my uncore up past 3407MHz my system trys to boot, doesn't even get to POST, it switches off and then powers back up with default BIOS settings.

I'm going to wait until I get the rest of the stuff I need for water cooling my processor and then have a proper mess about with this chip to see just how far I can push it.

Is anyone with 2000MHz RAM able to run their uncore at 4000MHz on here?


----------



## enios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> You would only see 26x on a very light load. If the system asks too much from your processor, it only uses 25x. The advantage to using the higher multiplier is you use a lower base clock, which in turn allows you to use a lower voltage compared to a similar overclock with a lower multiplier and higher base clock. The downside is a higher base clock gives you better overall system performance since uncore and other things are also affected by base clock.


thanks for the explanation








I'll keep pushing for the limit and report back soon.


----------



## Vipu

Can "unstable" oc make programs crash?

This is so annoying, everything works.
I can run IBT and p95 everything for hours and no problem.
Only Chrome crashes every now and then when I try to start it.

Is this some Chrome problem that happends to just be there at same time when I changed from i7 920 -> xeon??


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Can "unstable" oc make programs crash?
> 
> This is so annoying, everything works.
> I can run IBT and p95 everything for hours and no problem.
> Only Chrome crashes every now and then when I try to start it.
> 
> Is this some Chrome problem that happends to just be there at same time when I changed from i7 920 -> xeon??


yes they can


----------



## Vipu

Any idea what should I change then?
If everything else works perfectly but just not chrome.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Any idea what should I change then?
> If everything else works perfectly but just not chrome.


voltage / QPI
Maybe try to lower BCLK just a little and raise VTT a little then try to just tweak little things. It happened to me as well with VMware ESXi client 5.5 and Outlook 2013 and I was able to fix it with some fine tweaking


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> This is so annoying, everything works.
> I can run IBT and p95 everything for hours and no problem.
> Only Chrome crashes every now and then when I try to start it.


Much the same here.
Quote:


> Maybe try to lower BCLK just a little and raise VTT


So if I BSOD with 0x3B but Prime/IBT is stable you're thinking QPI/Vcc volts is the culprit?


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> voltage / QPI
> Maybe try to lower BCLK just a little and raise VTT a little then try to just tweak little things. It happened to me as well with VMware ESXi client 5.5 and Outlook 2013 and I was able to fix it with some fine tweaking


ok thx, will try some fine tuning then and see if that helps.


----------



## marcchep

Got my X5670 yesterday, no POST







. I guess I have to buy a preflashed Bios chip then.


----------



## Davyboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Got my X5670 yesterday, no POST
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I guess I have to buy a preflashed Bios chip then.


Which board have you got man?


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> voltage / QPI
> Maybe try to lower BCLK just a little and raise VTT a little then try to just tweak little things. It happened to me as well with VMware ESXi client 5.5 and Outlook 2013 and I was able to fix it with some fine tweaking


That MIGHT have helped, no random Chrome crashes yet.
Still it is very random so im not 100% sure yet its fixed.
Upped my QPI tiny bit.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Which board have you got man?


The Asus P6T6 WS Revolution.


----------



## spdaimon

I saw that you had from older posts. Personally I would pick up a i7-920 to flash it, though BIOS chips are only $13 on ebay versus $30-40 for the i7. Hope there is no soldering involved, not familiar with that. lol


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Got my X5670 yesterday, no POST
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I guess I have to buy a preflashed Bios chip then.


You should look at picking up a W3520, I bought one for $12 off of ebay to flash my gigabyte board. It is essentially the same thing as the i7 920/930.

Heres one for $13
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-W3520-Quad-Core-2-66GHz-8M-4-80-SLBEW-Processor-CPU-Guaranteed-/371275454129?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5671bdd6b1


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> You should look at picking up a W3520, I bought one for $12 off of ebay to flash my gigabyte board. It is essentially the same thing as the i7 920/930.
> 
> Heres one for $13
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-W3520-Quad-Core-2-66GHz-8M-4-80-SLBEW-Processor-CPU-Guaranteed-/371275454129?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5671bdd6b1


Do you think the W3520 will work? Because it needs the bios version 0311 and I do not know if my board even has this version


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Do you think the W3520 will work? Because it needs the bios version 0311 and I do not know if my board even has this version


Short answer, yes.

Its a single QPI link CPU, meaning its meant in a single CPU setup and with the X58 chipset.

It is essentially the same as a well binned I7, with ECC support.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Short answer, yes.
> 
> Its a single QPI link CPU, meaning its meant in a single CPU setup and with the X58 chipset.
> 
> It is essentially the same as a well binned I7, with ECC support.


Does that mean that even if I have the first Bios version, the CPU will work?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Does that mean that even if I have the first Bios version, the CPU will work?


Yeah it should work, since the w3520 is essentially a D0 i7 920 with ECC enabled.

It is also a 45nm CPU and it was the xeon equivalent to the i7. Ive NEVER heard of the W3520 being incompatible with any X58 board, or BIOS revision, period.

Also if you google your board+w3520, there are posts dating back to 2009 with people running that setup.


----------



## marcchep

Will buy a W3520 then, thanks mate


----------



## stinart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stinart*
> 
> Hello guys ,
> 
> can anybody confirm if *gigabyte UD5 X58a rev 1.0*( with latest bios) works with xeon 5600 series? According to that list , it should not support it , but one guy there , managed to run a x5650 with his rev 1.0 UD3R which is not officially supported too and runs the same bios as mine (F8a). I mean there is no reason that it should not run on a UD5 rev 1.0 too (same bios ,same chipset ,same "official" restrictions) Any info?


Good news , x5650 arrived , works and overclocks fine with my giga. Testing only on F7 bios because F8a reported as incompatible with xeons from one UD3R user. Now stable at (191x22) 4.2ghz ,1.30 vcore , 1.23 vtt .

My findings so far :

21x multi does not work. I can set it ok from bios , but always resets to 20x on boot. Must be a mobo issue. Any info? 20x and 22x (turbo) works ok.

BCLK limit for my cpu must be around 205 because at 210x20 gives weird/rare code bsods regardless the voltage.

My cooler is the old (crappy) H50 . For common usage like gaming, audio editing , etc , the xeon runs overall about 7 degrees colder than my previous i7 [email protected] as rarely exceeds 54 degrees , but pushing it with IBT , gives almost the same hot results as the i7 , touching 77 degrees. Much of a challenge for the H50 i guess

Haven't test it past 4.2ghz , but seems like an easy 4.4 ghz chip with better cooling.

As for performance , i have not test thoroughly yet but i may noticed the first gaming boost in dying light (if it means something). Strolling the open map , with i7 920 my 970 usage floated around 99-72%. With xeon never got below 84%.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> I'm no expert on this, but I'm *pretty sure* it'll work fine if you've got the latest BIOS.


+rep for being the only sure guy in the forum man!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The X5650 does not have a 21x multiplier. Its stock multiplier is 20x and turbo multipliers are 22x on six cores, 23x on two cores.


----------



## bill1024

If that CPU does not work because the microcode is not in the bios, the ASUS bios is NOT soldered in.
It just lifts out and drops in.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> If that CPU does not work because the microcode is not in the bios, the ASUS bios is NOT soldered in.
> It just lifts out and drops in.


I know, but I do not want to buy a 2nd CPU that does not work


----------



## marcchep

So the E5504 would work too?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> So the E5504 would work too?


That one might not, because it has 2 QPI links, which is the reason for the needed BIOS flash, to put the xeon microcodes for the CPUs that are meant for 2P configs. So anything E55xx, E56xx, L55xx/L56xx and the W55**/X56** might not work.

The W3520 that I suggested is the closest thing to the consumer i7 and is pretty much identical... also it was meant for the workstation X58 motherboards in the Dell workstations and Supermicro systems (and the other folks that sold x58 based workstations)

the cheap E55** CPUs _might_ work, but if the X5650 didnt work with your current BIOS, I doubt another dual xeon based CPU will work.

http://ark.intel.com/products/40711/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5504-4M-Cache-2_00-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI#@specifications


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> That one might not, because it has 2 QPI links, which is the reason for the needed BIOS flash, to put the xeon microcodes for the CPUs that are meant for 2P configs. So anything E55xx, E56xx, L55xx/L56xx and the W55**/X56** might not work.
> 
> The W3520 that I suggested is the closest thing to the consumer i7 and is pretty much identical... also it was meant for the workstation X58 motherboards in the Dell workstations and Supermicro systems (and the other folks that sold x58 based workstations)
> 
> the cheap E55** CPUs _might_ work, but if the X5650 didnt work with your current BIOS, I doubt another dual xeon based CPU will work.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/products/40711/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5504-4M-Cache-2_00-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI#@specifications


Thanks really much for your help


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Thanks really much for your help


No problem man, I sent you a PM!


----------



## Tritonk7

Hi, guys. The old man still can.









for statistics


----------



## Davyboy

Don't all these Xeons have 2 x QPI links on them,and that's why they can be ran on dual socket motherboards? :/


----------



## chessmyantidrug

There exists Xeons intended for uniprocessor platforms. I considered getting one of those instead, but they were considerably more expensive.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Don't all these Xeons have 2 x QPI links on them,and that's why they can be ran on dual socket motherboards? :/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> There exists Xeons intended for uniprocessor platforms. I considered getting one of those instead, but they were considerably more expensive.


Thats why I suggested the W3520, one QPI link, and it is cheap.
It really is essentially the xeon version of the 920.

http://ark.intel.com/products/39718/Intel-Xeon-Processor-W3520-8M-Cache-2_66-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI

And considerably more expensive is false... You just have to know what youre looking for, since this CPU is $12, and they normally go for under $20 on eBay.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-W3520-Quad-Core-2-66GHz-8Mb-Cache-4-80-SLBEW-Processor-CPU-/361251420962?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item541c433b22


----------



## chinesestunna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Davyboy*
> 
> Don't all these Xeons have 2 x QPI links on them,and that's why they can be ran on dual socket motherboards? :/
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> There exists Xeons intended for uniprocessor platforms. I considered getting one of those instead, but they were considerably more expensive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats why I suggested the W3520, one QPI link, and it is cheap.
> It really is essentially the xeon version of the 920.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/products/39718/Intel-Xeon-Processor-W3520-8M-Cache-2_66-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI
> 
> And considerably more expensive is false... You just have to know what youre looking for, since this CPU is $12, and they normally go for under $20 on eBay.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-W3520-Quad-Core-2-66GHz-8Mb-Cache-4-80-SLBEW-Processor-CPU-/361251420962?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item541c433b22
Click to expand...

That seems counter productive, the entire point and value of these upgrades is to get cheap 32nm hex cores in our systems. Replacing a 920 with essentially another 920 with ECC that your motherboard doesnt support seems to get you no performance gains. At that point might as well get a cheap 920 for $15


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chinesestunna*
> 
> That seems counter productive, the entire point and value of these upgrades is to get cheap 32nm hex cores in our systems. Replacing a 920 with essentially another 920 with ECC that your motherboard doesnt support seems to get you no performance gains. At that point might as well get a cheap 920 for $15


920s dont go for $15, trust me.. ahah they go for $50 on ebay which is stupid.

and yeah if you already have an x58 system it wouldnt make any sense to buy one, but if you picked up an X58 board cheaply, like I did, and dont have an i7, buying the cheap Xeon would be the best way to update the BIOS.


----------



## chinesestunna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chinesestunna*
> 
> That seems counter productive, the entire point and value of these upgrades is to get cheap 32nm hex cores in our systems. Replacing a 920 with essentially another 920 with ECC that your motherboard doesnt support seems to get you no performance gains. At that point might as well get a cheap 920 for $15
> 
> 
> 
> 920s dont go for $15, trust me.. ahah they go for $50 on ebay which is stupid.
> 
> and yeah if you already have an x58 system it wouldnt make any sense to buy one, but if you picked up an X58 board cheaply, like I did, and dont have an i7, buying the cheap Xeon would be the best way to update the BIOS.
Click to expand...

Time to sell my backup 920 then







. I didn't see the update bios part, in that case you're right, definitely get cheapest one as you're just using it for 15min anyways.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I wasn't looking for 45nm Xeons. I didn't see the point. I looked into 32nm Xeons intended for uniprocessor systems and those are more expensive than the 95W TDP processors featured throughout this thread.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I wasn't looking for 45nm Xeons. I didn't see the point. I looked into 32nm Xeons intended for uniprocessor systems and those are more expensive than the 95W TDP processors featured throughout this thread.


True that, the other hex core xeons not in the X56** line are really expensive. But, with certain motherboards the W36** has an unlocked multi.. So you could overclock it like the extreme edition i7s.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> True that, the other hex core xeons not in the X56** line are really expensive. But, with certain motherboards the W36** has an unlocked multi.. So you could overclock it like the extreme edition i7s.


I guess that could justify the price if you had one of those motherboards. I was unaware of this when shopping for a Xeon.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I guess that could justify the price if you had one of those motherboards. I was unaware of this when shopping for a Xeon.


Anyways heres a thread that they are talking about the unlocked xeon and what boards work for it.

It would be pretty pointless unless you really like overclocking, or have the board to do this with like you said.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1499987/intel-xeon-w3680-sold/0_30


----------



## chessmyantidrug

X58 Sabertooth was listed in that thread. Quick, someone talk me out of buying one of those chips.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> X58 Sabertooth was listed in that thread. Quick, someone talk me out of buying one of those chips.


Hahaha!

That unlocked multi is pretty appealing since you can just plug in a number and a vcore and not worry about the IMC.

But it is pricey.


----------



## aznplayer213

I have one in my system and its rock solid. the only thing that would replace it is probably a sr-2.


----------



## OCmember

Those W35xx Xeons also sport a lower TPD


----------



## sultanofswing

So what is the general consensus on the best Board out there for overclocking the X5675? This ASRock X58 Extreme 3 is having all sorts of issues with the X5675.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Those W35xx Xeons also sport a lower TPD


W35XX are Bloomfield processors with 130W TDP.


----------



## OCmember

Those unicore
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> W35XX are Bloomfield processors with 130W TDP.


whoops..

edit: i think i was reading they have a lower operating temperature limit


----------



## KINOKS

Hi, I just installed a X5670 in my system (UD3R rev2, 24GB 1600MHZ, 850w Gold series Corsair). I would really appreciate some quick pointers on OCing this Xeon. Is it much different then an i7 9xx? What are the known stable settings (multy, vcore, etc.)? Looking to get to at least a 4Ghz OC, don't have time to play with it for days, just a quick and dirty OC will suffice It's going to be used for video editing and grading, so this means stability is #1. Appreciate any help and pointers!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

There isn't really a shortcut to overclocking. You should take the time to isolate your maximum base clock, then your maximum memory overclock, then finally your maximum CPU overclock. Another person's settings are not guaranteed to work for you.

If you can't take the time to do all that, then you can try setting your multiplier to 20, base clock to 200, 8:2 RAM ratio, make sure uncore is 2:1 to your RAM, set core voltage to 1.3V, QPI/VTT to 1.35V and it might work. There's really no telling what voltages you will need without finding those other limits first.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Hi, I just installed a X5670 in my system (UD3R rev2, 24GB 1600MHZ, 850w Gold series Corsair). I would really appreciate some quick pointers on OCing this Xeon. Is it much different then an i7 9xx? *What are the known stable settings (multy, vcore, etc.*)? Looking to get to at least a 4Ghz OC, don't have time to play with it for days, just a quick and dirty OC will suffice It's going to be used for video editing and grading, so this means stability is #1. Appreciate any help and pointers!


each chip is different you can have an idea looking at all the settings posted here but most of us have x5650 or x5660. you just have to do some test of your own based on the numbers of others posted here. still each chips are differents as well as motherboards









you only have 2 posts, you really can't expect others to do all the work for you, all the base voltage bclk / voltage info you'll need is in the last 10 pages, just do the effort to read a little. chessmyantidrug did quite an effort to answer you nicely to be honest


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> There isn't really a shortcut to overclocking. You should take the time to isolate your maximum base clock, then your maximum memory overclock, then finally your maximum CPU overclock. Another person's settings are not guaranteed to work for you.


Yeah, I know... I just figured some pointers on dealing with the x56xx series from people who already overclocked theirs wouldn't hurt
I will off course go through the process you described in any case.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> each chip is different you can have an idea looking at all the settings posted here but most of us have x5650 or x5660. you just have to do some test of your own based on the numbers of others posted here. still each chips are differents as well as motherboards


Yup, will do. Will also post my findings when I do.

X5670 has a locked multi right? If X5650 is 21 I guess the X5670 is 23 right?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Yup, will do. Will also post my findings when I do.
> 
> X5670 has a locked multi right? If X5650 is 21 I guess the X5670 is 23 right?


All dual QPI X5XXX chips except ES Q3Q2 & Q3QR chips have locked multi. X5670 has 25 max multiplier


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The maximum multiplier on the X5670 is 22x, turbo on all cores is 24x, turbo on two cores is 25x.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> The maximum multiplier on the X5670 is 22x, turbo on all cores is 24x, turbo on two cores is 25x.


yeah but my mac pro max it at 3.33 in CPU-Z on 6 cores, so I figured it was possible to clock it up to 25, never really overclocked it for long on my P6T and X58 SLI3 since its my Mac Pro CPU-Z and I need those in it


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> yeah but my mac pro max it at 3.33 in CPU-Z on 6 cores, so I figured it was possible to clock it up to 25, never really overclocked it for long on my P6T and X58 SLI3 since its my Mac Pro CPU-Z and I need those in it


Either that's an X5675 or it's not turbo on all six cores. The X5670 can't do 25x on all six cores.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> The maximum multiplier on the X5670 is 22x, turbo on all cores is 24x, turbo on two cores is 25x.


22 got it, thx.

Q: did you guys overclock with or without turbo?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Some motherboards allow you to set the turbo multiplier in your BIOS, others do not. I have mine set to 24x.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Either that's an X5675 or it's not turbo on all six cores. The X5670 can't do 25x on all six cores.


Its and X5670, it's using some messed up Apple EFI instead of a bios, both my quad core Mac Mini server i7 and 15" retina Macbook Pro ivy bridge i7 are doing the same weird turbo thing that isn't up to spec, it overclocks 2 bins over Intel specs. I posted about the MacBook Pro doing it around 2 months ago in this topic or in the other X58 / X56xx one, I was talking about overclocking the Haswell cpu in my Asus ROG G750JZ and mentioned the bug in my MacBook Pro, maybe some of you remember about it?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Turbo on all cores is two bins above stock on X5670's, three bins on two cores. You will only see the two-core turbo if you have your CPU ratio set to auto and turbo enabled. Your system automatically use the highest multiplier based on load.


----------



## 1Quickchic

When dealing with these xeon's such as the x5670 is it needed to get ecc memory?, I'm considering seeing if a x5670 will work now that my bios is updated to change out the i7 970 that's in there now, and if it works out, well should be nice as I have a corsair h100 in there on the 970,just no oc on the 970, been considering that option too, what is everyone's opinion on this?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1Quickchic*
> 
> When dealing with these xeon's such as the x5670 is it needed to get ecc memory?, I'm considering seeing if a x5670 will work now that my bios is updated to change out the i7 970 that's in there now, and if it works out, well should be nice as I have a corsair h100 in there on the 970,just no oc on the 970, been considering that option too, what is everyone's opinion on this?


Your i7 970 is essentially the same thing as these Xeons = 6 core, 12 thread, 32nm, but has a TDP of 130w vs 95w.

edit: oh and your i7 970 will be able to push a tiny bit more Vcc/Vcore (1.375v vs 1.350v) than the Xeons, as long as you follow the Intel specs.


----------



## 1Quickchic

So you think it is possible to get this processor to 4.0 to 4.4 GHz reliably and keep it cool?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1Quickchic*
> 
> So you think it is possible to get this processor to 4.0 to 4.4 GHz reliably and keep it cool?


Most likely, your H100 should do a good job. My H110 w/ 2x Fractal R2 1000RPM 140mm fans keeps my X5650 @ 4.2GHz 1.35v around 70c. Mind you, my rig also has two oc'ed HD 7950's with open air coolers so my case temps are quite high.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1Quickchic*
> 
> So you think it is possible to get this processor to 4.0 to 4.4 GHz reliably and keep it cool?


Burn tests will test your cooler otherwise it'll be fine for gaming.


----------



## 1Quickchic

I'm not really gaming much on this one as its more of a Photoshop/ server build, I have gamed a little when my main machine was down however, I just recently replace all the thermal compound, and tape strips on the gtx580/3gb I have in it as it was idling at 52c and peaking way out of my comfortabilty zone along with getting artifacts. since I fixed it its been good. Yea this machine has lol 11 drives in it


----------



## bill1024

I just bought one of these dual socket 1366 for 43$, he had them for 49$ make offer. Free shipping.
Since I have 2 E5620 CPUs and a few sticks of pc3 1333 EEC laying around I figure what the heck, add it to the collection.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/281505707311?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1Quickchic*
> 
> I'm not really gaming much on this one as its more of a Photoshop/ server build, I have gamed a little when my main machine was down however, I just recently replace all the thermal compound, and tape strips on the gtx580/3gb I have in it as it was idling at 52c and peaking way out of my comfortabilty zone along with getting artifacts. since I fixed it its been good. Yea this machine has lol 11 drives in it


If it's more of a mission critical machine I would keep it ~ 4GHz. You can probably get away with somewhere around 1.3v for that speed. My i7 970 needed a little over 1.3v


----------



## OCmember

Exploring DirectX 12: 3DMark API Overhead Feature Test

The more cores the better, for gaming.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Exploring DirectX 12: 3DMark API Overhead Feature Test
> 
> The more cores the better, for gaming.


Better when the CPU is the limiting factor. What I gathered from that is dual-core gaming is going to be really difficult for DX12. Quad cores are still the sweet spot.


----------



## sultanofswing

Need a different motherboard. It won't do anymore than around 178 bclk unless I have the VTT above 1.35v. About all I can do with it from here.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't know if you really need a new board. I think 4.45GHz is pretty good. I'm not sure how much farther you'd be able to push it one a better board.


----------



## sultanofswing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I don't know if you really need a new board. I think 4.45GHz is pretty good. I'm not sure how much farther you'd be able to push it one a better board.


I like running the bclk higher for faster ram speed. In order to run my ram at its rated 1866 speed the board has to be at 1.4v on the vtt. I am running the vtt at 1.35 right now.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Have you tried a lower multiplier or 178 your BCLK wall?


----------



## sultanofswing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Have you tried a lower multiplier or 178 your BCLK wall?


180 seems to be my bclk wall. At or above the board won't post unless vtt is over 1.4v. I was running a 23 multi before. It wont do 200x20 either.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Were you able to run your BCLK above 180 prior to dropping in the Xeon?


----------



## sultanofswing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Were you able to run your BCLK above 180 prior to dropping in the Xeon?


I had a i7 950 in the machine before, I could run above 180 but had stability issues and still would have issues with the board not posting correctly.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Then your board could be the limiting factor. I personally wouldn't recommend getting a different, potentially better motherboard simply to run a higher base clock because you already have a pretty solid overclock on your hands. If you happen to stumble across a good deal, though, who am I to tell you to pass on it?


----------



## DR4G00N

Try increasing the PCIE Freq by a MHz or two, I've heard that it helps with the blck.

This reminds me, I haven't tested the max BCLK on my E762 yet. My E757 had a max of 223MHz so I'm expecting similar results.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I hit 220 fairly easily on my Sabertooth. I didn't try pushing things much further because I knew I wouldn't run it that high anyway. I could try 21x210 when I get home. I know my RAM could run 1680MHz with 6-7-6-18 1T timings, it's just a matter of the voltage required to run 4.41 GHz.


----------



## DR4G00N

Instantly hit 222 by just changing BCLK and Multi in the bios.

http://valid.x86.fr/v145wz


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Instantly hit 223 by just changing BCLK and Multi in the bios.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/v145wz


with E762 you should be able to get up too 250ish from one of my old posts
Quote:


> Well, tinkered around and while its just for fun here is my validations of high Bclk.
> 
> Bclk 250:
> http://valid.x86.fr/7lb575
> 
> 
> 
> vcore,multi/HT and various settings off/turned down(just to boot without issuesATM) until i get more time to play with it. Like i said so far just for fun.


----------



## DR4G00N

Cannot get it to go any higher, I tried messing with the VTT, VTT Switching Freq & PCIE Freq. I'll try again with HT off. Turning off HT doesn't help.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> with E762 you should be able to get up too 250ish from one of my old posts


May I ask what settings you used? (If you remember)


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Cannot get it to go any higher, I tried messing with the VTT, VTT Switching Freq & PCIE Freq. I'll try again with HT off. Turning off HT doesn't help.
> May I ask what settings you used? (If you remember)


if I recall again it was just for testing to do it it was not stable at that level.

pcie freq for I think topped out 115 but probably doesnt need to go over 105.
disable qpi fastlink I think it was also. Voltages shouldn't need to be very high either, not much more than you use for say 4ghz oc.

if I was at home I could check my bios


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I decided to remove half my RAM and see how far I could overclock the other half. For reference, here is a benchmark when it was at 1800MHz with 7-8-7-20 1T timings.



After ten successful passes in IBT, I ran a memory benchmark with my updated settings.



As long as I can live with 6GB, I think I can live with these settings.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Cannot get it to go any higher, I tried messing with the VTT, VTT Switching Freq & PCIE Freq. I'll try again with HT off. Turning off HT doesn't help.
> May I ask what settings you used? (If you remember)


Did any of that info help or you still stuck?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Did any of that info help or you still stuck?


I didn't get a chance to try those, busy with other things. I'll try them out tomorrow morning.

Edit: Didn't seem to help. Tried PCIE Freq up to 110MHz, Disabling QPI Fast Link fails to post.

Maybe 222 is the highest it will go, which I don't mind since I'll never use higher than that anyway.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> Hi everyone, after seeing this thread I upgraded my 920 to a x5670. It's still an upgrade from [email protected] but I seem to be getting pretty bad OC results compared to the guys in this thread.
> 
> At 22x175, 1.28v, HT off it's already reaching for the 80s with burn test. And that's with 20C room temp, in the summer it can go up to 35C so that's no good. Cooling with a nh-u12p push-pull and using the paste that came with it (nt-h1) 5 years ago. I already tried reapplying it with no results. I see people on air getting high 60s with 4.2. Did I just get a crap binned chip, just like my 920, or is there some tweaking magic I can do?


What were your temps like on your 920? If anything the X5670 should be running cooler.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> Hi everyone, after seeing this thread I upgraded my 920 to a x5670. It's still an upgrade from [email protected] but I seem to be getting pretty bad OC results compared to the guys in this thread.
> 
> At 22x175, 1.28v, HT off it's already reaching for the 80s with burn test. And that's with 20C room temp, in the summer it can go up to 35C so that's no good. Cooling with a nh-u12p push-pull and using the paste that came with it (nt-h1) 5 years ago. I already tried reapplying it with no results. I see people on air getting high 60s with 4.2. Did I just get a crap binned chip, just like my 920, or is there some tweaking magic I can do?


And so, my congratulations.
Paste that (nt-h1) is not good solution. You ask why? I use 2X NH-D14 and one nh-u12p, all three tube with pasta will be hardened after 8-14 months as be open. It is fact. And "5 years ago"








I've used many thermal solution items and have some thinking. In non contain metal thermal solution considered one of the best MX-4.
P.S. I am sorry but my English on not enough level.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> It does run a bit cooler clock for clock, 920 (it was d0 too..)was around 75C load at 3.6 with HT on.
> 
> Here's a pic of the xeon with burn test:
> 
> Well it didn't seem hardened and it looked like it spread nicely when I took the heatsink off, but I do hope you're right. I'll get some new paste.


Its my Xeon X5670 . Deepcool Neptwin with 3x120mm fans ,Thermal Compound "Arctic Silver 5" . Full Tower " Konqor Strom Killer with 3x230mm ,2x 140mm


----------



## DR4G00N

Hmm, after looking around it looks to me that your cooler just isn't up to the task tbh.
From reviews it only performs about 2c better (on average) than the Hyper 212+ which from my experience can barely keep a lapped 920 D0 @ 3.8GHz 1.25v under 75c.

So for your X5670 @ 1.28v the temps are actually about right for your cooler.

You could try lapping your cpu to drop the temps some (about 5-10c). But other than that, it seems you'll have to get a better cooler in order to oc further.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## chessmyantidrug

It sounds like the thermal paste is the issue. I don't know how that Noctua performs compared to the TRUE I once used, but my temperatures weren't that great with my TRUE. At 4.32GHz and 1.336V, temperatures on four of six cores were in the 80C to 83C range with the other two cores around 72C. Temperatures across each core dropped between 2C and 5C after switching to the Nepton 140XL. Before switching coolers, I switched pastes and going from Arctic Silver 5 to GC-Extreme and temperatures were largely unchanged.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/cooling/zardon/noctua-nh-u12p-special-edition-se2-review/4/
> 
> Here's a review showing little diference to antec kuhler 620, the very same cooler kana maru used in the OP.


Well, I came to my conclusion by looking at the average across multiple reviews.

Kana was using high CFM Delta fans in push/pull on that Kuhler 620 and not once were the oc'ed load temps ever mentioned. (or maybe I just missed them)

First of all though, I'd do what others are suggesting and change the paste.


----------



## Firehawk

The paste is fine. I use NT-H1 and I haven't had a tube dry out on me yet. It doesn't even dry out on the chip.

As for the U12P, it performs almost identically to the TRUE. I bought one when they first came out when I bought my 920 shortly after they came out. The 2 coolers were the best available at the time. [Cue 2008 flashback] There were no dual tower coolers, no CLCs, Prolimatech hadn't released the MEGA yet, Phanteks didn't exist, and Corsair was only making RAM. Actually that's not entirely true, CoolIT was making CLCs, but they were ****ty and had aluminum blocks. [/flashback] The noctua had a much better mounting solution, hence my choice, but I never got my 920 above 3.8GHz with it. On the same cooler, I can easily run 4.3GHz on my x5670.


----------



## KINOKS

Hi, so I'm finally starting to play with the X5670... ATM I'm trying to figure out/research what is the safe Uncore frequency and what ratio should it be with RAM speed (is the ratio the same as gulftown: 1.5x or above?)?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Try to maintain a 2:1 ratio for best performance. If your memory exceeds 2000MHz, then you probably have to dial back your uncore slightly. I know my system will not post if my uncore is "above" 4000MHz. I was playing with settings last night and 200BCLK with a 5:1 memory ratio resulted in 2005MHz with uncore at 4009MHz, but my system made it into Windows just fine. Unfortunately it wasn't stable. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## KINOKS

My memory is rated at 1600. Don't know yet how high I'll be able to get it, but don't think I'll be overclocking it per-see. So an uncore of 3200 or a bit higher it is then. Aren't there any safe numbers for uncore speed? I seem to recall that I've read somewhere that 3000 to 3200 is safe and where you would want to be... but seeing as that puts you at max 1600 RAM I don't see how people with higher RAM would cope.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I just finished telling you the upper limit was 4000MHz. If double your RAM speed is over 4000MHz, you will not be able to run a 2:1 ratio.


----------



## KINOKS

Yup, got it.

I'm trying to figure out my max bclk. Any idea why MB wont let my post above 180 bclk or if I change the uncore multy below 20x when on 180 bclk? I don't want 3600 uncore, I want 3200 uncore!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Yup, got it.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out my max bclk. Any idea why MB wont let my post above 180 bclk or if I change the uncore multy below 20x when on 180 bclk? I don't want 3600 uncore, I want 3200 uncore!


What board are you running?


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> What board are you running?


UD3R rev.2
FB version of BIOS

Clearing CMOS is really a pain on this board!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> UD3R rev.2
> FB version of BIOS
> 
> Clearing CMOS is really a pain on this board!


Does a lower uncore ratio work at lower bclk's?


----------



## KINOKS

Doesn't at 170 and 160. Must try lower, but not now, as it's getting really late (00:30 my local time)
It seems like it doesn't have to do much with uncore speed but rather just the ratio... weird


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Doesn't at 170 and 160. Must try lower, but not now, as it's getting really late (00:30 my local time)
> It seems like it doesn't have to do much with uncore speed but rather just the ratio... weird


Yeah strange. Maybe try a bit more VTT _(no more than 1.35!)_ and see if that helps. Maybe try running your ram at 1333. You should be able to run 200 bclk without issues.


----------



## KINOKS

RAM at 1600, bclk at 200, uncore at 3200, vtt 1.375 - it wont POST. MB just keeps flashing and beeping. These settings, accept the vtt, is what I was initially targeting for, but looks like 180 is max and even that with a strange uncore multi... something must be wrong


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> RAM at 1600, bclk at 200, uncore at 3200, vtt 1.375 - it wont POST. MB just keeps flashing and beeping. These settings, accept the vtt, is what I was initially targeting for, but looks like 180 is max and even that with a strange uncore multi... something must be wrong


Your VTT is too high, I wouldn't go above 1.35v as that could cause your cpu to prematurely fail.

Are you manually setting all of your voltages to default? Make sure they aren't set to auto as that can cause issues.
Try manually setting your timings to spec. Manually set your QPI clock to the lowest possible.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

When isolating your maximum base clock, you want to lower your memory ratio. You would keep your uncore double your memory speed, but a 200 base clock with a 4:1 ratio would result in 1600MHz RAM speed and 3200MHz uncore. Given timings, VTT and DRAM voltage, you should be able to run those settings. Perhaps your motherboard is the bottleneck.

What was your previous maximum base clock? With my i7-930, I was able to reach 225; with my X5670, I was "only" able to reach 220. I probably could have pushed it to 221 or 222, but I didn't bother because I knew I wouldn't be using either of those for 24/7 operation.


----------



## KINOKS

Sorry, my mistake, vtt is below 1.35. Its the last number my MB lets me input before going over 1.35. Dont know which on now exactly.

QPI clock is set to the lowest multy 36x (ie.18x). I havent set RAM timings manualy yet, will try that tomorrow but I doubt that will help (Im a pessimist by heart)

But I hate fiddling with RAM at this point because I want to determine bclk first without ram being in the equation...


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> When isolating your maximum base clock, you want to lower your memory ratio. You would keep your uncore double your memory speed, but a 200 base clock with a 4:1 ratio would result in 1600MHz RAM speed and 3200MHz uncore. Given timings, VTT and DRAM voltage, you should be able to run those settings. Perhaps your motherboard is the bottleneck.


You mean a 2:1 ration would resoult in 3200:1600 not 4:1?

The last cpu that was on this MB was the i7 950 and it wasnt OCed so I have no idea what the max bclk was on it
Could the MB really be this bad or is the proc? Proc is I think 2c or is it c2...


----------



## chessmyantidrug

No, a 4:1 ratio on your memory would result in 800MHz, but data rate is effectively doubled so you have an effective 1600MHz. Uncore shouldn't affect anything if it's double your memory speed and below 4000MHz.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Sorry, my mistake, vtt is below 1.35. Its the last number my MB lets me input before going over 1.35. Dont know which on now exactly.
> 
> QPI clock is set to the lowest multy 36x (ie.18x). I havent set RAM timings manualy yet, will try that tomorrow but I doubt that will help (Im a pessimist by heart)
> 
> But I hate fiddling with RAM at this point because I want to determine bclk first without ram being in the equation...


Drop your ram down to 1066 or 1333 if you can.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> No, a 4:1 ratio on your memory would result in 800MHz, but data rate is effectively doubled so you have an effective 1600MHz. Uncore shouldn't affect anything if it's double your memory speed and below 4000MHz.


It really depends on the board/chip, some need a lot of VTT for anything over 3200mhz.


----------



## KINOKS

Mine worked with: 180bclk, 3600 uncore, 1.3125 vtt. I mean it booted up and ran a quick intelburn without errors... I could also probably up the RAM to 8x. This is most likely the max I can do regarding bclk. But would end up with a weird ram uncore ration...


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Mine worked with: 180bclk, 3600 uncore, 1.3125 vtt. I mean it booted up and ran a quick intelburn without errors... I could also probably up the RAM to 8x. This is most likely the max I can do regarding bclk. But would end up with a weird ram uncore ration...


That could be. It is probably something with the board if you've tried everything.

It could be CPU related but I think it is unlikely. I've had five 5670's and at 1.25v VTT they all happily did 200mhz BCLK, 3200mhz uncore, with the ram at 2000mhz


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Mine worked with: 180bclk, 3600 uncore, 1.3125 vtt. I mean it booted up and ran a quick intelburn without errors... I could also probably up the RAM to 8x. This is most likely the max I can do regarding bclk. But would end up with a weird ram uncore ration...


You can try running your RAM at 1800MHz. Loosen the timings a tick and you shouldn't have any problem.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> It could be CPU related but I think it is unlikely. I've had five 5670's and at 1.25v VTT they all happily did 200mhz BCLK, 3200mhz uncore, with the ram at 2000mhz


I wish I could have my base clock at 200 and RAM at 2000MHz with 1.25V VTT. My VTT is currently at 1.35V because I set it there while trying to maximize my RAM speed and never bothered trying to figure out the lowest value I need for my current 2050MHz. I had to remove half my DIMMs to even achieve this overclock. With all six slots populated, I couldn't find stability above 1800MHz no matter how much I loosened the timings. I'd like to get a 3x4GB kit, but then I'd have to settle for worse timings. I'd rather just have all six spots populated and run the 1800MHz with 7-8-7-22 1T I was running.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I wish I could have my base clock at 200 and RAM at 2000MHz with 1.25V VTT. My VTT is currently at 1.35V because I set it there while trying to maximize my RAM speed and never bothered trying to figure out the lowest value I need for my current 2050MHz. I had to remove half my DIMMs to even achieve this overclock. With all six slots populated, I couldn't find stability above 1800MHz no matter how much I loosened the timings. I'd like to get a 3x4GB kit, but then I'd have to settle for worse timings. I'd rather just have all six spots populated and run the 1800MHz with 7-8-7-22 1T I was running.


Yeah figuring out the lowest voltages can be tricky. I try to let memtest run through 3 passes, with 24gb of ram that is usually around 15h or so. I've had memtest finish two passes and fail on the third pass, but never after that even when letting it go for another 30h or so _(around 5 passes)._ I think three passes is probably thorough enough.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@KINOKS

Hi. I used to have a UD3R v1.6, I'll try to keep an eye on the thread and help you out if you need it.

I had some success with
http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/
this process.

NB STICK TO VOLTS USED IN THIS THREAD - AFAIK Long term: <1.35 Core "Vcc" DEFINITELY ALWAYS <1.35V Uncore/IMC "Vtt" or annoying death of CPU may happen. Some leeway on Vcc seems to be possible, if you keep all cores <80C in load.

My UD3R had a bit of Vtt droop when measured with a multimeter, but was over under light load, so be careful out there.

You should be able to make 200 BCLK. Deffo set RAM Timings by hand to match the sticks on the sticks







Auto does not always get it right.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @KINOKS
> 
> Hi. I used to have a UD3R v1.6, I'll try to keep an eye on the thread and help you out if you need it.
> 
> I had some success with
> http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/
> this process.


Thanks!

Yeah, I'm following the same routine.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> NB STICK TO VOLTS USED IN THIS THREAD - AFAIK Long term: <1.35 Core "Vcc" DEFINITELY ALWAYS <1.35V Uncore/IMC "Vtt" or annoying death of CPU may happen. Some leeway on Vtt seems to be possible, if you keep all cores <80C in load.
> 
> My UD3R had a bit of Vtt droop when measured with a multimeter, but was over under light load, so be careful out there.


Okey, I've set manual timing to 99924 and this lets me boot on 200 bclk. Still doesn't let me change uncore multi though... Anyway got some progress yey!








You should be able to make 200 BCLK. Deffo set RAM Timings by hand to match the sticks on the sticks







Auto does not always get it right.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@KINOKS

Hi - I made a mistake typing that, I have changed
"Some leeway on Vtt seems to be possible"
to
"Some leeway on V*CC* seems to be possible"

Soz.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Still doesn't let me change uncore multi though




This is greyed-out?
NB - Ignore the settings.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Yeah, I'm following the same routine.
> Okey, I've set manual timing to 99924 and this lets me boot on 200 bclk. Still doesn't let me change uncore multi though... Anyway got some progress yey!


Nice, keep at it. I'm sure you'll find some settings you'll be happy with.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> This is greyed-out?
> NB - Ignore the settings.


Yup it's greyed out. Not the multi just the frequency, just like you posted.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@KINOKS
Maybe I'm being thick, but what's the problem? The Uncore Frequency is a multiple of the BCLK, you have to set a BCLK value and a multi to get the frequency you seek. The value shown im my pic is the product of the values around it: 210x16=3360.

To set the freq, type a BCLK, move to the multi value, hit return, choose a multi and ?press esc?* to exit the menu applying the multi - the product frequency will then appear, or if not, as you move the cursor to another field.

*gonna check a second, I forget.


----------



## KINOKS

The problem is that I cant lower the multi. If it's lower than 20x the system dosn't post.

Never mind the happy 200bclk post as I dont reach windows with that number


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh I see. Sorry, I was pre-coffee earlier









Hmmm, annoying that.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can you confirm exactly which board it is?

http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3449#ov

This one?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

As long as your uncore frequency is between 3:2 and 2:1 to your memory frequency, you should be fine. The closer it is to 3:2, the more you may have to loosen round trip latency, the secondary memory timing values.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Can you confirm exactly which board it is?
> 
> http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3449#ov
> 
> This one?


Yup, that's the one. Rev 2.0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> As long as your uncore frequency is between 3:2 and 2:1 to your memory frequency, you should be fine. The closer it is to 3:2, the more you may have to loosen round trip latency, the secondary memory timing values.


So I got it up and running at 1800 RAM (10-11-11-29) and 3600 Uncore, with bclk 180 and core clock at 22. This got me a stable OC at 3960MHz. Vtt at 1.335, Vcore 1,37, Dram 1,66 (it's either 1.64 or 1.66, and it didn't work on 1.64).
The problem here was that the temps were to high!?? Started to go beyond 90 at which point I stopped the test. Must be something wrong with my cooler, maybe I installed it badly or the thermal paste isn't spread out nicely. It's a completely new Noctua NH-L12.

Now at 160bclk, 1600RAM, 3200 uncore, 22 cpu multy = 3520MHZ and temps are 77-80. Left the turbo on but it doesn't activate while running Primer95 or intelburn...


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Your high temperatures could be from any number of variables. The first thing that stands out to me is core voltage. The more voltage you pump into your processor, the higher the temperatures; along with that, faster clock speeds will generate more heat, but that doesn't usually start to play a significant role until you surpass 4.0GHz.

If your BIOS settings aren't aggressive, I'm led to believe you ended up with a poor overclocking chip, which seems to be rare with these Xeons.


----------



## KINOKS

Okey, just updated to a newer version of BIOS, thought I had the last one...weird as I did the update, and the multiplier and 200 bclk work fine, without problems:doh:
Back to the drawing board it looks like. Although temps are still 90-92 at 4GHz (200 bclk) but all works O.K. Uncore multi can be set freely now.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Try bringing down your core voltage. If you're not stable with lower voltages, then it's really not worth overclocking you chip that much. At least I wouldn't want my temperatures bring that high under load even if I know nothing will stress my processor that much.


----------



## KINOKS

Will try and bring down vcore. I hope it goes down a bit, so my temps drop to 80-85. I can live with that.
Is it better to have a high bclk (200 or more) and lower multi (20 or less) or high multi (22) and lower bclk (180) regarding lower temps?
If I leave vcore on auto it goes up to 1.392V when doing a stress test. Is this voltage an indicator of what is my minimum voltage or will it work if I set it manually lower in windows?


----------



## KINOKS

Oh, and btw, this is a workstation, which means lots of rendering. So it's normal to have cpu maxed at 100% for longer periods of time.


----------



## DR4G00N

1.392v is way too high for 24/7 use, my X5650 does 4GHz @ 1.275v


----------



## KINOKS

Haha mine wont even boot properly if under 1.37 when at 4GHz!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

You generally want to run a lower base clock and higher multiplier. It's all about balancing with what your RAM can do.


----------



## KINOKS

Seeing as my ram can be OCed to 2000 there is no reason to have a low bclk then. Also for stabilitis sake I would rather have RAM at its rated speed (1600).
But why would ram be a problem seeing as you can lower its multi?


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Seeing as my ram can be OCed to 2000 there is no reason to have a low bclk then. Also for stabilitis sake I would rather have RAM at its rated speed (1600).
> But why would ram be a problem seeing as you can lower its multi?


Because you could find a CPU overclock you want but your RAM might have to run a lower ratio than you want. For example, I can do 24x185 but I can't run my memory at 1850MHz with all six slots populated.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Will try and bring down vcore. I hope it goes down a bit, so my temps drop to 80-85


Somebody sourced a doc saying 81.5C was Intel's long-term limit. I'm at 73Tops, 1.28/1.24 Vcc/Vtt.

I'm pretty sure most of these chips, in that board should hit 200x20Core x16Uncore with 1.32Vcc/Vtt if you have the other settings right.

Try it?

You will need turbo OFF.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Actually, try setting 1.35Vcc/1.315Vtt.

How many sticks of RAM are you using?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Having Turbo on or off shouldn't have an effect unless you're running a multiplier high enough to even use Turbo. If you have states turned off, then you won't have to worry about your first two cores using the highest Turbo multiplier. I can't even enable Turbo mode in BIOS unless I set my CPU ratio to auto and turn on SpeedStep.


----------



## marcchep

What do you guys think about the Asus P6T WS Professional?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Eeeerrrrr - this may be of use @KINOKS










Multi actually goes 12-20x

This is a UD7R, but it's much the same as my last board.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Haha mine wont even boot properly if under 1.37 when at 4GHz!


Sounds like you got a bad chip, that board should be more than sufficient for pushing a 5670 as it has 12 phases available to the cpu. My first chip was fairly terrible as well.. Although, not that bad. It needed ~1.33v for 4ghz. My second (current) chip needs only ~1.25v for 4ghz. My other three chips can do 4.1-4.2 at 1.325v.

Your temps are crazy high, I'd try to keep temps well under 80c if possible. What cooler are you running?


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Somebody sourced a doc saying 81.5C was Intel's long-term limit. I'm at 73Tops, 1.28/1.24 Vcc/Vtt.
> 
> I'm pretty sure most of these chips, in that board should hit 200x20Core x16Uncore with 1.32Vcc/Vtt if you have the other settings right.
> 
> Try it?
> 
> You will need turbo OFF.


I have 1.3175 vtt or something like that. My vcore is a bit more stupid. My mobo has little options, it's like 1.3175 and the next option to chose is 1.375. Really annoyig. 1.3175 vct is enough for 200bclk.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Actually, try setting 1.35Vcc/1.315Vtt.
> 
> How many sticks of RAM are you using?


I have 6 sticks. 6x4.
Also have 2 gpus if that matters...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Eeeerrrrr - this may be of use @KINOKS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Multi actually goes 12-20x
> 
> This is a UD7R, but it's much the same as my last board.


thx man! What ram do you have?
I cant set my vcore that low. Maybe at a lower cpu multi I could set it to 1.31...maybe. I have qpi pll at auto and ioh core at 1.3 as I have 2 gpus. And dram voltage also at auto. How come you have C states enabled?

Anybody knows how much bclk raises vcore? What if I try lowering cpu multi and upping bclk and at the same time lowering vcore? Any other ways of lowering vcore?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Sounds like you got a bad chip, that board should be more than sufficient for pushing a 5670 as it has 12 phases available to the cpu. My first chip was fairly terrible as well.. Although, not that bad. It needed ~1.33v for 4ghz. My second (current) chip needs only ~1.25v for 4ghz. My other three chips can do 4.1-4.2 at 1.325v.
> 
> Your temps are crazy high, I'd try to keep temps well under 80c if possible. What cooler are you running?


Using Noctua NH-L12. I'll try re-fitting it and reapplying thermal paste as the temps seem really high.

If all else fails I'll sell this god damn cpu but first Id really want to make sure its not my cpus fault...


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Base clock does not directly affect core voltage. When isolating your maximum base clock, the only voltage your want to adjust is QPI/VTT. You only adjust core voltage if raising QPI/VTT doesn't work. You don't adjust your core voltage until you're finding your maximum CPU overclock.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@KINOKS
Which chip do you have again?

I'm only familiar with up to a 200x20 multi setup.
Quote:


> What ram do you have?


ALWAYS Crucial Ballistix. Never had any kind of problem. 3x4GB @ 1600/8/8/8/24 [though, as you can see the Mobo wants to Auto them to 8/8/8/20, I'll get around to testing it someday]
Quote:


> I have qpi pll at auto


Hmm, I always worry about that because I don't want to stress the QPI/Uncore subsystem. I'd set that to a known value, perhaps 1.16 or something. Reason being not only might it be waaay high on auto, but I consider it "adding" to the QPI voltage, and we need to keep this <1.35! [more like <1.3 I think].
Quote:


> dram voltage also at auto


Do you have a MIT status screen like my fist pic? What applied DRAM V does it show? Again, I'd be wary of that. Try to set it to the value on the sticks. What are they/what are they rated for?
Quote:


> Any other ways of lowering vcore?


*I'd sort your temps/cooling out first*! While you're at it, make jolly sure you have a clean cpu base and socket. NB - Never touch the Socket at all with anything. Don't drop the CPU in more than a few mm when it's level above the socket!!

Pop the chip out, clean the pads with condensed breath and a clean cotton rag [never use loo roll etc, may leave dust and lint] blow any fluff out of the socket, refit. Clean and inspect the top of the CPU, any fluff or hairs would screw the thermal paste up - so fit it, wipe the top and inspect with a torch for fluff. Apply thermal paste like this

[what paste is it anyway?]
and then do the same inspection of the base of the cooler.

Refit when clean, press slowly and firmly down for a few tens of seconds to allow the paste to spread a bit, and then tighten the screws/clips thus if you can:


This should eliminate the mechanical side and leave only the electrical side.

FIRST: disable all non-essential hardware, Serial ports, PS/2, Firewire etc. Even the network adaptors if possible









Then: basically, I'd force the multi to x12 with the CPU setup I have used, dial in a RAM and then a BCLK setup.

Personally I'd suggest up to 12-20x setuup like mine, there seems to be a lot of the chips that will to 4.0, but 4.4 or so usually requires a very fast ramp in Vcc beyond published limits, and while it's fun hammering CineBench etc [You'll note I have a higer score in there along with the 4.0 one] the everyday difference between 4.0 and 4.4 is 0-10%, more likely the lower end of that, so I really don't see the point in 4.1, 4.2 etc, unless you can run with nice low Vcc [unusual, I think Kana does 4.2 at 1.25 or something, but it's rare]. 5GHz, yeah great, if you have the cooling and deep pockets









*Each boot, run RealtempGT and CPU-Z/HWMonitor and watch the Vcc and multi. If you have any turbo kick in selectively you will find it very hard to track the problems down*.

Next bring the max multi up a step at a time. With the setup I showed you, if you set x15, you should get 12-15x depending on load. You can continue on this path...

To be honest though, I have tried minimising the CPU volts with tiny changes as you are told to do, and with both the chips I tried it was a waste of time. Seems quicker to set max volts safe, try for 4GHz then bring it DOWN, there's a lot less steps of Vcc that way. Last step [assuming you had already set a Vtt for your BCLK overclock], Vtt bump one [if safe] notch, and see if that allows a lower Vcc or take it away again if it doesn't. I'd prioritise safe Vtt over clockspeed!!

Then lots of testing. I had a overly low Vc to start with, I could pass prime etc forever, but odd crashes and a LOT of crashes with Flash in Chrome. Turned out one last Vcc bump fixed it. *[Cheers Evil Monk]*
Quote:


> How come you have C states enabled?


It was stable, simples. The setup above allows core parking and the 12-20x multi auto/mobo selected, hence the 23C min temp in a 20C room







AFAIK this is a good idea for longevity and heat control. Saves a few pennies in electricity too.
Quote:


> NH-L12


Quote:


> The NH-L12 is a low-profile quiet cooler designed for use in small form factor cases and HTPC environments.


Might not be up to the job. Are your fans able to speed ramp? The UD3R v1.6 and this UD7R both support smart fan control. I use a Zalman CNPS-10x Extreme. If you have the space in your case I recommend them highly.
Quote:


> I'll sell this god damn cpu:


I'd buy another first, then you can find the best one. That's what I did when I killed the 5660 I bought first [Bad chip or high Vtt, I never did know].

Actually, that reminds me, what I did when I had two was to save my BIOS overclock profile and then load optimised defaults and reboot. This will set the speeds to defaults, but also the board will autodetect the volts for the Core/Uncore and you can see the values in the Motherboard Voltage section - this may gave you some point of comparison vs other chips WRT the quality of the chip itself before you start overclocking it.

See my previous post history for other details like the values my mobo auto loads for the three chips I have tried.

Oh -one last thing, I wanted to bring turbo in as well, I though I could set 12-21 or something - nope! With these boards you'll find big jumps in frequency if you enable it, and no way to control them. I think I got boosted to 4.4? I forget. Anyway, it wasn't happening!

Lastly, I do have a theory...... [which I will paste in as I really need to do some coursework]


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> You generally want to run a lower base clock and higher multiplier


Why? I haven't found a Vcc/Vtt difference with the Two Gigabyte boards I've tried, just that I lose a little RAM speed.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I have a theory about these chips, it goes like this.
> 
> Intel was looking to optimise/bin the chips based on the frequencies they were going to sell them at: 3-3.5Ghz. Across those frequencies they wanted to sell different chips, at different price with different characteristics. Cheap, fast, low power consumption etc.
> 
> Their process gave chips with various characteristics, leaky, hot, cold, low idle draw, low full use draw ACCROSS THAT FREQUENCY RANGE.
> 
> Therefore, they could have binned the chips with the model numbers we know, based on very different performance envelopes to those we are using... 4GHz+, power draw be dammed.
> 
> 5650s are more leaky, or hotter. so they set them to <3Ghz, but they got a lot of them from the process.
> 
> 5660/5670s were less leaky, perhaps, and ran cooler at 3-3.2. They might however not be any faster at 1.3v
> 
> The top end chips, well I guess they were more optimised for higher speeds, maybe they were the best quality, coolest at 3.5ish. But they were made with exactly architecturely the same design, and so still may perform to a broadly similar level unless they happen to have come out of the fab with a very low count of manufacturing defects, in which case you may get a really good overclock...perhaps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lastly we have the previous usage to consider, and what we do know is that usually the frequency that the processor operates at correlates closely to the voltage and therefore the temperature and the electromigration damage to the chip.
> 
> In that case, the lower binned chips will have had less strain overall over their previous lives, those are likely to be the cheapest to purchase for us now and perhaps work nearly as new.
> 
> Finally it would seem sensible to surmise the very highest binned chips, with the lowest power consumption would have been the most expensive to purchase, and do it seems more likely that they would have been installed in better motherboards, and perhaps have been taken the most care of in their lives, because of outlay.
> 
> Again, this kinda levels the playing field when we're talking 4GHz setup.
> 
> However, while they might still be the most expensive, even now, they are probably still worth it.... If you have the cash.
> 
> Just my tuppence: it's a bimodal frequency distribution


----------



## Pedros

Hi all,
i'm using a i7 870 with a "Hackintosh" install. It's running smooth but i have the need for some more muscle than the P55 platform can give me.

I saw a X5660 selling for a really good price ( 140 Eur ) and i'm also checking a Gigabyte X58A-OC ...

My question is, do you think the X5660 is still a good upgrade for the i7 870 ?

Any of you already tried a "hackintosh" install with the X5660 ?

Thank you all
Pedro


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> 870 with a "Hackintosh" install


Exact spec/clockspeed?


----------



## Vipu

There have been much talk about memory and I kinda have no idea about it, but can someone tell is everything "right" or fine for me?

I have these http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f3-10666cl7t-6gbpk
and my cpu-z says this: http://i.imgur.com/QfUVurj.jpg

Also does everything seem fine here, like qpi link or something? http://i.imgur.com/suSBe7A.jpg


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pedros*
> 
> My question is, do you think the X5660 is still a good upgrade for the i7 870 ?
> 
> Any of you already tried a "hackintosh" install with the X5660 ?
> 
> Thank you all
> Pedro


I'm running a ex58-ud3r with a x5660 on mavericks. Osx does not read the cpu microcode on the x5660 correctly as it is not in it's " bios" because apple never supported that cpu

. As a result the chip wont downclock when idle properly and has like 2x speedstep settings. End result runs a bit hotter over-clocked than on linux or windows. Also turbo not working properly. Performance blows a bit tbh and its difficult/impossible to get info on what the board and chip are running regards different p-states.

Works out not as good as you think it would be.

Worth checking which xeons apple did ship because they will work as intended

Hope that helps


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Vipu
Looks fine, can you not run the next frequency multi up for your ram? Manufacturer specified latancy/frequency gives you a constant you can use to calculate new frequency and latency combinations if you shift your bclk and multiplier values around.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob
What applications are you running?

Why not just lock all the frequencies in the BIOS? Too hot?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> What applications are you running?
> 
> Why not just lock all the frequencies in the BIOS? Too hot?


(nod)

Oh yes :-(

How's yours?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> How's yours?



Sweet.

Do you want to borrow a cooler?


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Vipu
> Looks fine, can you not run the next frequency multi up for your ram? Manufacturer specified latancy/frequency gives you a constant you can use to calculate new frequency and latency combinations if you shift your bclk and multiplier values around.


Im not sure what frequency multi is but here is pics from my bios so maybe you can help from there + check is everything ok here:
pic1
pic2
pic3
Everything in dram timing is at auto.

I have tried fiddling sometime with those DRAM Fequency and UCLK Frequency but I dont think I saw any difference anywhere and I dont know what should I put on those.
Just now I tried to put DRAM freq to 1400 something and then in windows sounds and network didnt work so I put it back to auto (lowest there is so 1050 something).


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Your client does not have permission to get URL /tkCikWWtToLzj6w646QVU_vRPZ582VGM7JNfLkwCyughAZKle2URa8IPwDYTXTmK2TIaelcj0srMTnE=w1896-h835 from this server.


----------



## cb750rob

@gofasterstripes

Nice Result. I take it you aren't trying to push for more in case it does an impression of a thermite charge................?

........Me meither








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Do you want to borrow a cooler?










lol nah, got one its just not big enough.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob

What frequency and volts is that at? Temps?

The Macho should be at least as cool as my Zalman!

I can hit 4.7, just, but the volts are just not safe.


----------



## cb750rob

You misunderstand my humour.

It's fine under Windows and linux. The macho does a fine job IBTx30 runs hottest core is 75 lowest 65 @ 4.25ghz across all cores. vcore 1.296 under load.

Osx fekks it all up. P states, eist turbo etc none work properly and Temps are way higher. Because its a hackintosh you cant deal with it as macs Fake UEFI or whatever does not have info for the chip. I think x5560 does tho as apple installed that into mac pros at one stage so the os recognises it and can run it accodingly.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I can hit 4.7, just, but the volts are just not safe.


4.6 for me but I have taken your previous experience under advisement.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*


https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqRzh3N0UzWXd1bzA/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqdFcyUnM5dE5BUkk/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqSHBpNkE0T3dKLUU/view?usp=sharing

What about now


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750robAmazed OSX would cause such a big problem. Can't you hack a config file somewhere?

@Vipu Yes, I'll take a look later.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @KINOKS
> Which chip do you have again?
> 
> I'm only familiar with up to a 200x20 multi setup.
> ALWAYS Crucial Ballistix. Never had any kind of problem. 3x4GB @ 1600/8/8/8/24 [though, as you can see the Mobo wants to Auto them to 8/8/8/20, I'll get around to testing it someday]
> Hmm, I always worry about that because I don't want to stress the QPI/Uncore subsystem. I'd set that to a known value, perhaps 1.16 or something. Reason being not only might it be waaay high on auto, but I consider it "adding" to the QPI voltage, and we need to keep this <1.35! [more like <1.3 I think].
> Do you have a MIT status screen like my fist pic? What applied DRAM V does it show? Again, I'd be wary of that. Try to set it to the value on the sticks. What are they/what are they rated for?
> *I'd sort your temps/cooling out first*! While you're at it, make jolly sure you have a clean cpu base and socket. NB - Never touch the Socket at all with anything. Don't drop the CPU in more than a few mm when it's level above the socket!!
> 
> Pop the chip out, clean the pads with condensed breath and a clean cotton rag [never use loo roll etc, may leave dust and lint] blow any fluff out of the socket, refit. Clean and inspect the top of the CPU, any fluff or hairs would screw the thermal paste up - so fit it, wipe the top and inspect with a torch for fluff. Apply thermal paste like this
> 
> [what paste is it anyway?]
> and then do the same inspection of the base of the cooler.
> 
> Refit when clean, press slowly and firmly down for a few tens of seconds to allow the paste to spread a bit, and then tighten the screws/clips thus if you can:
> 
> 
> This should eliminate the mechanical side and leave only the electrical side.
> 
> FIRST: disable all non-essential hardware, Serial ports, PS/2, Firewire etc. Even the network adaptors if possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then: basically, I'd force the multi to x12 with the CPU setup I have used, dial in a RAM and then a BCLK setup.
> 
> Personally I'd suggest up to 12-20x setuup like mine, there seems to be a lot of the chips that will to 4.0, but 4.4 or so usually requires a very fast ramp in Vcc beyond published limits, and while it's fun hammering CineBench etc [You'll note I have a higer score in there along with the 4.0 one] the everyday difference between 4.0 and 4.4 is 0-10%, more likely the lower end of that, so I really don't see the point in 4.1, 4.2 etc, unless you can run with nice low Vcc [unusual, I think Kana does 4.2 at 1.25 or something, but it's rare]. 5GHz, yeah great, if you have the cooling and deep pockets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Each boot, run RealtempGT and CPU-Z/HWMonitor and watch the Vcc and multi. If you have any turbo kick in selectively you will find it very hard to track the problems down*.
> 
> Next bring the max multi up a step at a time. With the setup I showed you, if you set x15, you should get 12-15x depending on load. You can continue on this path...
> 
> To be honest though, I have tried minimising the CPU volts with tiny changes as you are told to do, and with both the chips I tried it was a waste of time. Seems quicker to set max volts safe, try for 4GHz then bring it DOWN, there's a lot less steps of Vcc that way. Last step [assuming you had already set a Vtt for your BCLK overclock], Vtt bump one [if safe] notch, and see if that allows a lower Vcc or take it away again if it doesn't. I'd prioritise safe Vtt over clockspeed!!
> 
> Then lots of testing. I had a overly low Vc to start with, I could pass prime etc forever, but odd crashes and a LOT of crashes with Flash in Chrome. Turned out one last Vcc bump fixed it. *[Cheers Evil Monk]*
> It was stable, simples. The setup above allows core parking and the 12-20x multi auto/mobo selected, hence the 23C min temp in a 20C room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFAIK this is a good idea for longevity and heat control. Saves a few pennies in electricity too.
> 
> Might not be up to the job. Are your fans able to speed ramp? The UD3R v1.6 and this UD7R both support smart fan control. I use a Zalman CNPS-10x Extreme. If you have the space in your case I recommend them highly.
> I'd buy another first, then you can find the best one. That's what I did when I killed the 5660 I bought first [Bad chip or high Vtt, I never did know].
> 
> Actually, that reminds me, what I did when I had two was to save my BIOS overclock profile and then load optimised defaults and reboot. This will set the speeds to defaults, but also the board will autodetect the volts for the Core/Uncore and you can see the values in the Motherboard Voltage section - this may gave you some point of comparison vs other chips WRT the quality of the chip itself before you start overclocking it.
> 
> See my previous post history for other details like the values my mobo auto loads for the three chips I have tried.
> 
> Oh -one last thing, I wanted to bring turbo in as well, I though I could set 12-21 or something - nope! With these boards you'll find big jumps in frequency if you enable it, and no way to control them. I think I got boosted to 4.4? I forget. Anyway, it wasn't happening!
> 
> Lastly, I do have a theory...... [which I will paste in as I really need to do some coursework]


Thank you wery much for your time and effort. Werry much appreciated! I will through it later as I have much work to do now during the day.
For now I'll say only this: I don't know what happened but the firmware upgrade to FH made everything behave 100% differently. I have to find my max bclk and everything all over again.
Right now I just upped bclk, just for fun to 220 and it work without a problem lol ! Vtt is 1,375 currently. I'll try lowering it later. I've put this 220 number in totally arbitrarily and it works. I'll try going to 230 - 240 lol
Temps are also lower now. This is what I'm currently testing:
18x 220bclk
RAM 1.5v at 220 x 8 (will up this later)
Vcore in BIOS set to 1.318 with Level 2 option selected for voltages. In windows under load Vcore reads: 1.296v ! Nice!
My temps are currently maxing out at between 74 - 78C. Looks like vcore can be lowered and it greatly effects temps. And also looks like I need to take care of cooling. Either a better cooler or try making this one work better.
With a better cooler, like Noctua NH-D15 I coul probably hit 4.4 at 75C temps at this settings.

It's really weird how everything is starting to work nicely all of a sudden. Looks like there was something very wrong with BIOS before.


----------



## KINOKS

I have a x5670.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750robAmazed OSX would cause such a big problem. Can't you hack a config file somewhere?.


I know, have looked and looked but no luck. Prob is mac owners don't tinker as much as we do so tools and info are much more scarce.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> What temps are you getting with that OC ? I have the same cpu/mobo and that exact OC is the max I can pull. The only difference I run the ram at 1400 with 9-9-9-24


Hmm its not max I can get but I lowered it there to keep pc bit cooler and silent.
In prime it gets to 80C max and normal gaming etc 50-55C maybe, idle around 40C.

Ihad before bit under 4,4ghz but it needs so much more vcore that I will keep it at 4,2 because of much lower temps, summer coming soon so have to prepare for that.

Extra info if you want: I have Macho cpu cooler and Define R5 case with default fans.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Using Noctua NH-L12. I'll try re-fitting it and reapplying thermal paste as the temps seem really high.
> 
> If all else fails I'll sell this god damn cpu but first Id really want to make sure its not my cpus fault...


Ah yeah, that cooler really isn't great for overclocking. Are you using a low profile case?

If not I'd take a look at the Raijintek Ereboss as it is only $35 right now. I have one on the way for my second x5670 build, I'll let you know how it does compared to my U14S.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> I know, have looked and looked but no luck. Prob is mac owners don't tinker as much as we do so tools and info are much more scarce.


I think the x5670 was stock with the older mac pros. I'll be setting it up on my Asrock Extreme and x5670. I'll let you know how it goes.


----------



## KINOKS

Great. Do tell when you get some resoults.

My ex co worker ordered this one because this case has a very big fan on the side. It's inwin Ironclad


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Great. Do tell when you get some resoults.
> 
> My ex co worker ordered this one because this case has a very big fan on the side. It's inwin Ironclad


The Ereboss may not fit in your case. According to a review it says there is only 145mm clearance while the Ereboss measures 160mm. It may fit if you remove the fan on the side, you'd have to measure to make sure though (from the top of the CPU to the edge of the case/side panel).

I'll go ahead and get the actual measurements of the cooler when I get it as they may be playing it safe on the spec sheet.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I think the x5670 was stock with the older mac pros. I'll be setting it up on my Asrock Extreme and x5670. I'll let you know how it goes.


That would be great. We cant discuss on the forums though as I believe it's against overclock.net rules because hackintosh's break mac eula. I am surprised I haven't been told off already







If we were on anand we'd be banned already lol.

Isn't the eroboss rajinteks version of my macho cooler? would be interested in how it performs with a Xeon.


----------



## DR4G00N

I have a question, slightly off topic.
Would it be beneficial to disable the unused PCI-E slots on my E762? Would doing so disable a NF200 chip for example? (I'm only asking since I know PLX chips are turned off when not in use, I was thinking that NF200 chips would do the same).


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> That would be great. We cant discuss on the forums though as I believe it's against overclock.net rules because hackintosh's break mac eula. I am surprised I haven't been told off already
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we were on anand we'd be banned already lol.
> 
> Isn't the eroboss rajinteks version of my macho cooler? would be interested in how it performs with a Xeon.


Ahh good point. Yeah the Ereboss _(not ero







)_ is similar to the Macho, maybe slightly better.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@tbob22@cb750rob
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/specs/mac-pro-twelve-core-2.93-mid-2010-westmere-specs.html

Seems possible there's a configuration clash on your build somewhere.

Rob, are you using the latest BIOS? There were lots of h**kintosh machines built with UD3R boards, most with Nehalem chips. Can you try an i7 in there and see if the heat disparity goes away?

It might just be a UFEI/BIOS difference, maybe another BIOS [newer or older] would help? The BetaBIOS's must be fundamentally different because they're larger than the ones that came before.

Again, I have a i7 920 here you are welcome to borrow.


----------



## spdaimon

Stupid question.....

I have a P6T SE that I am testing the limits of the i7 960 in it before plopping in a X5660. Currently have it at 20 x 160 BCLK. I had this memory problem with it. Sometimes it would boot with 12GB (6 x 2GB) and sometimes with 10GB. I may have gotten that straightened out by manually setting the UCLK to 3200. It has mixed brand DDR3-1600 in it. I am thinking possibly selling the 6 sticks and getting 3 x 4GB Gskill Sniper 1600Mhz or something. Anyway, I wanted to check the DRAM voltage. I see two settings in the BIOS. One is called QPI/DRAM Core Voltage and one is DRAM Bus Voltage. Am I correct in assuming that the DRAM Bus Voltage is the typical DRAM Voltage? The other I assume is the IMC voltage. CPUID's HW Monitor doesn't list these values at all for some reason on this board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah I think you're right on those.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Im not sure what frequency multi is but here is pics from my bios so maybe you can help from there + check is everything ok here:
> pic1
> pic2
> pic3
> Everything in dram timing is at auto.
> 
> I have tried fiddling sometime with those DRAM Fequency and UCLK Frequency but I dont think I saw any difference anywhere and I dont know what should I put on those.
> Just now I tried to put DRAM freq to 1400 something and then in windows sounds and network didnt work so I put it back to auto (lowest there is so 1050 something).


So can someone tell is everything right here?
Or anything I should change?

Like UCLK, thats uncore right? I dont know what to do with that or any memory stuff if thats even needed.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah it looks like you have _some_ stuff setup.

I'd try to get a turbo-enabled overclock with multipliers rising to 24x when needed, then dial in manual volts for RAM and IOH etc, then set the ram timings to what you want and then finally overclock and stabilise your Uncore.

Uncore should hit 3200-3600 at 1.32ish volts, or lower if possible.

Check this for more info about all the subsystems:
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/

Then follow a good guide like Miahallen's x58 Westmere guide.

TAKE GOOD NOTE OF MAXIMUM VOLTAGES AND UNCORE vs DRAM MAXIMUM DIFFERENCE [<0.5v!]


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah it looks like you have _some_ stuff setup.
> 
> I'd try to get a turbo-enabled overclock with multipliers rising to 24x when needed, then dial in manual volts for RAM and IOH etc, then set the ram timings to what you want and then finally overclock and stabilise your Uncore.
> 
> Uncore should hit 3200-3600 at 1.32ish volts, or lower if possible.
> 
> Check this for more info about all the subsystems:
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/
> 
> Then follow a good guide like Miahallen's x58 Westmere guide.
> 
> TAKE GOOD NOTE OF MAXIMUM VOLTAGES AND UNCORE vs DRAM MAXIMUM DIFFERENCE [<0.5v!]


I had turbo on before but I didnt see any difference, it works just like it does without for me, it uses up to 24x with 2 cores and 22x with all cores.
So im not sure what I have wrong or why it does that even without turbo.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Turbo on two cores with the X5670 is 25x. You would only ever see that with C-states enabled and an extremely light load.


----------



## Vipu

So there is no difference to use turbo then? Or what is it?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Turbo allows some of the cores to run faster, in your case 2 at 25x. If the load is high on more than two cores then the speed reduces


----------



## chessmyantidrug

You're not really going to benefit from Turbo unless your BIOS allows you to use the turbo multi for all six cores 24/7. You won't see the two-core turbo ever really helping because your system only uses it under light loads, like when you're not using your computer and light tasks are running. There's some benefit, but you don't actually witness it.

The benefit to enabling C-states is your system dynamically changed the CPU ratio depending on load so you can get slightly lower idle temperatures. The ratio will kick up for things like scheduled tasks in the middle of the night (defrag, Windows update, etc.) and come back down when those are finished. I personally don't use C-states, but several people do.


----------



## KINOKS

Could anybody please care to explain why does my Vcore fluctuate so much.
In BIOS, for instance, I have it set to 1.300 but in windows CPU-Z reports (when fully under load) values between 1,216 - 1,232.
Or 1,275 in BIOS and 1,200 in Windows.
I have EIST disabled, and under LLC I have standard, so voltage really shouldn't fluctuate this much.

And I can't complete not one quick IntelBurn test, it always fails or BSOD.
And Vcore is lower when under load then when idle.


----------



## KINOKS

Edit: it was the "Standard" LLC setting that was lowering Vcore. I've set it to "Level 2" now and it works. Vcore is still lower in windows however. 1.3 Bios and 1.280 Windows...


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Rarely will the voltage value you set in BIOS be the actual value you see in Windows. The variance should be the same, though, so annotate the difference and adjust your voltage accordingly. In BIOS I have core voltage set to 1.300 and in Windows CPU-Z reports 1.336V idle and 1.342V under load. I tried disabling LLC and voltage drops far too low under load.


----------



## KINOKS

Oh, okey I see. It's a normal thing
Wow u have a high Vcore. What OC are you running and which cpu?
I'm currently hitting 20x200 at 1.268 Vcore in windows under load. I have bad temps though... 76C


----------



## chessmyantidrug

http://valid.x86.fr/zggbb7

There is my current overclock. I was at 24x180, but League of Legends crashed at the end of every game so it was either increase core voltage a notch or back down my overclock a notch. I opted for the latter. As much as I was looking forward to warm weather, higher ambient temperatures have me wanting better fans. I kind of want to get two of these to replace the JetFlo fans that came with my Nepton 140XL, but I can't find any reviews on how they perform on radiators. I have also considered using 120mm fans instead since there's holes to accommodate them, but I haven't seen anything about people trying that either.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @tbob22@cb750rob
> http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/specs/mac-pro-twelve-core-2.93-mid-2010-westmere-specs.html
> 
> Seems possible there's a configuration clash on your build somewhere.
> 
> Rob, are you using the latest BIOS? There were lots of h**kintosh machines built with UD3R boards, most with Nehalem chips. Can you try an i7 in there and see if the heat disparity goes away?
> 
> It might just be a UFEI/BIOS difference, maybe another BIOS [newer or older] would help? The BetaBIOS's must be fundamentally different because they're larger than the ones that came before.
> 
> Again, I have a i7 920 here you are welcome to borrow.


Dude we need to leave this topic alone as it's against overclock.net policy.

Thanks for your effort in looking though.







My understanding is this.....

I am running latest bios for the ex58-ud3r hence in windows all works as should, Linux all works as should ..... NB speed scaling is not reported correctly in most Linux programs. However, since kernal something around ubuntu hardy it is supposedly sorted just reported incorrectly. Phoronix have an article about it all not being sorted prior.

The mac thing is a different kettle of haddock because even though the bios is the latest one, the bios for the board does not have the final say. It is the (fake UEFI stuff) microcode for the processors that apple have shipped that is included in the kernal kexts and stuff.

I think its a bit like the problem Kinoks was having until he updated his bios: the processor would work - ish. He could overclock... But not optimum. The latest bios sorts that and he is now overclocking much better because the board knows what it is dealing with.

In my case yes the board knows...... But the OS takes no notice of the board unless the chip is a recognized variant. Therefor the the p-states etc are all nto fekk..

Ulimately the X5670 will work !00%because the microcode for that chip is present . The X5660 is not so is "hobbled".

Thanks for the offer of the loaner btw. Much appreciated but at this stage I think not needed. +1 rep


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Rarely will the voltage value you set in BIOS be the actual value you see in Windows. The variance should be the same, though, so annotate the difference and adjust your voltage accordingly. In BIOS I have core voltage set to 1.300 and in Windows CPU-Z reports 1.336V idle and 1.342V under load. I tried disabling LLC and voltage drops far too low under load.


Yeah, every board will react a bit differently. For example setting 1.325v on my Asrock ends up at 1.28v on CPU-Z, on my P6T Deluxe 1.325v in the bios ends up at 1.32v. (both with LLC enabled).. So to get the same overclock that was possible on the P6T, I need to set the the Asrock quite a bit higher, but ends up very close in CPU-Z.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Great. Do tell when you get some resoults.
> 
> My ex co worker ordered this one because this case has a very big fan on the side. It's inwin Ironclad


Got the Ereboss in and installed. First impressions is that it is very good. At 4.2ghz with 1.325v it maxes out around 70c on the hottest core and 60c on the coolest. The same chip on my NH-U14S maxed out at 74c on the hottest and 65c on the coolest, that was with white cheapo thermal paste so maybe 3-4c hotter than normal. I'd say it is pretty much even with my Noctua, but either way it is a awesome cooler for the $35. I can also fill all six slots if I wanted to. While mounted, the height measured from the top of the motherboard without the fan is 157mm, with the fan it is 178mm. From the CPU it would be quite a bit less, one could also replace the 140mm fan with a 120mm fan to reduce the height.

The downside is the mounting system, it is seriously the worst I've ever come across. I ended up super gluing the cross-bar to the heatsink and that made things much easier, but still not even close to easy. The fan mounting system is just as bad, I don't know if it is possible to mount the fan without bending the fins a bit.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/zggbb7
> 
> There is my current overclock. I was at 24x180, but League of Legends crashed at the end of every game so it was either increase core voltage a notch or back down my overclock a notch. I opted for the latter. As much as I was looking forward to warm weather, higher ambient temperatures have me wanting better fans. I kind of want to get two of these to replace the JetFlo fans that came with my Nepton 140XL, but I can't find any reviews on how they perform on radiators. I have also considered using 120mm fans instead since there's holes to accommodate them, but I haven't seen anything about people trying that either.


Oh, you are at 4,4, well that explains the Vcore As you go up the multi the need for vcore really increases. My uses 1,260 for 4GHz (20x200) and 1,360 for 4,4GHz (22x200). Really a big difference. I have noticed that the need for Vcore goes down if I push bclk more and lower the multi. 20x220 for instance... But this introduces other problems that manly concern RAM. At 200 bclk my RAM is happily working at it's rated speed and timings (1600, 9 9 9 24).

What temps are you getting with the Nepton? It has a small radiator, I'm surprised it's sufficient for a 4,4 GHz overclock. And are you O.K. running your CPU at such high voltages 24/7?
I was looking at the Corsair H100i for cooling...


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Got the Ereboss in and installed. First impressions is that it is very good. At 4.2ghz with 1.325v it maxes out around 70c on the hottest core and 60c on the coolest. The same chip on my NH-U14S maxed out at 74c on the hottest and 65c on the coolest, that was with white cheapo thermal paste so maybe 3-4c hotter than normal. I'd say it is pretty much even with my Noctua, but either way it is a awesome cooler for the $35. I can also fill all six slots if I wanted to. While mounted, the height measured from the top of the motherboard without the fan is 157mm, with the fan it is 178mm. From the CPU it would be quite a bit less, one could also replace the 140mm fan with a 120mm fan to reduce the height.
> 
> The downside is the mounting system, it is seriously the worst I've ever come across. I ended up super gluing the cross-bar to the heatsink and that made things much easier, but still not even close to easy. The fan mounting system is just as bad, I don't know if it is possible to mount the fan without bending the fins a bit.


Yeah, I'm not really keen on messing with it. To much hassle For now the Noctua will suffice, if I decide to push the overclock beyond 4GHz then I'll probably buy a H100i or something similar. But probably wont push the OC more as I don't have the time nor the energy to deal with it. 4GHz was simple and it's 24/7 stable now. It seems that going beyond 4GHz introduces a lot more hassle (at least for me). I'm quite happy with 4GHz, it's stable, the temps are OK (70C) and it's fast enough.

Thx to everybody that was willing to help me in this OC. I also hope I didn't spam this thread to much with my questions!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Oh, you are at 4,4, well that explains the Vcore As you go up the multi the need for vcore really increases. My uses 1,260 for 4GHz (20x200) and 1,360 for 4,4GHz (22x200). Really a big difference. I have noticed that the need for Vcore goes down if I push bclk more and lower the multi. 20x220 for instance... But this introduces other problems that manly concern RAM. At 200 bclk my RAM is happily working at it's rated speed and timings (1600, 9 9 9 24).
> 
> What temps are you getting with the Nepton? It has a small radiator, I'm surprised it's sufficient for a 4,4 GHz overclock. And are you O.K. running your CPU at such high voltages 24/7?
> I was looking at the Corsair H100i for cooling...


Under load, maximum core temperatures are 77 or 78 and two cores are around 8 to 10 degrees cooler. The only time I ever do anything that really pushes my CPU is when stress testing. I had been having issues with my League of Legends client crashing at the end of every game. Usually a small bump in core voltage would fix that, but it didn't so I backed off my overclock to 24x175. Turns out that wasn't the problem, either. I did eventually figure it out, but weather is about to heat up here in Texas so I don't want to push for an overclock I might not be able to run this summer when highs are between 100 and 110.

Overall I really like my Nepton 140XL. It's about 5-6C better than the TRUE it replaced, at least in my personal experience. My X5670 still seems to run hotter than other users so I'm at a loss.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## KINOKS

Yeah, I also left it at 4GHz because summer is almost here. But if I lived in Texas I would probably go for a 240mm cooler


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Yeah, I also left it at 4GHz because summer is almost here. But if I lived in Texas I would probably go for a 240mm cooler


The Nepton 140XL actually performs better than a lot of 240mm AIO coolers.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> So can someone tell is everything right here?
> Or anything I should change?
> 
> Like UCLK, thats uncore right? I dont know what to do with that or any memory stuff if thats even needed.


Vipu, does your pc downlock when idle and drop voltage accordingly?

I don't see any offset votage settings in your bios screenshots so that would suggest your cpu is getting a constant voltage even at lower frequencies if it does downclock.

Your board is different to mine so I cant say where they are but on mine setting cpu vcore to "normal enabled offset voltages to show in bios.

see here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2880_20#post_23504714

You can add an reduce voltage on mine so make sure you use correct setting + or -

This dramatically helped my temps.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Vipu, does your pc downlock when idle and drop voltage accordingly?
> 
> I don't see any offset votage settings in your bios screenshots so that would suggest your cpu is getting a constant voltage even at lower frequencies if it does downclock.
> 
> Your board is different to mine so I cant say where they are but on mine setting cpu vcore to "normal enabled offset voltages to show in bios.
> 
> see here:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2880_20#post_23504714
> 
> You can add an reduce voltage on mine so make sure you use correct setting + or -
> 
> This dramatically helped my temps.
> 
> Hope that helps.


It goes down but just a bit in idle.
And I dont know is there any setting like that in my bios, I have checked everything but I dont think there is.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> It goes down but just a bit in idle.
> And I dont know is there any setting like that in my bios, I have checked everything but I dont think there is.


There must be something What board exactly?


----------



## Vipu

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqRzh3N0UzWXd1bzA/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqdFcyUnM5dE5BUkk/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqSHBpNkE0T3dKLUU/view

You can tell if you see some option here in these pics.

And its Asus P6T SE

Checked idle temps now and lowest core is 35C and highest 45C.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> It goes down but just a bit in idle.
> And I dont know is there any setting like that in my bios, I have checked everything but I dont think there is.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqRzh3N0UzWXd1bzA/view
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqdFcyUnM5dE5BUkk/view
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqSHBpNkE0T3dKLUU/view
> 
> You can tell if you see some option here in these pics.
> 
> And its Asus P6T SE
> 
> Checked idle temps now and lowest core is 35C and highest 45C.


Turn your C-state tech on

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqdFcyUnM5dE5BUkk/view?pli=1

Edit: more info here

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2008/11/06/overclocking-intel-core-i7-920/3

And here:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/611

Hope that helps you


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Turn your C-state tech on
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4PyLqRi8WGqdFcyUnM5dE5BUkk/view?pli=1


And what do I put on those extra options I get after that?
I have tried putting it on 2 times and both times I could not get it stable, it just crashes instantly when I do some stress test.

Its not like im not fine already and done with changing settings, this seems stable now at 4,2ghz, no problems for 1 week at least.
So if I have to turn c-state on and find new settings again to get 5C less temps then im just gonna leave it here where im at now.


----------



## cb750rob

Sorry, I thought you were still having problems







:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> What cooler you have etc?
> Again someone with same cpu+mobo+clocks and you have so low temps compared to mine.
> 40-50C idle, 80C prime load.


Unfortunately I don't have that board so I cant point you directly to the correct settings. i can only show you what I have found via a quick google search of "Asus P6T SE vcore does not drop when idle".

have a look at my settings here if you want: http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/2880_20#post_23504967

They may point you in the right direction.

The offset voltage is max voltage that can be added when the cpu is in various load states. In my example the normal voltage is 1.2v..... + the offset of 0.08758v which gives you a max applied voltage of 1.28758v under max load (plus a bit if LLC is enabled)

Hope that helps but I guess if you are happy then leave it.

EDIT: I worked out my voltage by looking at cpuz while running IBT once stable and working out what offset I needed to put in bios to get my voltage under load to give the same result.


----------



## spdaimon

Just got my X5660 to boot on my P6T SE at 4.2Ghz. I didn't even notice that the Vcore doesn't drop much. Its hovering at 1.34-1.36. I set it to 1.35v in the BIOS. Everything esle is factory. CoreTemp doesn't show the VID for some reason. Max temp is 60-62C right now using a CPNS10X in push-pull.

Vipu, if I find out anything that will help, I'll let you know.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Just got my X5660 to boot on my P6T SE at 4.2Ghz. I didn't even notice that the Vcore doesn't drop much. Its hovering at 1.34-1.36. I set it to 1.35v in the BIOS. Everything esle is factory. CoreTemp doesn't show the VID for some reason. Max temp is 60-62C right now using a CPNS10X in push-pull.
> 
> Vipu, if I find out anything that will help, I'll let you know.


Ty, and if it doesnt need much fiddling








Im fine right now but of course I would like to have less temp if there is some 1 option to turn on/off.

My volts are:
idle: 1,28
2 thread: 1,288
12 tread: 1,296

In bios I think I had at 1,28something


----------



## DR4G00N

X5650 @ 4828.16MHz 1.4825v, 1.3v VTT.
http://valid.canardpc.com/jq76hn


----------



## KINOKS

@DR4G00N
Jeez 1.48 vcore. How much life can you expect at such high voltages?









What are your temps and what cooler are you using?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> @DR4G00N
> Jeez 1.48 vcore. How much life can you expect at such high voltages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are your temps and what cooler are you using?


Haha, this was just for fun. It was barely stable enough to validate.








1.48v would kill the chip very fast if used 24/7 (maybe a week or two) and it was idling at 39c with a H110 so the theoretical load temps would probably be in the mid 80's.

Next I'll try running with only 2 cores to use the 23x multi and aim for 5GHz.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> @DR4G00N
> Jeez 1.48 vcore. How much life can you expect at such high voltages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are your temps and what cooler are you using?
> 
> 
> 
> Haha, this was just for fun. It was barely stable enough to validate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.48v would kill the chip very fast if used 24/7 (maybe a week or two) and it was idling at 39c with a H110 so the theoretical load temps would probably be in the mid 80's.
> 
> Next I'll try running with only 2 cores to use the 23x multi and aim for 5GHz.
Click to expand...

are these xeons not as tough as say a 930 i ran my 930 at 1.46 vcore for years and it never degraded still running now at 4200 on 1.30/1.31 same vcore i needed day i got it.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> are these xeons not as tough as say a 930 i ran my 930 at 1.46 vcore for years and it never degraded still running now at 4200 on 1.30/1.31 same vcore i needed day i got it.


Nah, the xeon's aren't nearly as tough as the ol' 45nm chips. On these xeons 1.35v is the max safe 24/7 voltage whereas the i7's were good till 1.45v.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> are these xeons not as tough as say a 930 i ran my 930 at 1.46 vcore for years and it never degraded still running now at 4200 on 1.30/1.31 same vcore i needed day i got it.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, the xeon's aren't nearly as tough as the ol' 45nm chips. On these xeons 1.35v is the max safe 24/7 voltage whereas the i7's were good till 1.45v.
Click to expand...

ah i see lol my old 930 is tough as a tank i put 1.7 thru it for benchmarking when i get my xeon im not sure what im gonna do with my old 930 prices are so low almost not worth selling it I even was gonna push 1.8 but my board wouldnt post at that lol.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> ah i see lol my old 930 is tough as a tank i put 1.7 thru it for benchmarking when i get my xeon im not sure what im gonna do with my old 930 prices are so low almost not worth selling it I even was gonna push 1.8 but my board wouldnt post at that lol.


1.7v wow, max I ever put into my 920 was 1.55v mind you with the vdroop on my old board it was more like 1.46v









I just attempted 5GHz @ 1.5v on 2 cores but it didn't seem to like it very much at all.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> 1.7v wow, max I ever put into my 920 was 1.55v mind you with the vdroop on my old board it was more like 1.46v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just attempted 5GHz @ 1.5v on 2 cores but it didn't seem to like it very much at all.


Any luck on the max bclk? nice clock on the validation though!


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> ah i see lol my old 930 is tough as a tank i put 1.7 thru it for benchmarking when i get my xeon im not sure what im gonna do with my old 930 prices are so low almost not worth selling it I even was gonna push 1.8 but my board wouldnt post at that lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 1.7v wow, max I ever put into my 920 was 1.55v mind you with the vdroop on my old board it was more like 1.46v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just attempted 5GHz @ 1.5v on 2 cores but it didn't seem to like it very much at all.
Click to expand...

lol i used to be pretty brave and wanted all the mhz i could get for hwbot at one time i was ranked high on our team.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Any luck on the max bclk? nice clock on the validation though!


No, I couldn't get it any higher. Though I didn't mess around with the voltages much when I tried.

And thanks


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Haha, this was just for fun. It was barely stable enough to validate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.48v would kill the chip very fast if used 24/7 (maybe a week or two) and it was idling at 39c with a H110 so the theoretical load temps would probably be in the mid 80's.
> 
> Next I'll try running with only 2 cores to use the 23x multi and aim for 5GHz.


How can you make a claim like that? I've read through both of the X58 Xeon threads, front to back, and I can recall maybe a single person who claimed that his chip degraded. So where are you getting your statistics from to prove that running it above the "maximum safe voltage" will cause the chip to degrade, and in "maybe a week or two" no less?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I have read that the maximum "safe" core voltage for these Xeons is 1.45V, just like the i7-990X. I still think temperature is more important than voltage. Sure a high enough voltage will be dangerous for your processor, but chances are temperatures will be a limiting factor before voltage.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I have read that the maximum "safe" core voltage for these Xeons is 1.45V, just like the i7-990X. I still think temperature is more important than voltage. Sure a high enough voltage will be dangerous for your processor, but chances are temperatures will be a limiting factor before voltage.


He likely is going by the vid of these chips which is 0.750V-1.350V you could buy one and the stock volts be at 1.35 usualy theirs a pdf with more info that tells the real safe volts but im new to the xeon scene so dont know where to find it right now.


----------



## bill1024

The OP of this thread Kana-Maru, made a good detailed post about these chips and the max voltage.
Here it is. Read both pages. It is not that long.
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information

CPU world lists the max voltage at 3.5 too.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20X5660%20-%20AT80614005127AA%20%28BX80614X5660%29.html


----------



## KINOKS

If you're to lazy to read that article:
1.4 is max vcore says Intel. But this is the MAX vcore the chip should reach including all the voltage spikes, etc. This would usualy mean that the max BIOS setting should be 1.35.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Is there any performance difference between the 36xx and the 56xx series at the same frequency?

Why are we all using 56xx not 36xx, out of curiosity?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

X56XX chips tend to be cheaper, probably because some motherboards have the X3680 and X3690 unlocked.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Other than that there's no performance difference?

Hmmm.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I doubt there would be any performance difference. It's the same architecture.


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> X56XX chips tend to be cheaper, probably because some motherboards have the X3680 and X3690 unlocked.


never seen a X36XX only W36XX chips, and never heard of them being unlocked either but going to look into it now lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

Sorry, yes, W36xx

Point of interest: My friends new machine:

"15305 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970(2x) and Intel Core i7-5820K Processor
Graphics Score 20542
*Physics Score 13503*
Combined Score 5645"

VS

7869 with AMD Radeon HD 7970(1x) and Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz4.0GHz
Graphics Score 8832
*Physics Score 13988*
Combined Score 3181

Granted he's not OC'd yet - but these Xeons are ace VFM


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Sorry, yes, W36xx
> 
> Point of interest: My friends new machine:
> 
> "15305 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970(2x) and Intel Core i7-5820K Processor
> Graphics Score 20542
> *Physics Score 13503*
> Combined Score 5645"
> 
> VS
> 
> 7869 with AMD Radeon HD 7970(1x) and Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz4.0GHz
> Graphics Score 8832
> *Physics Score 13988*
> Combined Score 3181
> 
> Granted he's not OC'd yet - but these Xeons are ace VFM


I love my X5660 oc'ed, man it is a workhorse! Heck I am really using the heck out of it now, I just got started on KVM passthrough on CPU, ssd Drive, GPU! Trust me it is beast, I am running Arch Linux with Windows7 x64 in QEMU and my WEI windows score for the cpu's and drive are just what they were in normal windows! Just building a kernel now for the GPU and I will have two OS'es running at the same time able to game on one with full GPU graphics (windows) and game on the other if I wanted to (Linux)

I have Both systems (os'es) set to use 6 cores each


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'm still getting a mix of different BSODs, one every 2-7 days.

Apart from Prime and IBT - how can I track them down quickly? I have bumped both Vcc and Vtt up a bit, not gone away.

Maybe I should reinstall windows, but worried about doing this without having to reinstall everything else









Currently running at stock to check it's not just system corruption from the OC setup crashes.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I'm still getting a mix of different BSODs, one every 2-7 days.
> 
> Apart from Prime and IBT - how can I track them down quickly? I have bumped both Vcc and Vtt up a bit, not gone away.
> 
> Maybe I should reinstall windows, but worried about doing this without having to reinstall everything else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently running at stock to check it's not just system corruption from the OC setup crashes.


have you upped your qpi that can spit out bsod at random least it has for my 930 on another note my x5675 just came in cant wait to give it a try.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> have you upped your qpi


Yep it's 200x20 and on the lowest multi. Maybe more Vtt again?


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> have you upped your qpi
> 
> 
> 
> Yep it's 200x20 and on the lowest multi. Maybe more Vtt again?
Click to expand...

how much qpi i know i had to use 1.40 for 4400 on my 930.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Bal3Wolf




Actually I might have knocked it up one more to 1.255ish since that pic.

Uncore is 3200, RAM at 1600

>1.35 kills these CPUs very quick.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

hmm so these cpus cant handle near the voltages at all compared to the old 900s does anyone have a tech document on the 5600s that lay out the max vcore and qpi ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Gotta run dude, but yeah, <1.35 for both, better <1.3 for Vtt/QPI/Uncore longterm.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bradford1040*
> 
> never seen a X36XX only W36XX chips, and never heard of them being unlocked either but going to look into it now lol


Sorry, that's what I meant. My mind has been literally all over the place lately.


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK - for stability - trying the following:

Vcc to 1.3
Vtt to 1.255
QPI PLL to 1.2 [to match IOH as per this guide]

Previously they were 1.294/1.235/1.14


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> My mind has been literally all over the place lately.


Have you considered trying real drugs


----------



## gofasterstripes

.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't recommend adjusting more than one voltage at a time or you won't know which voltage adjustment actually helped.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Mostly I agree, but right now I'm sick of crashes, I need to get work done and they're all within safe limits. If this fixes it, maybe I'll drop then back one at a time.

Actually, I'm becoming a fan of doing it this way around, it's probably quicker


----------



## chessmyantidrug

With that mindset, just increase your voltages to the maximum safe value and work your way backwards.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Petty much. Though Ill try that if this isn't it.

Cheers, Sam


----------



## PICKLEINMOUTH

Anybody tried an x5650, L5639, or similar in an MSI X58 Platinum SLI? I'm rocking that board with a 920 now and it's great, but I want a hexa core









Thanks guys!


----------



## Manu78

Hi guys,

Upon discovery of this topic, back to november 2014, I got myself a Xeon X5660 and installed it on my X58A-UD3R v2.0.
I overclocked to 4.2 GHz @ 1,319v and it was rock stable so I decided to keep this setup.

But last week, while fiddling to get OSX Yosemite sleep/wake to work, my PC crashed and refused to get past POST.
No matter what I tried (CMOS reset, BIOS rollback to version ,FG1 letting it uplugged w/o battery overnight, ...) the system allowed me to enter BIOS, but it refused to boot from any media : Linux DVD, Win 7 DVD, USB drive with Memtest86x , Sata HDD with Clover bootloader,SSD. *Each boot attempt resulted in a reboot*
I began testing with other GPUs, Ram, ... without success. So I tought my mobo was bricked until I got my hands on my previous CPU (I7-950). Big surprise once I installed it: the system was able to boot again.
So it seems my Xeon is fried. I've already seen dead CPUs, but not dead ones that allow the mobo to POST.









By the way, I put it back on the mobo just to check if the CPU swap helped, but no change. Xeon temp in BIOS were ok as well.


----------



## KINOKS

Huh I had lots of trouble with bios because it reverted to FB after a crash or somethingm. After I updated back to FH everything worked okey.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Manu78*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> Upon discovery of this topic, back to november 2014, I got myself a Xeon X5660 and installed it on my X58A-UD3R v2.0.
> I overclocked to 4.2 GHz @ 1,319v and it was rock stable so I decided to keep this setup.
> 
> But last week, while fiddling to get OSX Yosemite sleep/wake to work, my PC crashed and refused to get past POST.
> No matter what I tried (CMOS reset, BIOS rollback to version ,FG1 letting it uplugged w/o battery overnight, ...) the system allowed me to enter BIOS, but it refused to boot from any media : Linux DVD, Win 7 DVD, USB drive with Memtest86x , Sata HDD with Clover bootloader,SSD. *Each boot attempt resulted in a reboot*
> I began testing with other GPUs, Ram, ... without success. So I tought my mobo was bricked until I got my hands on my previous CPU (I7-950). Big surprise once I installed it: the system was able to boot again.
> So it seems my Xeon is fried. I've already seen dead CPUs, but not dead ones that allow the mobo to POST.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, I put it back on the mobo just to check if the CPU swap helped, but no change. Xeon temp in BIOS were ok as well.


Strange. What was your VTT, mem speed and UCLK at? Had you manually selected all of your voltages or did you leave some on auto?

Temps will run quite a bit higher on non-windows/linux as I don't think there is official support for your CPU. Were you monitoring temps to make sure it wasn't overheating under load?


----------



## Manu78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Strange. What was your VTT, mem speed and UCLK at? Had you manually selected all of your voltages or did you leave some on auto?


QPI/VTT was set to 1.335v, RAM ran at 1600MHz and UCLK was around 2500MHz if I remember correctly.
Most voltages were set to auto.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Temps will run quite a bit higher on non-windows/linux as I don't think there is official support for your CPU. Were you monitoring temps to make sure it wasn't overheating under load?


Yes. FakeSMC* and its plugins allow CPU/mobo temp monitoring under OSX on hackintoshes








Furthermore, the fan is controlled by bios so if the Xeon had overheated , I would have heard it, I think.

While running games under Windows 7, the Xeon cores ran at very reasonnable temperatures (monitored using OCCT).

*http://sourceforge.net/projects/hwsensors/


----------



## gofasterstripes

My UD3R v1.6 roasted a 5660. The Vtt was running high when tested with a multimeter, it was only correct under high CPU loads.

I manually set all my voltages, and I think vtt was also 1.335


----------



## Bal3Wolf

seems like these xeons as a whole are much more picky and easy to kill but they do run super cool lol.


----------



## Manu78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> My UD3R v1.6 roasted a 5660. The Vtt was running high when tested with a multimeter, it was only correct under high CPU loads.


Interesting.
Is this a bios issue or a major design flaw on this mobo ?

*gofasterstripes*, was your Xeon totally toasted or was your system still able to reach POST like mine ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I gradually lost stability of my overclock.

The regulation of the Vtt seems comparatively poor, but I guess they were budget boards and i7's of that era would tolerate 1.4+, so....

My UD7r V2 is also a little over, but less so.

Good advice for UD3r users is to get the multimeter out!

In my old posts somewhere, I show/describe the testing points I found, next to the REAR of the socket.


----------



## gofasterstripes

EX58-UD3r Rev. 1.6 Rear view.



The big through-soldered pairs marked in the picture are the Vtt measuring points If I remember correctly.

All the others seemed tied for Vcc.

Each pair is +/gnd.


----------



## Manu78

Thank you for sharing.
I'll give a try as soon as possible


----------



## gofasterstripes

No worries, watch out you don't short anything.

IIRC I actually used the back of the CPU socket/support as my gnd point.


----------



## neoroy

I am gonna use X5650 or X5660 with EVGA X58 3way SLI and MSI GTX980 gaming, also maybe 6 or 12G RAM.
It's not bottlenecking my card, right guys???


----------



## coolbho3k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> I am gonna use X5650 or X5660 with EVGA x58 3way SLI and GTX980 gaming, also maybe 6 or 12G RAM.
> It's not bottlenecking my card, right guys???


Go with 12GB RAM and you'll be okay. 6GB is getting to be too low.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> I am gonna use X5650 or X5660 with EVGA x58 3way SLI and GTX980 gaming, also maybe 6 or 12G RAM.
> It's not bottlenecking my card, right guys???


Nope, your good. My X5650 @ 4.1GHz didn't bottleneck my Tri-fire 7950's so it definitely wouldn't bottleneck a 980.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> I am gonna use X5650 or X5660 with EVGA X58 3way SLI and MSI GTX980 gaming, also maybe 6 or 12G RAM.
> It's not bottlenecking my card, right guys???


alt tab and see if the app is using 100% of cpu, if it is thn its bottlenecking


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coolbho3k*
> 
> Go with 12GB RAM and you'll be okay. 6GB is getting to be too low.


Ok thanks coolbho3k









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Nope, your good. My X5650 @ 4.1GHz didn't bottleneck my Tri-fire 7950's so it definitely wouldn't bottleneck a 980.


Glad to hear that, thx DR4G00N









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> alt tab and see if the app is using 100% of cpu, if it is thn its bottlenecking


Will later when my rig is complete ^_^

Thanks for the tips guys









Btw looks like I can not afford 12G tripple channel RAM at this time, so I will use 2x4G dual channel RAM, is it OK in X58?


----------



## bill1024

You can run 4 sticks in triple channel. Read your manual to make sure I am right with placement.
Mine is 1st and 2nd slots closest to the cpu, then every other slot.
My Asus and EVGA are the same. Normal 3 sticks is 1st slot empty closest to the CPU then every other slot.
Just stick the 4th closest to the CPU. It will be triple channel.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I believe you actually get worse performance running four sticks in triple channel.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I believe you actually get worse performance running four sticks in triple channel.


My firestrike scores and my point production folding at home were the same with 3x4gb or 4x4gb triple channel.


----------



## spdaimon

Interesting. I have seen that you can do that, but I've wondered how that is actually implemented. Triple channel with 4 sticks? That's crazy!







Does it alternate between the Channel A and Channel B? Or is it more like dual channel + 2?

I'm not sure FireStrike is a good test of memory performance, thought thats more geared toward CPU and GPU usage. You are probably better off using the other FutureMark product, PCMark, that tests overall performance. BOINC and [email protected], surely, I've been told its very memory intensive.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> alt tab and see if the app is using 100% of cpu, if it is thn its bottlenecking


I've done this at work to test wither a laptop needed more memory, or increase the virtual memory, or at least I used to in XP days, but mostly increase the physical RAM. With Windows 7, we can just let the system manage it. 2GB of system ram is not enough in the corporate environment with all the security stuff running. The alt-tab is much quicker with 4GB!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I've wondered how that is actually implemented.


I read somewhere that the chan with 2 sticks in is slower than one with a single stick, but still better than dual channel alone. The commands/transfers get shared/delayed to some degree.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I believe you actually get worse performance running four sticks in triple channel.
> 
> 
> 
> My firestrike scores and my point production folding at home were the same with 3x4gb or 4x4gb triple channel.
Click to expand...

you should test in aida64 extreme memory benchmark to see what bandwith and latecy you get running the 4th chip, from what i remmber it will show tripple channel because 3 sticks being in it the 4th one wont be and it will be slower when somthing has to use it. And depending on app and how much memory you have your last chip might not get used much and you will never notice the slow down.

In the 3+1 triple channel configuration with 4 sticks, the first three sticks are interleaved together for full triple channel performance and the 4th stick gets tacked onto one of the other single channels. So, performance is not consistent across your entire memory space, however you get more total memory.


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> You can run 4 sticks in triple channel. Read your manual to make sure I am right with placement.
> Mine is 1st and 2nd slots closest to the cpu, then every other slot.
> My Asus and EVGA are the same. Normal 3 sticks is 1st slot empty closest to the CPU then every other slot.
> Just stick the 4th closest to the CPU. It will be triple channel.


OK thx for the information bill1024


----------



## gofasterstripes

4 hours in and no crash yet









_

Might have fixed it *crosses fingers*






*Celebrates*_


----------



## gofasterstripes

@spdaimon

"using a CPNS10X in push-pull"

Pics?

My CNPS-10X Extreme can't do this.

@EvilMonk

You said you run BOINC a lot.
I'm trying [email protected] again, mostly as an experiment in stability [in the winter it was also nice to keep the room warm, and I would also love to find a signal]. I was having crashes before, but now I'm up to 8 hours with no BSOD [Machine tested stable with IBT and Prime, but BOINC used to crash it in an hour].

I also reinstalled BOINC, because I was wondering if the crashes were software. not hardware [maybe because I crashed so many times it messed it up].

This time I installed the standalone version, with no Virtual Box. What version do you run? Noticed any difference between them? Either more stable?

[This is W7 64Bit, GUI BOINC, not command line]

Do you use the machines at the same time? I think I have to set my computing preferences up right to allow this. With "GPU While in use" and resource allocations at 100% I get some stuttering with music or YT [ I guess the pipeline and cache are totally flooded!], so I have set "Use at most xx% of processors" to 70 or 80, and that seems to fix it by reducing the overall load on each core.

Funny, though, because "xx CPU Time" just alternates between 100 and 0% load as duty-cycle. This doesn't help the stuttering.

Those two options seem to be named incorrectly, the wrong way around!

Any feedback etc?


----------



## bill1024

I run BOINC 24/7 I use the newest client 7.4.42 on most of my systems or the one before.
The newer clients WU time compleation estimates for the work units to finish is a lot better than it used to be.
Some projects require you have the latest client installed to get their work. GPUgrid is one I believe.
I mostly run WCG, GPUgrid and primegrid and POGS. POGS is out of work right now and will be back soon.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Maybe it was you I was thinking of! Sorry dude; that was a pre-coffee post again









Thanks.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @spdaimon
> 
> "using a CPNS10X in push-pull"
> 
> Pics?
> 
> My CNPS-10X Extreme can't do this.
> 
> @EvilMonk
> 
> You said you run BOINC a lot.
> I'm trying [email protected] again, mostly as an experiment in stability [in the winter it was also nice to keep the room warm, and I would also love to find a signal]. I was having crashes before, but now I'm up to 8 hours with no BSOD [Machine tested stable with IBT and Prime, but BOINC used to crash it in an hour].
> 
> I also reinstalled BOINC, because I was wondering if the crashes were software. not hardware [maybe because I crashed so many times it messed it up].
> 
> This time I installed the standalone version, with no Virtual Box. What version do you run? Noticed any difference between them? Either more stable?
> 
> [This is W7 64Bit, GUI BOINC, not command line]
> 
> Do you use the machines at the same time? I think I have to set my computing preferences up right to allow this. With "GPU While in use" and resource allocations at 100% I get some stuttering with music or YT [ I guess the pipeline and cache are totally flooded!], so I have set "Use at most xx% of processors" to 70 or 80, and that seems to fix it by reducing the overall load on each core.
> 
> Funny, though, because "xx CPU Time" just alternates between 100 and 0% load as duty-cycle. This doesn't help the stuttering.
> 
> Those two options seem to be named incorrectly, the wrong way around!
> 
> Any feedback etc?


I have the Performa version. I also run BOINC.


----------



## neoroy

Guys will all X58 mobo's run fine with windows 8.1? and perhaps in the future with windows 10?
I see in MSI website for Bigbang X58 Xpower doesn't show windows 8.1 supporting for the drivers & utilities


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> My p6t d v2 works. Except integrated audio. I didn't try any official oc/fan utilities, they might work. The way I see it w8 is pretty similar to w7 and you should get away with using w7 drivers for some things.


Thx Symix, so with windows 8.1 you don't have integrated audio installed but does windows 8.1 has driver for it? will it work?
I think it's the same on MSI bigbang also there is no supporting for Realtek/integrated audio in windows 8.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## spdaimon

Hmm..I got the P6T SE board. I didn't even think about the sound not running if I put Win 8 or 10 on it. I got Win7 currently. So, it looks like its using the ALC1200 sound card/driver...
I can't find any driver looking around either. So we have two options, either use an USB or PCI version of a sound card or I use Slimware's Driver Free updater to see if it can locate a driver. I may reformat my drive anyway...I did a quick and dirty transplant of a drive from a P45 mobo to P6T SE and had no issues, or not at first, but I am getting occasional random BSOD D1 (I think it was) saying something about driver issues. I'd feel better with a fresh install. I'd be willing to put Win 8.1 on it and let you know what I find.

EDIT: oh..doh. I didn't see the Deluxe the first time... completely different sound card from the P6T or P6T SE.


----------



## bill1024

Win8.1 works fine on my Rampage3, sound and all. Even got the Marvel SATA driver installed for what its worth.


----------



## Tritonk7

Xeon [email protected] Mhz http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4652416


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> There's no driver for my integrated audio and windows 8, it doesn't work. But for your motherboard you never know, you could just try a dual boot to make sure. Sometimes installing windows 7 driver works, sometimes it doesn't.


OK symix I will try then hope it will working fine









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Hmm..I got the P6T SE board. I didn't even think about the sound not running if I put Win 8 or 10 on it. I got Win7 currently. So, it looks like its using the ALC1200 sound card/driver...
> I can't find any driver looking around either. So we have two options, either use an USB or PCI version of a sound card or I use Slimware's Driver Free updater to see if it can locate a driver. I may reformat my drive anyway...I did a quick and dirty transplant of a drive from a P45 mobo to P6T SE and had no issues, or not at first, but I am getting occasional random BSOD D1 (I think it was) saying something about driver issues. I'd feel better with a fresh install. I'd be willing to put Win 8.1 on it and let you know what I find.
> 
> EDIT: oh..doh. I didn't see the Deluxe the first time... completely different sound card from the P6T or P6T SE.


OK spdaimon thx for sharing








I guess if onboard realtek doesn't work I need to use a sound card.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Win8.1 works fine on my Rampage3, sound and all. Even got the Marvel SATA driver installed for what its worth.


Thanks bill









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> 
> 
> Xeon [email protected] Mhz http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4652416


Wooow awesome score Tritonk7







I hope I can do that too







btw what is your stable daily OC for your X5670? volt?


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> OK symix I will try then hope it will working fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK spdaimon thx for sharing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess if onboard realtek doesn't work I need to use a sound card.
> Thanks bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wooow awesome score Tritonk7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope I can do that too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw what is your stable daily OC for your X5670? volt?


4500 Mhz @ 1.376-1.384V . Uncore [email protected] 1.2685V . Memory 2055Mhz @ 1.57 V. 4800 and more I using for bench only


----------



## Starbomba

My EVGA X58 Classified3 works on WIndows 10 like a charm. Even the Marvell storage, audio, LAN and all other stuff.


----------



## spdaimon

@neoroy
I think it will. The built-in Win 8.1 drivers works just fine on my P6T SE's Realtec, it even installed the 14.12 drivers for my 7970. However, the Deluxe uses a Soundmax sound card. Win8.1 must not have it in its database. A few got it to install but no sound. One person used a different driver and got it to work. Not sure if he said which one. I just thought I'd see if I can help out. I'm sure by now he's installed another card, or like on my hackintosh I use a cheapo Startech USB sound adapter. It works ok enough to hear the dings and whistles,


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> My EVGA X58 Classified3 works on WIndows 10 like a charm. Even the Marvell storage, audio, LAN and all other stuff.


Wow that is amazing







thanks for sharing Starbomba, btw is that EVGA 3way SLI classified?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> 4500 Mhz @ 1.376-1.384V . Uncore [email protected] 1.2685V . Memory 2055Mhz @ 1.57 V. 4800 and more I using for bench only


Hmm quite high the voltage but really awesome you can hit that speed








How about the temp? max while benchmark? What cooling do you use Tritonk7?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> @neoroy
> I think it will. The built-in Win 8.1 drivers works just fine on my P6T SE's Realtec, it even installed the 14.12 drivers for my 7970. However, the Deluxe uses a Soundmax sound card. Win8.1 must not have it in its database. A few got it to install but no sound. One person used a different driver and got it to work. Not sure if he said which one. I just thought I'd see if I can help out. I'm sure by now he's installed another card, or like on my hackintosh I use a cheapo Startech USB sound adapter. It works ok enough to hear the dings and whistles,


Nice thank for sharing spdaimon


----------



## Tritonk7

Use DeepCool Neptwin , on 4500 Mhz i have temp in linx max core temp 80 , min core temp 72 . on Firestrike 4800 Mhz i have max 66 degrees Celsius.


----------



## neoroy

Thanks *Tritonk7*







wow nice rig you have there. DeepCool Neptwin use dual tower, it should performs great.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> OK symix I will try then hope it will working fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK spdaimon thx for sharing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess if onboard realtek doesn't work I need to use a sound card.
> Thanks bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wooow awesome score Tritonk7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope I can do that too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw what is your stable daily OC for your X5670? volt?
> 
> 
> 
> 4500 Mhz @ 1.376-1.384V . Uncore [email protected] 1.2685V . Memory 2055Mhz @ 1.57 V. 4800 and more I using for bench only
Click to expand...

nice clocks my x5675 does 4400 on 1.344 i bet it could hit 4500 but its already overkill for what i use it for just a plex server eta but its really nice for when somthing needing transcoding it gets in done in a few mins and stays under 60c doing it most the time. Crazy how cool these cpus run my 2600k does not run as cool as my xeon does even under water and xeon is on air using a SilverStone Heligon HE01.


----------



## Sam412

Glad I found this thread! My 920 was starting to get tired, and I was looking to move into X99. Instead I got a X5660 for my old EVGA X58 SLI. Man this has got to be THEEEE easiest overclock I have ever done haha! Stable at 4.2, C-States on Auto (redic to see this thing idle around at 2.3 with next to nothing for voltage lol). Had to mod my board to do it (did it myself) but man I cant believe how well my now 6 year old board is performing. Next is a SATA3 card, and then replace my GTX 670 with a 980 and I'd say I'm good for a few more years!

X5660 @ 4.2
EVGA X58 SLI (132- BL-E758 V1.1)
12GB (4 X 3) Gskill @ 1600
Hyper 212+


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sam412*
> 
> Glad I found this thread! My 920 was starting to get tired, and I was looking to move into X99. Instead I got a X5660 for my old EVGA X58 SLI. Man this has got to be THEEEE easiest overclock I have ever done haha! Stable at 4.2, C-States on Auto (redic to see this thing idle around at 2.3 with next to nothing for voltage lol). Had to mod my board to do it (did it myself) but man I cant believe how well my now 6 year old board is performing. Next is a SATA3 card, and then replace my GTX 670 with a 980 and I'd say I'm good for a few more years!
> 
> X5660 @ 4.2
> EVGA X58 SLI (132- BL-E758 V1.1)
> 12GB (4 X 3) Gskill @ 1600
> Hyper 212+


lol these xeons are insane i think they match sandy almost for single threaded perf clock for clock maybe sandy is 2-5% faster then in muti core they kill them, to bad no new x58s can be made with pcie 3.0 and native usb3 so on be utilmate system lol for a cheap price right now. Just a heads up to people if your having problems in windows with random freezing and crashing you should try upping the qpi and ioh might only need the ioh.


----------



## Odesos

Hi guys has someone tried overclocking with Supermicro X8DAI??? I am waiting for mine to arrive and could not find anything about overclocking even though the manual says that you CAN change the ratio of the core clock and FSB !!! The idea is to get 3.5GHz (stable) with either x5650 or x5660 as they are dirt cheap atm. So did I got mislead from the manual or magic is going to happen







?


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Odesos*
> 
> Hi guys has someone tried overclocking with Supermicro X8DAI??? I am waiting for mine to arrive and could not find anything about overclocking even though the manual says that you CAN change the ratio of the core clock and FSB !!! The idea is to get 3.5GHz (stable) with either x5650 or x5660 as they are dirt cheap atm. So did I got mislead from the manual or magic is going to happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ?


I think that just means you can adjust the multiplier.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Sam412*
> 
> Glad I found this thread! My 920 was starting to get tired, and I was looking to move into X99. Instead I got a X5660 for my old EVGA X58 SLI. Man this has got to be THEEEE easiest overclock I have ever done haha! Stable at 4.2, C-States on Auto (redic to see this thing idle around at 2.3 with next to nothing for voltage lol). Had to mod my board to do it (did it myself) but man I cant believe how well my now 6 year old board is performing. Next is a SATA3 card, and then replace my GTX 670 with a 980 and I'd say I'm good for a few more years!
> 
> X5660 @ 4.2
> EVGA X58 SLI (132- BL-E758 V1.1)
> 12GB (4 X 3) Gskill @ 1600
> Hyper 212+
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol these xeons are insane i think they match sandy almost for single threaded perf clock for clock maybe sandy is 2-5% faster then in muti core they kill them, to bad no new x58s can be made with pcie 3.0 and native usb3 so on be utilmate system lol for a cheap price right now. Just a heads up to people if your having problems in windows with random freezing and crashing you should try upping the qpi and ioh might only need the ioh.
Click to expand...

Your cinebench score seems a bit low. I get 950 for [email protected]


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Man this has got to be THEEEE easiest overclock I have ever done haha!


Quote:


> Your cinebench score seems a bit low. I get 950 for [email protected]


Yep here i'm on [email protected]/3200Uncore - your memory timings maybe can be tightened? Is that 4x3GB? 1T should be possible, dunno about the others.

Keep a close eye on Uncore/Vtt/QPI volts! <1.3, only go to 1.35 if you've measured the voltage with a DMM. Easy to kill a chip - check all your settings and hand-input correct volts. Beware auto.

Have fun though, they're great chips


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> nice clocks my x5675 does 4400 on 1.344 i bet it could hit 4500 but its already overkill for what i use it for just a plex server eta but its really nice for when somthing needing transcoding it gets in done in a few mins and stays under 60c doing it most the time. Crazy how cool these cpus run my 2600k does not run as cool as my xeon does even under water and xeon is on air using a SilverStone Heligon HE01.


Wow your Xeon performs more cooler on air cooling than 2600K with water cooling? Awesome Bal3Wolf









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sam412*
> 
> Glad I found this thread! My 920 was starting to get tired, and I was looking to move into X99. Instead I got a X5660 for my old EVGA X58 SLI. Man this has got to be THEEEE easiest overclock I have ever done haha! Stable at 4.2, C-States on Auto (redic to see this thing idle around at 2.3 with next to nothing for voltage lol). Had to mod my board to do it (did it myself) but man I cant believe how well my now 6 year old board is performing. Next is a SATA3 card, and then replace my GTX 670 with a 980 and I'd say I'm good for a few more years!
> 
> X5660 @ 4.2
> EVGA X58 SLI (132- BL-E758 V1.1)
> 12GB (4 X 3) Gskill @ 1600
> Hyper 212+


Welcome to the club Sam








Do you mean that you managed to reach 4.2GHz without touching the volts?? How did you mod your board? Enlighten me please ^_^
Yup I think we at the same boat







me too also gonna grab a GTX980 to run with this X58 beast









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> lol these xeons are insane i think they match sandy almost for single threaded perf clock for clock maybe sandy is 2-5% faster then in muti core they kill them, to bad no new x58s can be made with pcie 3.0 and native usb3 so on be utilmate system lol for a cheap price right now. Just a heads up to people if your having problems in windows with random freezing and crashing you should try upping the qpi and ioh might only need the ioh.


OK thanks for the tips Bal3Wolf


----------



## Sam412

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Your cinebench score seems a bit low. I get 950 for [email protected]


Yeah I get 950 or so when I set its priority to high. During those runs I had CPUZ and Coretemp set to high to keep an eye on things, otherwise they freeze up until the test is done.


----------



## Sam412

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yep here i'm on [email protected]/3200Uncore - your memory timings maybe can be tightened? Is that 4x3GB? 1T should be possible, dunno about the others.
> 
> Keep a close eye on Uncore/Vtt/QPI volts! <1.3, only go to 1.35 if you've measured the voltage with a DMM. Easy to kill a chip - check all your settings and hand-input correct volts. Beware auto.
> 
> Have fun though, they're great chips


Yep I lowered my voltage down below 1.3, cant remember what its at, Im away right now, but I lowered it as low as it would go before not passing burn in. Ill try 1T tonight, Im so used to having it at 2T it never crossed my mind hah!


----------



## Sam412

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> Wow your Xeon performs more cooler on air cooling than 2600K with water cooling? Awesome Bal3Wolf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the club Sam
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean that you managed to reach 4.2GHz without touching the volts?? How did you mod your board? Enlighten me please ^_^
> Yup I think we at the same boat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> me too also gonna grab a GTX980 to run with this X58 beast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK thanks for the tips Bal3Wolf


No I have my voltages upped, you can see my vcore on my screenshot. For my board (E758) I had to remove a resistor and bridge another. Wasn't very hard


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Your cinebench score seems a bit low. I get 950 for [email protected]


The uncore has a pretty big impact on Cinebench scores, along with ram speed/timings. At 4.4ghz with a 3000mhz uncore I get around 1000, but at 3600mhz it jumps up to about 1020.

That being said, at 4.2ghz/3200/2000 I get around 970.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have been genuinely been visited by an actual Stork.



More as I get it


----------



## Tritonk7

nice videocards


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sam412*
> 
> No I have my voltages upped, you can see my vcore on my screenshot. For my board (E758) I had to remove a resistor and bridge another. Wasn't very hard


OK Sam412 I see you use 1.317volt for X5660 @4.2GHz nice








I will try that at first time OC X5660 or 4.0GHz first








You need to hardmod like that in order to have X5660 runs well on your EVGA X58 mobo? Does it only need BIOS update?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> You need to hardmod like that in order to have X5660 runs well on your EVGA X58 mobo? Does it only need BIOS update?


It will not POST without the mod done and it may need a bios update as well.


----------



## 486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have been genuinely been visited by an actual Stork.
> 
> 
> 
> More as I get it


Nice pair.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have been genuinely been visited by an actual Stork.
> 
> 
> 
> More as I get it


OOH Shiny!

Looking forward to some benches mate.









Are you running x58-ud5 rev.1.0 now? If so What are your voltages

I picked one up cheap off fleabay. Going to donate my ud3r to my brother if all is well. got it at same speed with .5v less vcore. just reinstalling windows as I didn't do and am getting crashes in firefox. Not with occt intel burn or prime tho. Weird. Still hopefully reinstall will hopefully sort it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Mine is UD7r V2 which is almost the same as the UD5r. I had the same issues with bsod after IBT and Prime were stable, I fixed it by raising three sets of volts simultaneously.


----------



## gofasterstripes

"OK - for stability - trying the following:

Vcc to 1.3
Vtt to 1.255
QPI PLL to 1.2 [to match IOH as per this guide]

Previously they were 1.294/1.235/1.14"


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> "OK - for stability - trying the following:
> 
> Vcc to 1.3
> Vtt to 1.255
> QPI PLL to 1.2 [to match IOH as per this guide]
> 
> Previously they were 1.294/1.235/1.14"


Thanks dude.

Looks like I had some file allocation errors or a prob with my C: drive. Was trying to do an acronis backup before re install but it was borking saying not enough space on the recipient drive even though there was.

Have done some disc maintenance and a registry clean. Acronis running correctly as I type this. I may see how it goes for another 24hrs to see if that was what was causing the problem as a complete OS and program reinstall is a pain in the arse. (I have only just re-activated win7 too due to the new board/bios via MS phone service and I think it will throw a wobble if I have to do it again within 90 days or something).

Have you installed those 970's yet. They are going to go like a scalded cat


----------



## gofasterstripes

https://www.justgiving.com/SamJohnMichael

Been very busy! Wish us luck!


----------



## cb750rob

Good luck!!


----------



## virpz

This thread got me excited and I already have the x5670.
Now I am aiming to a Gigabyte G1.assassin motherboard but the x5670 is not listed as supported at the gigabyte website.
Any thoughts on that ?

Thanks


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> This thread got me excited and I already have the x5670.
> Now I am aiming to a Gigabyte G1.assassin motherboard but the x5670 is not listed as supported at the gigabyte website.
> Any thoughts on that ?
> 
> Thanks


Most mobos don't officially support these CPUs but will work. My EX58-UDR3 v1.6 works so I don't see the G1 Assassin not working.


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> It will not POST without the mod done and it may need a bios update as well.


I see, I hope MSI Bigbang X58 Xpower doesn't need to soldered like that, I see latest BIOS is V1.7. Hope it will support Xeon's.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> https://www.justgiving.com/SamJohnMichael
> 
> Been very busy! Wish us luck!


Good luck gofasterstripes and God bless you guys....amen.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I haven't posted here in months. It's great to see that both X58 topics are still going strong. I guess I started some kind of revival for our great platform. I found that my GTX 670 2-Way SLI has been on par with a single GTX 980 according to some benchmarks I read which consisted of 3DMark11, FireStrike etc. Gaming wise I'm still getting great FPS with the resolutions I play with [Mostly 1440p - 1600p].

I still have an urge to upgrade my GPUs though. I'm waiting to see what AMD will do with their 300x series.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I haven't posted here in months. It's great to see that both X58 topics are still going strong. I guess I started some kind of revival for our great platform. I found that my GTX 670 2-Way SLI has been on par with a single GTX 980 according to some benchmarks I read which consisted of 3DMark11, FireStrike etc. Gaming wise I'm still getting great FPS with the resolutions I play with [Mostly 1440p - 1600p].
> 
> I still have an urge to upgrade my GPUs though. I'm waiting to see what AMD will do with their 300x series.


Honestly, a "sidegrade" to a single-card solution that gives the same performance is still an upgrade as you open yourself up to expansion. I am also waiting for the 300 series to release before I decide between a GTX 970 or 300-series equivalent.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Obviously the GTX 980 would be an upgrade since it's the latest flagship, especially if you include x2\x3\x4-way SLI. My point is that I really have no need to upgrade being that I still have a great experience when playing & streaming. Frame times and frame rates are solid so far. Being that I'm an enthusiast it's hard NOT to spend money and upgrade.


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6837998


----------



## Bradford1040

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6837998


Nice score, doubled mine, but I am only running one 680 classy

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4714289


----------



## kckyle

i returned my 970 cause of that 3.5gb bs


----------



## Bradford1040

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2342192

this was my rig with a GTX780 my buddy bought, I just wanted to see how it did


----------



## gofasterstripes

These were delivered by a stork, I told you







nothing to complain about, in fact I am +500mb fast VRAM over my 7970. Oh and, DX12- can add SLI RAM, not duplicate??


----------



## kckyle

i saw the problem almost immediately when i got a 4k monitor. i'm waiting on that 300 series amd


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6838036

It helps the score if it's not running a backup in the background!

I do have an issue though - they're too close together, and no option to move them apart







I have a 120mm fan aimed at them and a wooden wedge bending them apart a bit.





Still, not complaining!

Any tips?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6838036
> 
> It helps the score if it's not running a backup in the background!
> 
> I do have an issue though - they're too close together, and no option to move them apart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a 120mm fan aimed at them and a wooden wedge bending them apart a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still, not complaining!
> 
> Any tips?


New Case that gives more clearance between the bottom pcie slot and power supply?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> These were delivered by a stork, I told you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nothing to complain about, in fact I am +500mb fast VRAM over my 7970. Oh and, DX12- can add SLI RAM, not duplicate??


I just saw an article stating that. That would be huge, allowing 4K res without having to SLI 12GB cards. I also saw something where not its coming to Win7 or not. Still confused whether DX12 will run on DX11 cards or if that is just rumor. Sounds like the best thing since the invention of the wheel! It will give me something read today in between my studies.









EDIT: Running DX12, doesn't necessarily means the memory will stack. It will depend on how the dev's optimize the games, increasing the amount of memory available definitly but my impression is that it won't be 2x, but I guess this is a conversation for another thread.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob

No monies, also that a x8 slot and I think will put both the cards in x8 mode.

Does the card driving the monitor get hotter? What about physx?


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> 
> No monies, also that a x8 slot and I think will put both the cards in x8 mode.
> 
> Does the card driving the monitor get hotter? What about physx?


I memory serves the top card drives the monitor and you have the monitor cable connected to the connector closest to the mobo. That's how I used to have a pair of 9800gt's anyway. They were single slot cards though. Yes the card at the top is usually hotter I believe. I used to have one card configured for physx (bottom one).


----------



## gofasterstripes

Setup:



Modified cooling with air guide [towards gap in between cards]


Still the top card is throttling - but my while understanding of GPUBoost 2 is limited, I think that if it was not the temp that was limiting the cards then the powerbudget would be exceeded in vercy short order anyway. The lowest clockspeed is 1175MHz when the top card hits 81C.

A quick spin in Bioshock Infinite with vsync on shows around 60C tops









Thanks, Stork


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Setup:
> 
> 
> 
> Modified cooling with air guide [towards gap in between cards]
> 
> 
> Still the top card is throttling - but my while understanding of GPUBoost 2 is limited, I think that if it was not the temp that was limiting the cards then the powerbudget would be exceeded in vercy short order anyway. The lowest clockspeed is 1175MHz when the top card hits 81C.
> 
> A quick spin in Bioshock Infinite with vsync on shows around 60C tops
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, Stork


I would be tempted to pull it all out of the case and mount it on a plank of wood and bench it. I bet there is a negligible difference between having the card in the second to the third slot.

Once you know you can go all ghetto and admire your hardware:



That is fekking quality







:

http://www.overclock.net/t/666445/post-your-ghetto-rigging-shenanigans/2800_20#post_21785604


----------



## 486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Once you know you can go all ghetto and admire your hardware:


That's great, who needs to buy an aftermarket test bench when you live in the hood?


----------



## cb750rob

Sam are you not using a top finger connector to connect both cards?

My understanding is that it increases performance. (happy to be corrected here).


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *486DX*
> 
> That's great, who needs to buy an aftermarket test bench when you live in the hood?


I'm almost tempted to cancel my order with scan for a side window for my new fractal design arc midi


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Setup:
> 
> 
> 
> Modified cooling with air guide [towards gap in between cards]
> 
> 
> Still the top card is throttling - but my while understanding of GPUBoost 2 is limited, I think that if it was not the temp that was limiting the cards then the powerbudget would be exceeded in vercy short order anyway. The lowest clockspeed is 1175MHz when the top card hits 81C.
> 
> A quick spin in Bioshock Infinite with vsync on shows around 60C tops
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, Stork


Lookin' good!


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob

"Sam are you not using a top finger connector to connect both cards?"

Yes, I am. It just wasn't on in that pic.


----------



## gofasterstripes

My score's normal, for this setup, right? [4000Core/3200Uncore, 12GB @1600]


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Obviously the GTX 980 would be an upgrade since it's the latest flagship, especially if you include x2\x3\x4-way SLI. My point is that I really have no need to upgrade being that I still have a great experience when playing & streaming. Frame times and frame rates are solid so far. Being that I'm an enthusiast it's hard NOT to spend money and upgrade.


Yup I will use MSI GTX 980 gaming along with MSI Bigbang X58 Xpower







thanks for your thread now X58 can still live on


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> Yup I will use MSI GTX 980 gaming along with MSI Bigbang X58 Xpower
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanks for your thread now X58 can still live on


GTX 980 sounds great. X58 will love a very long time in my house. Even when I upgrade I'm still going to use the X58 for several reasons. I'm glad to see this topic and my X58 club topic is still alive after I've been away for many months. It shows how strong the X58 user base is in 2014\2015. I almost bit the bullet and purchased two GTX 970's, until I saw the single GTX 980 score performance and compared with my current setup. Plus the GTX 970 2-way SLI performance over my GTX 670 SLI appears to be 20%- 30% more. I think I'll want a bit more performance increase when it comes to spending $700+.


----------



## marcchep

Hello guys, I have to ask the same question I asked in the X58 Xeon Club Thread.
Which motherboard should I get, the ASRock Deluxe3, the Gigabyte EX58-UD4P or the Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3? (For overclocking a X5670)









Thank you very much, you are all awesome


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Hello guys, I have to ask the same question I asked in the X58 Xeon Club Thread.
> Which motherboard should I get, the ASRock Deluxe3, the Gigabyte EX58-UD4P or the Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3? (For overclocking a X5670)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you very much, you are all awesome


The UD4P has the best VRM so I'd go with that. It may oc better because of that.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The UD4P has the best VRM so I'd go with that. It may oc better because of that.


Ditto


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Ditto


I do not know what to think of this board, because I found this http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=1001875 and this http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1420 so I am a little confused if the UD4P and the X5670 work well togehter.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> I do not know what to think of this board, because I found this http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=1001875 and this http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1420 so I am a little confused if the UD4P and the X5670 work well togehter.


That doesn't look good. I didn't really look into how well it worked with the xeons








I couldn't find any confirmation for the x58-usb3 or asrock board either.

Maybe try and find a UD3R or an Asus board so you can get the best chance of it working well.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Gigabyte all the way. EX58-UD3r v1.6 or v2, and EX58A-UD7 all confirmed to work. Best stick to boards of that era or later.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> I do not know what to think of this board, because I found this http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=1001875 and this http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1420 so I am a little confused if the UD4P and the X5670 work well togehter.


What is it you are worried about?

http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showthread.php?t=1001875 - I'm not clear whether the extreme bios is supposed to be on it or not...

As a heads up I have both ex-58-ud3r rev1.6 and an ex-58-ud5 rev 1. Both boards needed to have the bios flashed to latest version before they would boot with my x5660. I had to get a i7920 just to do that.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/1420 - 220 bclk is a rocking overclock - I get 185 bclk. but that translates to 4.254ghz on all cores with turbo enabled. thats more than a 50% overclock









How much higher do you want to go?


----------



## kckyle

i would like to chime in on the gigabyte board, after a bios crash the backup bios restored my board back to the factory version which was like from 2010, although the menu looks very different it nevertheless works with xeon, plus it was alot easier to overclock than my asus board and more stable


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i would like to chime in on the gigabyte board, after a bios crash the backup bios restored my board back to the factory version which was like from 2010, although the menu looks very different it nevertheless works with xeon, plus it was alot easier to overclock than my asus board and more stable


That is really handy. My old p32ne-sli could have done with that feature......









Previously I have had Asus boards. My crosshair iv formula was nice with the power phases and features. But the quality of these "Ultra durable 3" is superior. I especially like the 2oz copper they print the board with. It just feels hefty in comparison. I only wish the health monitoring and fan control was a bit better.


----------



## kckyle

yeah the dual bios is one of these features that you don't know if you need it til you actually need it, it was like any other day, turned on my pc and i got hit with a error message. took me a minute to read the error code on the mobo, turned out bios is corrupted. reset the cmos and the backup bio kicked in and reestored the bad one.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i would like to chime in on the gigabyte board, after a bios crash the backup bios restored my board back to the factory version which was like from 2010, although the menu looks very different it nevertheless works with xeon, plus it was alot easier to overclock than my asus board and more stable


To avoid that in the future, there is a way to update the backup BIOS (I have version F13 in both my backup and regular). Updating the backup bios is the same from X58-x79. All use the Alt+F12 to update the backup and Ctrl+F12 to restore main bios from backup.

Make sure you have usb keyboard enabled or try using a PS/2 keyboard. Make sure you are holding the alt key before the system starts and then spam the F12 key. If left alt doesn't work, try right alt.
*
MAKE SURE YOU UPDATE WITH A KNOWN STABLE VERSION!!!*

@marcchep, I can't recommend the USB3 board, its the lowest end mobo from Gigabyte, so you know they cut corners to make it cheap. Boards that we know work well are the UD3R, UD5 and UD7. I have a UD5 and got my bclock up to 220 without much effort.


----------



## kckyle

but whats consider a stable version though, after the bios i have everything else is basically beta bios.

but yeah any boards i buy from now on the dual bios feature is a must.


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> GTX 980 sounds great. X58 will love a very long time in my house. Even when I upgrade I'm still going to use the X58 for several reasons. I'm glad to see this topic and my X58 club topic is still alive after I've been away for many months. It shows how strong the X58 user base is in 2014\2015. I almost bit the bullet and purchased two GTX 970's, until I saw the single GTX 980 score performance and compared with my current setup. Plus the GTX 970 2-way SLI performance over my GTX 670 SLI appears to be 20%- 30% more. I think I'll want a bit more performance increase when it comes to spending $700+.


Thanks Kana-Maru








Yes, I think your SLI GTX670 setup is already good enough







& you're right better need more than 30% performance raise when later you upgrade them.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Here's some interesting results with the 970SLI config and scaling:

Here's my base line: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4739626 Score:15089

First I overclocked, _harder_.


This was holding @ 4600MHz +15%

Then I Benched with Firestrike:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851732 Score:16061 : +4% Graphics, +11% Physics +8% Combined

Next step: I can eliminate throttling, and in fact overclock both cards if I manually take control of the fans. Speeds Approx 1250MHz Core / 7500MHz Memory

Then I also clocked cards up to circa 1300MHz [+15%ish] Fans on LOUD EDITED - As above - 1250ish
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851765 Score:16976 : +11% Graphics, +11% Physics +16% Combined

Then last Set CPU back to 4GHz [and at safe volts!]
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851835 Score:16547 : +10% Graphics, +0% Physics +14% Combined

Seeing as I think I can customise the fan curve to eliminate throttling, in my case likely the best thing to do if I need extra performance is cool and clock the GPUs.

Hope you enjoyed that, I did









NB - The "Time measuring inaccurate" means I Alt.+Tabbed out of the demo. It doesn't actually make a difference to the score.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Here's some interesting results with the 970SLI config and scaling:
> 
> Here's my base line: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4739626 Score:15089
> 
> First I overclocked, _harder_.
> 
> 
> This was holding @ 4600MHz +15%
> 
> Then I Benched with Firestrike:
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851732 Score:16061 : +4% Graphics, +11% Physics +8% Combined
> 
> Next step: I can eliminate throttling, and in fact overclock both cards if I manually take control of the fans. Speeds Approx 1250MHz Core / 7500MHz Memory
> 
> Then I also clocked cards up to circa 1300MHz [+15%ish] Fans on LOUD
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851765 Score:16976 : +11% Graphics, +11% Physics +16% Combined
> 
> Then last Set CPU back to 4GHz [and at safe volts!]
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851835 Score:16547 : +10% Graphics, +0% Physics +14% Combined
> 
> Seeing as I think I can customise the fan curve to eliminate throttling, in my case likely the best thing to do if I need extra performance is cool and clock the GPUs.
> 
> Hope you enjoyed that, I did




Awesome!


----------



## gofasterstripes

LOL I kno rite


----------



## gofasterstripes

Other observations: the card in the first initialised slot [set in the BIOS] is the card with monitor output, and that is also the card that runs WebGL tasks.

I wonder if the "master" card runs cooler or hotter....I might try swapping the monitor and seeing whether this reduces or increases the heat output.


----------



## neoroy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Here's some interesting results with the 970SLI config and scaling:
> 
> Here's my base line: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4739626 Score:15089
> 
> First I overclocked, _harder_.
> 
> 
> This was holding @ 4600MHz +15%
> 
> Then I Benched with Firestrike:
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851732 Score:16061 : +4% Graphics, +11% Physics +8% Combined
> 
> Next step: I can eliminate throttling, and in fact overclock both cards if I manually take control of the fans. Speeds Approx 1250MHz Core / 7500MHz Memory
> 
> Then I also clocked cards up to circa 1300MHz [+15%ish] Fans on LOUD EDITED - As above - 1250ish
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851765 Score:16976 : +11% Graphics, +11% Physics +16% Combined
> 
> Then last Set CPU back to 4GHz [and at safe volts!]
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851835 Score:16547 : +10% Graphics, +0% Physics +14% Combined
> 
> Seeing as I think I can customise the fan curve to eliminate throttling, in my case likely the best thing to do if I need extra performance is cool and clock the GPUs.
> 
> Hope you enjoyed that, I did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NB - The "Time measuring inaccurate" means I Alt.+Tabbed out of the demo. It doesn't actually make a difference to the score.


Wow great scores gofasterstripes


----------



## 99belle99

What multiplier is everyone using? I am on 21 and cannot get any higher for some reason. It says it goes up to 24 but if I enter a higher number than 21 it reverts back to 21. I am using a Xeon x5660.


----------



## gofasterstripes

In what board? With my Gigabyte boards that would be what happened if you had turbo off.


----------



## 99belle99

Yes I have a Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1.


----------



## gofasterstripes

So you have this setting?


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> So you have this setting?


Yes, but I have them all disabled.


----------



## 99belle99

Actuallu I have multi-threading enabled all power saving features disabled.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Ok, so if you enable them all you will be able to access turbo.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Ok, so if you enable them all you will be able to access turbo.


Ok cool.


----------



## autoshot

Hey guys,

I just started OCing my X5650 and got it to 3.6 GHz (Turbo off) with CPU Voltage set to 1.20v, CPU PLL Voltage set to 1.90v and QPI/DRAM Core Voltage at 1.26875v on my ASUS P6T Deluxe. This gives me ~59 GFlops in the Intel Burn Test (Stress Level: Standard). Is this an acceptable result or should I change anything?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Score's fine.

You'r PLL doesn't need to be raised. IIRC 1.88 is the max safe value.

Try 1.8


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> You'r PLL doesn't need to be raised. [...] Try 1.8


I set the PLL-voltage to 1.90v because I read that it improves the stability of the overclock. But if you're certain it doesn't have to be raised I'm of course going to lower it again (probably not to 1.80 but 1.82v since I heard that the P6T Deluxe considers 1.80v as "Auto" and might do something funny)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> IIRC 1.88 is the max safe value.


What do you mean IIRC 1.88 is the max safe value? You think I might already have damaged my CPU by setting it to 1.90v?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Unlikely, but put it back to 1.88


----------



## autoshot

I'm curious because when I set the PLL voltage in the BIOS values up to 1.90v are colored normal while going above 1.90v results in yellow or even red colored voltage values.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The colors for the values in the BIOS don't mean as much as you think. If I bump DRAM voltage any little bit over 1.65V, I get a warning but I know it's safe to run at least up to 1.8V. I haven't bothered because there's negligible performance gain.


----------



## 486DX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I'm curious because when I set the PLL voltage in the BIOS values up to 1.90v are colored normal while going above 1.90v results in yellow or even red colored voltage values.


I think that's more of a general warning than anything else, I haven't got any experience with the specific BIOS you're discussing but on my last rig (i7-870 on a 1156 MSI board) the Core voltage value would turn red at anything above 1.2v even though the Intel recommended limit is 1.3. I think it's intended to dissuade non-enthusiasts from getting close to the limits for safety's sake, even though there were plenty of people at the time running at 1.3v and in some cases far more; I once saw a 'suicide' benchmark with an i7-870 on 1.5v CPU core and 2.5v PLL









^ I'm not recommending you try these settings for one second though. Even if you don't outright fry the chip, it will degrade much faster, or damage internal components; usually starting with the temperature sensors.

As long as you're within the recommended limits and don't notice any adverse effects or stability issues when benching/burning, you're probably good to go







That said, I don't know the limits for your hardware, so Gofasterstripes's advice is sensible.

@Chessmyantidrug, I've never had to overvolt RAM unless I've really pushed it, as you say the gains from the extra juice don't seem to make much of a difference in real world terms.


----------



## 486DX

^ As an aside to this, regardless of what your BIOS tells you: always research safe max voltage limits and work your way up to them.


----------



## gofasterstripes

.... and beyond


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *486DX*
> 
> As long as you're within the recommended limits and don't notice any adverse effects or stability issues when benching/burning, you're probably good to go :thumb


funny you would say that







because when I tried to run my system at 3.8 GHz (DRAM Frequency: 1520 MHz, UCLK Frequency: 3040 MHz, QPI Link Data Rate: 6857 MT/s), again with CPU Voltage set to 1.20v, QPI/DRAM Core Voltage at 1.26875v and Turbo off, but CPU PLL at 1.82v this time, it passed the IntelBurnTest (Stress Level: Standard) without a problem at ~62 GFlops but running the prime95 "In-Place large FFTs"-torture test resulted in prime crashing (not aborting) after like 30 minutes. At that, core temperatures peaked at 72°C and did not exceed 68-70° in steady state. Do you have any idea what might have caused this? I'm asking since, until now, whenever the overclock was too high prime would usually just give me an error and stop the corresponding workers instead of crashing so I'm not 100% sure the crash was due to the overclocked CPU. Also, aside from this incident my system was completely stable (including a quick 15 min session of driving around Los Santos







).

Further, just to be sure the crash didn't occur due to the DRAM oder UCLK-Frequency being to high I tried 3.8 GHz at a DRAM Freq. of 1143 MHz, UCLK Freq. of 2286 MHz and everything else unchanged. Weirdly, with those settings I just got ~53 GFlops in the IntelBurnTest. How is that possible?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Error correction sometimes means these chips will tolerate low voltage: frequency, but this slows them down. Try a slight bump in core voltage (keeps below 80 in ibt, maybe 77ish).

Also, that voltage is in the bios, right? What does CPUID HWMonitor say?


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Error correction sometimes means these chips will tolerate low voltage: frequency, but this slows them down.


mmh I read about that. however, the thing is I got 62 GFlops with the *exact same voltage settings*, but higher DRAM and UCLK frequency, so I'm not sure the voltage throttling thing is responsible for the drop in GFlops.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Also, that voltage is in the bios, right? What does CPUID HWMonitor say?


that's right, I set 1.20v in the BIOS, but cpu-z also showed 1.200v during the prime-run yesterday. unfortunately, I don't know the HWMonitor readings since I don't use it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aah, but you changed DRAM and UCLK? I guess it's data bandwidth then.


----------



## autoshot

you think that little decrease in DRAM and UCLK-frequency cost me almost 10 GFlops!? that's cruel









also, how likely is it that prime crashed because of the overclock?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes, and very likely.

It's quite a low voltage for 3.8. Try 1.3 in BIOS and see what you get [temps permitting]. You can always bring it down later.

IBT is Linpack which is a data streaming/modyfying operation. Hence the bandwidth sensitivity.


----------



## autoshot

Thanks a lot for your explanations! So you think the prime crash was because vCore was too low and not maybe because of some RAM-issues at 1520 MHz (I'm running 3x 8GB DDR3-1333 CL9 Dimms)?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Try 1.3 in BIOS and see what you get [temps permitting].


I think I shouldn't go much higher than 1.2v given that I'm already at around 70° under full load. I'm probably just gonna determine what's possible with the 1.2v and settle for that until I have a better cooler.


----------



## gofasterstripes

It appears I'm only being half helpful today, sorry. 4.5 hours sleep does that









Yeah, running your RAM over spec might cause a lockup, but if I was stable before..... Also Prime Small should really only use the caches IIRC, not the RAM.

If you're on triple channel then RAM speed isn't that important.

You can also try adjusting the timings. Stock timing value/frequency will give you a constant. Multiply the constant by the new frequency and round up to the next whole value and you'll get a new timing value that should allow the chips to cope with the throughput better. Stick to common values though, like7/8/9 or 20/24.

WRT the cooler, you're being sensible, but if you get temps in the 70's during IBT they are not going to happen in "real life" unless you use it for rendering or SETI or something else with 100% CPU or if your case airflow is too poor and GPU heat builds up in gaming.

I use a Zalman CNPS10X - Extreme, rather old now, but available in the UK for about £30, and I think they're great. For IBT i get about 74 max at 4GHz/1.28V. Not that big either, and comes with a neat fan control system.

I've been through a few changes and challenges with my system, and I always try to write it up. If you have the patience you may find reading through my old posts useful

GTG - hope I am of some help.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> It appears I'm only being half helpful today, sorry. 4.5 hours sleep does that


don't worry, you've already helped me a lot (thanks again for that!)








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah, running your RAM over spec might cause a lockup, but if I was stable before..... Also Prime Small should really only use the caches IIRC, not the RAM.


that's the thing, my system did not lock up at any point while I was running 3.8 GHz CPU/ 1520 MHz RAM/ 3040 MHz UCLK, just prime crashed after running 30 minutes. also, I selected the in-place large FFTs stress test, which - according to the description - tests "some ram".
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If you're on triple channel then RAM speed isn't that important. You can also try adjusting the timings. Stock timing value/frequency will give you a constant. Multiply the constant by the new frequency and round up to the next whole value and you'll get a new timing value that should allow the chips to cope with the throughput better. Stick to common values though, like7/8/9 or 20/24.


I am definitely going to do one more test @ 3.8 GHz and 1.20v, but with DDR3-1540 CL10-10-10-27 instead of 9-9-9-24 (9 * 1520/1333 = ~10.26, 24 * 1520/1333 = ~ 27.37) when I come home today.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> GTG - hope I am of some help.


as I said before, you have no idea how much you've helped me already







!


----------



## gofasterstripes

My pleasure.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *neoroy*
> 
> I see, I hope MSI Bigbang X58 Xpower doesn't need to soldered like that, I see latest BIOS is V1.7. Hope it will support Xeon's.
> Good luck gofasterstripes and God bless you guys....amen.


I just saw this, check out my previous post:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Speaking from personal experience, the MSI Big Bang XPower X58 DOES support a Xeon X5650 with the latest bios, with a catch.
> 
> On the original Nehalem 45nm, the uncore was usually set to 2x memory multiplier, but the Westmere-EP's can run at 1.5x memory multiplier if need be. Given that the stock memory multiplier is 10x (133x10 = 1333), the Uncore multiplier doubles to 20x (133x20 = 2666). This is completely fine at stock; however, when you try to OC it, you will obviously want to lower the memory multiplier (e.g. 200x8 = 1600), but the Uncore won't lower to the "double" @16x (12x or 1.5 times memory multi is ENTIRELY out of the question) and will stay at 20x (meaning 200x20 = 4000). For me this was completely unstable at voltages I was comfortable with, so for that build I was only able to OC the X5650 to 160x20 = 3200, with a memory of 160x10 = 1600, and an Uncore of 160x20 = 3200. I ended up giving this system to a family member for CAD use, and decided to keep my Sabertooth X58 for my own X5650 @4.4
> 
> I hope that helps.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Neroy @cb750rob

Can't remember if I gave you guys a sponsored ride report. Here it is









@Xevi - check out that bike I got to use. From this guy


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I am definitely going to do one more test @ 3.8 GHz and 1.20v, but with DDR3-1520 CL10-10-10-27 instead of 9-9-9-24 (9 * 1520/1333 = ~10.26, 24 * 1520/1333 = ~ 27.37) when I come home today.


OK so I have to admit I didn't exactly do what I said I would, but let me start from the beginning









First thing I did yesterday was change the most important settings in the the "DRAM Timing Control" section from "Auto" ( = 9-9-9-24-1T) to 9-9-9-24-*2*T, with everything else left the same (3.8 GHz CPU/ 1520 MHz RAM/ 3040 MHz UCLK @ 1.20v Core / 1.82v PLL / 1.26875v QPI/DRAM Core). Back in Windows I first of course did a quick standard IntelBurnTest run, which my system passed with flying colors at ~62 GFlops. Then I started the prime95 "In-Place Large FFTs"-torture test, which did not crash this time, but unfortunately one of the workers stopped after around 39 minutes due to a rounding error.

So I went back to the BIOS, increased just the CPU Voltage from 1.20v to 1.20675v, restarted the "In-Place Large FFTs"-torture test and let it run through the night. Luckily all workers were still running when I checked back this morning before leaving for work and I really hope this won't have changed when I come back tonight since I'd like to avoid increasing the voltage any further (max. core temperatures are as high as 73° now).


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> @EvilMonk
> 
> You said you run BOINC a lot.
> I'm trying [email protected] again, mostly as an experiment in stability [in the winter it was also nice to keep the room warm, and I would also love to find a signal]. I was having crashes before, but now I'm up to 8 hours with no BSOD [Machine tested stable with IBT and Prime, but BOINC used to crash it in an hour].
> 
> I also reinstalled BOINC, because I was wondering if the crashes were software. not hardware [maybe because I crashed so many times it messed it up].
> 
> This time I installed the standalone version, with no Virtual Box. What version do you run? Noticed any difference between them? Either more stable?
> 
> [This is W7 64Bit, GUI BOINC, not command line]
> 
> Do you use the machines at the same time? I think I have to set my computing preferences up right to allow this. With "GPU While in use" and resource allocations at 100% I get some stuttering with music or YT [ I guess the pipeline and cache are totally flooded!], so I have set "Use at most xx% of processors" to 70 or 80, and that seems to fix it by reducing the overall load on each core.
> 
> Funny, though, because "xx CPU Time" just alternates between 100 and 0% load as duty-cycle. This doesn't help the stuttering.
> 
> Those two options seem to be named incorrectly, the wrong way around!
> 
> Any feedback etc?


Sorry man have been away for a while.
I don't run boinc you might have mistaken what I said about [email protected] to Bill1024 a while back about wanting to know about boinc and running it. Wish I could help but I never had the time to get to it and just continued with [email protected] since I fold mainly for cancer research, my father fight leukaemia for the 3rd time in the last 15 years so I really try to do my part about that. If I start to learn stuff on BOINC ill let you know


----------



## gofasterstripes

@autoshot Good work. I forgot about 1T








It's usually a small and safe boost in performance to use 1T, but if you're already overclocked then it might push you over the edge.

@EvilMonk Thanks for getting back to me. I will add some folding to my workload, but still having problems with BOINC running SETI - I need to fix the prefs for it, as when I was setting up the 4.6GHz overclock for the 970SLI scaling benches above, BOINC ran at startup and then crashed the machine and ruined it's preferences/lost WUs etc... now I can't remember my password!

Good luck for your father, mine also has cancer, though a different type. You're in my thoughts.

Hope everybody is having fun with their Xeons









Sam


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> So I went back to the BIOS, increased just the CPU Voltage from 1.20v to 1.20675v, restarted the "In-Place Large FFTs"-torture test and let it run through the night. Luckily all workers were still running when I checked back this morning before leaving for work and I really hope this won't have changed when I come back tonight since I'd like to avoid increasing the voltage any further (max. core temperatures are as high as 73° now).


unfortunately, one of the workers stopped after a little more than 11 hours. since increasing the CPU voltage further to 1.21250v yielded temperatures in the high 70s under load I decided it wouldn't be worth the extra couple of MHz and set the clock back to 3.74 GHz (= 990X). I haven't had time to prime-test it yet but I hope I finally found the sweet spot


----------



## gofasterstripes

@autoshot
You're so close mate, I bet someone else can get you that last step


----------



## autoshot

just a quick update: my Xeon X5650 survived 22 hours prime95 In-Place Large FFTs at 3.74 GHz | 1.20625v. I'm running another torture test at 3.76 GHz right now to see if this is also stable (I'd really like to have at least ~61 GFlops, which I don't at 3.74 GHz...







)


----------



## cb750rob

Good for you!! and good luck with this test!









I bet your room is nice and warm too lol.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Good for you!! and good luck with this test!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet your room is nice and warm too lol.


maybe not these chips dont seem to generate much heat at all iv been keeping my x5675 at 4.4ghz and never passes 50c on normal use and around 75c doing ibt in a mid tower case with 6 hardrives a 5850 and crappy airflow.


----------



## spdaimon

That's why I am thinking getting another NH-D14 for my X5675. I just got another, but I'm thinking about using it on the W3690 I just ordered to replace the dead X5650 in the RIIIE. Thanks to @chessmyantidrug for pointing this one out a while back. I did a side by side comparison at CPUBoss, and its indistinguishable from the i7-990X, except you can get the W3690 for half the cost and has better memory speed support. I got mine for sub-200. I didn't go for the X5690 because I understand from some threads that I saw mostly @EvilMonk and chess discussing it that the W chip is unlocked. Why get a 130W chip you ask? Because I own two 95Ws already, a X5660 and X5675.

Getting back to my original thought...I nearly the same set up as your Xeon-Wolf,@Bal3Wolf. Its Vulture in my sig. I tried my X5675 at 22x200, but the first core would creep up to 80-85 at full load. A lot higher than it would like. I know I mentioned this a while back, just haven't had a chance to pull it apart and see why the H70 is doing such a lousy job. Don't want to spend another $60 on a cooler, but then again I just got some upgraded fans for the X5660 system and spent that much on the fans. Its a used system I bought off a friend...think the case is a CM Elite 690 or RC-690. Fans are all caked with dust, and only push 44CFMs. (Best way to clean them, btw? I'd like to get a DataVac soon). I got a couple JetFlos for the side and back, and a couple Corsair Air series SP120s for the front and top. Should be pushing 90 CFM at top speed. Hope to bring the X5660 down a few degrees and see if I can't get it to 4.2Ghz from its current 4Ghz. Also,right now I have the X5675 at 25*160 and the cores are around 60-65C at load. At 20x200 it runs a lot hotter, in the upper 70s. I guess thats because you are pushing more data through the bus/QPI? I believe the vCore voltage is higher too. I'd have to check, but when the Bclk is 160, the vCore is at 1.20, but at 200 Bclk, its around 1.33.


----------



## autoshot

since the outside temperatures around where I live have dropped from 20+ to around 10°C on tuesday my room was actually colder after 22hrs of prime than on monday without the PC even running








aside from that, the X5650 also sustained 21h prime @ 3.76 GHz | 1.20625v







however, after setting the BCLK from 188 to 189 (= 3.78GHz) yesterday evening and starting another prime run my computer unfortunately must have crashed and rebooted sometime last night, which is kind of weird since it didn't do that at 3.8 GHz (just prime reported a rounding error in one of the workers after 11 hours, as mentioned earlier). so what I'm trying to say is: the CPU was more stable at 3.8GHz than it was at 3.78GHz with otherwise identical voltage settings. any idea why that might be?


----------



## gofasterstripes

If I read that right you increased your BCLK - so it's QPI, cache or memory limit being passed. Need to isolate them one at a time. Might not be worth the bother.


----------



## DR4G00N

I gave 4.3GHz another shot and it's looking good so far.
Settings,
4301MHz
22X195.5
Vcore: 1.3875v








VTT: 1.25v
RAM Freq: 1954MHz (9-9-9-24 1T)
VDIMM: 1.57v
Uncore: 2933MHz (low, I know but it likes to throw BSOD's at me if it's >3GHz)
QPI Link: 3519MHz (7.04GT/s)

Highest core temp I've seen so far was 72c when running P95 small FFT.

Might try for 4.4GHz even if it needs more than 1.4v and also try to get the ram to 2000+MHz









Edit: Had to bump the vcore up to 1.4v it was erroring in some tasks.


----------



## spdaimon

New fans brought down the temp about 10C at full load. Amazing what a little air flow will do!


----------



## marcchep

Hey guys,
I need your opinion on a mainboard again, is the EVGA X58 SLI LE any good?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Hey guys,
> I need your opinion on a mainboard again, is the EVGA X58 SLI LE any good?


Yes, that's a very nice board - I have one in my secondary rig.
Just make sure you get a revision 1.1 or 1.2 so these xeons will work natively. Rev. 1.0 requires a mod which I can show you if need be.


----------



## marcchep

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Yes, that's a very nice board - I have one in my secondary rig.
> Just make sure you get a revision 1.1 or 1.2 so these xeons will work natively. Rev. 1.0 requires a mod which I can show you if need be.


Thank you very much for your fast answer, it´s Rev. 1.2







Does the Bios need to be the newest Version?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Thank you very much for your fast answer, it´s Rev. 1.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the Bios need to be the newest Version?


I don't think so, of course it wouldn't hurt to have the latest bios.


----------



## spdaimon

Ok guys, I need a little CPU 101 help. The X5660 Tjunction is 81. CoreTemp detects TjMax as 96. Am I correct in setting the Tjunction offset in CoreTemp to -15 (96 - 81 = 15). I had the same question for when I was tinkering with a X5470 last year. I just ended up leaving it as the default, because no one could seem to agree on an answer. I don't want to artificially lower the temp, but don't want to think my cooling system is underperforming too. The new 95CFM fans definitely helped bring it down 5-10C. 2 of the fans are 64CFM with high static pressure becuase they have to blow through a restriction in the case (i.e. hdd cage and foam layer), which I read the airflow is better with these types of fans in this situation. With the default, CoreTemp is reporting 68C @ 4.2Ghz full load. vCore is 1.36.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Confused.

What do you mean tjunction "is" 81?

When? Under what conditions?


----------



## spdaimon

The maximum operating temperature. Tjunction as I understand it, is the maximum temperature the CPU is suppose to reach. Is this synonymous with TjMax? I believe that TjMax is the point where the CPU does a thermal shutdown. For example, I was just helping someone with thier 990X, and the Tj is 68C. He said he occasionally would run it to 80C at full load. I thought this was dangerous, but I checked a few forums and found that you can run it to 90C, but after that it will shut down. So what I am asking in my case, is the CPU 83 or is it really 68, which is what it reports after I set the Tjunction offset to -15 in CoreTemp. The default Tjunction is 96C.

When? at Full load.

See here, they list the max temp as 81:

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20X5660%20-%20AT80614005127AA%20(BX80614X5660).html

Here they actually label it Tjunction:

http://www.meetgadget.com/gadget/13268/Intel+Xeon+X5660


----------



## justinyou

Great news for us who are still using x58, OWC has introduce this add-on PCIE board for the SSD.

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/owc-offer-sata3-ssd-pcie-daughter-board.html


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Great news for us who are still using x58, OWC has introduce this add-on PCIE board for the SSD.
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/owc-offer-sata3-ssd-pcie-daughter-board.html


That is great news, but there are cheaper alternatives out there on the web that allows more options. I'm looking at a few others choices since I want to run x1 RAID 0 SSDs & x2 RAID 0 HDDs. I suppose this is good for those who want to run 1 SSD 6GB\s with much better speed.


----------



## Dotachin

Since PCIE 2.0 x1 speed is 500MB/s, shouldn't it run just fine in such a slot?
Considering this, a cross, and a sound card would all viable in a X58 board.

edit: it's bootlable, isn't it?


----------



## spdaimon

Someone posted this a few weeks ago, I saved it to look into it later. I seem to be doing just fine on SATA2 w/Win8 however. Boots up quick.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0090IA3GY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1PLAVF2S03DRP&coliid=I1LOESVBUX2FM3&psc=1

Note there is a PCIe X1 and PCIe X2 version.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Since PCIE 2.0 x1 speed is 500MB/s, shouldn't it run just fine in such a slot?
> Considering this, a cross, and a sound card would all viable in a X58 board.
> 
> edit: it's bootlable, isn't it?


I think it is, it is worthless piece of hardware if not bootable.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That is great news, but there are cheaper alternatives out there on the web that allows more options. I'm looking at a few others choices since I want to run x1 RAID 0 SSDs & x2 RAID 0 HDDs. I suppose this is good for those who want to run 1 SSD 6GB\s with much better speed.


LSI or Adaptec raid card ?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Someone posted this a few weeks ago, I saved it to look into it later. I seem to be doing just fine on SATA2 w/Win8 however. Boots up quick.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0090IA3GY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1PLAVF2S03DRP&coliid=I1LOESVBUX2FM3&psc=1
> 
> Note there is a PCIe X1 and PCIe X2 version.


They are not the same brand, OWC vs Apricorn.
And if you check the PCIE pins, the Apricon looks like lacking some pins, but the Apricon card allow user to plug in 2 SSDs, which is not bad at all.


----------



## Sam412

I have the Apricorn Velocity2 with 2XSamsung 850 250gb in Raid 0. It is bootable and extremely easy to install. I get around 900mbs read/write, its pretty dang fast. I love the clean look too, no sata cords


----------



## cobovo

Hello guys,
I received new mobo on LGA 1366 AsusTeck Rampage III Extreme. Mobo perfect to overclocking. In stock my X5650 need only 0.9V in idle and 0.96V if burn. But i have some problem with overclocking on this rig. Problem still in the next action when i use not default setting (for X5650 that is 2.66Ghg) some overclocking, voltage on CPU not down in idle state. I trying to do everything as i know, but not found solution.. Am not new in overclocking. And this point (this mobo) is problem. I use the last version of the bios 1502 for mobo.
This my config
CPU X5650
MB AsusTeck Rampage III Extreme
PSU Seasonic X1250
GPU Asus GTX 660ti
Ram kingstone KHX1600C9D3K6/24GX (6x4Gb)
Any ideas or solution? I am open to questions.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

1502 is NOT last version, 1601 is the last version made for R3E. On my R3E I need 1.31v for stable 4ghz overclock on X5650. What is your problem?


----------



## cobovo

On official site of Asus i can seen only 1502 version of bios for this mobo. But it is no important in this case. Problem in the voltage for CPU. It is always is 1.3V when CPU in idle mod or burn mode. On previews mobo RIIE offset mod worked perfectly but on this mobo i can't see this option as ffset". It is problem. Or any others way to do this.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah, it don't matter what is on the site. 1601 came directly from Asus Bios Enginering dept and it was given to us over at the ExtremeSystems forums, and then eventually made its way to BIOS-Mods forums. Either way it is the latest R3E bios directly from Asus, and then updated with the latest onboard devices firmware.

Yeah, please forgive me as I do not understand what you mean by saying "offset mod". Anyone else know what he is trying to say?


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah, please forgive me as I do not understand what you mean by saying "offset mod". Anyone else know what he is trying to say?


"Offset mode" is for example. You must keep in mind only following information: CPU always keep voltage on 1.3V. But in idle state must reduce to 1.16-1.2V (for example).
Any powersave option like C1E or Speed&step not working when i trying to overclock my CPU.


----------



## cobovo

To *}SkOrPn--'*
Please show your overclocking settings.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

OK, a friend told me what you mean. Yeah this board stays 1.3v all the time for real overclocking, or it stays at what ever voltage you put it at. The Asus boards don't work like the gigabyte ones. The gigabyte ones can overclock like that, or it can add an offset. If you add an offset on the gb board, it still drops the cpu voltage when idle. I never seen it do that on my R3E board.

Wow, not sure I have my settings printed anywhere. I am using 1.31v, 200 BCLK, 20 Multi, and a few other settings. Let me find the time to copy my settings, but it may take a day or so. I can also post some screenshots of CPU-Z and other sensing software if you want.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> OK, a friend told me what you mean. Yeah this board stays 1.3v all the time for real overclocking, or it stays at what ever voltage you put it at. The Asus boards don't work like the gigabyte ones. .


It is wrong information.
I used many motherboard on s1366 like(*MSI x58 Pro-E* then *Asus P6T* then *Asus P6T Deluxe* then *Asus P6T6 Workstation* (at this moment is available to use) the *Evga X58 micro* (with mod for westmere) then *Evga X58 SlI3* then *Evga X58 FTW* (is also available) then *Asus Rampage II Exeteme* and all of this mobos works with reduce the voltage in OCing. It is verified information by myself.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Wow, not sure I have my settings printed anywhere. I am using 1.31v, 200 BCLK, 20 Multi, and a few other settings. Let me find the time to copy my settings, but it may take a day or so. I can also post some screenshots of CPU-Z and other sensing software if you want.


You can just pictured not write all


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> You can just pictured not write all


Yeah that is what I planned on doing for you. All new pics taken below of my simple setup. Remember, I am not a serious over clocker and I am perfectly happy with 4ghz. Your mileage may vary from my results.


----------



## cobovo

To *}SkOrPn--* not bad result. In your case reduce of voltage not doing because you disabled C1E and Speed and Step function. You can enable this option and say what happen with voltage on CPU
*Many thanks for pictures.*








I have good sample of CPU (X5650) i inspect more than 10 X5650 exemplars.My the best sample need for 4.0Ghg 1.25V for Vcore and 1.2 for QPI link. But on this mobo request less voltage.


----------



## Blacklac

Is there a list of X56XX compatible motherboards or way way to tell what ones aren't? Thinking I may jump on the X5660 train... Honestly, this Q9650 @ 4.3Ghz is still fine for 1080p, but this is really a great deal for a hexacore setup that can clock high. Should last me years...


----------



## spdaimon

You could do what I did, which is check the first post of the Xeon-X58 thread: here
I just looked at what the other members were using. A few early EVGA boards need to be modded, most the ASUS boards seem to work. Can't really speak for the Gigabyte boards. The UD3 I tried first didn't work. It was a Rev 1.0, which seemed to be the problem. Rev 1.1 I believe works.

Post #700!


----------



## Blacklac

Its the different revisions im really concerned about.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blacklac*
> 
> Its the different revisions im really concerned about.


if it makes u feel better, asus p6t, p6t v2, p6x58d, gigabyte ud3 1.1 ud5, ud7 ,ud9, most asrock, most msi, evga need latest bios/ hard mod on some.


----------



## Blacklac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> if it makes u feel better, asus p6t, p6t v2, p6x58d, gigabyte ud3 1.1 ud5, ud7 ,ud9, most asrock, most msi, evga need latest bios/ hard mod on some.


Any of those youd avoid if you were shooting for ~4.5Ghz?

That does help, thanks!


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blacklac*
> 
> Any of those youd avoid if you were shooting for ~4.5Ghz?
> 
> That does help, thanks!


hmm thats tough cause it also depends on what chip you get, if you get a 5675 you're pretty much guaranteed a 4.5ghz oc with a good voltage. but the rule of thumb is the more power phrase, vrm, mosfet, the better the power delivery and the more stable the oc. that goes for all motherboard, if you want really high oc, you're looking at rampage 3, ud7, ud9. evga classified, sabertooth and p6x58d on paper looks average but some people was able to get high oc out of them, not the best voltage but a high oc nevertheless.


----------



## cobovo

So guys, first chip today. It is result. Other 4 not expected yet.



And additional info Vcore 1.3V; QPI -1.204V


----------



## gofasterstripes

Jebus - what are you going to do with the others?!


----------



## marcchep

Hello guys, I have to decide AGAIN on what motherboard to get because the EVGA X58 SLI LE I bought got damaged.








Now, I have to decide between the DFI LANParty DK X58-T3eH6 and the ASUS P6T. So, which one should I get? I´m going to use a X5670 on it.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Hello guys, I have to decide AGAIN on what motherboard to get because the EVGA X58 SLI LE I bought got damaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now, I have to decide between the DFI LANParty DK X58-T3eH6 and the ASUS P6T. So, which one should I get? I´m going to use a X5670 on it.


DFI boards don't work with the xeons at all so the only choice is the P6T.


----------



## Tritonk7

Hi guys , its foto my rig X5670 + X58 sabertooth

http://fotohost.by/image/JgW
http://fotohost.by/image/Jgj
http://fotohost.by/image/Jg1
http://fotohost.by/image/JgH
http://fotohost.by/image/JgI
http://fotohost.by/image/JgJ
http://fotohost.by/image/JgS


----------



## marcchep

If you had to choose between any X58 Mainboard, which one would you get?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Mine


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I purchased exactly the one I wanted. When I was piecing together my second build, I wanted a military theme and the Sabertooth fit in perfectly with it. I bought a desert camo spray paint kit and never found the time to actually use it. Maybe one of these days I actually will. I would honestly prefer to do that with a CaseLabs case. If I never can afford one, I'll get an Enthoo Pro.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The honest answer is that I have only ever used Gigabyte boards from that generation and have never had a problem [apart from when I broke the voltage readout with a screwdriver].

Also the Ud5/UD7v2 have a lot of pretty lights


----------



## Kana-Maru

Everyone has their favorites at this point. I'd have to say my Sabertooth X58. Even when I upgrade I'm sticking with the Sabertooth brand more than likely. Solid performance and they can take a beating when overclocking. 5 year warranty. The nice extras and cooling solutions that actually does help. From my experience it has been a very dependable motherboard with no issues for years.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> If you had to choose between any X58 Mainboard, which one would you get?


I do like my EVGA FTW3 boards, The classified3 or if we can counts the SR-2. I would be tickled pink to own a SR-2
EVGA has great cust. service.

Some of the best cust service out there.
EVGA
G-skill memory
BUNN coffee brewers.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Jebus - what are you going to do with the others?!


"Jebus" -what this means?
They are will be overclocked and then select the best sample for my usage.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yo. It's an intentional misspelling of Jesus, trying not to offend anyone









I bought two chips to choose the best from and I thought that was a bit extravagant!

I'll be very interested to have a look at all the results [serial/model numbers, temps, volts, speeds[core/uncore] ] of that group of chips.

Keep us updated mate


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yo. It's an intentional misspelling of Jesus, trying not to offend anyone
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bought two chips to choose the best from and I thought that was a bit extravagant!
> 
> I'll be very interested to have a look at all the results [serial/model numbers, temps, volts, speeds[core/uncore] ] of that group of chips.
> 
> Keep us updated mate


Okey, no problem. But keep in mind, the seller does not want to choose the CPU from needs BACH code for you or me. Once, I tried to explain the seller, why I needed chips with some bachecode. He said: ok, not problem. But instead to receive chips "made in Costa Rica", I received "made in Malaysia". When I wrote to seller about confused of receives wrong item, the seller told me: to just return the item, and then he will send replacement. The returning item, cost to me about $ 60 in one side. It is not economically viable.
Some observations and his results:
On average, the chips from Malaysia better than chips from Costa Rica. All chip from Malaysia keeps 4.0 GHg with voltage lower then 1.32V on V core and lower then 1.3 on QPI/Vtt. But the most successful instances with the chips made in Costa Rica. Incidentally most worst too.
If you wont bach code i can do this.


----------



## Tritonk7

I have malasia X5670 . 4400 Mhz 1.328-1.336 V , QPI 3600 Mhz 1.26875 V


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> I have malasia X5670 . 4400 Mhz 1.328-1.336 V , QPI 3600 Mhz 1.26875 V


It is oldest chip made in 2010 year.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> It is oldest chip made in 2010 year.


it is better or worse? I have these markings do not understand


----------



## spdaimon

I wanted the Rampage III, because its the flagship board. It has some nice features, not that I'd use them all. It was a toss up between it or the Sabertooth


----------



## gofasterstripes

If it works, it works. The point of understanding the connection between the markings and the performance is to help people who are looking to buy chips.

*******
Different topic: Spotting an unstable setup:

I have found, with my combination, that a slightly low load voltage is easily spotted by [Drumroll]

*Adobe Flash!*

If I don't have the LLC settings correct on my board [this happens after a crash as there is a Gigabyte utility* I am using] _then I get a slightly too low loaded voltage_.

Sometimes this setting gets corrupted by a crash, or when I have booted into Linux, this causes the load voltage to sag a little, like 0.1V or something. Sometimes I don't realise that this has happened.....

Until I notice Flash crashing in Chrome all the damn time ["The plugin Adobe Flash has crashed"]

99% of the time, just nudging that voltage back up will fix it [use utility in my case to fix the VDroop].

Then the Flash crashes go away - indicating full stability. In case you're wondering IBT will also crash if the settings are mismatched, but Flash just gives it away when I browse.

So - as part of your testing routine, browse loads of pr0n flash-enabled sites. If you get crashes all the time, you're likely just below the correct operating voltage for your chip, and may get crashes in other software!









*Dynamic Energy Saver 2 - I use this not to save energy, [bet it makes no difference] but to enable the Dual-Power settings which alternate the load across different VRegs.

EDIT : Here's a pic of an old 486SX-25, because you'll like it


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> it is better or worse? I have these markings do not understand


The highest chips need to being youngest as possible. Because is hard usage and high speed and voltage is means quick degradation.
You can find chips made in 2011 or 2012 or some models of E56xx-series made in 2013 .
How to find info from BACH code
foe example *3841A579*:
3 - factory ( number or letter of means Intel's factory or plants)
8 - year (2008 - made in this year)
41 - week in year (in year we has 48-49 week)
A579 - lot number
1st letter or digit = plant code: (Malaysia)
0 = San Jose, Costa Rica
1 = Cavite, Philippines
3 = Costa Rica
6 = Chandler, Arizona
7 = Philippines
8 = Leixlip, Ireland
9 = Penang, Malaysia
L = Malaysia
Q = Malaysia
R = Manila, Philippines
Y = Leixlip, Ireland


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> The highest chips need to being youngest as possible. Because is hard usage and high speed and voltage is means quick degradation.


This depends on how the part in question was used. Many of the 1366 Xeons in circulation now are OEM pulls that were never OCed and only occasionally fully loaded.


----------



## Tritonk7

My have never been used, the seller was lying in a box OEM, even contacts were no signs of the socket, a cover without a scratch. and the 49 weeks, it's almost 2011, so that the processor is pretty good caught


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> This depends on how the part in question was used. Many of the 1366 Xeons in circulation now are OEM pulls that were never OCed and only occasionally fully loaded.


I just assume from the fact that this product is used to me (second hand if you want). The information about environment where worked unit, closed for me. (This maybe some data center or privat server, i don't know) In any case, the seller in (90% procents) ignores my question or last 10% give me vague information. Because the little insurance will not be superfluous.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> My have never been used, the seller was lying in a box OEM, even contacts were no signs of the socket, a cover without a scratch. and the 49 weeks, it's almost 2011, so that the processor is pretty good caught


Your processor from 2010 year not 2011. It is early exemplar. And 4.4GHg with 1.33V on Vcore for x5670 is not amazing . Maybe for you but not for me.
To *Tritonk7* i have to you question: how many sticks of RAM you use on this rig? You know then more Sticks of RAM y used then more need be Vcore and also QPI/VTT voltage. I use all 6 stick of RAM (6x4Gb)


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Your processor from 2010 year not 2011. It is early exemplar. And 4.4GHg with 1.33V on Vcore for x5670 is not amazing . Maybe for you but not for me.
> To *Tritonk7* i have to you question: how many sticks of RAM you use on this rig? You know then more Sticks of RAM y used then more need be Vcore and also QPI/VTT voltage. I use all 6 stick of RAM (6x4Gb)


and you have a result of OC? I have 3 modules of 4 gigabytes operate at a frequency of 2000 MHz, is now too hot, so usually use 4500 for 24/7 In the event 1.376 MHz and the memory at 2055 MHz NB 3700, which is quite normal, and I drive tests on 4700 and 4800 and higher


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> and you have a result of OC? I have 3 modules of 4 gigabytes operate at a frequency of 2000 MHz, is now too hot, so usually use 4500 for 24/7 In the event 1.376 MHz and the memory at 2055 MHz NB 3700, which is quite normal, and I drive tests on 4700 and 4800 and higher


See my previous posts on 404 page. Please, you can posted some screen with memory on 2000 MHg. As i know Xeon don't work with memory higher than 1800MHg.


----------



## Tritonk7

I see x5650 with turbo boost on 4400 mhz in cb 11.5 . How voltage u have on linx on 4400 mhz?


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> I see x5650 with turbo boost on 4400 mhz in cb 11.5 . How voltage u have on linx on 4400 mhz?


At first time i see xeon work with memory on 2000Mgh.







I use turbo-bust multiplayer for CPU. Not turbo boost option as all. If use turbo-boost it is not work for all six core. You must know that. And not use lynx as a point of stability. For searching stability i use render in 3DS Max. At many-many time i has stable in Linx but when trying render some scene i have code BBC 101.


----------



## dotagaming

Does anyone know where I can get a X5670 for cheap in Europe? They used to be like 70 Euros but now they cost 120++


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> I see x5650 with turbo boost on 4400 mhz in cb 11.5 . How voltage u have on linx on 4400 mhz?


and 2100 can be from memory or higher, but in 2200, I could not even download, 2155 is not stable


----------



## virpz

Have been playing with my X5670 for almost two days.

So far I have been able to reach 220 blck but this processor crashes if I try anything above 4630Hz.
.
I like the platform but not the abscence of a real SATA III controller.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice work dude. You may want to 24/7 below 1.35v, see what that gets you. At a guess 1.3 will do 4GHz.


----------



## cobovo

Someone request the batch code from this processor


So, I trying to do some screens for *Triton 7* but Linx give me low result of GFlops only 25. First i think some problem in program, so i download another one and result be also 25 GFlops.


I noticed that the temperature of cores rises strongly and frequency be reduced, I decided to replace Noctua NH-U12 on Noctua NH-D14, but the result did not change. I touched the cooler tubes and feel that they are not hot. In general, I have concluded that the thermal solution very bad. I bought 20g tube but i think is a fake.


----------



## gofasterstripes

What?

It's from NewEgg and it's fake? That seems a little unlikely.

Are you sure you're not having trouble getting the cooler seated? It's not sitting on something else, maybe it is resting on the RAM?


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> What?
> 
> It's from NewEgg and it's fake? That seems a little unlikely.
> 
> Are you sure you're not having trouble getting the cooler seated? It's not sitting on something else, maybe it is resting on the RAM?


So guess, maybe my previous post is unreasoned but something wrong. Maybe processor very hottest. 76-78 C only for 1.3-1.31 on Vcore with D-14. It is not normal.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmmm, I'm 73c for 1.28 on 4GHz. I think the temp is related to both the voltage and the frequency.

Might as well try different paste though.


----------



## cobovo

At this time temperature is more huge.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hmmm, I'm 73c for 1.28 on 4GHz. I think the temp is related to both the voltage and the frequency.
> 
> Might as well try different paste though.


Y also used Noctua D-14 heatsink? Before temp for 1.3 V core on D-14 is be lower then 70 C.
Will trying to use another processor.


----------



## gofasterstripes

No I have a Zalman CNPS-10X Extreme, but it's pretty similar performance.

Interesting, keep us posted


----------



## cobovo

I think something wrong. The radiator is not very hottest this indicates on poor heat-exchange with the cap of CPU and sole of cooler.
For example some time ago i had two not good samples of X5670. They request for 4.4Ghg 1.41Vcore and 1.32V QPI first. second 1.42Vcore and 1.32V QPI. Wint D-14 both has temp lower than 72C. If i correct noticed, voltage has more influence on temp than frequency.
So, i have bad:
1. termal solution;
2. not correct value on core temp;
3. bad cooler.
Because the radiator is not very hottest.


----------



## Blacklac

Reseat the cooler. When you pull it off, see how the paste spread out. Maybe it left a bubble or didn't spread over the entire area.

My cooler doesn't get hot, just warm. I could leave my hand on it all day. If my cooler was hot, I'd worry my airflow sucks, but I know I have a good cooler. So is the Noctua though.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> I think something wrong. The radiator is not very hottest this indicates on poor heat-exchange with the cap of CPU and sole of cooler.
> For example some time ago i had two not good samples of X5670. They request for 4.4Ghg 1.41Vcore and 1.32V QPI first. second 1.42Vcore and 1.32V QPI. Wint D-14 both has temp lower than 72C. If i correct noticed, voltage has more influence on temp than frequency.
> So, i have bad:
> 1. termal solution;
> 2. not correct value on core temp;
> 3. bad cooler.
> Because the radiator is not very hottest.


VCORE 1.328 on full load cpu .


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice work dude. You may want to 24/7 below 1.35v, see what that gets you. At a guess 1.3 will do 4GHz.


Thanks.

This thing run as hot as my FX [email protected]

I managed to run prime for 2 hours with:

1.35v - 4400Hz - bclk 200
1.37v - 4400Hz - bclk 220
1.41v.- 4630Hz - bclk 220
1.43v - 4730Hz - bclk 215

I can barely load windows at 4820Hz and I can only post at 5280Hz ( 24*208 ) 1.45v .


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blacklac*
> 
> Reseat the cooler. When you pull it off, see how the paste spread out. Maybe it left a bubble or didn't spread over the entire area.
> 
> My cooler doesn't get hot, just warm. I could leave my hand on it all day. If my cooler was hot, I'd worry my airflow sucks, but I know I have a good cooler. So is the Noctua though.


I trying to use second D-14( from other rig) but more oldest, situation not change. Cooler not hottest and not warm is not change the temperature as all. I put the imprint of the thermal paste on cap of CPU.



In burn mode the tube of cooler not warmer. It is look like in idle.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> In burn mode the tube of cooler not warmer. It is look like in idle.


*feel? So the temperature doesn't change?

Are you really really sure it's not sitting on the RAM or the chipset cooler?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Dude!

I suggested lower volts, not higher LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....

_And the biggest balls award goes to...._


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> This thing run as hot as my FX [email protected]
> 
> I managed to run prime for 2 hours with:
> 
> 1.35v - 4400Hz - bclk 200
> 1.37v - 4400Hz - bclk 220
> 1.41v.- 4630Hz - bclk 220
> 1.43v - 4730Hz - bclk 215
> 
> I can barely load windows at 4820Hz and I can only post at 5280Hz ( 24*208 ) 1.45v .


Dude!

I suggested lower volts, not higher LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....

And the biggest balls award goes to....


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Dude!
> 
> I suggested lower volts, not higher LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....
> 
> And the biggest balls award goes to....


What are u talking about . I spent a good ammount of money on this system







I may even remove the *IHS* .


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> What are u talking about . I spent a good ammount of money on this system
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I may even remove the *IHS* .


I wouldn't do that if I were you. *hint*


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



It's soldered and you'll destroy the processor


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I wouldn't do that if I were you. *hint*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> It's soldered and you'll destroy the processor


Yes, it is dangerous but I have some experience with that . My real concern is the final height of the cpu without the IHS as I don't really feel like modifying the ILM


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well I guess if you'll be pumping a lot of voltage throughout the chip it's gonna burn. Those 6 cores can get really hot once you get near 1.30v+ 70+% Load without adequate cooling. You'll probably kill it overtime anyways with the high voltages.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well I guess if you'll be pumping a lot of voltage throughout the chip it's gonna burn. Those 6 cores can get really hot once you get near 1.30v+ 70+% Load without adequate cooling. You'll probably kill it overtime anyways with the high voltages.


The max temp I ever got was 79-80 celsius during prime. What do you consider as max bench voltage and a 24/7 voltage if I am able to keep core temp bellow 70C ?


----------



## Kana-Maru

My personal 100% Load \ bench standard is below 73c. You really don't want to go over 78c, but Nahalem and Westmere's are tough cookies. I use Intel standards and I don't pump constant voltage through my CPU. The max voltage is 1.35v so I'll stay below that for 24/7 use just to be safe.

*Edit*:
Your max temps are fine, but I wouldn't want those temps for long periods of time.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> What are u talking about . I spent a good ammount of money on this system
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I may even remove the *IHS* .


Sorry, I guess with the accidental double post and the language that maybe sounded rude?

Im not taking the ****, you should feel free to do as you want with your equipment!







it was supposed to be light hearted.

But yeah, those voltages really high. With enough cooling you may be fine, or you may not be. I thought you probably knew, but 1.35 is the Max safe 24/7, remember these chips are optimised for high density servers, not for surviving DIY builds and mods like i7's.

I killed an IMC with only a slightly high voltage ( 1.4 Vtt (uncore) maybe, it was the regulation that wasn't tight and i set 1.35 but it was over delivering) but I personally have used 1.43Vcc (VCore) for 30 mins for benching. Other people have done higher, but it is a bit of a lottery! Have a look at Kanas posts, i think there's some good ones on voltages at the start of the thread. Youll have to find them your self, in not getting out of bed to use the PC, even though i have just been woken up by builders dropping rubbish into a skip, sounds like sniper fire in Metro!

Stonking overclock there though..... !

Good luck!









Carry on!


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Sorry, I guess with the accidental double post and the language that maybe sounded rude?
> 
> Im not taking the ****, you should feel free to do as you want with your equipment!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it was supposed to be light hearted.
> 
> But yeah, those voltages really high. With enough cooling you may be fine, or you may not be. I thought you probably knew, but 1.35 is the Max safe 24/7, remember these chips are optimised for high density servers, not for surviving DIY builds and mods like i7's.
> 
> I killed an IMC with only a slightly high voltage ( 1.4 Vtt (uncore) maybe, it was the regulation that wasn't tight and i set 1.35 but it was over delivering) but I personally have used 1.43Vcc (VCore) for 30 mins for benching. Other people have done higher, but it is a bit of a lottery! Have a look at Kanas posts, i think there's some good ones on voltages at the start of the thread. Youll have to find them your self, in not getting out of bed to use the PC, even though i have just been woken up by builders dropping rubbish into a skip, sounds like sniper fire in Metro!
> 
> Stonking overclock there though..... !
> 
> Good luck!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carry on!


You didn't sounded rude. I meant sarcasm by saying "good amount of money" as I have spent only $ 340 with this system .

I must admit that I am kind of pissed for not being able to get close to the 5Ghz mark.

Thanks for the tip on the voltage, ill keep it in mind.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I must admit that I am kind of pissed for not being able to get close to the 5Ghz mark.


Yeah, I was too. I read a load of people hitting 4.5, 5.0 and i didn't realise that they were going over the "safe" volts. When i tried for 5ish i rapidly exceeded the limits and got in a sulk, messaged Kana like all "boohoo".

SOL









5670/-75 does seem to be better binned, but then you pay more...


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice pic -
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Yes, it is dangerous but I have some experience with that . My real concern is the final height of the cpu without the IHS as I don't really feel like modifying the ILM


What was that and how'd it go? Was it a soldered die?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah, I was too. I read a load of people hitting 4.5, 5.0 and i didn't realise that they were going over the "safe" volts. When i tried for 5ish i rapidly exceeded the limits and got in a sulk, messaged Kana like all "boohoo".
> 
> SOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5670/-75 does seem to be better binned, but then you pay more...


I wanted atleast 4.8GHz stable but I don't see that happening with that chip without going 1.46V+









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice pic -
> What was that and how'd it go? Was it a soldered die?


It is my FX-8320, a good clocker. It was a pain to take the IHS off, not only because the ihs is soldered to the core but mostly because it's capacitors are laying around the edge and some are even attached to the glue ( which is super strong ) making it almost impossible to just cut around with a razor. The temperature to melt the glue is also higher than what is needed to melt the solder. In the end I managed to remove te IHS while preserving the caps and was able to reach 5289Mhz- all cores on.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I wanted atleast 4.8GHz stable but I don't see that happening with that chip without going 1.46V+


And it won't be happening unless you pump a crap load of voltage through the CPU and MB. [read below]

Quote:


> It is my FX-8320, a good clocker. It was a pain to take the IHS off, not only because the core is soldered to the core but mostly because it's capacitors are laying around the edge and some are even attached to the glue ( which is super strong ) making it almost impossible to just cut around with a razor. The temperature to melt the glue is also higher than what is needed to melt the solder. In the end I managed to remove te IHS while preserving the caps and was able to reach 5289Mhz- all cores on.


Instead of having you search back through my topics about this story I'll tell you now.

My highest was 5.4Ghz on all cores. I'm never going above 4.8Ghz again on this platform though. My PC almost died. My PC wouldn't boot for nearly a hour after making those suicide runs. I had a lot of coil whine as well. I thought I literally killed the CPU and I probably damn near did. I screwed up my previous OCs which now requires more voltage. Thankfully no more coil whine noises. This MB and CPU has proven that it is a beast and I'm going to retire from both from suicide runs now.

Heat was never the issue with my suicide run, it was pure voltage. If I was a fool and messed around with the CPU PLL or PCI-e Frequency I would have killed the CPU for sure Thankfully I'm not a fool and left certain voltages alone.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I love war stories!


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> And it won't be happening unless you pump a crap load of voltage through the CPU and MB. [read below]
> Instead of having you search back through my topics about this story I'll tell you now.
> 
> My highest was 5.4Ghz on all cores. I'm never going above 4.8Ghz again on this platform though. My PC almost died. My PC wouldn't boot for nearly a hour after making those suicide runs. I had a lot of coil whine as well. I thought I literally killed the CPU and I probably damn near did. I screwed up my previous OCs which now requires more voltage. Thankfully no more coil whine noises. This MB and CPU has proven that it is a beast and I'm going to retire from both from suicide runs now.
> 
> Heat was never the issue with my suicide run, it was pure voltage. If I was a fool and messed around with the CPU PLL or PCI-e Frequency I would have killed the CPU for sure Thankfully I'm not a fool and left certain voltages alone.


Damn. Now there is no way I am going close to 1.45v again.

I am just a lil frustated that I cannot get close to 5Ghz without alot of voltage being pumped to the cpu. It feels like If I was careful setting the bed to get no candy in the end.

5.4GHz with the X5660 ?

Yes, I have had some losses while messing with PCI-E frequencies and voltages and ill never do that again, never.

You guys know if there are anyways to save/view bios settings on PC ? I am not really into taking screen shots.


----------



## gofasterstripes

5.4GHz probably not possible without extreme cooling, can't imagine anyone would go that high for real use. Try asking Xevi, he's the top nutter here!

Save BIOS settings? Dunno, I can on my Gigabyte boards. By screen shot you mean you don't want to photograph the screens? Yeah that's a bit lame, but if you mess with the settings enough i bet you can proven a whole BIOS in a minute







Practise, dear boy!

About the top frequency, what are you using the rig for? If it's gaming i think the benefits are limited above 4GHz. Both myself and Kana and probably others have upped bench results at different frequency and I'm pretty sure that 4is quite a bit faster than 3, but that going to 5GHz the returns deminish somewhat. Yeah it's faster, but when you factor in the GPU as well, not much faster.

I think i saw 0-2% for 18% extra GHz in Firestrike.... If you look at my posts back a few pages you'll find the results with a pair of 970's, if you're GPU limited the results would be even less exciting.

Try your own benches, keep us in the loop.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I love war stories!


Haha








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Damn. Now there is no way I am going close to 1.45v again.
> 
> I am just a lil frustated that I cannot get close to 5Ghz without alot of voltage being pumped to the cpu. It feels like If I was careful setting the bed to get no candy in the end.


Well it is a 32nm 1st gen. There aren't many PCs that hit 5Ghz. Most wont run stable. Anything over 1.35v is A LOT of voltage according to Intel. Actually 1.35v is a crap load of voltage if you consider the stock voltages. Anything over 1.35v definitely degrades the CPU due to several factors. Of course their could be other factors to make matters worse.
Quote:


> 5.4GHz with the X5660 ?


Yessir.. Suicide run. I was able to boot into windows and log in. 5.4Ghz was very unstable. I'll never do it again.

Quote:


> You guys know if there are anyways to save/view bios settings on PC ? I am not really into taking screen shots.


I don't know another way.


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I love war stories!


Ok...here's one from my awkward past. I got into the cheapskate Xeon club last year with a 5660 and an old Sabertooth. Studied the Xeon hexcore thread at anandtech and still made a few 'tactical' errors along the way...

Settled on offset voltages (1.01 at idle), but started with fixed volts. And what I thought were safe, mild voltages...

During a late night OC session there was a separation of mind and hand. My fingers typed 1.62 in the bios, rather than 1.26V my mind wanted - but the mind saw what it wanted to see and rebooted.

Started running IBT and the temps were off the chart! That's weird. Only bumped the core up by .02V and BCLK to 190. Glance at CPU-Z and see *1.62V*!!! *I'm killing my Xeon!!!* Leap out of the chair, screaming like a little girl, trip and and knock over the open case to pull the AC plug. It was pretty funny. Just not at the time. And kids, one twist tie and a piece of duct tape is not always the best method to secure fans to the heatsink.

The tough little hotrod Xeon survived and now is working smoothly on my cheapskate render farm at 4255/1.32V at full hex load with max temps in the low 60s.

Here's one of the early CB 11.5 scores. Put it in the top 20 at Anand for a few weeks. Until those showoff X99 systems spoiled the X58 Forever vibe.



Managed to push it higher, using less than 1.62V. ;-) For 24/7 use tho, 4.2-4.3 is the sweet spot for temps and stability with this vintage muscle-chip.


----------



## autoshot

all that talk about voltage offset got me thinking: I have a P6T Deluxe, which doesn't offer a voltage-offset, but I read it is possible to cross-flash the BIOS of some another ASUS motherboards that support it. does anyone have more information on that?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I don't actually get how it's possible to damage a chip with heat. Looking at this video, years old, there seems to be brilliant thermal management on these old P IV chips, so how come we can roast a Xeon?!


----------



## gofasterstripes

I just edited

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulftown

to reflect our toys and their new uses









@Kana-MaruNote reference 8


----------



## Kana-Maru

I see. I read it and I liked what you wrote. However the link should refer to the "Full Review":

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can do







Does do


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Can do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does do











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I don't actually get how it's possible to damage a chip with heat. Looking at this video, years old, there seems to be brilliant thermal management on these old P IV chips, so how come we can roast a Xeon?!


The Pentium 4s were such beast. The CPUs are smart enough to slow down performance to generate less heat, well except those older AMDs apparently lol. The Xeon's have the same updated technology. When the PC freezes from high overclocks that's a mechanism purposely added by Intel to prevent damage to the cores, uncore and so on. I think Intel has done a great job from preventing rookie overclockers from killing their PCs on Day 1. The CPU could freeze due to high voltage or heat other times it could BSOD and restart due to other CPU related issues. If the PC isn't freezing and you are roasting it then the Intel guidelines aren't preventing the chip from freezing.

The max temp for the X5660 is between 80c -82c IIRC. Anything higher than that will cause degradation. However, as overclockers we take the risk. Daily usage should remain below 70c. The motherboards allow us to roast the Xeon CPUs. If you are crazy or dumb enough to mess around with settings in order to hit high overclocks then you will roast the CPU. Sometimes you won't be able to stop the CPU from dying. I've read stories of people messing around with offset and frying their CPU instantly on a reboot.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually get how it's possible to damage a chip with heat. Looking at this video, years old, there seems to be brilliant thermal management on these old P IV chips, so how come we can roast a Xeon?!


Poor Duron.
During the P4 time I had an Athlon XP [email protected] modded to barton ( 512K L2) Epox 8RDA+ Nforce MCP-T ( best onboard sound EVER ! ) and some nice thermalrigth 947u with a cooljag fan that sounded like a jet taking off *EDIT:* or a R9 290X reference








I really miss the soundstorm.


----------



## Tritonk7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*


I tried to overclock the memory up to 2200 MHz, does not load the OS on the 220 bus.

219 bus, all is well in the BIOS writes the frequency 2195 MHz, a little less in the OS



QPI LINK "SLOW MODE" Dram FREQ 2240 MHZ


----------



## Carrotsfart

So, I'm planning on putting an x58 system together at some point in time motherboard allowing. What happens if you're overclocking and can only reach say 180 BCLK? would that cause issues with memory timings if you had 1600 MHz RAM? That's one thing I've not quite understood yet.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Memory speed is calculated using base clock and memory ratio. For example, the possible speeds with a 200 base clock are 1200, 1600, 2000, 2400, etc. Unfortunately these processors don't seem to like memory ratios over 10:1 so the highest memory speed you could achieve with a 180 base clock is 1800MHz.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Thanks for confirming that for me. So, if I was only able to get 180 BCLK out of my motherboard/processor, the smartest choice would be to buy 1866 MHz RAM and run it slightly below spec/try to bring the timings down, because the options for 1600 MHz aren't so pretty?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The RAM you buy doesn't matter. And any decent board should get you around 210 to 220 base clock.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Thanks for confirming that for me. So, if I was only able to get 180 BCLK out of my motherboard/processor, the smartest choice would be to buy 1866 MHz RAM and run it slightly below spec/try to bring the timings down, because the options for 1600 MHz aren't so pretty?


I was able to reach 2154Mhz with my crucial 1600Mhz . I highly recommend it due it's price vs performance/compatibility ratio, it is also low voltage ram 1.35 to 1.5v. 10-10-10-25 to 9-10-10-24


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Crucial BLS2KIT8G3D1609DS1S00



The point is that most decent ram chips will get you to this frequency and any decent motherboard can handle bclk 220 *BUT* not every Xeon will be able reach bclk 220.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





http://valid.x86.fr/naviv7


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My i7-930 was capable of reaching a higher BCLK, but not a higher overclock. Granted my X5670 has access to higher multipliers, I couldn't find stability on my i7-930 far beyond 3.8GHz while I've been stable as high as 4.32GHz with my Xeon.


----------



## virpz

Okay, someone did bid on my motherboard.
I had fun with my Xeon but I just can't stand the crappy SATA "III" performance.

A picture of my rig along with my best stable settings to posterity.

http://valid.x86.fr/naviv7


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Okay, someone did bid on my motherboard.
> I had fun with my Xeon but I just can't stand the crappy SATA "III" performance.


Crappy? If you use a single SSD non-RAID then the performance should be fine. SATA III PCI-e cards are literally less than $50.00 with many ports. I think I might just bite the bullet and buy the SATA III PCI-e card.


----------



## Dotachin

Cleaned dust from my pc and now my hottest core is at 28ºC (4.2Ghz - H100i)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> Cleaned dust from my pc and now my hottest core is at 28ºC (4.2Ghz - H100i)


Idle correct? Its amazing what a good cleaning can do.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Idle correct? Its amazing what a good cleaning can do.


Yes ofc. I'll run IBT later.
edit: Hottest core @72 I really wanted it to stay at 69 ;_;


----------



## Kana-Maru

72c is fine. I bet you can get below 70c at night when the ambient temp "should be" cooler.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Okay, someone did bid on my motherboard.
> I had fun with my Xeon but I just can't stand the crappy SATA "III" performance.


It is only in your mind. If you use ssd you can't check some differences on eye with sata2 or sata3.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tritonk7*
> 
> I tried to overclock the memory up to 2200 MHz, does not load the OS on the 220 bus.
> 
> 219 bus, all is well in the BIOS writes the frequency 2195 MHz, a little less in the OS


Thank man, you changed my mind about overclock memory on x58.


----------



## Manu78

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> hmm thats tough cause it also depends on what chip you get, if you get a 5675 you're pretty much guaranteed a 4.5ghz oc with a good voltage. but the rule of thumb is the more power phrase, vrm, mosfet, the better the power delivery and the more stable the oc.


Does it mean that the X5675 is more tolerant toward average mobos ?
Since the failure of my X5660 (on X58A-UD3R v2), I'm willing to get another Xeon... But I'm afraid it could fry just like the previous one...


----------



## gofasterstripes

I don't think there's an actual problem with the combination you had.

What were the maximum voltages you used?


----------



## Manu78

QPI/VTT was set to 1.335v
Vcore 1.31875v
DVID 1.335v
CPU PLL 1.8v
QPI PLL 1.2v
ICH Core 1.2v
DRAM 1.540v
Everything else was set to auto.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Probably the QPI voltage was too high.

Anyone know better?


----------



## Carrotsfart

I've finally managed to find a board, I've got the option of a Gigabyte x58A-UD3R (obviously the first choice) but I'm yet to find out whether it's a Rev 1.0 or a 2.0, assuming it's a 1.0, the other options are Asus P6t SE, or an MSI x58 Pro.

Does anyone have any experience with the other two that they can share/which would be the best choice for an x5670? I'm fairly sure the MSI board isn't compatible with a xeon, but I guess it's better to ask if anyone's made one work?

EDIT: It's a Rev 2.0, I've finally got a board! I'm so stoked right now!


----------



## KINOKS

Got a question:
My OC was doing well (UD3R rev2, X5670, 24GB 1600Mhz Adata @1600 Mhz) and then all of a sudden it started crashing.
The problem was memory. I had to up the ram voltage from 1,5 to 1,64 (UD3R doesn't have 1,65). Doing a test with IntelBurn and till now it looks OK, no memory problems (doing it on max RAM).
Now the question: is the fact that my RAM started failing (system freezes and BSODs) and that I needed to add more voltage to it a sign of a degrading IMC or some other part of the board or the RAM sticks them self?

Ram is Adata 1600Mhz rated at 99924 1.5v. I've set the timings and voltages manually to the ones that the RAM is rated for. I had lots of crashes and even got an error a couple of times on startup "Detecting DRAM size". This is a common error on the UD3R but in 4 years that I've used this board with the exact same RAM I never had this problem. This was a result of OCing for sure...


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> Got a question:
> My OC was doing well (UD3R rev2, X5670, 24GB 1600Mhz Adata @1600 Mhz) and then all of a sudden it started crashing.
> The problem was memory. I had to up the ram voltage from 1,5 to 1,64 (UD3R doesn't have 1,65). Doing a test with IntelBurn and till now it looks OK, no memory problems (doing it on max RAM).
> Now the question: is the fact that my RAM started failing (system freezes and BSODs) and that I needed to add more voltage to it a sign of a degrading IMC or some other part of the board or the RAM sticks them self?
> 
> Ram is Adata 1600Mhz rated at 99924 1.5v. I've set the timings and voltages manually to the ones that the RAM is rated for. I had lots of crashes and even got an error a couple of times on startup "Detecting DRAM size". This is a common error on the UD3R but in 4 years that I've used this board with the exact same RAM I never had this problem. This was a result of OCing for sure...


Other data:
20x, 3200uncore, 1600 ram, 200 bclk. Vcore at 1,2875, Vtt at 1,295.
I made no changes to the hardware.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Manu @Carrotsfart @KINOKS
I refer you all to this
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/3800_100#post_23804332
and subsequent posts by me concerning the UD3R


----------



## gofasterstripes

What voltage is the RAM stickered at?


----------



## KINOKS

This is the RAM http://www.amazon.com/ADATA-1600Mhz-Desktop-Memory-AX3U1600GC4G9-2G/dp/B003E1TQCK?tag=duckduckgo-ffcm-20
It's rated at 1.55 I guess? I think it says 1.5v on the modules though...


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Manu @Carrotsfart @KINOKS
> I refer you all to this
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/3800_100#post_23804332
> and subsequent posts by me concerning the UD3R


So you're basically saying that this board has bad Vtt regulation and that this can cause fluctuations in OC stability... This would maybe explain this: I lowered Vtt to 1.295 from 1.315 and it's stable at it now. Before, at my previous OC it wasn't stable at 1.295 but now it somehow is... Maybe it's due the fact I UPed DRAM voltage or do you think it's bad Vtt regulation?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Kinda, what I am saying is that I think the Vtt regulated output may be higher than selected and we are well aware of how fragile these Xeons are. More RAM voltage may help stability in the short term

I am very confused about that RAM - that Amazon page seems to say a voltage range?! Try googling the model number and see what other retailers say. I wouldn't go over the rated voltage.

I would do it for you but I am just trying to write a Thesis, eeerk.

Also - with those boards I'd hand-input the main RAM timings [the 9-9-9-24 or whatever] and the Wait value [1/2T], and leave only the detailed ones on Auto. If you use RAM TIMING>QUICK you can enter for one bank and it'll apply the same timings across all banks.

Try 2T, usually 1T works, but if you have 1T selected try 2T, especially with ?6? sticks.

GTG - Have a look through my BIOS picture uploads, I've had two different Gigabyte boards and upped lots of BIOS pictures with various settings that may be of use/interest.

Bonne chance!


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Kinda, what I am saying is that I think the Vtt regulated output may be higher than selected and we are well aware of how fragile these Xeons are. More RAM voltage may help stability in the short term
> 
> I am very confused about that RAM - that Amazon page seems to say a voltage range?! Try googling the model number and see what other retailers say. I wouldn't go over the rated voltage.
> 
> I would do it for you but I am just trying to write a Thesis, eeerk.
> 
> Also - with those boards I'd hand-input the main RAM timings [the 9-9-9-24 or whatever] and the Wait value [1/2T], and leave only the detailed ones on Auto. If you use RAM TIMING>QUICK you can enter for one bank and it'll apply the same timings across all banks.
> 
> Try 2T, usually 1T works, but if you have 1T selected try 2T, especially with ?6? sticks.


RAM is rated at 1.5v but Adata tested it between 1.5 and 1.65. That's what that means.
My timings were manually set yes. Im just wondering if something is degrading, as the OC was fine for almost a month.
This is a workstation and I must make sure it's going to be stable and not hung up on me in the middle of a project!








Good luck with your paper!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Maybe other manufacturers quote the maximum voltage. Either way, if 1.65 is allowed, go for it.

I think the IMC in these chips may draw less current and therefore the calibration of the Vtt regs may go wrong if they were optimised for 45nm chips. Stay low, but 1.295 should be fine.

If in doubt - get the DMM out.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Maybe other manufacturers quote the maximum voltage. Either way, if 1.65 is allowed, go for it.
> 
> I think the IMC in these chips may draw less current and therefore the calibration of the Vtt regs may go wrong if they were optimised for 45nm chips. Stay low, but 1.295 should be fine.
> 
> If in doubt - get the DMM out.


DMM out?


----------



## gofasterstripes

DMM = Digital MultiMeter

I photographed the Vtt measuring point for you to my own post in the link I gave before.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with the other two that they can share/which would be the best choice for an x5670? I'm fairly sure the MSI board isn't compatible with a xeon, but I guess it's better to ask if anyone's made one work?


Will work just update bios on latest version as possible.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> DMM = Digital MultiMeter
> 
> I photographed the Vtt measuring point for you to my own post in the link I gave before.


Oh the multimeter off course . Yeah, I don't think I want to fiddle with it. To afraid I would short-circuit something.


----------



## commputer33

I am have a odd issues with a x5650 es cpuid B0 , In a foxconn flamingblade gti. Where the uncore multiplier is locked at 20. I try to update the cpu mircocode. It did not help. what do you think I can try. I was think it's because the cpu is a es it have the uncore locked.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Maybe other manufacturers quote the maximum voltage. Either way, if 1.65 is allowed, go for it.
> 
> I think the IMC in these chips may draw less current and therefore the calibration of the Vtt regs may go wrong if they were optimised for 45nm chips. Stay low, but 1.295 should be fine.
> 
> If in doubt - get the DMM out.


Cheers for the heads up, I've got the X58A-UD3R, not the EX58-UD3R so i'll have to go looking for the DMM contacts. Will definitely check it out and get back to you guys, might take a while though.

EDIT: I guess while I'm posting, I may as well ask if any of you have suggestions for CPU coolers, I'm not looking to smash any benchmark records, just something that will run cool and quiet. I know the NH-D14 is the king, does anyone know what a 212 EVO would perform like on an OC'd Xeon?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

DRAM voltage can go as high as 0.5V over VTT. If you have VTT set to 1.35V, DRAM voltage can go as high as 1.85V. It's not necessarily recommended to go above 1.65V because that's out of spec, but overclocking these CPUs technically puts them out of spec so it's all about picking your poison.


----------



## jorpe

I'm really glad I found this thread. I occasionally search for gulftown processors on craigslist and found a 980x that would be in the 200-250 range.

Now I'm looking for a x5690 to replace my 930.

Here's my current setup on that computer:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



]Gigabyte x58a-ud5 rev 1 mobo
i7-930 cpu (with a push/pull prolimatech megahalems cooler)
2gb x 6 corsair XMS 3 1600 memory (really need to get this up to 24GB)
AX 860 psu
ATI 5850 GPU (meh, not a gaming computer)
PCIe USB 3.0
PCIe Sata III



Right now I use the computer for a mix of of audio encoding, video transcoding (off my DVR), several game servers, and 2 VMs.

This thread mentions the UD3, UD5 and UD7 mobos several times.

Is there any reason I shouldnt just drop a x5690 in there instead of a 980x?


----------



## KINOKS

IMO both are a waste of money. Buy an x5650, x5660 or x5670 for 100=$ and then overclock to 4ghz. Its realy easy to owerclock to something like 4ghz. Above that it would get harder...


----------



## v0dka

jope no overclock?

the only reason to upgrade to xeon would be the extra cores really, and higher overclock potential as a bonus. Assuming you are running that 930 at at least 3.9-4Ghz like it should.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jorpe*
> 
> I'm really glad I found this thread. I occasionally search for gulftown processors on craigslist and found a 980x that would be in the 200-250 range.
> 
> Now I'm looking for a x5690 to replace my 930.
> 
> Here's my current setup on that computer:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ]Gigabyte x58a-ud5 rev 1 mobo
> i7-930 cpu (with a push/pull prolimatech megahalems cooler)
> 2gb x 6 corsair XMS 3 1600 memory (really need to get this up to 24GB)
> AX 860 psu
> ATI 5850 GPU (meh, not a gaming computer)
> PCIe USB 3.0
> PCIe Sata III
> 
> 
> 
> Right now I use the computer for a mix of of audio encoding, video transcoding (off my DVR), several game servers, and 2 VMs.
> 
> This thread mentions the UD3, UD5 and UD7 mobos several times.
> 
> Is there any reason I shouldnt just drop a x5690 in there instead of a 980x?


Any 980X has probably already been through the overclocking wringer... Two that I bought had crippled imc and while they worked fine at stock clocks, just would not overclock past 4GHz. Depressing when that happens. Xeons are less likely to have already pushed to or beyond their limits.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *v0dka*
> 
> jope no overclock?
> 
> the only reason to upgrade to xeon would be the extra cores really, and higher overclock potential as a bonus. Assuming you are running that 930 at at least 3.9-4Ghz like it should.


It's actually a bit more than that. You get more L3 cache, better response during everything day use [web browsing, word processing, watching YT\Twitch vids etc]. When it comes to gaming you will not suffer horrible micro stuttering and crazy frame times with high end MAXED OUT games like Crysis, Tomb Raider, Hitman: Absolution, Metro:LL, Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor etc. running at 1080p, 1440p & 1600p & higher. I'm talking all stock clocks as well.

Yes these 32nm can be straight dogs when it comes to overclocking, but they can also easily be damaged quicker than their older brothers. So if you are stable, but find that your PC isn't stable 3 to 6 months from now, then you have probably degraded your CPU. 4Ghz is the sweet spot, but most can hit between 3.8Ghz - 4.4Ghz easily or with a little help. The extra cores does allow you to come within 9.77% [from my test] of a Sandy Bridge-E - Ivy-Bridge-E + DDR3 2000+Mh Quadz + X79 performance. So you pretty much aren't missing out if you decide not to upgrade to X79. You also get more up to date tech [32nm and some nice tock stuff lol] along with lower power usage. Even 4Ghz-4.2Ghz is manageable to keep under control with a good cooler. The Bloomfield were extremely hot above 4Ghz under load.

Coming from a i7-960 at around 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz, I found the performance increase to be well worth the price I paid for my X5660+L5639 in late 2013. I think the performance gains in several benchmarks were like 70+% increases. Amazing and worth the upgrade to me.My gaming experience also changed for the best.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jorpe*
> 
> I'm really glad I found this thread. I occasionally search for gulftown processors on craigslist and found a 980x that would be in the 200-250 range.
> 
> Now I'm looking for a x5690 to replace my 930.
> 
> Here's my current setup on that computer:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ]Gigabyte x58a-ud5 rev 1 mobo
> i7-930 cpu (with a push/pull prolimatech megahalems cooler)
> 2gb x 6 corsair XMS 3 1600 memory (really need to get this up to 24GB)
> AX 860 psu
> ATI 5850 GPU (meh, not a gaming computer)
> PCIe USB 3.0
> PCIe Sata III
> 
> 
> 
> Right now I use the computer for a mix of of audio encoding, video transcoding (off my DVR), several game servers, and 2 VMs.
> 
> This thread mentions the UD3, UD5 and UD7 mobos several times.
> 
> Is there any reason I shouldnt just drop a x5690 in there instead of a 980x?


If you want a multiplier unlocked chip, look at the W3680 or W3690. Otherwise grab a 95W TDP X56** and overclock it the old fashioned way. I personality went from an i7-930 to an X5670 and my system is simply smoother. There's really no better way to describe it. The performance difference is otherwise minimal, but so is the investment. I paid $100 for six cores with hyper-threading. That's a pretty tough deal to beat.


----------



## KINOKS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yes these 32nm can be straight dogs when it comes to overclocking, but they can also easily be damaged quicker than their older brothers. So if you are stable, but find that your PC isn't stable 3 to 6 months from now, then you have probably degraded your CPU.


I had it stable for a month on 4Ghz and now I can't get RAM to work. Went back to stock speeds for now. Definitely be careful with this CPUs.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Handily, the maximum safe volts are listed on the Wikipedia Gulftown page


----------



## EvilMonk

Got myself a 4U server rackmount case to put my EVGA SLI3 & X5670 I got on ebay for 90$ with my P410 1Gb and my HP 24 ports SAS Expander with 16 2Tb SATA 6Gbps 7.2k WD Drives.
Going to make myself a sweet cheap little file server and reuse my old rigs I used less.


----------



## jorpe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> IMO both are a waste of money. Buy an x5650, x5660 or x5670 for 100=$ and then overclock to 4ghz. Its realy easy to owerclock to something like 4ghz. Above that it would get harder...


That's the goal is to get 4Ghz stable 24/7
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *v0dka*
> 
> jope no overclock?
> 
> the only reason to upgrade to xeon would be the extra cores really, and higher overclock potential as a bonus. Assuming you are running that 930 at at least 3.9-4Ghz like it should.


I've had this processor to 4.1Ghz way back in 2009 or early 2010. I didnt like the power usage and I never was able to get the stability I was looking for. The extra cores for a SRCDS server and also for a VM would be what I was looking for.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Any 980X has probably already been through the overclocking wringer... Two that I bought had crippled imc and while they worked fine at stock clocks, just would not overclock past 4GHz. Depressing when that happens. Xeons are less likely to have already pushed to or beyond their limits.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KINOKS*
> 
> IMO both are a waste of money. Buy an x5650, x5660 or x5670 for 100=$ and then overclock to 4ghz. Its realy easy to owerclock to something like 4ghz. Above that it would get harder...


He told me he had it at >4.3Ghz under water and had to give it 1.4V to get higher than that on the 980x. What youre saying confirms it would not be a good purchase so I'll pass. Figured it was worn out anyways... but the extra mhz and cores had my mind clouded.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *v0dka*
> 
> jope no overclock?
> 
> the only reason to upgrade to xeon would be the extra cores really, and higher overclock potential as a bonus. Assuming you are running that 930 at at least 3.9-4Ghz like it should.


Stock clocks since 2010 which Is the reason I wanted the stock clocked x5690 at 3.46ghz so 4ghz could be achieved (in my mind anyways) fairly easily
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Any 980X has probably already been through the overclocking wringer... Two that I bought had crippled imc and while they worked fine at stock clocks, just would not overclock past 4GHz. Depressing when that happens. Xeons are less likely to have already pushed to or beyond their limits.


Definitely sounds like I should go the Xeon route then...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's actually a bit more than that. You get more L3 cache, better response during everything day use [web browsing, word processing, watching YT\Twitch vids etc]. When it comes to gaming you will not suffer horrible micro stuttering and crazy frame times with high end MAXED OUT games like Crysis, Tomb Raider, Hitman: Absolution, Metro:LL, Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor etc. running at 1080p, 1440p & 1600p & higher. I'm talking all stock clocks as well.
> 
> Yes these 32nm can be straight dogs when it comes to overclocking, but they can also easily be damaged quicker than their older brothers. So if you are stable, but find that your PC isn't stable 3 to 6 months from now, then you have probably degraded your CPU. 4Ghz is the sweet spot, but most can hit between 3.8Ghz - 4.4Ghz easily or with a little help. The extra cores does allow you to come within 9.77% [from my test] of a Sandy Bridge-E - Ivy-Bridge-E + DDR3 2000+Mh Quadz + X79 performance. So you pretty much aren't missing out if you decide not to upgrade to X79. You also get more up to date tech [32nm and some nice tock stuff lol] along with lower power usage. Even 4Ghz-4.2Ghz is manageable to keep under control with a good cooler. The Bloomfield were extremely hot above 4Ghz under load.
> 
> Coming from a i7-960 at around 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz, I found the performance increase to be well worth the price I paid for my X5660+L5639 in late 2013. I think the performance gains in several benchmarks were like 70+% increases. Amazing and worth the upgrade to me.My gaming experience also changed for the best.


That gets me excited to find a xeon and go for it!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> If you want a multiplier unlocked chip, look at the W3680 or W3690. Otherwise grab a 95W TDP X56** and overclock it the old fashioned way. I personality went from an i7-930 to an X5670 and my system is simply smoother. There's really no better way to describe it. The performance difference is otherwise minimal, but so is the investment. I paid $100 for six cores with hyper-threading. That's a pretty tough deal to beat.


I like that idea of the w3690. Is the unlocked multiplier the only difference between that and the x5690?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Carrotsfart I use a Zalman CNPS10X Extreme. Just hit 75 on the hottest core in IBT, and they're cheap and with a whole lot of fan control options built-in.


----------



## KINOKS

Jorpe my x5670 (which I got for 110€) hits 4Ghz just by increasing BCLK an I can leave everything else on auto basically. I got some problems with my MOBO and bios image I just figured. I get 4Ghz at around 1,264 Vcore. Going higher then 4Ghz just means more work and I'm not willing to lose that much time. It also means I would have sort out my RAM ie. overclock it more stability, which also I'm not getting my self into. Otherwise I think these xeons are great. You can get 3 or 4 X5650 for the price of one x5690. 4Ghz OC is basically guaranteed with these CPUs, no mater which one you get.


----------



## Carrotsfart

I might have to look into it, I'm putting it in an NZXT s340 and there's not much clearance between the case window and an NH-D14, so I don't think that's an option. Don't really want to spend more on a case with less. Looking at the dimensions of the Zalman tells me that a Coolermaster won't cut it (if I could even find one) so you've just saved me making a terrible mistake, that's twice now!

I just found a Zalman, I might jump on it so I can put this thing together finally.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I might have to look into it, I'm putting it in an NZXT s340 and there's not much clearance between the case window and an NH-D14, so I don't think that's an option. Don't really want to spend more on a case with less. Looking at the dimensions of the Zalman tells me that a Coolermaster won't cut it (if I could even find one) so you've just saved me making a terrible mistake, that's twice now!
> 
> I just found a Zalman, I might jump on it so I can put this thing together finally.


The D14 will fit!

Heres a post from the s340 thread.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> ND-H14 fits, it's rather close though. You'd have roughly a bit less than 1/8 of an inch which is ~3mm. ND-H14 is 160 without fans so max I would say is no more than 163mm. The ND-H15 is also 160mm without fans so if you have low profile ram or have enough room to drop your fans down to roughly the height of the end of the heatpipes (1-2mm above should also be ok) you should not have an issue. I can guarentee the ND-H14 fits, however the H15 should fit but I cannot say 100%.
> 
> A little side note, you will have to remount the cooler with the motherboard installed in the case, or have an 4/8pin atx power cable that is long enough to give you the slack necessary to connect the cable while the motherboard is just outside the case.
> 
> Overall the case is nice, definitely on the small side but well built.


----------



## Carrotsfart

@Ultra-m-a-n @gofasterstripes So, the guy at the local computer store refuses to sell me a Zalman cooler (my dad does a lot of business with them, so he refuses to sell me things based on reliability). Apparently Zalman are impossible to RMA in Australia, same with G.Skill. Anyway, Now I'm torn again, I'm potentially the least decisive person in the world, why are these choices so hard!?

As far as I see, my options are: NH-D14, Thermaltake Frio or buy a Zalman elsewhere and put an aftermarket fan on it to appease the computer gods (only about $20 less than the previous two options unfortunately), at this point I may as well just get a D14 hey?


----------



## gofasterstripes

You can't really go wrong with the Noctua.

I've had 2 Zalman coolers, nothing went wrong with them.

What's that about another fan? The CNPS 10X Extreme comes with great fan, but doesn't support push-pull.

Ebay, then the seller is your point of return?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

@Carrotsfart
I say if the D14 is available, get it! Noctua has pretty good customer service from what I hear.

If you wana be different look into the phanteks dual tower cooler. I have it running with AP-15's in my s340, and I put the 140s in the front of my case. The with the bottom fan ziptied to the top since it doesn't directly screw in.. I wanted something different and I liked the white fans.

I may just drill correct mounting holes in the future. But who am I kidding, I'm lazy.


----------



## Carrotsfart

I was planning on replacing the fan because his key concern was failure rate on them, what can fail on a heatsink other than the fan? I think I might push for the D14, it was where I was originally headed, besides, I kinda like the look of noctua's fans, something about everyone saying they're ugly makes me like them haha. Thanks for all the help again guys!


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I was planning on replacing the fan because his key concern was failure rate on them, what can fail on a heatsink other than the fan? I think I might push for the D14, it was where I was originally headed, besides, I kinda like the look of noctua's fans, something about everyone saying they're ugly makes me like them haha. Thanks for all the help again guys!


Sweet, I didn't like the noctua fan color that's the reason I didn't buy one. But the fans are top notch.

Other failure points would be stripping the mounting hardware, which is replaceable. Ummm destroying the fins or cracking the heatpipes. And that's about as likely as you throwing it against the wall as hard as you can.

Like I said noctua has good customer service and people say they can easily get replacement mounting hardware for free, or fan clips and other misc accessories that come with the cooler. Oh and the thermal paste that comes with the cooler is supposedly pretty good as well.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Yeah, that's what my first question was, how does a heat sink fail? Stripes said that fan was pretty top notch, so that's not likely to fail. Other than that, how does a piece of metal fail? Unless it's primarily constructed out of Galium and melts at room temp, I can't see any point of failure.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes.

Again, for the same sake of balance, mounting the Zalman is far easier outside of the case.


----------



## bill1024

Does anyone have this board? EVGA X58 SLI3 131-gt-e767 ?
If you do, there is someone needs your help.

I have a 131-gt-e767 motherboard with a fried component. I had a swiftech AIO water cooling solution, and the pump fried wiping out the cpu fan header. In the center of this image you can see q44 is FRIED. I need a clear image of this board so I can identify q44. I would guess it's a 12w "n-channel enhancement mosfet", but I would rather confirm it! I tried getting the info from evga support and they said they couldn't help. So can someone please take an image of q44, located at the top edge of the board near dimm slot 1 "next to vcore test point".


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Does anyone have this board? EVGA X58 SLI3 131-gt-e767 ?
> If you do, there is someone needs your help.
> 
> I have a 131-gt-e767 motherboard with a fried component. I had a swiftech AIO water cooling solution, and the pump fried wiping out the cpu fan header. In the center of this image you can see q44 is FRIED. I need a clear image of this board so I can identify q44. I would guess it's a 12w "n-channel enhancement mosfet", but I would rather confirm it! I tried getting the info from evga support and they said they couldn't help. So can someone please take an image of q44, located at the top edge of the board near dimm slot 1 "next to vcore test point".


I have this board the thing is its mounted in a case and I have a watercooling installed on it. Maybe someone else has one and can help you.
Maybe you can find pictures of it on google images as well.


----------



## Waltercat

Hello all! New to the forum here. Been stalking this thread for a while and just made the jump to a xeon x5660 from an OC'ed i7 920. My board is EVGA E760 A-1 and just sent it into EVGA for the "Westmere" mod. Purchased my xeon from Amazon. This one to be exact http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003EM81PC?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00 So my question is... At this price point of 130$, does anyone think I've been hosed? Just seems such a great deal(Hopefully not too great) when most others are paying in the $200+ range. Haven't been able to test yet as my board is en route to EVGA for modding as I write. Thanks all and GREAT thread!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Actually, you paid more than most have. You can find an X5660 on eBay for around $80.


----------



## Waltercat

Okay, I stand corrected. Only made it through the first 60-something pages before posting here. The company I purchased from stated over the phone my cpu was "New bulk." Now let the hurry up and wait begin. The wife's i3 laptop doesn't do BF4 too well. LOL. Here's to hoping this will be a good chip!


----------



## Kana-Maru

You overpaid but the CPU is worth it. They usually go for approx $75-$85. For a short time the X5650 were cheaper. I hope that you get a good CPU as well.

I'm going to see how my PCI-e 2.0 rig handles high end 2015 graphic cards to determine if I'll wait for Cannonlake. I was originally waiting on Skylake-E, but those plans have died down a bit. I guess Skylake-E will depend on the actual RAW performance increase. I'm looking at he 980 Ti, but Fury X benchmarks won't release until mid next week. So I'm going to wait and see what happens.


----------



## Waltercat

Happily running an r9 290x here. Will probably get another soon and crossfire when I upgrade to 144mhz monitor, hence the need for the x5660. Would love to put together a new build too but just don't have the funds these days. This platform still eats up all the games I play! Again, great thread Kana-Maru and thank you all for the quick replies!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks. It took many months to perform all of the tests and benchmarks. I plan running dual 980 Ti's before the end of the year.. I almost never game at 1080p anymore unless I'm live streaming. It appears that the 980 Ti man handles games at 1440p and 1600p and 4K. I'm getting OC'ed non-reference cards this time around. I'm going to be posting GPU benchmarks on my blog-website.

I'm also getting a 144Hz monitor as well. It will 3D as well. The 980 Ti card I want is out of stock so I'm playing the waiting game.


----------



## mengs

hi just like to say that i like all the of the reviews on the xeon. 5660 and i had a sabertooth motherboard so i purchased xeon 5660 of eBay and am running it at 4.2 ghz on custom water cooled system. max temp 67c at a room temperature of 28c. The voltage is a bit high at 1.352 I may try lowering it just a tad.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Dude, that looks wild!


----------



## mengs

thanks the computer is called sabertooth i have had the mb for 4years now it had a i7950 in it


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mengs*
> 
> thanks the computer is called sabertooth i have had the mb for 4years now it had a i7950 in it


Looks like a candy machine


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mengs*
> 
> thanks the computer is called sabertooth i have had the mb for 4years now it had a i7950 in it
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That looks really nice.









Hey guys since around December last year a lot of people have said that Nvidia is forgetting about Kepler [mostly 700 series cards] and I have a 600 series Kepler. Recently Nvidia released a driver to stop some of the madness, but this has me wondering about Nvidia and their drivers now. Mostly their marketing schemes. Fury X reviews are a few days away. I decided to check to see if Nvidia did indeed kill performance on the Kepler platform and it appears they have.

One of the first things I noticed was that my Overclock will not work with drivers after 344.48. ALso the latest driver literally kills my OC by showing all kinds of crazy **** on the screen. Pixels and different colors everywhere. I normally run stock settings, but even the modest OCs suffer from crazy color, bleeding and crashing. I had to fall back to drivers from last summer to regain stability and performance. Even the Beta drivers from last year outperformed the latest 2015 drivers. I'm planning on writing more about this on my blog, but I haven't had much time these past couple of months.

So how is AMD with their drivers lol. At one point the 970 was out performing the 780 iI and Kepler Titan which was 100% laughable for months.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

AMD is really bad about updating drivers. I think they've released like five drivers so far this year. I also had problems with my monitors when I updated my drivers a couple months ago. Anything that was on my secondary monitor would show up on my primary monitor after waking my screens. I keep my browser on my secondary monitor and games/streams on my primary. It got so old moving everything over every time I came back to my computer. At first I thought it was an issue with using DVI and DP instead of two DVI, but the problem disappeared after swapping out my HD 5870 for this GTX 970. I will say my system doesn't like an overclocked PCIe bus at all. I bumped it up to 102 to see if it would help my WiFi performance and my wireless card wasn't working at all. Speaking of which, I need to replace this AC7260 because I actually get worse performance on the 5GHz band than I did with a WMP600N. That purchase will have to wait until after my summer trips, though.


----------



## DividebyZERO

I have been running 290x's ony my evga classified 4 way and SR2 with x5650's. The thing is i run really high resolutions so i dont have the same complaints as single gpu users. If your going to use a single GPU AMD is pretty comparable to nvidia on drivers. They say AMD has cpu overhead issues but it looks like thats about to get sorted out now with windows 10/dx12 - and i think possible 300 series will help as well.
Where AMD really lacks right now is power consumption and heat (excluding fury since its unknown yet) So if your picky about power and heat then it may be an issue for you.

I have been really happy with my 290x's since i bought them and i came from 680gtx 3way sli at that time. Right now pure performance goes to 980ti/TitanX until possibly Fury? I am not sure about Fury myself, i am worried the vram could be and issue for me gaming @ 6400x3600. So i may possibly nab 390x for the 8gb and run tri-fire until dual fury comes out. I run 2x2 eyefinity now so Nvidia is not really an option for me right now. I have eyeballed the 980ti though as it seems like a decent card, i just wish nvidia wasn't so pricey.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't think VRAM will be much of an issue with Fury X because of the massive bandwidth advantage. It's hard to know before benchmarks are released.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I don't think VRAM will be much of an issue with Fury X because of the massive bandwidth advantage. It's hard to know before benchmarks are released.


Yeah, i am patiently waiting to see. Problem is i don't think anyone will test over 4k resolutions in reviews. I also am a bit hesistant about early adopting a whole new gpu build, as i would like to see the dual fury in Fall.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> AMD is really bad about updating drivers. I think they've released like five drivers so far this year. I also had problems with my monitors when I updated my drivers a couple months ago. Anything that was on my secondary monitor would show up on my primary monitor after waking my screens. I keep my browser on my secondary monitor and games/streams on my primary. It got so old moving everything over every time I came back to my computer. At first I thought it was an issue with using DVI and DP instead of two DVI, but the problem disappeared after swapping out my HD 5870 for this GTX 970. I will say my system doesn't like an overclocked PCIe bus at all. I bumped it up to 102 to see if it would help my WiFi performance and my wireless card wasn't working at all.


Dang that sucks.Good thing you upgraded. Also never mess around with the PCI-e Frequency. You'll kill several components easily.102 mad it stop working. I wonder hat 104 or 106 would have done.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Yeah, i am patiently waiting to see. Problem is i don't think anyone will test over 4k resolutions in reviews. I also am a bit hesistant about early adopting a whole new gpu build, as i would like to see the dual fury in Fall.


What! They better test 4K. Then again I can't stand to read a lot of these reviews nowadays. They never "max" anything out anymore and literally skip resolutions. You won't get true performance unless you test it yourself. I try to bench multiple resolutions and different settings. I'll max a game out at 1600p or 4K just to see the true performance, then I'll lower some of the settings. Usually starting with the AA and so on.

With Nvidia I[m afraid the 980 Ti might suffer the same fate as the 780 Ti and have worse performance than a card with much lower specs. Seems like a driver marketing tactic to me.


----------



## Carrotsfart

AMD do the dodgy too, the 390 and 390x are just rebranded 290 and 290x with higher chip binning despite AMD boasting better performance. They improved tessellation for 300 series drivers but did not apply it to the 200 series, so the 390 and 390x appear to be more powerful cards, when in fact they aren't.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I was going to pick up a 380 or 380X until I found a good enough deal on a 970 to pull the trigger. The 380 and 380X are still rebrands, but at least it's a newer chip with newer technology. In my opinion, the only other enticing cards this time around are in the Fury line. If Pascal brings HBM to the mainstream, AMD could be in trouble.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> AMD do the dodgy too, the 390 and 390x are just rebranded 290 and 290x with higher chip binning despite AMD boasting better performance. They improved tessellation for 300 series drivers but did not apply it to the 200 series, so the 390 and 390x appear to be more powerful cards, when in fact they aren't.


Is that a proven fact? Then again I wouldn't put anything past any company now. I've been hearing that the high end 300 series are rebadges. Improving specific things for the 300 series, but not the 200 series is pretty lame as well. Consumers are screwed on both sides. Man we really need a 3rd party to rival Nvidia\AMD GPU and Intel\AMD CPU. I still remember the Nvidia 700 series rebrands as if it was yesterday







I believe the 760 Ti was basically my 2GB Ref GTX 670. I also believe the 770 was a souped up 680 pretty much. It's been some years so I can't remember them all.

After looking at some benchmarks. It seems the 290X is the best buy right now. The 390X just doesn't seem worth it since the performance is with 3fps - 8fps of the 290X. The 290X is also near the GTX 980 in terms of performance\fps and $200+ cheaper. I'm planning on running another SLI setup through. I really don't feel like paying $650 - $750 for a single card right now. I'm hoping Fury X surprises everyone and Nvidia and 3rd party vendors are forced to lower some of their prices.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I was going to pick up a 380 or 380X until I found a good enough deal on a 970 to pull the trigger. The 380 and 380X are still rebrands, but at least it's a newer chip with newer technology. In my opinion, the only other enticing cards this time around are in the Fury line. If Pascal brings HBM to the mainstream, AMD could be in trouble.


Well I thought about picking up two 970s late last year and running them in SLI. I also heard about Nvidia gimping the cards at 3.5GBs as well. The 970s are reasonably priced as well.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Someone managed to apply the 300 series drivers to their 290x and were seeing identical benchmark scores to the 390x. I believe the link was in /r/hardware on reddit yesterday, unfortunately I didn't read too in depth about it because I don't have that kind of cash, if I were to upgrade I'd be looking at a 280x at best.

I don't mind the Nvidia rebadging tbh, releasing a 670 as a 760 to me is acceptable, but it'd have to come with price reductions (the 760 being priced similarly to the 660), it does mean that they open up space at the top end of the line up whilst manufacturing better quality low end cards for people. The issue I have is that AMD have brought nothing new to this line up (fury pending), with some cards being rebadges of the 7xxx series. It doesn't affect me, I don't play anything graphically intensive enough to warrant the upgrade, but I don't like seeing people paying $600 for a $400 product, thinking they're getting an upgrade when really, they're paying $200 to replace a two with a three.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Rebranding happens on both sides, there are many valid points on both sides as well. The 300 series is now going to be maybe mid line at best Fury will be the flagship thats new for AMD.

It is hard to recommend AMD over Nvidia on the high end because Fury is unknown. Right now Nvidia 980ti is probably the go to GPU. I am sad to hear about kepler having a short life span. I was never very happy with my 680gtx sli because i paid 1.5k usd and it felt underpowered for that price to me. I watercool now so my r9 cards arent an issue on temps and felt way more powerful to me. We only have a few more days for Fury numbers and even after that it may still be nvidia stays recommended for current performance.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I was going to pick up a 380 or 380X until I found a good enough deal on a 970 to pull the trigger. The 380 and 380X are still rebrands, but at least it's a newer chip with newer technology. In my opinion, the only other enticing cards this time around are in the Fury line. If Pascal brings HBM to the mainstream, AMD could be in trouble.


When Nvidia puts HBM on Pascal, AMD should still make money, no?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Why would AMD make money on Nvidia products?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Why would AMD make money on Nvidia products?


I think he is saying that Nvidia would have to pay AMD since they helped develop HBM. I'm guessing the same way Sony would have to pay Microsoft if wanted to use DirectX.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

If that were the case, I would assume it's more like a licensing issue where Nvidia would pay AMD a certain amount of money to use that technology. Then again, AMD isn't the one manufacturing the stuff. Regardless, I think the 400 series will need HBM on at least the 490 and 490X which means either current Fury cards would be rebranded to that tier or they develop a new GPU for that tier. My money is on the former.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I think he is saying that Nvidia would have to pay AMD since they helped develop HBM. I'm guessing the same way Sony would have to pay Microsoft if wanted to use DirectX.


That's what I am talking about. HBM is developed by Hynix and AMD so if Nvidia is incorporating it, AMD will be making money from Nvidia.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

It would be a flat rate, if anything, and more than likely not a percentage of sales. HBM is already confirmed for Pascal so I guess they already hashed that out.


----------



## Kana-Maru

So therefore AMD is making money. Now if Intel could share some of their fast tech maybe we could get more out of AMD CPUs, but that's not going to happen. AMD does have a lot of positives. They have the consoles on lock, affordable CPUs, HBM and hopefully Zen turns out much more than they want it to be.


----------



## 2010rig

Great thread! I'm buying an X5660 and just want to make sure the P6X58D-E will support it.

Anyone running one of these Xeon's with the P6X58D-*E*?

ASUS doesn't officially support it, but I already seen people running it on the Premium...

Thanks!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Great thread! I'm buying an X5660 and just want to make sure the P6X58D-E will support it.
> 
> Anyone running one of these Xeon's with the P6X58D-*E*?
> 
> ASUS doesn't officially support it, but I already seen people running it on the Premium...
> 
> Thanks!


Thanks. You should be listed here:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Thanks. You should be listed here:
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9


Thanks dude, I'm updating to the latest BIOS now. Will update when it arrives.


----------



## Kana-Maru

No problem and good luck on getting a good CPU for your rig.


----------



## verbatim

I just ordered a x5660 to upgrade the rig in my sig. I always wanted a 6 core and i wont go to next gen until a mainstream one comes around that beats my old 4ghz one nicely. I play a lot of battlefield mainly so I am interested to see that give the 6 core a workout. Two things I would like help with

1* I havent gone into the bios in years. What settings woul I change to put the thing at 4.2ghz? I particular there was a setting to limit the ram as I up the BLK(Ill play around with volts to stablise it.)

2* I have 6 gig of ram in there ATM but the cooler takes up the other slots so I cant add another 6 in. Where is a cheap/second hand place to get 12gbish of triple ram for it? I always hate looking for ram as its got so many complicated numbers and crap /fail


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> 1* I havent gone into the bios in years. What settings woul I change to put the thing at 4.2ghz? ==


You'll be looking for the "BCLK Frequency" and the "CPU Ratio Setting" or "CPU Ratio Multiplier". You should shoot for 180 - 183 on the BCLK setting and set the CPU Ratio to 23. You will also want to turn off other settings like EIST - SpeedStep etc You'll need to manually set your CPU voltage. Don't set your CPU voltage\CPU Vtt above 1.35v when trying to find your safest voltage.

Quote:


> I particular there was a setting to limit the ram as I up the BLK(Ill play around with volts to stablise it.)


You'll have to find the limit on your RAM when moving the BCLK upwards. I believe 180-183 should put you between1400Mhz - 1500Mhz. So you should be fine if you are using DDR3 1333 - 1600Mhz .
Quote:


> 2* I have 6 gig of ram in there ATM but the cooler takes up the other slots so I cant add another 6 in. Where is a cheap/second hand place to get 12gbish of triple ram for it? I always hate looking for ram as its got so many complicated numbers and crap /fail


Nothing is really cheap, but cheaper maybe. You can get 12GB with only 3 sticks for around $80 - $150. You are across seas, but you can still check these out:

$87
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233146

$95
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231356

$100
www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231358

Those are a few cheaper 12GB Triple Channel kits in the USA. There are other good 12GB kits with low CAS [6 & 7 @ 1600Mhz] that you can get around $100 as well.


----------



## virpz

Could not get rid of my X5670, got an R3E BE with *real* SATA III . Let's see.


----------



## dotagaming

Hey guys, guess I just joined the Xeon club.











Upgraded from an i7 950 to a X5675. Thing is, I'm a total novice when it comes to overclocking -- I got my 950 to 3.7 GHz but that's it.
This baby? 4.2GHz without breaking a sweat. I'm sure I could push some more but I'd like to go easy on it so it lasts me until Skylake-E.

Could you tell me if these values are safe?
I'm not running the system 24/7 but it will see some action, so I want to make sure I'm not frying it.

System:
*CPU:* X5675
*MB:* GA-X58A-UD3R
*RAM:* 3x2GB Corsair Dominator @1.600 MHz, 8-8-8-24, 1,65 V

BIOS:
*CPU Clock Ratio:* 21x
*Turbo:* Disabled
*Power Saving States:* Enabled
*QPI Clock Ratio:* x36
*Uncore Clock Ratio:* x18
*BCLK:* 200 MHz
*SPD:* 8.0
*->Memory Frequency:* 1600 MHz
*PCIE Frequency:* 100 MHz
*Memory Timings:* 8-8-8-24-1T
*CPU Vcore:* 1.29375V
*Load-Line Calibration:* Auto
*Dynamic Vcore:* Normal
*QPI/Vtt Voltage:* 1.275V
*CPU PLL:* 1.8V
*IOH:* 1.3V
*DRAM Voltage:* 1.64V

Does this look ok?

Thanks!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Could not get rid of my X5670, got an R3E BE with *real* SATA III . Let's see.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Once again SATA II is fine [300MB+ write- 500+ MB read in my RAID setup] and SATA III PCI-e cards are less than $50. Single SATA III SSDs run fine on X58 [marvell controller]. It becomes a problem when you try to run more than one.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> Hey guys, guess I just joined the Xeon club.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upgraded from an i7 950 to a X5675. Thing is, I'm a total novice when it comes to overclocking -- I got my 950 to 3.7 GHz but that's it.
> This baby? 4.2GHz without breaking a sweat. I'm sure I could push some more but I'd like to go easy on it so it lasts me until Skylake-E.
> 
> Could you tell me if these values are safe?
> I'm not running the system 24/7 but it will see some action, so I want to make sure I'm not frying it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> System:
> *CPU:* X5675
> *MB:* GA-X58A-UD3R
> *RAM:* 3x2GB Corsair Dominator @1.600 MHz, 8-8-8-24, 1,65 V
> 
> BIOS:
> *CPU Clock Ratio:* 21x
> *Turbo:* Disabled
> *Power Saving States:* Enabled
> *QPI Clock Ratio:* x36
> *Uncore Clock Ratio:* x18
> *BCLK:* 200 MHz
> *SPD:* 8.0
> *->Memory Frequency:* 1600 MHz
> *PCIE Frequency:* 100 MHz
> *Memory Timings:* 8-8-8-24-1T
> *CPU Vcore:* 1.29375V
> *Load-Line Calibration:* Auto
> *Dynamic Vcore:* Normal
> *QPI/Vtt Voltage:* 1.275V
> *CPU PLL:* 1.8V
> *IOH:* 1.3V
> *DRAM Voltage:* 1.64V
> 
> 
> 
> Does this look ok?
> 
> Thanks!


Looks fine to me. Run a few stability test. Congrats:thumb:


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Once again SATA II is fine [300MB+ write- 500+ MB read in my RAID setup] and SATA III PCI-e cards are less than $50. Single SATA III SSDs run fine on X58 [marvell controller]. It becomes a problem when you try to run more than one.
> Looks fine to me. Run a few stability test. Congrats:thumb:


I respect your opinion and I understand that it may fit your needs but I also don't see myself wasting an SSD on SATA II with RAID to get a single SSD on SATA III performance.

I think it is fair to add that standard X58 boards have no real SATA III controller: You have the integrated intel SATA II controller and the crappy, buggy marvell 9128 that doesn't even supports TRIM and performs bellow the Intel controller most of the time.

In your image doing the comparison between X79 and X58 you could add there is no SATA III performance at all with the older X58 boards.
It may not bother most users but it will sure help on making decisions.


----------



## jorpe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I respect your opinion and I understand that it may fit your needs but I also don't see myself wasting an SSD on SATA II with RAID to get a single SSD on SATA III performance.
> 
> I think it is fair to add that standard X58 boards have no real SATA III controller: You have the integrated intel SATA II controller and the crappy, buggy marvell 9128 that doesn't even supports TRIM and performs bellow the Intel controller most of the time.
> 
> In your image doing the comparison between X79 and X58 you could add there is no SATA III performance at all with the older X58 boards.
> It may not bother most users but it will sure help on making decisions.


http://www.amazon.com/Vantec-UGT-ST644R-Channel-Express-Retail/dp/B00LS3G8TK This is the card I've installed in 3 x58 systems for SATA III. Definitely is not like running native off the chipset but There's a 15 second boot time difference using that card on my i7-930pc as opposed to using the onboard sata II connection.

+1 on it only being a single drive solution though, it's very easy to lock up one of those marvell controllers while transferring a lot of data between two drives on the controller.

Still looking for a Xeon in this series for that previously mentioned build. Can't wait to get it and see what it's about!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I guess I don't quite understand the stigma that comes with the Marvell controllers on these X58 boards. My Samsung 850 Pro seems to perform just fine. Then again, I was so used to my operating system booting from a 10000RPM HDD for so long. If I need "true" SATA3 performance, there's a fix for that.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I guess I don't quite understand the stigma that comes with the Marvell controllers on these X58 boards. My Samsung 850 Pro seems to perform just fine. Then again, I was so used to my operating system booting from a 10000RPM HDD for so long. If I need "true" SATA3 performance, there's a fix for that.


There is no stigma.
The marvell 9128 can't perform anything like SATA III, there is no fix, it is a design limitation.
Just google marvell 9128 performance.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Why should I Google about performance I experience everyday?


----------



## i7monkey

Are all X58 motherboards compatible with this?


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Are all X58 motherboards compatible with this?


Some require hard mods, some i think bios updates? I am pretty sure P6T can do it but, someone with one needs to speak up. I only did it with EVGA boards and they had to have hard mod


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Are *all* X58 motherboards compatible with this?


All? No


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Are all X58 motherboards compatible with this?


No. It appears most, if not all, Asus boards are compatible. Early EVGA boards need a mod. I'm not sure about Gigabyte, MSI, ASRock or other motherboard manufacturers.


----------



## DividebyZERO

found this
looks like he got the board and the chip same time and it wouldnt work until bios update?

http://www.overclock.net/t/688617/the-official-asus-p6t-series-motherboard-owners-club/280#post_24084983

Quote:


> Seems my 3 best options were noted over on [H] by some helpful people
> 
> pre-flashed bios chip
> bios flashing USB tool
> or get a Xeon X55** series
> 
> http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1820772&page=46&highlight=1366
> 
> So see which i can do faster and keep everyone posted.


Quote:


> Very nice! I have a 5650 in my P6T and I've been very happy with it. thumb.gif
> 
> Pssssh... less than 2000 posts? OCN's massive 1366 thread has over 5000! Check it out here. biggrin.gif


----------



## PontiacGTX

with bios update it fully works
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041298331&postcount=920


----------



## OCmember

EVGA motherboard Xeon support list, the others need a hard mod:

http://forums.evga.com/FindPost/2340229

"_Here's a list for Evga mobo's that support -EP Xeon's & the minimum Rev. required to run them.
I got the list from an other forums x58 1366 xeons very long thread.

E757 - Rev. 1.1
E758 - Rev. 1.2
E760 - Rev. 1.1
E762 - Rev. 1.1
E767 - All
E768 - All

Most of the Rev. 1.0 boards do need a hard mod in order to use -EP Xeons._" - bill1024


----------



## i7monkey

So helpful









+rep to all


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> So helpful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +rep to all


now if someone could tell him which xoen get, for ocing with his mobo for the optimal BCLK multi ratio would be useful


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I respect your opinion and I understand that it may fit your needs but I also don't see myself wasting an SSD on SATA II with RAID to get a single SSD on SATA III performance.
> 
> I think it is fair to add that standard X58 boards have no real SATA III controller: You have the integrated intel SATA II controller and the crappy, buggy marvell 9128 that doesn't even supports TRIM and performs bellow the Intel controller most of the time.


*sigh*







Time for a history lesson. It's literally 2008 - X58 first gen . We all know that SATA III wasn't native and neither is USB 3.0 for that matter. it's all we had at the time. TRIM isn't supported, but there are BIOS mods that allows TRIM to work. BIOS mods have been available for years and there are still some active X58 BIOS mods that enable TRIM for RAID & Marvell. I've seen people use a single SSD III and get great results. TRIM is great, but GC is just fine for most. I'd rather use both so I modded my BIOS. Anyways my point is 250MBs - 450MBs were great when these boards were created. Most SSDs weren't able to hit 250MBs. You also had those top of the line SSDs that "could" hit 270MBs - 300MBs back then. Literally many years ago. Yes the technology increased as well as SSD speed rapidly.. Then we got X79 and so on. We even got better Marvell controllers. I've learned that people who claim they need more really don't need more at all. I guess it's bragging rights and moving some meaningless data. So every time I see people trashing the X58 Marvell controller I sit back and laugh. OLD TECH PEOPLE.

Now once again there are *cheap fixes* for X58 SATA III if users want them. You can get a good SATA III for less than $50. Most people waste that on junk food every month. I run a lot of high end programs and yes RAID 0 is doing just fine for me. However $50 is so cheap that I've been eye balling a few PCIe SATA III cards. I think I'm gonna bite the bullet and get one eventually.

Quote:


> In your image doing the comparison between X79 and X58 you could add there is no SATA III performance at all with the older X58 boards.
> It may not bother most users but it will sure help on making decisions.


Trust me if users are making decision I'm sure they would go with the latest and greatest tech out there. Most X58 users know what the tech is about since it's old and widely understood [well except how the CPUs should operate on a daily basis]. SATA III is supported, natively or not. Yeah the companies made some lame decisions on the implementation, but it was enough for the SSDs at that time of release. Also X79 was PCIe 2.0. I don't believe hacks weren't necessary until Ivy Bridge and revisions. I believe that's what happened. There's so much tech. X79 was a side grade to most X58 users. The point of the graph was to show the minor difference. The benchmarks also prove it and when it comes down to gaming X58-PCIe 2.0 still stands.


----------



## Tezoch

I've recently upgraded my I7 920 to an X5650. This thing is a beast, and I am incredibly happy with the performance. I had to perform a hard mod on my EVGA mobo, but It worked out in the end (and was pretty easy to pull off). Thanks to everyone in this thread who gave good advice on the upgrade, especially Kana!


----------



## i7monkey

^What was your 920 clocked at?


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> now if someone could tell him which xoen get, for ocing with his mobo for the optimal BCLK multi ratio would be useful


I wish i knew i only dealt with evga x58 boards and turbo was very flaky on my 4 way classified, but my sr2 seems to work properly.
That said it depends on the cpu and most of the regulars have posted a chart somewhere in this thread.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> I wish i knew i only dealt with *evga x58* boards and turbo was very flaky on my 4 way classified, but my sr2 seems to work properly.
> That said it depends on the cpu and most of the regulars have posted a chart somewhere in this thread.


Apparently there has to be a hard mod for the Turbo to work too, with the 970, 980, and 990

http://forums.evga.com/BL141E760A1-EVGA-Classified-Motherboards-Need-EVGA-Tech-Support-Modification-w970-CPU-m872663.aspx

I don't know if it also pertains to your 4 way classified but the 760 "needed" it


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tezoch*
> 
> I've recently upgraded my I7 920 to an X5650. This thing is a beast, and I am incredibly happy with the performance. I had to perform a hard mod on my EVGA mobo, but It worked out in the end (and was pretty easy to pull off). Thanks to everyone in this thread who gave good advice on the upgrade, especially Kana!


How was your Turbo working on your EVGA board?


----------



## Tezoch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> ^What was your 920 clocked at?


I could only get 3.8ghz out of my 920. It was a nice boost from stock clocks, but I always wanted to go further
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How was your Turbo working on your EVGA board?


Turbo is a bit weird, I have trouble keeping it stable even at lower clock speeds. I usually have it turned off.


----------



## 2010rig

Should be here Monday


----------



## bacon612

Hey guys and gals. Full disclosure: I made it to page 327 from the beginning and then caved to post this message to ask for some help. Ill continue to read on from 327 hereafter.

Ive been fighting to stay on the x58 for a while. Ran a Gigabyte ex58 UD4P with a 920 C0 until Feb this year. Id been sitting on an x5650 since October 2014. (i know) Ive been watercooled with my 920 since the beginning. Full board block including vrm mofset cooling. Had two AMD 5850s on water too. I came to find out around Xmas that the x5650 isnt supported by the Ud4p so i got a 980x on the cheap. Payed $200. Figured it was cheaper and less involved than replacing my gigabyte board and all of my water cooling. Ran the 980x for about two months then my board went on me. It was my fault. i replaced the AMD 5850s with 970GTX without draining my loop. Was a circus act. I drizzled on my board a bit. it lasted for a bit but to power up my pc i had to heat the middle of it with a hairdrier. Never again.

I ended up selling the 980x at a profit and wanted the glory of an overclocked XEON which I still had. I got a craigslist p6t that had bent pins which I was able to RMA with ASUS for a sabertooth for a total net cost of $110. Not bad. I slowly rebuilt my rig adding another 970GTX for SLI and used 670 heatkiller waterblocks that fit the 970s. Hooray.

My Rig specs:

Asus x58 Sabertooth Latest BIOS
Xeon 5650
GTX 970 in SLI
24 Gigs of Gskill Ripjaws 1600 Six sticks total
Boot drive is a Crucial M500 on the marvell (im happy with the castrated SATA6 performance)
Storage is 4x 3tb on a promise 2310 in raid5
PSU PC Power and Cooling 750 crossfire edition (im thinking i may need something beefier)



My goal is 4.4ghz 24/7 OC. Presently im having issues getting ibt to pass 10 without nuclear voltage. Im talking 1.525 in the bios, vdroop off resulting in a load vcore of about 1.45. This is too high for me although my waterloop keeps max core temps at around 64C even at that voltage. After reading about voltage spikes, im going to go back to the drawing board and turn LLC back on and retest lower voltages. I am fine with keeeping my LLC enabled vcore at 1.4. I'm thinking i shouldn't have a problem achieving 4.4 with 1.4vcore and vtt of 1.35.

I have dialed in my ram timings manually into bios. Settings listed below. All Power saving features are off. I have left voltages other than VTT and VCore on auto. I'm hoping @kana-maru, who also has a sabertooth might chime in with some advice. Do you guys think 4.4 isnt a likely outcome for me?




This thread is fantastic btw. No nonsense childish banter (up to pg 327) Lots of great info. Thank you all for contributing.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't think 4.4GHz will happen with that chip. If that speed is really important to you, consider grabbing an X5670 or X5675 from eBay as those would be more likely to reach 4.4GHz thanks to higher multipliers.


----------



## bacon612

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I don't think 4.4GHz will happen with that chip. If that speed is really important to you, consider grabbing an X5670 or X5675 from eBay as those would be more likely to reach 4.4GHz thanks to higher multipliers.


Thanks for your reply. I thought that 200bclk x 22 multi would take me to the promise land. Maybe i just have a weak 5650. What kind of 24/7 Clocks are you getting?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I have been able to get 24x180 but I'm currently running 21x200.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bacon612*
> 
> This thread is fantastic btw. No nonsense childish banter (up to pg 327) Lots of great info. Thank you all for contributing.


Oh there was some childish banter here and there. Overall the topic has been pretty positive and full of many ideas and discussion.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Wow. Turn that CPU Voltage down.
Quote:


> My goal is 4.4ghz 24/7 OC. Presently im having issues getting ibt to pass 10 without nuclear voltage. Im talking 1.525 in the bios, vdroop off resulting in a load vcore of about 1.45. This is too high for me although my waterloop keeps max core temps at around 64C even at that voltage. After reading about voltage spikes, im going to go back to the drawing board and turn LLC back on and retest lower voltages. I am fine with keeeping my LLC enabled vcore at 1.4. I'm thinking i shouldn't have a problem achieving 4.4 with 1.4vcore and vtt of 1.35.
> 
> I have dialed in my ram timings manually into bios. Settings listed below. All Power saving features are off. I have left voltages other than VTT and VCore on auto. I'm hoping @kana maru, who also has a sabertooth might chime in with some advice. Do you guys think 4.4 isnt a likely outcome for me?


Oh I got rid of my Sabertooth. Now you know I'm joking.

http://s26.postimg.org/6v0zqw78o/Inside_2.jpg

Most overclockers here won't and don't care how much damage they do to their CPU and other components. This is OCN afterall. However, I do care about my rig+voltages and try to watch spikes. 4.4Ghz is possible you'll just need to see how much voltage is required for stability. If it's going to take more than 1.35v than it's already looking bad. I saw 1.5+v so that's looking extremely hot and dangerous over time. 1.4v is fine if that's what you want to do. You just have to mess around with the voltages and bench like crazy. If it makes you feel any better I run 4Ghz daily with no issues and I can hit 4.6Ghz, 4.8Ghz and over 5Ghz easily, but I never go above 4.8Ghz. 4.6Ghz and 4.8Ghz are for benchmarking and high end gaming. I follow Intel Guidelines as well when I overclock. You'll also want to find out what your highest BCLK is. That could make overclocking a bit easier.


----------



## bacon612

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Most overclockers here won't and don't care how much damage they do to their CPU and other components. This is OCN afterall. However, I do care about my rig+voltages and try to watch spikes. 4.4Ghz is possible you'll just need to see how much voltage is required for stability. If it's going to take more than 1.35v than it's already looking bad. I saw 1.5+v so that's looking extremely hot and dangerous over time. 1.4v is fine if that's what you want to do. You just have to mess around with the voltages and bench like crazy. If it makes you feel any better I run 4Ghz daily with no issues and I can hit 4.6Ghz, 4.8Ghz and over 5Ghz easily, but I never go above 4.8Ghz. 4.6Ghz and 4.8Ghz are for benchmarking and high end gaming. I follow Intel Guidelines as well when I overclock. You'll also want to find out what your highest BCLK is. That could make overclocking a bit easier.


Hmm. It seems that my board supports stable bclk of 210 without issues when i drop my multli and voltage. I really love how my ram runs at 1600 at 200bclk tho, ha. Do ICH and IOH voltages make a difference? Any opinion on PLL etc?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bacon612*
> 
> Hmm. It seems that my board supports stable bclk of 210 without issues when i drop my multli and voltage. I really love how my ram runs at 1600 at 200bclk tho, ha. Do ICH and IOH voltages make a difference? Any opinion on PLL etc?


You can leave ICH and IOH voltages set to AUTO unless you are having some very specific issues. I don't mean just OC issues either. I mean issues within Windows\OS that's noticeable. As far as hitting your OC the ICH\IOH voltages won't really matter.

My opinion on PLL is to stay way from it. It will kill your CPU faster than high CPU voltage. Leave it set to 1.8v or else lol. Some people increase it, but I had no reason to increase it during my benchmarks and high OCs. Many people hit their highest OC frequencies without ever touching the CPU PLL. Although I do know the absolute maximum PLL voltages I'll never tell because I'm sure people will think that it is ok to move it past 1.8v. The same way people think it's good to mess around with the PCIe Frequencies [100Mhz default].


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I've read PLL voltage is largely a non-factor in overclocking these Xeons. I read on another forum some people have their PLL voltage as low as 1.2. My board doesn't let me go below 1.8. I've had mine set to 1.88 from the time I overclocked my i7-930 and haven't touched it. I haven't had a reason to.


----------



## bacon612

OK. Ive taken a different approach. I'm seemingly stable at 215x20 @ 1.4v. I left all other voltage settings on auto, thanks guys. Ill try and knock voltage down with these clock speeds and see where I get. Relaxed the timings of my ram to 10-10-10-25 and its running at 1720 mhz. Im thinking this is the way to go rather than the lower memory mullti with tighter timings. Everyone agree? 

Id also like to run some of the power saving features so save some juice when the system is at idle. You sabertooth users out there, what do you tune in terms of the power features. There's speed step and then a sub menu with a bunch of options for various C-states. Any advice there?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tezoch*
> 
> Turbo is a bit weird, I have trouble keeping it stable even at lower clock speeds. I usually have it turned off.


So Turbo does work with your Xeon, on your EVGA board? What board model is it again?


----------



## Carrotsfart

I've finally got my x5670 installed and booted! Turns out that new Kingston Fury is compatible with an x58a-UD3R provided you flash the bios to something that isn't version FE, that was an interesting 2 days... Still toying around with cable management and fans and stuff in my case, gotta get it pretty before I start OCing right?


----------



## Tezoch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So Turbo does work with your Xeon, on your EVGA board? What board model is it again?


Turbo works with stock clocks, but I haven't tested it enough overclocked. I have the E762 4 way SLI board.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tezoch*
> 
> Turbo works with stock clocks, but I haven't tested it enough overclocked. I have the E762 4 way SLI board.


It should give the the turbo multiplier. When I had a X5660 in my Asrock board, it gave me the 23x on all 6 cores and when overclocked. I wonder why it's flakey on the EVGA boards, hmm.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bacon612*
> 
> OK. Ive taken a different approach. I'm seemingly stable at 215x20 @ 1.4v. I left all other voltage settings on auto, thanks guys. Ill try and knock voltage down with these clock speeds and see where I get. Relaxed the timings of my ram to 10-10-10-25 and its running at 1720 mhz. Im thinking this is the way to go rather than the lower memory mullti with tighter timings. Everyone agree?
> 
> Id also like to run some of the power saving features so save some juice when the system is at idle. You sabertooth users out there, what do you tune in terms of the power features. There's speed step and then a sub menu with a bunch of options for various C-states. Any advice there?


Personally I prefer tighter RAM timings for performance reasons.

Forget SpeedStep at the moment. Just Enable the C-States and set all setting to "AUTO".


----------



## 4everAnoob

I think 4.4 Ghz is out of reach for my x5670 without stupid voltages.
My question is is it better to run with or without turbo? So either 175x22-25 or 200x21. Only with the 175 setting I must run the memory at 1400 MHz else no post.

Another problem is that the memory can't go over 1700 MHz else the x58a ud3r won't post. It is not due to the memory itself.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

It's probably the multiplier. You can't use one above 1333, or 10:2. Or are you not able to run 1800 with a base clock of 180?

As for the whole turbo thing, I don't know. I have SpeedStep, Turbo and all C-states turned off. My motherboard allows me to use the turbo multiplier in BIOS. I haven't noticed my system showing favoritism toward any multiplier.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> It should give the the turbo multiplier. When I had a X5660 in my Asrock board, it gave me the 23x on all 6 cores and when overclocked. I wonder why it's flakey on the EVGA boards, hmm.


I'm hoping I'll be able to run the 23x multiplier, had no problems running 21x200 with pretty low volts.

23x200 would be pretty sweet on all cores.


----------



## gofasterstripes

With my Gigabyte boards I have run 20x200.

I haven't got 21 or 22 to work, only 23x (turbo, needs all c-states etc)

I used to use 6x memory multi, tri-channel @1200 (1333 rated, i was able to tighten the timings to make it up)

Now I run 8x with 1600 memory, at stock timings, tri-channel.

200mhz bclk might be faster because of QPI or matching to PCIE clock as a whole multiple, but it's not proven. Test it!

If you dig though my posts you'll see lots about the x58-ud3r v1.6 and the x58a-ud7r v2, including BIOS shots.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh, I doubt you'll notice much difference if you have 1200 or 1600 ram, if you're tri-channel.

I also wouldn't worry too much about clock speed. Certainly for gaming, the difference between 4 and 4.6 ghz for me was tiny. Just go with whatever you can reach at <1.35v.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> With my Gigabyte boards I have run 20x200.
> 
> I haven't got 21 or 22 to work, only 23x (turbo, needs all c-states etc)


Which processor do you have? If 23x is your turbo multiplier, your processor won't have 22x.


----------



## Carrotsfart

So, here's a question. In my BIOS I have Vcore set to 1.275, but CPU-Z is displaying Vcore to be 1.24 or so which seems strange?

Holy heck it's taking a lot of voltage to get over 4.0 GHz. I could pass IBT with 1.2V at 3.6GHz, now i'm at 1.28V for 4.0GHz and still blue screening


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Pay attention to the voltage reported by CPU-Z.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@CarrotsfartAs I understand it this is vdroop. Fixing it completely leaves the possibility of overshot as the load decreases, so most boards operate like that to eer on the side of caution.

IMHO, take your loaded voltages from CPU-Z, and imagine your CPU will be subjected to the voltage selected in the BIOS when unloaded.

You can trust the unloaded CPU-Z voltage to some degree, but unless it's much lower than the BIOS setting it's probably not the true peak.

As there's the possibility of overshoot, I'd not set a higher voltage in the BIOS than you want to have as your maximum.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Chessmyantidrug I didn't know that, cheers


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Carrotsfart The voltage required for 4Ghz+ does seem to ramp up very quickly in most cases.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Yeah, 3.8GHz took 1.248V in CPU-z, 4.0GHz takes 1.28v. It just passed 3 passes of IBT on maximum, so I might try enabling C-states and see if I can't get it stable with them active, then call it a day. I feel hella accomplished. Who would've thought overclocking was this rewarding?


----------



## dotagaming

Is it better to run High BCLK/Low Mult or low BCLK/High Mult?
For some reason I can't get my X5675 stable when running 23x183, but I have no problem running 20x200.

Should I bother trying to get 23x stable or does it make no difference anyway?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> Is it better to run High BCLK/Low Mult or low BCLK/High Mult?
> For some reason I can't get my X5675 stable when running 23x183, but I have no problem running 20x200.
> 
> Should I bother trying to get 23x stable or does it make no difference anyway?


I'm betting your 200 BCLK is unstable and you just haven't found it it yet.

What is your CPU VTT voltage at 200, and at 183? do they differ?


----------



## dotagaming

21x200 is pretty much rock stable as far as I can tell. No freezes or crashes so far, can basically run IBT or Prime for hours.
I'm using 1.29V QPI/Vtt and 1.28Vcore.

Haven't touched voltages when trying lower BCLK and higher mult, just aimed for the same effective clock


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> 21x200 is pretty much rock stable as far as I can tell. No freezes or crashes so far, can basically run IBT or Prime for hours.
> I'm using 1.29V QPI/Vtt and 1.28Vcore.
> 
> Haven't touched voltages when trying lower BCLK and higher mult, just aimed for the same effective clock


So at 183 & a 23x you are having stability issues, right? What is the RAM speed between both 183 & 200 BCLK?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> Is it better to run High BCLK/Low Mult or low BCLK/High Mult?
> For some reason I can't get my X5675 stable when running 23x183, but I have no problem running 20x200.
> 
> Should I bother trying to get 23x stable or does it make no difference anyway?


It sounds like your motherboard doesn't like a base clock between roughly 180 and 200. Base clock holes are not that uncommon.


----------



## dotagaming

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So at 183 & a 23x you are having stability issues, right? What is the RAM speed between both 183 & 200 BCLK?


Yep!

I'm running the memory at 8.0*200MHz = 1600 MHz (8-8-8-24-1T), so I guess 8.0*183 shouldn't be a problem.
Meh. It's no big deal, I'm pretty happy with the OC. Just wondering what's going on
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> It sounds like your motherboard doesn't like a base clock between roughly 180 and 200. Base clock holes are not that uncommon.


Yeah that might be it. Maybe something like 25x170 could work, I'll give it a try.

But then again I don't know if having higher mult and lower BCLK would even make a difference

*Edit*:
Thanks!

I'm now running 23x173 with turbo (4.33GHz on all cores and 4.5GHz on two). I had to up the Vcore to 1.328V (in idle it's just 0.99V). Does the dynamic Vcore put more stress on the CPU?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

A higher base clock will give you better overall system performance, but it usually takes more voltage.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## gofasterstripes

What's your IOH and ICH voltage?

I'm not familiar with that board, are you using any non native usb ports (pcie card, usb3 chipset on motherboard etc)?

Vcore? Vcc? QPI speed, multipliers etc?

I'm going to bed now, sorry.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I've been getting some BUGCODE_USB_DRIVER bluescreens. Usually happens while playing a game. My Oc can pass 10 ibt on max and a couple hours prime95. Hasn't crashed during rendering yet. I slightly bump vcore every time it happens, is that the right move? I left all other voltages on auto.


Is your USB drivers in MSI mode? *EDIT:* If so your system is unstable


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## BaldMan

Dang, Wish I had read this thread before I ordered the X5680.

Thought I was going to be able to push it , but I see these things dont like to much voltage.

Oh well It will arrive in a week or so, and will let you all know how I go!

Currently running a i7 920 @ 4.25Ghz, was running 4.5g until I upgraded the Bios of F9d and now cant get it as high...


----------



## OCmember

Ok, so I think EVGA screwed me. What Xeon uses the 25x multi as a base multi and not in Turbo mode?

EDIT: nm, it's the X5680


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> Dang, Wish I had read this thread before I ordered the X5680.
> 
> Thought I was going to be able to push it , but I see these things dont like to much voltage.
> 
> Oh well It will arrive in a week or so, and will let you all know how I go!
> 
> Currently running a i7 920 @ 4.25Ghz, was running 4.5g until I upgraded the Bios of F9d and now cant get it as high...


Are you looking at the 1.3v posted on cpuworld? I checked out the Intel ARK page and it states 1.350v is the Intel stated max for the X5680. Not to worry man, you'll be alright with that chip


----------



## 4everAnoob

200x21 stable Vcore 1.3625v, 200x22 fails even at 1.475v







(x5670)


----------



## 4everAnoob

Are there real world gains from increasing uncore from 2400 (x12) to 3200 (x16) ? I would need to increase QPI / VTT, so tiny bit extra gflops in IBT is not worth it to me.


----------



## dotagaming

I think I found my 24/7 stable & safe OC!

*System:*
CPU: X5675
MB: Gigabyte X58A UD3R
RAM: 3x2GB Corsair Dominator 1600MHz

Running 23x175 with Turbo and all C-States @ 1.33V max Vcore.
System steps from 12x = 2.1GHz @ 1.00V Vcore to up to 26x = 4.55GHz @ max Vcore.

Temps during IBT load are a bit too high for my liking but I will install a second Noctua on my CPU heatsink ASAP.
During gaming etc. I never see high temps.

*Settings:*
CPU Vcore: 1.21875V
Dynamic Vcore: +0.13125V
LLC: Level 1
Vtt: 1.295V
CPU PLL: 1.7V
DRAM: 1.64V
SPD: 10 -> 1750 MHz RAM Freq
RAM Timings: 8-8-8-24-1T
QPI: 6.3GHz
Uncore: 3325MHz


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> I think I found my 24/7 stable & safe OC!


Nice. Now bench for 48+ hours straight. You'll want your temps no higher than 70c-75c. If you get near 78-79c I'll be cautious since you'll start causing issues around 80-81c or higher. You'll need to check and make sure that none of the single cores are getting hotter than 81c as well. Vcore and settings are only half the battles. Sometimes less is more. Newer games have been pushing the cores harder now. Crysis 3, Tomb Raider 2013, Hitman: Absolution and for me Batman: Arkham Knight has the cores pretty warm nowadays. I'm sure other intense games like Project Cars and the The Witcher 3 will warm things up a bit as well.

You covered up your Glops as well lol. Don't hide them. What are they.


----------



## dotagaming

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice. Now bench for 48+ hours straight.


Thanks man!
Every single post of you in this thread was a huge help.

Is there a benchmark you recommend for running this long?
I'm afraid to degrade my CPU with such a stress test that will never occur in my real use scenarios.
Quote:


> You'll want your temps no higher than 70c-75c. If you get near 78-79c I'll be cautious since you'll start causing issues around 80-81c or higher. You'll need to check and make sure that none of the single cores are getting hotter than 81c as well.


Yeah that makes sense. I'm sure I can reduce core temps by at least 3-4c with a pull fan. Maybe I'll throw in another intake as well.

Also I've got a GTX 750 TI on it's way, I want this system to be very efficent in idle









Quote:


> Vcore and settings are only half the battles. Sometimes less is more.


100% agree.
I don't really see the point of running dangerous voltages 24/7. I much prefer having an efficent system that is able to deliver heavy punches when needed. Not as easy to get a good OC this way, lol. Just pumping 1.35+ fixed VCore with no power states or Turbo gets me a good clock easily but I don't like this style at all.
Quote:


> Newer games have been pushing the cores harder now. Crysis 3, Tomb Raider 2013, Hitman: Absolution and for me Batman: Arkham Knight has the cores pretty warm nowadays. I'm sure other intense games like Project Cars and the The Witcher 3 will warm things up a bit as well.


Considering I'm only playing Kerbal Space Program and Dota 2 I'm not even sure why I got this upgrade in the first place, lol. But the way I see it, I can throw in a Pascal based Card in 2016 and enjoy high end VR gaming. This platform is nothing short of insane, best computer investment I've made.
Quote:


> You covered up your Glops as well lol. Don't hide them. What are they.


lol got me. Don't know, seem a bit low to me. I get 81GFlops @ very high


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> I think I found my 24/7 stable & safe OC!
> 
> *System:*
> CPU: X5675
> MB: Gigabyte X58A UD3R
> RAM: 3x2GB Corsair Dominator 1600MHz
> 
> Running 23x175 with Turbo and all C-States @ 1.33V max Vcore.
> System steps from 12x = 2.1GHz @ 1.00V Vcore to up to 26x = 4.55GHz @ max Vcore.
> 
> Temps during IBT load are a bit too high for my liking but I will install a second Noctua on my CPU heatsink ASAP.
> During gaming etc. I never see high temps.
> 
> *Settings:*
> CPU Vcore: 1.21875V
> Dynamic Vcore: +0.13125V
> LLC: Level 1
> Vtt: 1.295V
> CPU PLL: 1.7V
> DRAM: 1.64V
> SPD: 10 -> 1750 MHz RAM Freq
> RAM Timings: 8-8-8-24-1T
> QPI: 6.3GHz
> Uncore: 3325MHz


Dude you have the same board as me. I have the X5670. When you aren't looking, I'm sneaking into your room and stealing your cpu. I can barely reach 4.2 ghz with that Vcore.
But you are using LLC so that makes it a bit more I guess with LLC off.


----------



## 4everAnoob

I reach about 77 at 4.2 and that is with only 1 stick single channel ram!


----------



## dotagaming

I think I got super lucky in the silicon lottery. This is my first real OC and it's been a breeze.
Got this chip from a server reseller that sells many of these X56xx, guess he doesn't bin them.

What kind of BLCK are you running? My UD3R has a BCLK hole from ~180-200.

And I don't get the low Gflops at all. Not sure if IBT even is a good benchmark. I know I can get 3-4GFlops if I up my Uncore but I'd rather not raise my VTT


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I feel like I should try my luck again either with my Nepton or a new Xeon. My temperatures are higher than everyone else. My Nepton stopped coming effectively and I don't know why. Maybe I'll swap out coolers when I'm off Wednesday.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> Thanks man!
> Every single post of you in this thread was a huge help.


Thanks. I'm glad I'm able to help. There are so many people willing to help that only makes things better for everyone.
Quote:


> Is there a benchmark you recommend for running this long?


Prime95: Torture Test. IBT v2.54 Maximum are two widely used and great test. There are others that will test everything from the CPU to the memory to your GPU.
Quote:


> I'm afraid to degrade my CPU with such a stress test that will never occur in my real use scenarios.


If you are going to overclock them in the first place there is no need to be scared. You will and are degrading the CPU as we speak. Intel has their recommended specs, but any time you run out of the stock spec you are slowly killing it anyways [Follow Intel Guidelines for longer usage outside of stock specs ]. The test are for stability test only. Even in real world situation you don't want your PC to be randomly showing BSODs, freezing or restarting. That "could" lead to some weird issues like data loss etc. You also don't want to "think" the voltages are ok when you really need more in other places. So it's more of a stability test to ensure their aren't any headaches in the future. if you are afraid to run a stress test then you probably shouldn't be overclocking that high in the first place. You need to know that your OC and rig can handle the heat and stress under ANY situation.

Yeah that makes sense. I'm sure I can reduce core temps by at least 3-4c with a pull fan. Maybe I'll throw in another intake as well.
Quote:


> Also I've got a GTX 750 TI on it's way, I want this system to be very efficent in idle


These Xeons will pretty much be efficient at Idle no matter what. Even if CPU-Z or some other program shows a high ratio [x26 - x25 and so on] the CPU ALWAYS downclock no matter what. You should also want efficient use during usage as well. That's when the heat and performance comes into play. To much heat will usually lead to lower performance and throttling. I guess it depends on what is hot.
Quote:


> high end VR gaming. This platform is nothing short of insane, best computer investment I've made.
> lol got me.
> 
> Don't know, seem a bit low to me. I get 81GFlops @ very high
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Haha yeah there we go. Yeah it is pretty low for 4.5Ghz-4.6Ghz, but every rig is different. I'm getting 79-80Gflops @ 3.8Ghz with only 1.15v - 1.16v max. Idle is 0.88v something. At 4Ghz I get a bit more.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I got super lucky in the silicon lottery. This is my first real OC and it's been a breeze.


Hey you have to be patient and wait a few weeks\months to make sure. If you don't run a lot of stability test then you won't truly know how "stable" your overclock really is. 10 passes of IBT only does so much and isn't 100% correct [trust me







].


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dotagaming*
> 
> And I don't get the low Gflops at all. Not sure if IBT even is a good benchmark. I know I can get 3-4GFlops if I up my Uncore but I'd rather not raise my VTT


If I remember correctly, Gflops changes depending on how much RAM you set it to test.. The lower the RAM you set, the faster the test is done but the lower your Glop score will be. That's the way it was with the Linx Test I'm sure Intel Burn Test is the same.


----------



## BaldMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Are you looking at the 1.3v posted on cpuworld? I checked out the Intel ARK page and it states 1.350v is the Intel stated max for the X5680. Not to worry man, you'll be alright with that chip


More along the lines, i thought i would be able to jam 1.4 in it and try for 4.6 and up.

No matter, new toy to play with ☺


----------



## bacon612

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Personally I prefer tighter RAM timings for performance reasons.
> 
> Forget SpeedStep at the moment. Just Enable the C-States and set all setting to "AUTO".


OK. Speedstep is listed in the Sabertooth bios in two areas. Never seen that before. One is on the main OC page and the other in CPU configuration on the sabertooth. Do I disable both Speedsteps? Why are there two? To be clear, disabling speedstep and enabling all of the C-states leaves the multi locked but all power saving features on?

Thanks again for the advice. I'm looking forward to saving the OC profile when im done and enjoying this SaberXeon for years to come.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> More along the lines, i thought i would be able to jam 1.4 in it and try for 4.6 and up.
> 
> No matter, new toy to play with ☺


For reference I am able to hit 4.6GHz @ 1.371v with 1.30 cpu VTT so you should be able to achieve something similar

Congrats on the chip! I might sell off my X5660 in favor for that or another X5690


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bacon612*
> 
> OK. Speedstep is listed in the Sabertooth bios in two areas. Never seen that before. One is on the main OC page and the other in CPU configuration on the sabertooth. Do I disable both Speedsteps? Why are there two? To be clear, disabling speedstep and enabling all of the C-states leaves the multi locked but all power saving features on?
> 
> Thanks again for the advice. I'm looking forward to saving the OC profile when im done and enjoying this SaberXeon for years to come.


I can't really comment on what the C-states exactly do, but both SpeedStep options are tied together. I assume Asus just wanted to make it accessible from the CPU configuration page. If you enable or disable it from one place, it will reflect in the other.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I can't really comment on what the C-states exactly do, but both SpeedStep options are tied together. I assume Asus just wanted to make it accessible from the CPU configuration page. If you enable or disable it from one place, it will reflect in the other.


C-States is throttling CPU speed / power usage to use less when its not needed so it will save some.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Symix - I'm going to guess it's your IOH/ICH voltage. Try setting them one at a time to 1.2 v - start with ICH and only change IOH if it doesn't.

@dotagaming @i7monkey GFlops in IBT depends on Clocks, RAMspeed [perhaps latency too], Hyperthreading, Uncore speed and probably the phases of the moon.

For comparison's sake I'd just quote: Test selected, frequency and HT status so other people can compare - or ask more if they want to really compare.


----------



## Carrotsfart

So, I'm confused, I want to enable dynamic Vcore, because...power saving and stuff, but every time I go into my bios and set Vcore to Normal, it shows a different voltage, what's the deal with that?

Had to settle for 3.8GHz, in the end, still, I'm happy. I'm considering setting up 2 of my drives in RAID 0 though for games and the like, I guess the tinkering never ends right?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Carrotsfart I bet if you just change the Vcc to 1.3 you can run at 20*200. Just keep the temps down. You can probably reduce it later too.

Also:
Q2 PC = New $1,600: i5 4690 @ 4.2 GHz + 980 GTX @ 1300ish . Q1 was SLI 970 like me.

vs:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4742078



Conclusion - x58 still awesome, 4GHz plenty. Spend the saving on a bigger / dual graphics card.









@4everAnoob Yes, Uncore boost is worth it. Try 3200 at 1.3 v Vtt. Don't go higher than 1.325 on that board, I killed my 5660 with UD3R Vtt right to 1.35 as it was overvolting [when measured with a DMM]


----------



## gofasterstripes

Just tried Monster Hunter Online benckmark.

Benchmark/ranking mode: 29987 Av:136fps Min 36fps

1080p / 4x MSAA / Max settings : 20809 Av 90 Min 30fps

I think im running into temp limits on a GPU even with fans at 100%, it's the hottest day of the year so far here, even the CPU hit 71C ( not opened the case up though).

Oh well, I guess it means its heat stable!


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Carrotsfart I bet if you just change the Vcc to 1.3 you can run at 20*200. Just keep the temps down. You can probably reduce it later too.


Yeah, I probably could but i don't want to run 1.3 for Vcc, I've only got a 750Ti, so it's not like I need the extra power, stock is probably fast enough if I'm honest. It gets to 45*C here in summer so I don't want to run into issues because of that

My computer just locked up in sleep mode, wouldn't come out of it, and everything in the case was still running, I guess i've got a bit of troubleshooting to do.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Yeah, I probably could but i don't want to run 1.3 for Vcc, I've only got a 750Ti, so it's not like I need the extra power, stock is probably fast enough if I'm honest. It gets to 45*C here in summer so I don't want to run into issues because of that
> 
> My computer just locked up in sleep mode, wouldn't come out of it, and everything in the case was still running, I guess i've got a bit of troubleshooting to do.


That's super hot, I totally understand!


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That's super hot, I totally understand!


Yeah, we generally get a week of days of 40+ per summer, it's typically mid to high 30's though. That was my reasoning for such a big cooler with such a mild overclock. That and quietness


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> My computer just locked up in sleep mode, wouldn't come out of it, and everything in the case was still running, I guess i've got a bit of troubleshooting to do.


Do you mean the computer locked up after trying to wake it? Because that happens to me also from time to time (both with my old i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz as well as with my X5650 @ 3.8 GHz) even though my system is 100% stable otherwise. I wouldn't worry too much


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bacon612*
> 
> OK. Speedstep is listed in the Sabertooth bios in two areas. Never seen that before. One is on the main OC page and the other in CPU configuration on the sabertooth. Do I disable both Speedsteps? Why are there two? To be clear, disabling speedstep and enabling all of the C-states leaves the multi locked but all power saving features on?
> 
> Thanks again for the advice. I'm looking forward to saving the OC profile when im done and enjoying this SaberXeon for years to come.


They will work as one. So if you disable one of the SpeedStep the other is also disabled. I'm not sure why their are two, but I'm guessing that ASUS wanted to include all the CPU configuration for those who might skip past the OC page and go straight to CPU options. As I said before the Xeon will down clock to x12 [or whatever it was] no matter what. So even if you decided to run 1.45v through the CPU for a high overclock behind the scenes the CPU is still downclocking when there is no load on the cores. C-States still kick in as well over time. C-States = Power saving features. I starting writing about Westmere-EP, but I never finished the article. Maybe I'll finish it and upload it to my blog someday.







I was simply going to explain a lot of different things about the CPU. SpeedStep\EIST simply allows the system to change the core speed and the voltage during no loads. SpeedStep + C-States + LLC Disable = Win.

I also uploaded my Batman: Arkham Asylum Benchmark last night. So far I've only done 1080p 100% maxed with Nvidia GameWorks for 50+ minutes. Later this evening I'll try 1440p all settings maxed with NO Nvidia GameWorks. I'm only running 2GB cards.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/38-batman-arkham-knight-benchmark-2

I'm also going to add it to my X5660 Review - gaming benchmarks.

I want to get a 980 Ti, but the model I want is always sold out








I'm just waiting. My 670s have been amazing. I just feel I need more RAM for my resolutions and settings.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

VRAM was an issue for me. My HD 5870 only had 1GB. I don't particularly care how much power my video card draws, but I really wanted MSI's GTX 970 because I like their Twin Frozr cooling solution and I found it on another forum for $275. I would have otherwise waited for the 380X. I wasn't about to spend the amount of money they're asking for a 390 or 390X.


----------



## Kana-Maru

The 970s performance greatly decreases after 3.5GBs correct? I know there was a lot of people asking for refunds and complaining about the limitation although it shows 4GBs when you purchase the card. Yeah those 390\390X cards are pretty high in price. I'm still shooting for the 980 Ti. I'm honestly getting tired of waiting. The demand is so dang high for some of the models.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

That's what I hear, but I haven't experienced any stuttering yet. I don't believe the problem manifests itself very often at 1080p. I wouldn't recommend a 970 to anyone gaming at a higher resolution.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'm on SLI 970's - do you want me to test something?

I think they're rippers, but yeah, >3.5 the performance tanks.

Having said that, DX 12 should merge the VRAM for DX12 ready apps, and I doubt 7GB will be a problem, even with a 4k monitor.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> That's what I hear, but I haven't experienced any stuttering yet. I don't believe the problem manifests itself very often at 1080p. I wouldn't recommend a 970 to anyone gaming at a higher resolution.


Well there were test done by several people and websites that shown that once you go above 3.5GBs the cards start to struggle. Which of course hurts performance above 1080p. I've been well above 1080p for some time now. The higher the better. The picture quality is just much better than 1080p to me and I find it hard falling back down to 1080p other than to run benchmarks. I can easily see the difference. Dual 970s were my only option. I need more VRAM.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I'm on SLI 970's - do you want me to test something?
> 
> I think they're rippers, but yeah, >3.5 the performance tanks.
> 
> Having said that, DX 12 should merge the VRAM for DX12 ready apps, and I doubt 7GB will be a problem, even with a 4k monitor.


I'd like to start a comparison chart on my blog. It would take a lot of benchmarks from a lot of different cards. Plus they would have to be stock and OC. Well just synthetic test like Heaven, Valley, 3D Mark and more benchmarking tools.

I wonder how long it will be for the majority of games start to use DX12. It sounds good on paper and the early test from last year looks promising. It will add even more life to the X58 platform I imagine.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I'm on SLI 970's - do you want me to test something?
> 
> I think they're rippers, but yeah, >3.5 the performance tanks.
> 
> Having said that, DX 12 should merge the VRAM for DX12 ready apps, and I doubt 7GB will be a problem, even with a 4k monitor.


We don't know how DX12 will change things for SLI 970s. If load is split equally across both sets of VRAM, there shouldn't be an issue. Since that makes sense, I doubt it will work that way.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> We don't know how DX12 will change things for SLI 970s. If load is split equally across both sets of VRAM, there shouldn't be an issue. Since that makes sense, I doubt it will work that way.


We will see. I'm hoping it's easier for devs to implement DX12 efficiently across many games. i've been following and looking over DX12 API and articles. Looks very promising. OpenGL is still a great option. DX12 seems to be promising a lot.

I've also uploaded the rest of my Batman: Arkham Asylum benchmark results. 1080p and 1440p with Nvidia Gameworks disabled.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/38-batman-arkham-knight-benchmark-2

Overall I'm loving the game and you see how well the GTX 670 2GB running stock plays the game.


----------



## 4everAnoob

I haven't researched DX12 in depth, but it seems to improve something called "draw calls". But this mainly seems to help low end CPUs.

At the same time, I wonder if our Xeon X5600 are at a disadvantage in the (near) future if programs / games could take more advantage of instructions like AVX and FMA.
I don't know if there are real world gains to expect from these advantages. If there are, then even a low end i5 would be at least as good as our Xeons, and use less power and have a platform with more features etc. Altough I must say the X58 platform is still very good (especially the quantity of the interfaces, so many PCIe lanes and stuff, really good).
Skylake looks like it will be underwhelming. Well at least if you compare to the gains that were made from P4 -> C2D -> Nehalem -> SB.
The reason I am looking at the other platforms at all is that I could probably sell all the X58 stuff for a good profit, thus enabling me to go to a newer platform.
I would consider Ivy Bridge or newer, because with Ivy Bridge SATA3 / USB3 native was introduced.

To the comment about AMD 8 cores being better possibly with DX12, I really doubt it, since it arent full 8 cores to begin with, and 4 intel cores are simply stronger than the 8 AMD cores regardless.
AMD is a steadily sinking ship and that is very unfortunate, and bad for everyone. Their Zen architecture won't save them, it will simply not make enough of a difference.
They have made a huge mistake with their graphics department as well. The 300 series should have been an architecture overhaul, like Maxwell, regardless of increased R&D costs.
But they still have a last chance with this when next year a die shrink to 16nm or so will take place for graphics cards. If they create a competitive architecture both in performance AND efficiency, not all is lost. In the past they have been able to do this, so I believe it can still happen. The CPU department however is increasingly becoming a dead end. Though Intel will also face difficulties in the future when going past 10nm, they probably can't do their tick-tock strategy anymore. This might give AMD some time to catch up but I think it is still too late for them to actually create something competitive.
Their focus should be fixing their graphics NOW. If they lose that, it is over.


----------



## gofasterstripes

DX12 also helps with multi-threading, which is right up our street


----------



## 4everAnoob

That might be true, the problem is DX12 is all speculation at this point. While the improvements in newer CPU's is already there and does work in some circumstances, however it is unclear if there are any benefits for games. I can't find any evidence right now of current games benefitting from the newer CPU instructions / architecture. Maybe the games have to be legacy compatible and thus can't use it or something. Some people even say SSE4 isn't used a whole lot, so even our CPU's could get a boost or something like that.
However, raw IPC is indeed pretty good on westmere, and not that significantly behind haswell.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> That might be true, the problem is DX12 is all speculation at this point. While the improvements in newer CPU's is already there and does work in some circumstances, however it is unclear if there are any benefits for games. I can't find any evidence right now of current games benefitting from the newer CPU instructions / architecture. Maybe the games have to be legacy compatible and thus can't use it or something. Some people even say SSE4 isn't used a whole lot, so even our CPU's could get a boost or something like that.
> *However, raw IPC is indeed pretty good on westmere, and not that significantly behind haswell*.


Ok. How far is Westmere behind Haswell in raw IPC (i'm assuming we will be talking about single thread comparisons)


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Ok. How far is Westmere behind Haswell in raw IPC (i'm assuming we will be talking about single thread comparisons)


Comparison: http://techreport.com/news/24886/haswell-compared-to-everything

990x (3.73G) 0.35 pnts / GHz
4770k (3.9G) 0.45 pnts / GHz

An increase of roughly 29%.

The AMD 9590 scores virtually the same as the 990x single threaded.
Which is painful considering it is a much newer chip with a 220W TDP.

SuperPi should be under 10 seconds for the 4770 stock.

More scores at anandtech: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/444?vs=836


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Comparison: http://techreport.com/news/24886/haswell-compared-to-everything
> 
> 990x (3.73G) 0.35 pnts / GHz
> 4770k (3.9G) 0.45 pnts / GHz
> 
> *An increase of roughly 29%.*
> 
> The AMD 9590 scores virtually the same as the 990x single threaded.
> Which is painful considering it is a much newer chip with a 220W TDP.
> 
> SuperPi should be under 10 seconds for the 4770 stock.
> 
> More scores at anandtech: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/444?vs=836


29% can't be generalized. It is fair to take the middle % between what I remember from a while ago. Let me see if I can recall this correctly. 29% was the lowest percent while slightly above 50% (these percents are based off different benches) So basically a 40% increase would be describing it more accurately. Forgive me if I am wrong I haven't the time right now to look through all the bench score comparisons.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'm quite surprised at those synthetics! The difference in gaming is generally much lower though, and that's what bothers me.

I wonder how much of that is to do with new instructions.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 29% can't be generalized. It is fair to take the middle % between what I remember from a while ago. Let me see if I can recall this correctly. 29% was the lowest percent while slightly above 50% (these percents are based off different benches) So basically a 40% increase would be describing it more accurately. Forgive me if I am wrong I haven't the time right now to look through all the bench score comparisons.


Possibly 40% is correct overall yes. But I really doubt it is that much in games. At least the game tests I saw it was much less than that.

Another thing, people say the max vcore for westmere is 1.35v otherwise increased degradation could occur.
But the Sandy Bridge CPU is supposedly safe up to 1.52v. Since they are both the same process node, wouldn't the limit be the same as for Sandy Bridge? Are there any stories of chips going dead after 24/7 1.45v+ usage?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Comparison: http://techreport.com/news/24886/haswell-compared-to-everything
> 
> 990x (3.73G) 0.35 pnts / GHz
> 4770k (3.9G) 0.45 pnts / GHz
> 
> An increase of roughly 29%.
> 
> The AMD 9590 scores virtually the same as the 990x single threaded.
> Which is painful considering it is a much newer chip with a 220W TDP.
> 
> SuperPi should be under 10 seconds for the 4770 stock.
> 
> More scores at anandtech: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/444?vs=836


none of those are real world.

these are.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/CPU-Hardware-154106/Tests/CPU-Test-Benchmark-AMD-Intel-675663/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> That might be true, the problem is DX12 is all speculation at this point.


nope
http://wccftech.com/amd-sheds-more-light-on-explicit-multiadapter-in-directx-12-in-new-slides/

Quote:


> While the improvements in newer CPU's is already there and does work in some circumstances, however it is unclear if there are any benefits for games.


Improved Frametime/rate and better hw utilization.
Quote:


> I can't find any evidence right now of current games benefitting from the newer CPU instructions / architecture


in some console ports the ST does


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I'm quite surprised at those synthetics! The difference in gaming is generally much lower though, and that's what bothers me.
> 
> I wonder how much of that is to do with new instructions.


Well it generally depends of the games... and with all the optimizations nowadays the difference can get bigger and bigger depending of the quality of the coding


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> *nope*
> http://wccftech.com/amd-sheds-more-light-on-explicit-multiadapter-in-directx-12-in-new-slides/


Yep







It is speculation UNTIL we, the end users, have DX12 on our PC's with the appropriate drivers and games which can utilize it. Then we can see whether it actually works or not.
That site proves nothing at all.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Yep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is speculation UNTIL we, the end users, have DX12 on our PC's with the appropriate drivers and games which can utilize it. Then we can see whether it actually works or not.
> That site proves nothing at all.


how is speculation if AMD and Microsoft had talked about it.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Off topic, but is this true? http://www.reddit.com/comments/367qav/


----------



## OCmember

Why do review sights STILL, when comparing CPUs, use the default clock speeds instead of a even clock speed comparison? ffs Maybe I just keep coming across shi^^y review sights. I mean cmon compare a base clock speed like a 3.5GHz Haswell VS a Westmere @ 3.5GHz


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Off topic, but is this true? http://www.reddit.com/comments/367qav/


Yeah I heard that from different places (both french and english communities)
And seeing the anti competitive practices already used by them in the past honestly I wouldn't be surprised...


----------



## Kana-Maru

I don't like what I've been seeing, reading and hearing from Nvidia lately. I think I might switch to AMD. 980 Ti has been on my radar for awhile now. I'm starting to reconsider again.






Gimp gimp gimp is the name of the game. The comment about "Line Tessellation" on the dog made me lol. That's pathetic. Nvidia is literally making their own hardware\software run slower just to make AMD cards run worse.







Some reports on several sites in 2015 has proven this. Although some Nvidia fans think otherwise.

Decisions decisions.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't like what I've been seeing, reading and hearing from Nvidia lately. I think I might switch to AMD. 980 Ti has been on my radar for awhile now. I'm starting to reconsider again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gimp gimp gimp is the name of the game. The comment about "Line Tessellation" on the dog made me lol. That's pathetic. Nvidia is literally making their own hardware\software run slower just to make AMD cards run worse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some reports on several sites in 2015 has proven this. Although some Nvidia fans think otherwise.
> 
> Decisions decisions.


Well they are doing weird ****s like making their previous generations obsolete just to make AMD look bad to their current lineup... what a bunch of crooks... their CEO always looked like a big ******* dumbass to me and he proved it with the GTX 970 memory cover up they were forced to admit...







I mean I don't say I don't like the card, I got 2 in SLI in one of my rigs but still if it wasn't discovered they would have never admitted it... way to go nVidia


----------



## gofasterstripes

Well, I feel really odd about the whole situation.

Got two 970's, so performance is great.

On the other hand NV are a cunch of bunts.

On the other other hand, any optimisations and dirty dealing benefit me.

Im quite glad I didnt pay for these cards, I'd feel guilty.

Odd.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Well, I feel really odd about the whole situation.
> 
> Got two 970's, so performance is great.
> 
> On the other hand NV are a cunch of bunts.
> 
> On the other other hand, any optimisations and dirty dealing benefit me.
> 
> Im quite glad I didnt pay for these cards, I'd feel guilty.
> 
> Odd.


I know what you mean, I'm in the same boat for the optimizations since I have 2 of those cards (well I paid for them but it was back when they were released before prices went up to adjust the Canadian $ value) so I paid like 100$ less then they are now for both of them together. Still just to think what might happen with the next generation release and those little cheat tweaks bringing down my 2 GTX 970s I don't know I'm not really happy...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I know what you mean, I'm in the same boat for the optimizations since I have 2 of those cards (well I paid for them but it was back when they were released before prices went up to adjust the Canadian $ value) so I paid like 100$ less then they are now for both of them together. Still just to think what might happen with the next generation release and those little cheat tweaks bringing down my 2 GTX 970s I don't know I'm not really happy...


Well I can tell you that since last year my Kepler cards have lost performance. I performed some test. With the later drivers in 2014, post 970 release, I noticed that my OC settings wasn't stable unless I used older drivers. I'll see if I can find my post I made about this later. Overall I noticed that the later and latest Nvidia drivers causes tons of issues when overclocking. I was already thinking about upgrading, but I don't want to be forced to upgrade GPUs.

The 970 was outperforming the 780Ti or they were at least neck and neck. Spec wise it's laughable to compare the two. A lot of people have been complaining about Kepler performance. Even with the so called "Kepler" fix drivers I still haven't seen the numbers I was putting up last year.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> I mean I don't say I don't like the card, I got 2 in SLI in one of my rigs but still if it wasn't discovered they would have never admitted it... way to go nVidia


It's only illegal if you're caught....so to speak.

I'm in the same boat. I have SLI'ed 970s, but the only reason I bought them was because I wanted dual cards and I wasn't sure I could run R9 290s with the X58 platform. So far they've performed well, but I haven't had any games running in the 3.5-4 GB range yet.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> It's only illegal if you're caught....so to speak.
> 
> I'm in the same boat. I have SLI'ed 970s, but the only reason I bought them was because I wanted dual cards and I wasn't sure I could run R9 290s with the X58 platform. So far they've performed well, but I haven't had any games running in the 3.5-4 GB range yet.


You made a good choice at the time, 290s did have issues with x58. I think its all solved now but not 100% sure as i am on an SR2 now. I had to use ASUS PT1 bios for a long time to stop the pcie lane switching/power saving BSOD's. I want to say its cured with new drivers as i no longer have the issue, i could swear it was happening on my sr2 at first.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Kana-Maru

Yeah, I should have edited that post, I hear what you're saying.

970's clockspeed is much higher, that will help with some games, but it doesn't explain the instability.


----------



## Carrotsfart

@Kana-Maru, from what I've seen the Fury is a far worse card than the 980 Ti, an overclocked fury is approximately equal to a factory overclocked reference 980 Ti, which is a real shame, not to mention you have to find somewhere to stuff the dual 120mm Rads if you SLI them. It's a real shame tbh.

In other news, my javascript has started working again, gee that was a weird 24 hours, I'm contemplating reinstalling windows on my SSD so that I can operate in AHCI rather than IDE (I messed up), everyone said that after they swapped to an SSD they'd never consider going back, this machine takes far longer to boot than my 775 ever did. It's strange really.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Carrotsfart it is possible to change from IDE to ACHI mode without reinstall. I think it's a register hack? On phone now, have a google.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh, and boot time, is that after POST? My x58 takes an age to POST.


----------



## Carrotsfart

I'd say after POST boot time is the same on this with an MX200 as it was on my Q9400 with Barracuda's, but POST takes FOREVERRRR. Seems like it's inherent to the platform rather than my system.

Yeah, I did look into changing it to AHCI without re-installing, turns out it's easier to apply than I thought haha, I was worried it might introduce a new source of potential instability.

I'm tempted to set up my hard drives in RAID 0 using the Intel SATA 3.0 ports, Have you had any issues with your arrays in the past, Kana?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Look the way I see it BOTH AMD and NVidia are bad right now.
In my opinion too many people overreacted to the 3.5GB issue. I understand that they feel slightly ripped off, however what is the actual real world loss due to the slightly slower bus? It is probably very small.
However degrading the performance of Kepler to make Maxwell look better is unacceptable, if it is true. Apparantly the latest 353 driver contains fixes for the Kepler architecture. However, all I could find was some users saying The Witcher 3 performed better with the new driver.
Project Cars, a game which performs best on the new GTX 900 series, didn't improve according to one user.
Opinions seem to be mixed about the GameWorks issue, some saying that it is indeed ruining the chances for AMD to be competitive, while others say AMD is perfectly able to provide fixes but isn't doing it. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
AMD is bad because they now have gone WAY too far with their rebranding nonsense. The pricing of video cards, at least where I live, has never been this bad. Even a year ago or so it was a lot better. The prices of most cards has RISEN instead of dropped. Remember, all the AMD cards you can currently buy are based on an architecture from 2012. Sure GCN has had revision 1.1 and 1.2, but only 1.2 has actual meaningful improvements (like memory compression) but I would say it is little more than the jump from NVidia 600 to 700 series or so. I would not buy rehashed technology from 2012 unless it is priced VERY competitively. Again, where I live this is not the case at all. Only the second hand market is decent. Altough, since the 7970 (for example) is equal to the 280x, and the 280x is still available new from a number of shops, people try to sell their 4 year old 7970 for the same price as the 280x costs new.
I am a very casual user when it comes to video cards. All my cards have been under €150. I went from 7600 GT (died) -> 9800 GT (guess what, died) -> 6870 (still working, like all my old ATi cards LOL) and they were all fantastic bang/buck. For €150 now, I buy a complete POS from AMD and from NVidia I can buy a 750 Ti which is virtually equal to the 6870 but 2x+ more efficient.
Maybe intel GPU's will become so powerful that NVidia and AMD are forced to work much harder and stop their nonsense tactics.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Look the way I see it BOTH AMD and NVidia are bad right now.
> In my opinion too many people overreacted to the 3.5GB issue. I understand that they feel slightly ripped off, however what is the actual real world loss due to the slightly slower bus? It is probably very small.


No the slowness was obvious. People started wondering and figuring it out. The card was choking after utilizing more than 3.5GBs

False advertising is very bad and can get your pants sued off your legs. Nvidia clearly states 4GBs on the merchandise. They never state anywhere on the box, website or sellers pages [Newegg, Amazon etc] "Struggles after using 3.5GBs" or "Will halt to a crawl @ 3.6+GBs". After being caught Nvidia started saying that it will only run 1/7th of the speed and the remaining 0.5GBs is left up to the OS. There was nothing about this before people & reviewers found out that the cards began to suffer well before the 4GB limit.

Websites were also confused because apparently Nvidia lied, I'm sorry there was a misunderstanding between Nvidia engineering team and technical PR team [lies?]. So apparently the wrong info was sent out to the public for reviews. People literally thought the 970 was closer to the 980 which probably resulted in a lot of hype and sales. Turns out instead of 64 ROPs and 2048KB L3 cache. the 970 only showed 56 ROPs 1972 L2 Cache. Consumers were upset and Nvidia stated that they will be helping purchasers get a refund. Nvidia was still hit with a class lawsuit for false advertising anyways.

Quote:


> However degrading the performance of Kepler to make Maxwell look better is unacceptable, if it is true. Apparantly the latest 353 driver contains fixes for the Kepler architecture. However, all I could find was some users saying The Witcher 3 performed better with the new driver.
> Project Cars, a game which performs best on the new GTX 900 series, didn't improve according to one user.


It's true man. I've ran benchmarks myself. Here's a post I made a few weeks ago about Kepler performance.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



I did some recent test and older drivers perform better than the driver that was suppose to fix the Kepler issue: 353.06. When paired against older drivers 344.48 & 337.50 my GTX 670 Overclocks better and performs better in several benchmarks. I'm getting nowhere near the scores I was getting last year with my GTX 670 SLI. 353.06 also breaks my overclock and my graphics. The colors bleed and disappear from the screen. This never happened before the 900 series. Most noticeable was in early 2015. I thought my cards were going bad, but it seems it was just some bad Nvidia drivers. I was going to put all of the results up on my blog, but I haven't had time to do so just yet. Here are some quick example:



Ice Storm: Same PC settings.
P198567 = 337.50 Driver
P192385 = 344.48 Driver
P185572 = 353.06 Driver [Suppose to fix Kepler]

Fire Strike:
11205 = 331.82 Driver
10796 = 344.48 Driver
10930 = 353.06 Driver [Suppose to fix Kepler = Did better than 344.48, but still lost to older driver]


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



I have other test I've done. Since upgrading after last summer I have seen nothing, but lost overclock that were stable, graphical glitches and color bleeding, drivers crashing and lower performance. I was getting ready to upgrade anyways, but I don't want to be FORCED to upgrade because Nvidia wants to make even more money.



Quote:


> Opinions seem to be mixed about the GameWorks issue, some saying that it is indeed ruining the chances for AMD to be competitive, while others say AMD is perfectly able to provide fixes but isn't doing it. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.


I think people have been waking up to what Nvidia has been doing for a while now. GameWorks is only available to Nvidia. I'm not even sure if the devs get full access to the source. When it comes to Project Cars, The Witcher 3. Apparently, Nvidia writes tone of spaghetti code to make it harder for AMD techs to figure out what the heck is going on. That's one of the main reasons it takes Nvidia so long to fix GameWork issues. Another issue is that Nvidia lower performance of it own GPUs if it will hurt AMD GPUs more. Given Nvidia latest downgrading via drivers I tend to believe this.

Basically if Nvidia tessellate the crap out of something and Nvidia knows they will take a 10% performance hit, but AMD will loose 30%-40% then Nvidia will do that! If that's the definition of competition in the GPU market then I can't support that behavior. A perfect example is COD. Call of Duty: Ghost for instance contains the dog hair. When GameWorks is enabled the dog hair is tessellated so many times that it hurts AMD more than Nvidia. Mostly due to the way the source code is written. Then there's Batman cape. So much tessellation just to hurt AMD.

Project Cars on the other hand which is built around Nvidia technologies. PhysX boggles down the CPU [even a extreme high end intel CPU - i7-5960X] won't allow AMD drivers to operate. That's because PhysX is just overwhelming on the cores. Nvidia Gameworks makes things even worse. So that's the name of the game. Kill the competition by not even allowing their cards to work properly with the game. So how can anyone expect AMD to push out drivers quickly when they have so much spaghetti code to go through, connect the dots and reportedly diag. I can't blame AMD for this, it's pretty much the Project Cars devs and NV tech. This is the future of PC gaming? Gameworks doesn't allow the AMD to see any source only .dlls.

Quote:


> AMD is bad because they now have gone WAY too far with their rebranding nonsense. The pricing of video cards, at least where I live, has never been this bad. Even a year ago or so it was a lot better. The prices of most cards has RISEN instead of dropped. Remember, all the AMD cards you can currently buy are based on an architecture from 2012. Sure GCN has had revision 1.1 and 1.2, but only 1.2 has actual meaningful improvements (like memory compression) but I would say it is little more than the jump from NVidia 600 to 700 series or so. I would not buy rehashed technology from 2012 unless it is priced VERY competitively.


I mean what can you say, the technology has stood the test of time. It's actually amazing that their OLD tech is still relevant today. Reminds me of the X58 actually. The fact that the old technology can compete with Nvidia really good. AMD is still a company that needs to make money. Both companies re-badge their butts off. I was looking at some benchmarks between the GTX 970 and 290X and I don't think 290X users have anything to worry about. I know a few people who are still happy with their 7970Ghz Ed GPUs.

Quote:


> Maybe intel GPU's will become so powerful that NVidia and AMD are forced to work much harder and stop their nonsense tactics.


We will see what Intel brings to the table.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I'm tempted to set up my hard drives in RAID 0 using the Intel SATA 3.0 ports, Have you had any issues with your arrays in the past, Kana?


DON'T use the SATA 3.0 ports for RAID 0. I can only recommend using only 1 SSD with the SATA III port. If you go for RAID 0 on the SATA III ports you'll get a nasty bottleneck. There has been a lot of discussion about the X58 SATA III that people tend to forget so go here for a quick history lesson:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/4210#post_24093100

You have a few choices. You can either use the SATA II ports, here what I got with two cheap SSDs:

http://s26.postimg.org/8kqe8p6ax/03849e55_2u9gv21.jpg

My HDDs in RAID 0 does extremely well too [350+Write \ 500+Read].

Another option you have is to buy a PCI-e SATA III card. They are normally less than $50 and can be as low as $25 - $30. It depends on the port and the speed you are seeking. Then you'll have access to SATA III speeds and RAID 0.


----------



## 4everAnoob

I agree with a lot you are saying. However personally I will not buy a rebadged card which is essentially tech from 2012 for €150+.
I would much rather buy 2nd hand, but then this doesn't benefit AMD.
I think the X58 situation is different, because Intel has changed the architecture and kept innovating all the time, efficiency has improved a lot, what has AMD done?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> @Kana-Maru, from what I've seen the Fury is a far worse card than the 980 Ti, an overclocked fury is approximately equal to a factory overclocked reference 980 Ti, which is a real shame, not to mention you have to find somewhere to stuff the dual 120mm Rads if you SLI them. It's a real shame tbh.


Far worse? I wouldn't say that the Fury X is a "far" worse card. When you max your games out and play at higher resolution like 1440p, 1600p & 4K you see that the Fury X does much better. The cards were clearly made for the high end gaming. When you compare @ 1080p the Fury X doesn't do well until you crank up the settings @ 1080p to max you clearly see Nvidia limitation. The benchmarks become more even. Even at a high resolution like 4K with 100% maxed out settings you see the difference. I'm maxing out games and I almost never play at 1080p so everything above that + maxed settings matter to me. Of course certain games will perform better with Nvidia cards vice versa.

I would have no problem finding a place to install the rads if I were to SLI them . I've been looking at price and performance so I think I may know which card I'm getting soon. The 980 Ti will always be a contender, but who's to say that Nvidia won't pull the same stuff in the future and gimp the cards? At the same time AMD is still keeping their really older cards up to date according to some of my friends.


----------



## gofasterstripes

AMD have done loads of things, they also open source things too, which I like. Hell, they gave us 64 bit x86!

My 7970 was ace.

Kana, why are you "New to Overclock.net", lol. Leap second problems, eh?

**edited due to annoying autocorrect*"


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> I agree with a lot you are saying. However personally I will not buy a rebadged card which is essentially tech from 2012 for €150+.
> I would much rather buy 2nd hand, but then this doesn't benefit AMD.


I understand and that is your choice. On the other hand the tech has been updated over the years and increased. Otherwise a R9 390X couldn't hang with a GTX 980 and even out do a 980 in a few benchmarks I viewed. Plus the 390X is actually competitive priced. Depending on the game @ 4K the Fury X beats the 980 Ti in benchmarks. Even at lower resolutions the Fury X wins in certain games 100% maxed. Until AMD allows the Fury X cards to be overclocked who knows the potential. 980 Ti OC pretty well from what I've read.
Quote:


> I think the X58 situation is different, because Intel has changed the architecture and kept innovating all the time, efficiency has improved a lot, what has AMD done?


Well I'm talking solely about AMD GPU division when I was comparing. Also Intel has been dragging their feet for years. The architecture hasn't really changed that much since Sandy Bridge. Even then the biggest difference was that the PCIe lanes were accessible from the CPU versus X58 PCIe > NB. Oh and QPI was replaced with DMI, but still does the same thing [FSB]. Now it's more of the same depending on the tier and the difference is speeds. Intel can keep the same architecture going with different speeds and small additions until they get competition. I mean seriously 2008 X58 1st gen Hexa Core + DDR3-1600Mh vs 2011 X79 + Hexa core +DDR3-2000+Mhz = 9.77% performance difference. Completely laughable. You can view the results here:

http://postimg.org/image/8zza822kl/

Those are the top of the link Extreme Edition i7's as well. So when it comes to innovation what has Intel done about the single core since 4770? They seems to be focused on big numbers from the multi core scores. IPC yes, but finally adding native SATA III isn't what I exactly call innovative. RAW Performance is what we need. Real time everyday performance is what we use and see. AMD GPUs even with old tech still hangs and even beats Nvidia in some of the test. I'm no fanboy for neither company.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> And have done loads of things, they also open source things too, which I like. Hell, they gave us 64 bit x86!
> 
> My 7970 was ace.


AMD does open source some of their tech.They also make it accessible for Nvidia to optimize their cards. I remember when TressFX ran horribly on my GTX 670. Nvidia optimized the code so well that their cards beat out AMD in most cases now lol. I think with some newer drivers and more mature drivers in the future AMD will continue to compete. The 7970Ghz was getting driver updates well into late 2013 that increased frame times and frame rates. I'm still hearing that the drivers are doing good for the 7970.
Quote:


> Kana, why are you "New to Overclock.net", lol. Leap second problems, eh?


I never got around to changing it I suppose. Never really paid attention to it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The AMD GPU guys just gave us FreeSync.


----------



## 4everAnoob

The 285/380 worth considering to me, since it is GCN 1.2 (I'm hoping they can still extract some extra perf. from it with new drivers)
But at ~€200 it is a tough sell.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The AMD GPU guys just gave us FreeSync.


True. I'm happy that Freesync is free to implement. On the other hand Nvidia requires proprietary hardware which will more than likely come with a premium on the monitors.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> The 285/380 worth considering to me, since it is GCN 1.2 (I'm hoping they can still extract some extra perf. from it with new drivers)
> But at ~€200 it is a tough sell.


Drivers will help. I can't wait for DirectX 12 and to see what It brings. I wonder what it will bring to the table for AMD and Nvidia cards.

http://cdn.overclock.net/4/47/900x900px-LL-4714aef8_featuresetsdx12.png
http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/46/IMG0046699.jpg


----------



## gofasterstripes

AFAIK they do cost more.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I'd say after POST boot time is the same on this with an MX200 as it was on my Q9400 with Barracuda's, but POST takes FOREVERRRR. Seems like it's inherent to the platform rather than my system.
> 
> Yeah, I did look into changing it to AHCI without re-installing, turns out it's easier to apply than I thought haha, I was worried it might introduce a new source of potential instability.
> 
> I'm tempted to set up my hard drives in RAID 0 using the Intel SATA 3.0 ports, Have you had any issues with your arrays in the past, Kana?


Don't use the marvell "SATA III", stick with the intel SATA II, especially if you are messing with large files.


----------



## virpz

Kana-Maru

I tried to find out your Performance Test 7 benchmark submission but I couldn't.
I want to see hows my processor performance compares to yours


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Kana-Maru
> 
> I tried to find out your Performance Test 7 benchmark submission but I couldn't.
> I want to see hows my processor performance compares to yours


I probably should run some new test for 2015, but here are my results for 2014:
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=3

It looks like something is wrong with the pictures and I'm gonna have to fix it.

Performance Test 7 = *14791.6*

Those are my results.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I probably should run some new test for 2015, but here are my results for 2014:
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=3[


I was talking about a submission to the Performance Test 7 database, there is nothing like an X5660 with a CPU score over 13k there.


----------



## Kana-Maru

it should have picked up my results. I have proof of my scores. I was having issues with Performance Test 8 and then 7.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> it should have picked up my results. I have proof of my scores. I was having issues with Performance Test 8 and then 7.


Not disputing your results, just curious to compare performance. It seems there are some discrepancies in between motherboards types concerning sse and physics .


----------



## Kana-Maru

I noticed that none of my older CPU scores are there as well.


----------



## gofasterstripes

QPI, memory and uncore speed also play a part.


----------



## verbatim

I put in my x5660 that arrived today and good to go. Did nothing else but set it to 23x190 and Im surfing at 4.370 GHZ atm. So easy lol.
Now to drop voltage. Everything else is stock, memory is at 1900 I think.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well I can tell you that since last year my Kepler cards have lost performance. I performed some test. With the later drivers in 2014, post 970 release, I noticed that my OC settings wasn't stable unless I used older drivers. I'll see if I can find my post I made about this later. Overall I noticed that the later and latest Nvidia drivers causes tons of issues when overclocking. I was already thinking about upgrading, but I don't want to be forced to upgrade GPUs.
> 
> The 970 was outperforming the 780Ti or they were at least neck and neck. Spec wise it's laughable to compare the two. A lot of people have been complaining about Kepler performance. Even with the so called "Kepler" fix drivers I still haven't seen the numbers I was putting up last year.


Yeah. I haven't really pushed my 780 TIs too hard, but from what I understand, 344.48 is the last good driver for pre-Maxwell, ie Keplar and Fermi


----------



## verbatim

Well my chip boots at high MHz but if I start prime the temp goes through the roof. I've dropped it down to 1.25 (1.216 in CPUz) and 4ghz. Only now is it sitting below 80 when in prime. Oops now a alarm is going off, too hot.

The megahalems isn't clearing this heat very well EDIT** It does if I screw it down properly! >< Dropped 10 degs.


----------



## MicroCat

That's does not sound good. What is your ambient temp? And more critically, what is the temp at the cooler intake? How many fans on the Megahalems?

Are you still using the HAF as listed? That should be able to provide good airflow to the cooler.

When I put a 5660 with a Mugen 4 in my Ghost box, saw similar, but not quite as high temps - in the mid 70s with stock Scythe fan. After much tweaking, got very good airflow in the case. The intake temp delta dropped from 10 degrees to 2-3 degrees. Now use 2 fans (Vadars) on the Mugen. At 4.25Ghz / 1.29(ish)V with Prime or IBT temps are in the low-to-mid 60s. Ambient 24 degrees, intake 26 degrees.

Expect the Megahalems to perform within a few degrees of the Mugen 4. Some more Megahalem/HAF tweaking might be called for.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Yeah. I haven't really pushed my 780 TIs too hard, but from what I understand, 344.48 is the last good driver for pre-Maxwell, ie Keplar and Fermi


Everything prior to 337.50 was better for me. 344.48 did knock me down a bit actually. Also here is the post where I showed some of my results.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/4320#post_24119225
Quote:


> I did some recent test and older drivers perform better than the driver that was suppose to fix the Kepler issue: 353.06. When paired against older drivers 344.48 & 337.50 my GTX 670 Overclocks better and performs better in several benchmarks. I'm getting nowhere near the scores I was getting last year with my GTX 670 SLI. 353.06 also breaks my overclock and my graphics. The colors bleed and disappear from the screen. This never happened before the 900 series. Most noticeable was in early 2015. I thought my cards were going bad, but it seems it was just some bad Nvidia drivers. I was going to put all of the results up on my blog, but I haven't had time to do so just yet. Here are some quick example:
> 
> *Ice Storm: Same PC settings.*
> *P198567 = 337.50 Driver*
> P192385 = 344.48 Driver
> P185572 = 353.06 Driver [ Suppose to fix Kepler ]
> 
> *Fire Strike:*
> *11205 = 331.82 Driver*
> 10796 = 344.48 Driver
> 10930 = 353.06 Driver [ Suppose to fix Kepler = Did better than 344.48, but still lost to older driver ]
> 
> I have other test I've done. Since upgrading after last summer I have seen nothing, but lost overclock that were stable, graphical glitches and color bleeding, drivers crashing and lower performance. I was getting ready to upgrade anyways, but I don't want to be FORCED to upgrade because Nvidia wants to make even more money.


The highest I've ever got in Fire Strike was 11,462 and Ice Storm was also 203,974. That was last summer in July. It's impossible to get close or go higher with the drivers post-GTX 970.


----------



## Waltercat

Ah man! Got her back from EVGA the other day and finally had some time to OC. So far I've got a 4.08 OC at 195x21 and a 4.21 at 201x21. Both 20 run Linx stable using all memory and max problem size. Absolutely love this x5660! Hafta say that EVGA RMA service for the "Westmere," mod on my board was great. One week turnaround time and everything is good. I know it's in here somewhere but how do I join the xeon club?


----------



## verbatim

Im having a issue. If I turn the throttle setting off in the bios, then select 23x then the throttling comes on again (turbo boost). I cant figure out if its possible to have 23x with my x5660 with turbo boost off.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Would it be wise to sell the Xeon system for a Haswell i5 (locked) or Skylake i5 system?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Also, GTX 950 (when it comes out) vs GTX 660 (ti) / GTX 670 / GTX 680 / GTX760 / 7870 / 7950 ?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Would it be wise to sell the Xeon system for a Haswell i5 (locked) or Skylake i5 system?


For either of those no...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Also, GTX 950 (when it comes out) vs GTX 660 (ti) / GTX 670 / GTX 680 / GTX760 / 7870 / 7950 ?


GTX 680 I would say yes







The 1536 Cuda core GK104 is still a very good GPU and I have a GTX 680 and GTX 770 (Both 4Gb) and they still run GTA V all at max details in 1080p


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Would it be wise to sell the Xeon system for a Haswell i5 (locked) or Skylake i5 system?


Going from X58 to a Z97 i7 is kind of a sidegrade whereas a Z97 i5 would be a slight downgrade. I doubt the improvements in Skylake will be enough to make an i5 really worth it. It would only be worth it if you don't need hyper-threading.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waltercat*
> 
> Ah man! Got her back from EVGA the other day and finally had some time to OC. So far I've got a 4.08 OC at 195x21 and a 4.21 at 201x21. Both 20 run Linx stable using all memory and max problem size. Absolutely love this x5660! Hafta say that EVGA RMA service for the "Westmere," mod on my board was great. One week turnaround time and everything is good. I know it's in here somewhere but how do I join the xeon club?


Just post your CPU-Z screenshot or CPU-Z link here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club

Then add the sig to your code. It's cool since I see that you already have a Xeon. You'll be approved easily








Congrats on the board and the OC so far. I'm sure you'll be trying to push it further soon.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> Im having a issue. If I turn the throttle setting off in the bios, then select 23x then the throttling comes on again (turbo boost). I cant figure out if its possible to have 23x with my x5660 with turbo boost off.


I'm trying to figure what you doing. There are different settings for different boards. To prevent "throttling" you are suppose to turn off CPU TM function\control that monitors the CPU thermals, but beware your CPU will burn with nothing to prevent damage. No matter what you set in the BIOS the Xeon will downclock no matter what. If you run a program you'll push the cores to x23. You'll need to change some settings to "see" -x23- in your CPU monitoring program such as CPU-z. Disable C-states, EIST, set the Ratio to x23 and see what you get. Leave CPU TM Function Enabled unless you were trying to actually prevent throttling while overclocking regardless of heat.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Would it be wise to sell the Xeon system for a Haswell i5 (locked) or Skylake i5 system?


Personally I wouldn't. Especially if you run a high end GPU, run more than one GPU or play at high resolutions greater than 1080p. I can just smell the bottlenecking.


----------



## gofasterstripes

'Sup, guys ?


----------



## brootalperry

Well guys after a few (failed) attempts at trying to break the 4.0 (215 bclk) wall that I've hit, I finally got to 4.5Ghz without freezing or crashing as soon as I booted into Windows.

I literally can't believe I just got the turbo multiplier to work with my motherboard. The magical setting for it has been right in front of my face THIS WHOLE TIME!!!
Right now I'm sitting at 22x205 for 4517Mhz aka 4.5Ghz!

Vcore - 1.41v
RAM - 1642Mhz
QPI/DRAM - 2463Mhz (I think)
QPI/DRAM voltage - 1.28v
IOH voltage - 1.16v
RAM timings 9-9-9-24-2N

C-states - disabled
Speedstep - disabled
C1E - disabled
HT - enabled

And a little more I could get into. It's probably a little early to celebrate but I seem to be stable at the moment.
Idle temps went from being in the high 20s - low 30s to the high 30s - low 40s. This is with an H80i mind you. I don't think the temps will be a problem in the long run, but I'll use this for a few days and see just how stable it is.



*Edit:* While trying to run Cinebench the computer kept freezing forcing me to hard restart it. I raised the vcore to 1.45v and the Uncore frequency from 1.5x to 2.0x. I was able to run and complete a Cinebench test (score went from 840 (4.0Ghz) to 1009 (4.5Ghz) this time and I still haven't crashed. I'm not sure which was the "stable" factor. The vcore at 1.45 or the raise in the Uncore frequency.

I kinda suspect it to be the Uncore because it kept freezing as I raised the vcore until I hit the "safe" limit at 1.45v. I think had I just raised it to 1.45v then it still wouldn't have been stable...or maybe that's me just being pessimistic. In any case I'm not sure if it's 100% stable so I won't celebrate just yet. I'll do more tinkering. Like lowering the vcore and keeping the Uncore at 2.0x later

Oh! Also temps during the test didn't break 70C. The highest the temp went to was 66C on one of the cores. So I'm pretty satisfied with the temps since I don't think I'll be seeing those temps outside of rendering which I don't do anymore.


----------



## autoshot

Are you planning to keep those settings for daily use? Because I think 1.45v (or even 1.41v) are a little too high for sustained periods of time...


----------



## brootalperry

Nah. I think I'll lower it back to 4.0Ghz. I'm just a little excited that I finally figured out how to make the turbo multiplier stable.

Like I said I don't know which was the stable factor to getting it to stay at 4.5Ghz. So before putting it back to 4.0 I'll first lower the vcore and see if it's unstable.
If so then the vcore was the stable factor. If not then it's the Uncore, which means if I were to find a stable lower vcore then I could try lowering the Uncore frequency next.


----------



## gofasterstripes

1.28v is ok for long-term uncore, assuming your board is actuary sticking to that.

3200mhz uncore is a useful performance boost, no need to drop it. If you can get a multimeter on the board, check what voltage your Uncore really is at.

You can check the Uncore/memory speeds in the 'Memory' tab.

It probably would be safer to set Core voltage to 1.32ish and see what speed you can get.


----------



## brootalperry

Well this is interesting. I lowered the vcore to 1.41 and it froze when I started the Cinebench test. So I lowered the bclk to 200 for 4.4Ghz.
I was able to complete the Cinebench test this time. The score went down to 915. Hmm...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I kinda suspect it to be the Uncore because it kept freezing as I raised the vcore until I hit the "safe" limit at 1.45v. I think had I just raised it to 1.45v then it still wouldn't have been stable...or maybe that's me just being pessimistic. In any case I'm not sure if it's 100% stable so I won't celebrate just yet. I'll do more tinkering..


1.45v is far from safe. 1.35v or lower is safe. Long term you'll want below 1.27v.
Quote:


> Oh! Also temps during the test didn't break 70C. The highest the temp went to was 66C on one of the cores. So I'm pretty satisfied with the temps since I don't think I'll be seeing those temps outside of rendering which I don't do anymore.


Well your ambient temp must be very cool and constant because these Hexa cores heat up like crazy above 4Ghz. They will literally warm up fairly large room.


----------



## gofasterstripes

1.27? That's the lowest figure I've heard yet :/ I'm 1.28- 1.264 loaded :/


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 1.45v is far from safe. 1.35v or lower is safe. Long term you'll want below 1.27v.
> Well your ambient temp must be very cool and constant because these Hexa cores heat up like crazy above 4Ghz. They will literally warm up fairly large room.


I was more referring to this quite informative post. In any case I've gone back to my conservative 4.0Ghz at 1.25v.

Also yes the room I'm in is probably the coolest in the entire house. With the AC on I have to keep the vent behind me closed because it can get really cold down here within minutes of having it open, so I'm not really worried about [CPU] temps so much. GPU on the other hand...

Anyway now I know that I can get to 4.5Ghz. It seems to be my new wall. Anything above that would be dangerous waters, and I quite like my ship as-is.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 1.27? That's the lowest figure I've heard yet :/ I'm 1.28- 1.264 loaded :/


Well of course you know anything under 1.35v is better than being above it. I was talking from a "heat" perspective. Once you get around 1.27v+ you'll be more than likely around 4Ghz+. The heat is the issue at that point. The lower the better or in other words the less damage you'll do over time. Judging by Intel feet dragging and all of the nice upgrades available, we will probably be on this platform longer than we want.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> I was more referring to this quite informative post. In any case I've gone back to my conservative 4.0Ghz at 1.25v.
> 
> Also yes the room I'm in is probably the coolest in the entire house. With the AC on I have to keep the vent behind me closed because it can get really cold down here within minutes of having it open, so I'm not really worried about [CPU] temps so much. GPU on the other hand...
> 
> Anyway now I know that I can get to 4.5Ghz. It seems to be my new wall. Anything above that would be dangerous waters, and I quite like my ship as-is.


Honestly I'm not reading that long post lol. I'm currently reading a book that over 1000 pages. My last book was 800+ and the book before that was 900 something pages. Let's just say I learn a lot and read a ton of books so I'll pass. I still have at least 4 more I want to read before the end of September.

4.5Ghz is good. If the room is cool enough you should be able to manage the GPU temps. Well that is if you have a good air flow and enough cool air making it inside of the case.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 4.5Ghz is good. If the room is cool enough you should be able to manage the GPU temps. Well that is if you have a good air flow and enough cool air making it inside of the case.


At 1.45v? Forget that. Not for daily use anyway. I doubt I'll see much improvement in gaming anyway. This chip has been good to me so I don't feel right pushing it that hard.
My GPU is also overclocked. I've also got it right at the safe limit voltage wise. Even on stock it lets out heat like a coal power station. I was thinking of getting a third party heatsink for it but the temps are under control









Could use some airflow fans though.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Well I meant 4.5Ghz as in that a pretty good high OC to achieve. 1.45v is a bit much. The higher the better for games, but there is a limit were the increases aren't worth the stress + heat placed on the cores. Hmmm at stock my CPU never really gets hot at all. Are you running stock with all of the power saving settings enabled? If you run stock without paying attention to the frequency so much the CPU is still great for every day use.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well I meant 4.5Ghz as in that a pretty good high OC to achieve. 1.45v is a bit much. The higher the better for games, but there is a limit were the increases aren't worth the stress + heat placed on the cores. Hmmm at stock my CPU never really gets hot at all. Are you running stock with all of the power saving settings enabled? If you run stock without paying attention to the frequency so much the CPU is still great for every day use.


Yes it is a bit much. Where some others in this thread and the X58 club thread have reached that speed with lower I need to go way above that to get the same. I do find it interesting I was able to run 4.4Ghz at 1.41v though. Well, at least complete a Cinebench test with that anyway.

I've gone back to 1.25v and 4.0Ghz like I said. I currently have all the power saving features off but I might turn them back on.


----------



## 2010rig

Got my x5660 shipped today finally, already replaced it, but when I went to put the brackets for the NH-D14 the rubbers are not making contact with the screws. It's as if they're too tall now. Even without the metal bracket, the screws won't tighten up.

I really don't want to buy a new cooler, but I'm really not sure what to try next.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Got my x5660 shipped today finally, already replaced it, but when I went to put the brackets for the NH-D14 the rubbers are not making contact with the screws. It's as if they're too tall now. Even without the metal bracket, the screws won't tighten up.
> 
> I really don't want to buy a new cooler, but I'm really not sure what to try next.


I'm confused as to how it won't fit. I just popped in an X5675 with a NH-D14 into my wife's rig 2 days ago so it's fresh in my mind. Are the screws and backplate flat against the back of the motherboard? Does that motherboard tray have an opening in the back so that you can hold the backplate in place while you mount the spacers and brackets?


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hazardz*
> 
> I'm confused as to how it won't fit. I just popped in an X5675 with a NH-D14 into my wife's rig 2 days ago so it's fresh in my mind. Are the screws and backplate flat against the back of the motherboard? Does that motherboard tray have an opening in the back so that you can hold the backplate in place while you mount the spacers and brackets?


Thanks dude, I forgot that part, got the brackets on now and going to mount the cooler on.

Thoughts on getting new thermal paste? My tube is like 5 years old now.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Yeah it does have the spacing in the back. It's been 5 years since I installed this thing...
> 
> Please expand on the motherboard spacing on the back part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't get the brackets to mount, even without the metal part, the screws don't make contact.


When I mentioned space in the back, I meant a hole you can access the back of the motherboard like so.



The backplate needs to be up against you motherboard like this.



Then you put those black spacers on top.



And then the brackets.



Finally, put some thermal paste onto the CPU, screw the heatsink on alternating between the two screws and mounting the fans.


----------



## 2010rig

First OC - http://valid.x86.fr/mq7ymz



2nd OC - http://valid.x86.fr/vvq98t



Not sure how stable that is yet, and I doubt I will push it further.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Everything prior to 337.50 was better for me. 344.48 did knock me down a bit actually. Also here is the post where I showed some of my results.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/4320#post_24119225
> The highest I've ever got in Fire Strike was 11,462 and Ice Storm was also 203,974. That was last summer in July. It's impossible to get close or go higher with the drivers post-GTX 970.


I just saw this article by RaginCajun on our main page ... pretty extensive testing. Interested me since I used to run 780 TI SLI, but running a single for the moment, mostly because of Batman.. not sure if I misquoted the driver version and meant 347.88? I read through a lot of threads over the days, so don't remember where I saw it first to go and check.

here is his article - http://www.overclock.net/a/the-gtx-780-ti-sli-end-of-life-performance-analysis

Unfortunately for me, I just blindly accept each upgrade, thinking its an improvement over the last. Guess that's not necessarily true.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> I just saw this article by RaginCajun on our main page ... pretty extensive testing. Interested me since I used to run 780 TI SLI, but running a single for the moment, mostly because of Batman.. not sure if I misquoted the driver version and meant 347.88? I read through a lot of threads over the days, so don't remember where I saw it first to go and check.
> 
> here is his article - http://www.overclock.net/a/the-gtx-780-ti-sli-end-of-life-performance-analysis


Good test and good results. He's still using a newer card than my GTX 670s. I'm still getting much lower performance overall. Unstable OCs and pixel bleeding. I feel back to 353.06. The latest two drivers causes Batman:AK to crash as well as other benchmarks [even while running stock]. 353.06 allows me to play Batman smoother than the newer and previous drivers. However, when compared to the previous drivers -353.06- does the worst during my benchmark and causes issues. It plays Batman:AK decently with no Nvidia GameWorks. I guess since I already have the benchmarks I could compare the FPS in Batman:AK against an older driver that gave me better performance.

Quote:


> Unfortunately for me, I just blindly accept each upgrade, thinking its an improvement over the last. Guess that's not necessarily true.


It's makes you wonder how long this has been going on eh?


----------



## verbatim

I take the upgrades for the new games. For instance the latest one optomised witcher 3. If I dont take it then the game chugs..


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah that's the position I'm in.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Spoiler: Quote



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> First OC - http://valid.x86.fr/mq7ymz
> 
> 
> 
> 2nd OC - http://valid.x86.fr/vvq98t
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure how stable that is yet, and I doubt I will push it further.






Great to see the 2010rig finally get updated to Xeon...I was wondering when that i7-930 was going Xeon







Congrats bro, those clocks look great.


----------



## virpz

The thing is that Nvidia will keep doing all the craps they have been doing as it is still working for them. People are still buying their cards and everybody seems to be happy with the gameworks, new drivers nerfing old cards, cards marketed and sold as 4GB that are in fact 3.5GB cards.

In two thousand something I remember nvidia cheating DX files ( lower mipmap or some crap to get better performance ) and microsoft denying WHQL certification to them. The last Nvidia card I had was an Geforce Ti200 and since that time I have been an ATI/AMD customer on what concerns GPU.

Don't expect review sites to man up on that, it is up to customers to let them know that we are not happy with the amount of ***** they are throwing at us. The best way to let them know how you feel is by not buying their products.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> 
> Great to see the 2010rig finally get updated to Xeon...I was wondering when that i7-930 was going Xeon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congrats bro, those clocks look great.


Thanks bro, the upgrade was long overdue! Should hold me over to Skylake-E.







now hunting for a new video card...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> The thing is that Nvidia will keep doing all the craps they have been doing as it is still working for them. People are still buying their cards and everybody seems to be happy with the gameworks, new drivers nerfing old cards, cards marketed and sold as 4GB that are in fact 3.5GB cards.
> 
> In two thousand something I remember nvidia cheating DX files ( lower mipmap or some crap to get better performance ) and microsoft denying WHQL certification to them. The last Nvidia card I had was an Geforce Ti200 and since that time I have been an ATI/AMD customer on what concerns GPU.
> 
> Don't expect review sites to man up on that, it is up to customers to let them know that we are not happy with the amount of ***** they are throwing at us. The best way to let them know how you feel is by not buying their products.


I don't remember that, but I've read a lot of crap about Intel and Nvidia over the years to believe it. I've really been eye balling AMD GPUs this time around. I skipped Nvidia 700 series, 900 series and Titans altogether. It was good until the driver Kepler downgrades and instability. I'm speaking solely from my expereience btw. I really wanted the 295x2 last year, but AMD went crazy and wanted $1,500.00. That simply was never going to happen. By the time they lowered the price I didn't want to upgrade anymore since we were moving into another architecture. Fury X still looks good to me. Especially at high resolutions maxed out. Anyone not maxing out their cards at resolutions higher than 1440p is wasting money anyways. 1080p doesn't = $650+ cards.


----------



## iSlayer

I had no idea Gulftown clocked so well, that OC is juicy.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't remember that, but I've read a lot of crap about Intel and Nvidia over the years to believe it. I've really been eye balling AMD GPUs this time around. I skipped Nvidia 700 series, 900 series and Titans altogether. It was good until the driver Kepler downgrades and instability. I'm speaking solely from my expereience btw. I really wanted the 295x2 last year, but AMD went crazy and wanted $1,500.00. That simply was never going to happen. By the time they lowered the price I didn't want to upgrade anymore since we were moving into another architecture. Fury X still looks good to me. Especially at high resolutions maxed out. Anyone not maxing out their cards at resolutions higher than 1440p is wasting money anyways. 1080p doesn't = $650+ cards.


I got two 290x bnib for $ 480 during the bitcoin mining sale and I must say that I have been really happy with the cards. I should also add that I turned my computer only once with the reference cooling ( big mistake by amd ) and then went straight to putting the cards under water as I don't like noisy computers/components frying.

I like the Fury X too. It is a product packed with innovation and the price tag is right.

The interview bellow is really entertaining if you are interested in API's, AMD, Nvidia etc.

Skip to 23:40 to see Huddy challenging nvidia.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Skip to 23:40 to see Huddy challenging nvidia


Gotta love how he talks up Mantle, 9 months before its inevitable death.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

A few months ago, I was hoping to buy an R9 390. Once it became known the 300 series would be full of rebrands, I decided I would rather get a 380X but that card is being released at an unknown date. The 390 and 390X released at a higher price than I expected and considerably higher than I was willing to pay. Granted they are powerful cards, but I didn't feel like putting a small furnace in my Define R4. AMD also has to really push clocks out of the box to get adequate performance leaving little overclocking headroom. I wasn't able to overclock my 4870 or 5870 very far at all, even with a T-Rad2 on them. The GTX 970 I currently have installed overclocks rather well and is considerably cooler than the 5870 it replaced. I'll be interested in what Pascal has to offer, but I don't see myself upgrading again so soon.

I think the whole 3.5GB fiasco was blown way out of proportion. If it was _that_ big of an issue, sales would have tanked and prices would have dropped as a result. GTX 970 prices have remained rather steady all year so they're still selling.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Gotta love how he talks up Mantle, 9 months before its inevitable death.


Mantle is dead ? I use it daily on BF4 and BFHL, the performance increase is amazing and you don't need to have an AMD cpu to use it.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Mantle is dead ? I use it daily on BF4 and BFHL, the performance increase is amazing and you don't need to have an AMD cpu to use it.


Isn't Mantle really just starting? It was only made public a few months ago and the next Mirrors Edge and Star Wars Battlefront will use it.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I think the whole 3.5GB fiasco was blown way out of proportion. If it was _that_ big of an issue, sales would have tanked and prices would have dropped as a result. GTX 970 prices have remained rather steady all year so they're still selling.


I don't think it is out of proportion.

Exe: If you sell me 4 pounds of 18K gold you better deliver 4 pounds 18k I have paid for. Not 3.5 pounds of 18k and 0.5 pounds of 12k.

If you don't make a big issue of this now you may regret that in the future as the industry is carefully watching us.

Right now you are telling Nvidia " This is no big deal, screw me again and the rest of the industry may follow you !"


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hazardz*
> 
> Isn't Mantle really just starting? It was only made public a few months ago and the next Mirrors Edge and Star Wars Battlefront will use it.


Not dead at all, that guy was







BUT it may die if DX12 comes out as good as they say it will be.

Back to the topic. I was thinking about taking an X5675. Not an performance issue, I just have something in my mind that is asking for more MHz.

Any of you guys have he x5675 clocking really well ?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I don't think it is out of proportion.
> 
> Exe: If you sell me 4 pounds of 18K gold you better deliver 4 pounds 18k I have paid for. Not 3.5 pounds of 18k and 0.5 pounds of 12k.
> 
> If you don't make a big issue of this now you may regret that in the future as the industry is carefully watching us.
> 
> Right now you are telling Nvidia " This is no big deal, screw me again and the rest of the industry may follow you !"


You're comparing apples and plutonium. The GTX 970 _does_ have 4GB, but 512MB of it is significantly slower than the other 3584MB. You only experience decreased performance if the GPU has to access that 512MB, which isn't very often and makes the issue not big. If the GPU had to frequently access that VRAM, then it would be a problem and I highly doubt the video card would have ever hit the market.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> You're comparing apples and plutonium. The GTX 970 _does_ have 4GB, but 512MB of it is significantly slower than the other 3584MB. You only experience decreased performance if the GPU has to access that 512MB, which isn't very often and makes the issue not big. If the GPU had to frequently access that VRAM, then it would be a problem and I highly doubt the video card would have ever hit the market.


Yeah...I know what it does and how it does... that's why I said 3.5 pounds of 18K and 0.5 of 12k gold.









Imagine intel selling the Xeon E5-2667 v3 wich is 8 cores at 3.2GHz but in the end the processor ended up having only 7 cores at 3.2GHz and 1 core running at 300MHz. Or having 17.5MB of L3 instead of the advertised 20MB.

That's 12.5% less, that's what nvidia did.

Anyway...I don't agree with you and I think that is a big issue.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Yeah...I know what it does and how it does... that's why I said 3.5 pounds of 18K and 0.5 of 12k gold.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Imagine intel selling the Xeon E5-2667 v3 wich is 8 cores at 3.2GHz but in the end the processor ended up having only 7 cores at 3.2GHz and 1 core running at 300MHz. Or having 17.5MB of L3 instead of the advertised 20MB.
> 
> That's 12.5% less, that's what nvidia did.
> 
> Anyway...I don't agree with you and I think that is a big issue.


Your comparisons aren't the same. The VRAM issue doesn't manifest itself very often. It's as if you don't know what "blown way out of proportion" means. Yes, the VRAM issue is an issue, but it's so rarely an issue that it's practically a nonissue.


----------



## bill1024

I am very pleased with my GTX970, it cranks out a lot of points in folding at home and crunching BOINC.
It is a very powerful card indeed.
The memory issue pops up when gaming in high resolutions under conditions. It dose not happen often and at 1080 or less I believe not at all.
At 4k you would want more than a GTX970 anyway right?
I can see the point though, I would not be happy if my card slowed down, or stuttered because of a memory issue that was known about.

I will look tomorrow for the article that explains the why, how and when the issue happens.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I get where you're all coming from, but the thing is, chess, its not good enough that it's rarely an issue, it should never have happened.

That 500mb is massively slower, the card is to all intents and purposes a 3.5Gb card.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

It's well-documented that it occurs when the GPU has to access the last 512MB of VRAM. I personally have not experienced the issue yet. How many months had the cards been out before anyone even noticed? Once again, blown way out of proportion.


----------



## bill1024

I like my R9 280X 3gb cards, they crunch BOINC primegrid as good as a Titan and GTX980, in Folding at home, they equal a 660Ti.
I really like the color playing games and it plays great at 1080,

The bad thing about the R9 280x is the power draw and the heat output. AMD cards throw off some heat for sure and spin the electric meter.
If running a card at 100% load 24/7 like I do is a problem in warm weather.
I heat my home in the Winter running computers.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Your comparisons aren't the same. The VRAM issue doesn't manifest itself very often. It's as if you don't know what "blown way out of proportion" means. Yes, the VRAM issue is an issue, but it's so rarely an issue that it's practically a nonissue.


Okay.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I think the whole 3.5GB fiasco was blown way out of proportion. If it was _that_ big of an issue, sales would have tanked and prices would have dropped as a result. GTX 970 prices have remained rather steady all year so they're still selling.


False advertisement is false advertisement. They were hit with a class lawsuit and Nvidia even reached out to offer refunds. That lame excuse the Nvidia tech gave to the world was hilarious. You can only use 3.5GBs at full speed, then it struggles. They split the memory in two chunks 3.5GB and 500MBs. That's what I got from Nvidia. Once you go past 3.5GB Nvidia won't tell you that you'll be using 1\7th of the speed in the 500MB chunk and Nvidia didn't tell us that. it took gamers and reviews to wonder why they couldn't utilize the entire 4GBs they paid full price for. That's not advertised on the box. It's 4 full GBs not 3.5GBs and low to a crawl with the final 500MBs.

The wrong specs were given to press as well regarding the 970. Nvidia doubled back and spinned that as well. "Communication Error". I guess this is after people started to buy the card like crazy. Sold out everywhere. People literally thought they were getting something as good as GTX 980. Which was a flash back to the GTX 670 \ 680 minor differences in performance for me.

Then there was the driver degradation with Kepler 600-700 series that starting popping up in December 2014 and lasted until Nvidia was forced to address the issue and release a "Kepler fix" recently. Sadly my stability and performance is still gone when compared to drivers from last year. 970 beating 780 Ti. That made some people made for sure.

I'm sure that if you love Nvidia and don't game on a high-end level it's not "that" big of an issue. However, if you are unbiased and think outside of the box and think about this in the long run........you'll be pretty POed. The last thing we need is blatant lies and performance crippling drivers [over time] for some of the most expensive cards on the market. This is coming from a current Nvidia SLI gamer. If AMD tried this and was in the exact same position I would say the exact same thing.

As of February Nvidia profits were up 31%! Shares were up as well. Billions of dollars later this type of behavior shouldn't be necessary or accepted from any company. Especially a well paid company with a huge market share.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

This is my first Nvidia card. I get whatever is the best performance for the price. When I bought my HD 4870, that was it. When I bought my HD 5870, it was used from someone on this site for a good price. I grabbed this GTX 970 for $275 last month. One of the reasons I was holding off on upgrading for so long was because I didn't want a graphics card creating so much heat inside my case and AMD's cards have only gone way up in power usage since the 5000 series. If AMD's next round of cards can manage to bring power draw and subsequent temperatures down, I will probably consider one.

I understand that Nvidia wasn't the most forthcoming about the VRAM on the GTX 970, but the issue doesn't exactly manifest itself very often. If it was a persistent issue that completely ruined your gaming experience, then that's another thing. But it isn't. And it doesn't.


----------



## Kana-Maru

The GTX 970 was $329 - $400+ [MSRP is what most paid] depending on the model and was beating a $699+ GTX 780 Ti flagship that released 10 months prior. if you don't see something wrong with that then I don't know what to tell you. The specs says otherwise. Nvidia drivers tell a different story.

Nvidia cards aren't the coolest either. I guess it depends on your ambient temp and your overclock. Games like Crysis 3 will burn just about any CPU. I do enjoy the lower power usage, but that's not a necessity for me. There's been a lot of mess with Nvidia later. I do expect the masses to overlook the problems that Nvidia has and could have on the PC market entirely. I refuse to look pass it. Even if I got a Titan X for $150 the price doesn't change the actual issues.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

No, the 780 Ti is still a superior card to the GTX 970. It's the 780 that's not quite as good. I will probably never think a $600+ video card will be worth the money because it's never double the performance of $300 cards. That's just me, though.

My 5870 ran hotter with a T-Rad2 than my 970 does with the Twin Frozr V. That 5870 was stock and this 970 is overclocked.


----------



## Kana-Maru

As I said the 780 Ti was losing to a GTX 970. 780 *TI* not 780. I hope you got my point.

Of course heat is going to be a big difference in heat when you compare a 2009 Radeon 5870 +T-Rad2 vs a 2015 970+Twin Frozr V. New tech will always be better and cooler than that old tech. Comparing the two isn't even fair. They are in different a different decade actually. Apples to plutonium right?

AMD does have the water cooling solution and 3rd party support to help dissipate the heat as well. If you want better temps get a 3rd party cooler or a watercooled GPU.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Yeah, but the 780 Ti doesn't lose the 970. So no, I don't get your point.

I was considering a 290, but the heat would have been massive. It's in the same time period as a 970. The 5870 had a TDP rated at 188W so it's not like it was that much higher than a 970, but it produced so much more heat. My 5870 ran around 80 while gaming while my 970 doesn't even hit 80 while stressed. It's a fair comparison because they're still video cards.

I'm not getting a water-cooled GPU. That just sounds inconvenient to me. Maybe if I already had a custom loop in my system, it's worth considering. And I should need an aftermarket cooler for a video card to run cool enough. I didn't really have a choice with the 4870 because it ran so damn hot, but the T-Rad2 was an incredibly effective cooler.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Yeah, but the 780 Ti doesn't lose the 970. So no, I don't get your point.


Once again. Nvidia tweaked drivers and forgot to optimize older cards in favor of the newer 900 series. Some say Nvidia purposely lowed the performance to increase 900 series sales. From my personal test the latest drivers lowered my performance. The 970 clearly matched the 780 Ti in terms of performance. In certain games the 970 was actually beating the 780 Ti. Nvidia forgot about Kepler which forced some pretty angry voices across the web which forced a "Kepler fix". If you don't get my point then I don't know what to tell you. If you don't understand that a 970 shouldn't beat a 780 Ti and that a GTX 960 shouldn't beat a GTX 780 I don't know what to tell you. Moving on.

Quote:


> I was considering a 290, but the heat would have been massive. It's in the same time period as a 970. The 5870 had a TDP rated at 188W so it's not like it was that much higher than a 970, but it produced so much more heat. My 5870 ran around 80 while gaming while my 970 doesn't even hit 80 while stressed. It's a fair comparison because they're still video cards.


I could careless about TDP or Watts. If you don't understand that the MSI tech has changed drastically since 2009 I don't know what to tell you. Just being video cards doesn't mean you can compare something like a T-Rad2 vs a Twin Frozr V. Please don't make me laugh. Many generations later??? MSI has literally had approx. 7 years to continue to perfect the Twin Frozr. Obviously it's going to perform better than 2009 Radeon 5870. It's not a fair comparison because one is old and outdated and one is much newer and recent with much newer tech behind it.

Quote:


> I'm not getting a water-cooled GPU. That just sounds inconvenient to me. Maybe if I already had a custom loop in my system, it's worth considering. And I should need an aftermarket cooler for a video card to run cool enough. I didn't really have a choice with the 4870 because it ran so damn hot, but the T-Rad2 was an incredibly effective cooler.


That's great and that's your decision. Water cooling isn't for everyone. I really want my GPU to have a closed loop WC like my CPU. The water cooled EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid and the Fury X has much better temps than the reference and 3rd party fan versions [390X, Titan X, 908 Ti etc]. The problem is that that the EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid is $750. This makes the $650 Fury X better in my eyes. I can really use that $100 saved towards some other PC upgrades I've been willing to make.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I don't understand your point because the 780 Ti beats a 970 and 780 beats a 960. Not sure why that was even worth bringing up, but whatever.

The T-Rad2 was still a very good cooler, but the 5870 produced a crazy amount of heat. I'm sure something like a Twin Frozr V wouldn't have performed much better. Unfortunately AMD cards are quite notorious for running hot, especially with reference coolers, which is why I had to buy a T-Rad2 in the first place. Since AMD hasn't done anything about power consumption and heat production, I decided to try out Nvidia this time around. I can't say I'm disappointed. If AMD finds a way to make their GPUs run cooler, I'll probably look at getting one of their cards. I'd just really rather not deal with all that extra heat in my case, but a built-in all-in-one cooling solution isn't my cup of tea. I would have to make accommodations for the radiator and fan and I'd rather not have to deal with that. A nice air cooler is infinitely more convenient.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I don't understand your point because the 780 Ti beats a 970 and 780 beats a 960. Not sure why that was even worth bringing up, but whatever.


Ok man. There were test and discussion months ago about the 960 outperforming the 780 and the 970 outperforming the 780 Ti. Or the 970 matching the 780 Ti. Add some OC juice to the 970 and it could go past the 780 Ti.. Nvidia clearly forgot about Kepler for some of the biggest games or something. Hmmmm or marketing







Just because you don't know about this doesn't make it untrue, but ok moving on.

Quote:


> The T-Rad2 was still a very good cooler, but the 5870 produced a crazy amount of heat. I'm sure something like a Twin Frozr V wouldn't have performed much better.


Moving on.
Quote:


> I decided to try out Nvidia this time around. I can't say I'm disappointed. If AMD finds a way to make their GPUs run cooler, I'll probably look at getting one of their cards. I'd just really rather not deal with all that extra heat in my case, but a built-in all-in-one cooling solution isn't my cup of tea. I would have to make accommodations for the radiator and fan and I'd rather not have to deal with that. A nice air cooler is infinitely more convenient.


OK. I have room for 8 fan placements. Closed or custom loops with rads aren't a problem for me personally. I prefer watercooled components to keep the heat down as well. That's why I have a closed loop on my CPU. All in one cooling is perfect for people like me who doesn't "need" to run a custom loop. I'm pretty sure I'll be getting a closed loop GPU. At least I'm hoping I do.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Perhaps the part about it not being true makes it untrue. That or reviews and benchmarks don't mean anything. I guess we'll agree to disagree since your ramblings don't align with my research.

I tried an all-in-one cooling solution for my processor. It was better than my TRUE for about three or four weeks and stopped cooling effectively. My case has seven places to mount fans, I just don't care to have any of them occupy a radiator for a video card, especially when air cooling is more than adequate.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Perhaps the part about it not being true makes it untrue. That or reviews and benchmarks don't mean anything. I guess we'll agree to disagree since your ramblings don't align with my research.


Wow really? Did you even attempt to research anything? No? Maybe the part about you not knowing something doesn't make it untrue like I stated earlier.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review
Check out the 970 vs 780 Ti FPS. 970 is nearly matching the 780 Ti in performance. The 970 is usually 1 - 3 FPS off when compared to the 780 Ti. In other cases they are neck and neck. Bump up the cores and overclock a little and you'll skip right past the 780 Ti. The MSI 970 overclocked just skips right on past the 780 Ti.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941-8.html
Check out the BF4 970 coming within 3 fps of the 780 Ti.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941-9.html
Check out the 970 beating the 780 Ti.

Then there's the Project Cars fiasco which revolves around built in PhysX:
1080p = http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page2.html
1440p = http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page2.html

Notice the 960 outperforming the 780 and the 970 outperforming the 780 Ti some of those test. Nvidia needs to continue to support their expensive flagships. Even i f they want to sell newer cards.



Now if you want to search about Nvidia possibly gimping the Kepler cards you can Google that and research it yourself. It was going on since December 2014 so it should be easy to find. Also it's not just so called "AMD fanboys" complaining it's actual Nvidia owners such as myself who's seen the degrading performance. I understand that Nvidia lying, I mean not stating the 3.5GB correctly is passable to you. That's fine and I expect nothing less from Nvidia fans. There's been way to much going on for me to continue to support that behavior. Behavior I've experienced first hand. If I spend $699+ on a flagship GPU I expect that GPU to perform well for a long time. Not 9 to 10 month later it's being MATCHED or beaten by a card that retails for $329.99. What a waste. Nvidia must focus on optimizing all of their GPUs while not neglecting and hurting performance for previous gens. That says a lot about the company. I was hyped for the 970 as well last year, but there was to much negativity going on with the card and Nvidia so I waited.

Now since you didn't feel like researching it yourself maybe you'll continue to research and find more reviews + discussions about the 900 series [$329] outpacing the 780 + 780 Ti [$699] flagship.

Quote:


> I tried an all-in-one cooling solution for my processor. It was better than my TRUE for about three or four weeks and stopped cooling effectively. My case has seven places to mount fans, I just don't care to have any of them occupy a radiator for a video card, especially when air cooling is more than adequate.


As I said that is your choice and that's fine. I was stating that it wasn't a problem for me and that I'm sure my next GPU will be watercooled. At least that's what I'm shooting for. My closed loop cooler has my temps 4.8Ghz very low:

4.8Ghz = 70c Average during IBT v2.54
Looking at the closed loop WC GPUs I'm hoping I can match the GPU reviews. Fury X looks good in the temperature department & high-end maxed out department.


----------



## bill1024

My GTX970 and R9-280X they both run cool, meaning the GPU temp stays below 65c full 100% load.
But the AMD card throws off a lot more heat into the room, using water or air coolers will not change that fact.
The more watts you use the more heat will be thrown off.

Here are a few Firestrike v1.1 scores. X5660 at 4ghz. 12 gb ram at 1754mhz. Windows 8.1

R9-280X at 1050 the score was 6507

GTX 660Ti single card at 1100mhz score 5222
GTX 660Ti SLI 1100mhz score 8761

GTX970 at 1475 single card score 10489


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'm not an Nvidia fanboy. It's clear that we're not going to see eye-to-eye on this topic. I recognize the 3.5GB thing is an actual issue, but it's not exactly a common occurrence. It's like saying your engine stalls if you travel over 100mph, but how often are you going over 100mph?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My GTX970 and R9-280X they both run cool, meaning the GPU temp stays below 65c full 100% load.
> But the AMD card throws off a lot more heat into the room, using water or air coolers will not change that fact.
> The more watts you use the more heat will be thrown off.


That's fine with me. I'm focused on keeping the GPU core cool. I can deal with the heat it pumps out. My 670 SLI dumps tons of heat while running games. That's not the issue for me. My ambient temps are well taken care of. I'm looking more at the price per performance. Nvidia does have their power usage in check.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I'm not an Nvidia fanboy. It's clear that we're not going to see eye-to-eye on this topic. I recognize the 3.5GB thing is an actual issue, but it's not exactly a common occurrence. It's like saying your engine stalls if you travel over 100mph, but how often are you going over 100mph?


There is a tread at EVGA where the guy has 2 GTX970 one has a problem and one does not do it.
The one that does not do it has Samsung Vmem and the one with the problem has another brand v-mem
Seemed the problem was worse in one game and not much in other games.
I hope they can figure it out and make a driver to fix it and put this to bed once and for all.
My card has the Samsung mem and I have no problem. Go figure.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> There is a tread at EVGA where the guy has 2 GTX970 one has a problem and one does not do it.
> The one that does not do it has Samsung Vmem and the one with the problem has another brand v-mem
> Seemed the problem was worse in one game and not much in other games.
> I hope they can figure it out and make a driver to fix it and put this to bed once and for all.
> My card has the Samsung mem and I have no problem. Go figure.


It's a hardware issue. It can't be fixed with drivers.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's fine with me. I'm focused on keeping the GPU core cool. I can deal with the heat it pumps out. My 670 SLI dumps tons of heat while running games. That's not the issue for me. My ambient temps are well taken care of. I'm looking more at the price per performance. Nvidia does have their power usage in check.


How does my 660Ti scores look compared to your 670? they are basically the same card with a different number.
Now that rebranding cards with different numbers should not be allowed and they both do it.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> It's a hardware issue. It can't be fixed with drivers.


What memory is on your card? GPUZ will tell you that?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> How does my 660Ti scores look compared to your 670? they are basically the same card with a different number.
> Now that rebranding cards with different numbers should not be allowed and they both do it.


I'll have to run the single cards, but my highest SLI score in Fire Strike is 11462 with drivers from last year of course.

With the latest drivers in Fire Strike I have some issues with the drivers [ video driver crashing, instability, game crashing color bleeding etc ]. So I fell back to 353.06 and I'm only getting 10930 in Fire Strike at the moment.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> What memory is on your card? GPUZ will tell you that?


That isn't the problem. There's something turned off inside the GPU itself so that it can't effectively use the last 512MB of VRAM. Nvidia engineers decided disabling one sector of L2 cache to keep the GTX 970 from performing as well as the GTX 980 was the best course of action. Typical engineer mentality. Unfortunately this means the 512MB of VRAM directly linked to this sector of L2 cache gets accessed at much lower speed. A better solution would have been either limit the GPU in some other fashion or just make that sector of memory completely inaccessible and market the card as having 3.5GB.


----------



## bill1024

"Typical engineer mentality."

I hear that, some of the things I have seen them come up with.
All I could think is what were they smoking when they dreamed this up.
They get paid well to boot.
They should have to work in the field for 2-5 years and see how things really work before they design the product.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think the TL; DR is that NVIDIA reassigned lots of transistors in GM204 that would otherwise be for FP64; increased the density, increased the render ratio and then wound the clockspeed up.

It's a pretty hardcore game-optimised and lean chip, different in layout, content and capabilities than the previous NVIDIA chips, and very different than AMD's offerings.

Both companies are STILL on 28nm so some interesting engineering solutions are being offered [like the RAM on Fury X].

Why are you guys falling out over it?









Heat can be an issue with the 970 - the chip downclocks at 80c!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My 970 maxes out at 79 with fans running at 50%, 77 with fans running at 100%. On top of that, I can't hear the fans above anything else in my system.


----------



## cb750rob

Moving to a slightly different topic;







but not much......

I have just bought another xfx r7850 dd to crossfire my rig. Not the best choice but hopefully for £57 it is probably the best solution performance-wise I can afford without paying three times that.

Thing is its going to be a tight squeeze on my ex58-ud3r.

gofasterstripes how are you managing heat wise with yours?

any pics of your final solution appreciated and suggestions welcome from all.







-


----------



## OCmember

Ok guys, this is a thread about 1366 Xeons Westmere and Gulftown. Lets not get off topic.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> gofasterstripes how are you managing heat wise with yours?


I have a piece of a clothes peg prying my cards apart. The card that is facing the other is highly airflow starved and hits the temp limit under benchmarking, even with the fans set to an x+20% curve. My case airflow is good, though the throughput is not extreme [1x140 and 1x120 exhaust].



Blower GPUs may fare very slightly better. They also won't heat the
Quote:


> 1366 Xeons Westmere and Gulftown










up like mine do.

The final solution will be this:

...when I get around to it.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Ok guys, this is a thread about 1366 Xeons Westmere and Gulftown. Lets not get off topic.


I know









Once my graphics card arrives I'll do a review on how the x5660 does with the setup.









promise........


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Ok guys, this is a thread about 1366 Xeons Westmere and Gulftown. Lets not get off topic.


I don't mind talking about other things as well. My topic is open to all tech conversation as it will relate to X58 and our PCs anyways. It always revolves and come back around to our beloved platform anyways. This isn't limited to simply CPU discussions. I'll definitely love to see how newer GPUs perform on the X58+HexaCore\Westmere PCI 2.0 platform.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> I know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once my graphics card arrives I'll do a review on how the x5660 does with the setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> promise........


Sounds great.







What GPU will you be getting? I'm getting some upgrades as well that I'll be posting soon. I decided to get a SATA III PCIe card. It won't affect my x16\x16 SLI bandwidth either. I'll be posting those results to see what the X58 platform can crank out with a add on card. I also saw a USB 3.1 add on card.


----------



## cb750rob

I Like what you did there......








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The final solution will be this:
> 
> ...when I get around to it.


MMM Like the clothespeg.

Temps are an issue. beacause my *Xeon X5660* is overclocked I dont fancy temps getting much higher. It tops out at 70-78c depending on ambient when I bench or do heavy video encoding.

Where did you see the etender cable? That may be an answer to stop my *Xeon X5660* from overheating.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I just googled it. They're on Amazon. I'm not exactly sure how I'd support the card yet, mind.

Motherboard standoffs in the anchoring holes and something else at the bottom?


----------



## spdaimon

Sounds like a good idea. All I've seen is people use those PCIe risers with egg crates for cheap miner. lol.. 'course, its getting a bitcoin miner type case, but I don't think we'd want to go there.

Edit: I should say scrypt miner case.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't mind talking about other things as well. My topic is open to all tech conversation as it will relate to X58 and our PCs anyways. It always revolves and come back around to our beloved platform anyways. This isn't limited to simply CPU discussions. I'll definitely love to see how newer GPUs perform on the X58+HexaCore\Westmere PCI 2.0 platform.


Thanks Kana








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sounds great.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What GPU will you be getting? I'm getting some upgrades as well that I'll be posting soon. I decided to get a SATA III PCIe card. It won't affect my x16\x16 SLI bandwidth either. I'll be posting those results to see what the X58 platform can crank out with a add on card. I also saw a USB 3.1 add on card.


It's an XFX R7850 Double D to go with my existing one for crossfire.

I know that there are better options out there but I:


Don't have much cash
Don't want to upgrade my whole platform as I'm pretty chuffed with the performance this has given me on a limited budget (in fact I would say it if buying used on a budget you can't beat it)
want to appeal to the pikey in me








Will be happy to review the performance and do some benches to share with you all once I get it. - Hopefully postman comes tomorrow or Monday.

Interested in how you get on with the sata 3 pci card and maybe the usb3.1. - let us know please.

@Gofasterstripes I like the idea of the ribbon cable but where to put it is the thing. I could mount it in the aux slot where my Arc Midi has a fan controller at the moment but would need a long flexi crossfire bridge. It would look pants though. Also totally buggering up the look of my brand new windowed sidepanel I have just bought.

So clothes peg it may have to be. A bit ghetto and you can say your rig has "wood"


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> So clothes peg it may have to be.


Don't go crazy, remember there's 75W [?20A?] coming through that slot for power.

You don't want the slot burning out due to a poor contact.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Don't go crazy, remember there's 75W [?20A?] coming through that slot for power.
> 
> You don't want the slot burning out due to a poor contact.


Well this is what I will have to play with; the bottom card in the picture is a fekked one that I bought hoping to repair. Unfortunately, It has a knackered power IC chip (I think)

But the dimensions are the same, my new one will be exactly the same as the top one.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Have you taken the shroud off those?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Have you taken the shroud off those?


It does look like it but I can't be sure, they release so many editions with different aftermarket cooling nowaday its just impossible to know anymore


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Have you taken the shroud off those?


No I haven't. Here is one from a different angle



But I may try it to see whether it makes a difference


----------



## gofasterstripes

I literally cannot understand how those two angles are of the same card. My mind is clearly blown, maybe I should put this reefer out....
Quote:


> But I may try it to see whether it makes a difference


Only if you can get them back on again! All cards with this sort of cooler have a similar design, I would imagine it serves a purpose :/

Our cards look very similar, I would imagine you'll run into similar issues to me. What's the TDP? 220W?


----------



## Carrotsfart

I'm confused, I just did some googling and it says that these chips have 16 PCIe lanes, so wouldn't that mean that you couldn't run a PCIe SATA expansion for SSD along with SLI, Kana?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

As far as I remember, PCI Express lanes on X58 motherboards were controlled by the chipset, not the processor.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Ah, there's 40 lanes, that makes far more sense.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Ah, there's 40 lanes, that makes far more sense.


Yeah there are 40 total lanes. We only have access to 36. So it's 100% safe to say 36 total PCIe lanes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I'm confused, I just did some googling and it says that these chips have 16 PCIe lanes, so wouldn't that mean that you couldn't run a PCIe SATA expansion for SSD along with SLI, Kana?


If I occupy all of the PCIe x16 ports I can still run x16 + x16 [SLI] + x4 [expansion etc] = 36 lanes. So it shouldn't effect my SLI setup. x4 should give me plenty of bandwidth. Around 2GB\s in each direction from what I can remember. We will see how everything works out soon.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Haha, my good old Xeons kicking and my 290x quadfire is what like 2 years old and it keeps getting updates from AMD.

Using stilts bios for 1075/1375 clocks default with an older driver



Using stilts bios for 1075/1375 clocks default with the 15.7 newest



I am tempted to oc higher and push my psu to the limits for a 10k run


----------



## gofasterstripes

Don't like NVIDIA and in the market for an air cooled GPU?

CLICKY

@DividebyZERO- amazing score. What do you get with regular Firestrike?

EDIT - While NVIDIA might have been gimping their cards, AMD has improved the performance of their older models [290x and 7970 etc] with new drivers


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Don't like NVIDIA and in the market for an air cooled GPU?
> 
> CLICKY
> 
> @DividebyZERO- amazing score. What do you get with regular Firestrike?
> 
> EDIT - While NVIDIA might have been gimping their cards, AMD has improved the performance of their older models [290x and 7970 etc] with new drivers


I will have to do a run, i most likely will be cpu limited due to clock speeds are 3.6 i think due to my psu limits. I have been meaning to get a psu dual adapter and just havent done it yet.

I am waiting to see how well fury performs because im debating it or migrating to 390x 8gb over my 4gb now. Still not sold on 4gb hbm vs 8gb ddr5 on high resolutions.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Yes that is to be expected, since all newer AMD cards are based on the GCN architecture so hopefully improvements made for Fury X also help other GCN cards (of course this won't always work, but you can hope)


----------



## chessmyantidrug

The entire Fury line is out of my price range. I like where AMD is headed, though. The next round of GPUs in a die shrink should be good for everyone.


----------



## gofasterstripes

In that case get a 7970







My Sapphic Sapphire Vapor X was pretty beastly.



http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4165785

EDIT - All those clocks are wrong


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> EDIT - While NVIDIA might have been gimping their cards, AMD has improved the performance of their older models [290x and 7970 etc] with new drivers


Agreed. I have seen a 1000 point increase in 3dmark11 between the 13series drivers and the 15.6 betas I'm using now.


----------



## prznar1

So ive finally moved to xeon x5650. Still in delivery but now i wonder about upgrading my video card. I have gtx 580 atm, and want to move to something with dx 12 from amd video cards range. What should i get to not overkill my machine? What kind of card this cpu will be able to feed?


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> So ive finally moved to xeon x5650. Still in delivery but now i wonder about upgrading my video card. I have gtx 580 atm, and want to move to something with dx 12 from amd video cards range. What should i get to not overkill my machine? What kind of card this cpu will be able to feed?


stripes is running SLI 970's, Kana has SLI 670's and is planning on upgrading to I believe Crossfire* Fury X's? I'm not sure whether the CPU will bottleneck the cards, i'd doubt it if they're running such high end set ups. You should be sweet to run any single card solution you like. I'm contemplating upgrading to a 280x but have no reason to at all unfortunately.

EDIT: had to fix my lack of attention xD


----------



## prznar1

so r9 280 will suit me very well







thx for info.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> So ive finally moved to xeon x5650. Still in delivery but now i wonder about upgrading my video card. I have gtx 580 atm, and want to move to something with dx 12 from amd video cards range. What should i get to not overkill my machine? What kind of card this cpu will be able to feed?


I bought an ASUS R9 290X for my X58 rig a week after GTA V was released. Unfortunately, my X5650 actually did limit the card at stock clocks; a mild overclock to 3.8 GHz solved the problem, however







I would buy a Sapphire R9 390 if I were you (you might even be able to unlock it to a R9 390X if you're lucky)


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Have there been any accounts of a 390 being unlocked to a 390X?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> stripes is running SLI 970's, Kana has SLI 670's and is planning on upgrading to I believe SLI Fury X's? I'm not sure whether the CPU will bottleneck the cards, i'd doubt it if they're running such high end set ups. You should be sweet to run any single card solution you like. I'm contemplating upgrading to a 280x but have no reason to at all unfortunately.


I really wanted the EVGA 980 Ti Hybrid or the Gigabyte 980 Ti OC Gaming. Since then I've changed my mind. I'm skipping Nvidia this time around until they get their act together & stop the crap. Dual Fury X does sound good. I'm either getting Fury X for it's 4K advantage or the Fury X2 [dual card] later this year. The 295x2 is still performing well. It's good to see AMD keep their drivers going for the flagship from last year. Whatever I get I want it to have a water cooled solution. The power consumption is the least of my worries. Money isn't a issue and I have no problem paying my bills.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Have there been any accounts of a 390 being unlocked to a 390X?


Not sure to be honest. But if you're interested you should definitely ask here.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'm curious more than anything. I don't plan on buying either card.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> stripes is running SLI 970's, Kana has SLI 670's and is planning on upgrading to I believe *SLI Fury X's*? I'm not sure whether the CPU will bottleneck the cards, i'd doubt it if they're running such high end set ups. You should be sweet to run any single card solution you like. I'm contemplating upgrading to a 280x but have no reason to at all unfortunately.


Crossfire Fury X's for AMD cards


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Have there been any accounts of a 390 being unlocked to a 390X?


Usually it's only possible with new early version production chips.


----------



## 2010rig

Hey guys,

I'm just wondering, what kind of volts are you guys using for your MAX OC's?

I've tweaked and got my chip stable at 4.6, and I'm pretty sure I could go higher, since it's only using 1.336 V, and my temps are in the 70's with Real world usage.


----------



## DividebyZERO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm just wondering, what kind of volts are you guys using for your MAX OC's?
> 
> I've tweaked and got my chip stable at 4.6, and I'm pretty sure I could go higher, since it's only using 1.336 V, and my temps are in the 70's with Real world usage.


Grats on the xeon and oc, how does it compare to your old cpu?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> stripes is running SLI 970's, Kana has SLI 670's and is planning on upgrading to I believe SLI Fury X's? I'm not sure whether the CPU will bottleneck the cards, i'd doubt it if they're running such high end set ups. You should be sweet to run any single card solution you like. I'm contemplating upgrading to a 280x but have no reason to at all unfortunately.


I wish they had mantle on every single game as there is no bottleneck. I had an FX 8320 down clocked to 2.6GHz and I had no bottlenecks at all with mantle enabled on a 290X
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm just wondering, what kind of volts are you guys using for your MAX OC's?
> 
> I've tweaked and got my chip stable at 4.6, and I'm pretty sure I could go higher, since it's only using 1.336 V, and my temps are in the 70's with Real world usage.


Really nice oc. Gratz

Any chances you can share the batch number of your processor ?


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DividebyZERO*
> 
> Grats on the xeon and oc, how does it compare to your old cpu?


Thanks! I haven't ran enough benches to compare, but pretty much in line with the OP's findings.

Cinebench 11.5 = 11.49, my previous best was 7.29.

Cinebench 15 = 1017

My max OC before was 4.2 on the 930. Hitting 4.6 was quite easy and effortless, and the system just feels much more stable.

I'm really happy with this chip, since I got it for about $100 shipped, *brand new*.

I was able to *validate* 4758








http://valid.x86.fr/ymalyh



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I wish they had mantle on every single game as there is no bottleneck. I had an FX 8320 down clocked to 2.6GHz and I had no bottlenecks at all with mantle enabled on a 290X
> Really nice oc. Gratz
> 
> Any chances you can share the batch number of your processor ?


Is there a way to read that with software?

Otherwise, I just bought some RAM, which will be here in a couple days, I can check the chip then, since it didn't come with a retail box.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@2010rig
I take it that there are no more of these brand new CPU's?

Im 1.28-1.264 volts (loaded) for 4.0 (ht+cstates on) with 5650 on a UD7 v2.

Your overclock is very high for the voltage, nice. How stable is it? Like, 20x IBT max? Prime95?

Aaah, i used to have a 470, till it melted. Got about +25% clocks on it, though the noise was extreme! Firestrike? I always wondered what a xeon would do for it....


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @2010rig
> I take it that there are no more of these brand new CPU's?
> 
> Im 1.28-1.264 volts (loaded) for 4.0 (ht+cstates on) with 5650 on a UD7 v2.
> 
> Your overclock is very high for the voltage, nice. How stable is it? Like, 20x IBT max? Prime95?
> 
> Aaah, i used to have a 470, till it melted. Got about +25% clocks on it, though the noise was extreme! Firestrike? I always wondered what a xeon would do for it....


I did grab the last one from that seller, but I'm sure if you look on eBay you can find them.

I haven't done any Prime95 testing, but have passed 20 Standard IBT runs.

I will do 20x IBT Max runs now.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Don't expend any effort on my behalf









It doesn't suit my ethos


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Don't expend any effort on my behalf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't suit my ethos


A 10x Max test is running now.









My first run crashed immediately, so I gave the QPI & RAM more volts. So far it's passed 3 with 1.52V But the Temps have reached 85C. And are mostly in the low 80's.

Does 80 Gflops sound about right with HT on?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@2010rig

That's too high a voltage and temperature!

Stop and read back through the thread. My phone hates this forum, i cant type it out in detail.

<1.35v (vcc/vtt. Vtt is very sensitive, beware) < 78c!


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @2010rig
> 
> That's too high a voltage and temperature!
> 
> Stop and read back through the thread. My phone hates this forum, i cant type it out in detail.
> 
> <1.35v (vcc/vtt. Vtt is very sensitive, beware) < 78c!


Ok, stopped it @ 7 runs.









Seeing those temps in the mid 80's were too hot for comfort.

If you look at my previous screenshot in Adobe Premiere, the Temps were in the 70's, which is more typical real world usage.

I'm gonna continue tweaking tomorrow.









btw - here's a brand new 5670 for $139
http://www.ebay.com/itm/INTEL-XEON-SLBV7-IBM-SIX-CORE-6C-CPU-PROCESSOR-X5670-2-93GHz-12MB-CACHE-LGA-1366-/151659392260?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item234f9aad04


----------



## gofasterstripes

With IBT using 10GB, I'm 56GF with HT on, and 87 with it off at 4GHz and 3200 Uncore, 1600/8/8/8/24 RAM

I read recently that as chips heat up, they draw more current, and therefore warm up further.

Thermal runaway!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> A 10x Max test is running now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My first run crashed immediately, so I gave the QPI & RAM more volts. So far it's passed 3 with 1.52V But the Temps have reached 85C. And are mostly in the low 80's.


1.52v on the RAM and QPI? 85C = no no no. You should never go above 81c-82c. You'll definietly want 75c or lower and 78c [as gofasterstripes stated] or lower is decent as well. I knew those clocks [4.8-4.6] wouldn't be stable with the low voltage usage. The heat becomes a big issues after passing 4.2Ghz. You'll probably have to add a little more to the CPU voltage, but don't burn up other things for stability. You'll also have to do something about the heat. IBT\Prime95 etc are great for ensuring that your current rig is ready for anything. The last thing you want is to be working on something only to see your PC randomly BSOD and reboot.
Quote:


> Does 80 Gflops sound about right with HT on?


If you are talking about 4.6Ghz and not 4.8Ghz then yeah it's low to me. At 3.8Ghz I'm getting 80Glops. I got much more at 4.6Ghz.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> With IBT using 10GB, I'm 56GF with HT on, and 87 with it off at 4GHz and 3200 Uncore, 1600/8/8/8/24 RAM
> 
> I read recently that as chips heat up, they draw more current, and therefore warm up further.
> 
> Thermal runaway!


I've never really tried running the test with no HT. I've always used HT. 87Gflops with HT off is pretty good.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Yeah, I was pushing 70 GFlop at 3.8 GHz with HT on, 8GB of RAM on maximum, 1600/9/9/9/24 RAM. I don't have a screenshot, I was embarassed to take one because of Kana's results, if you really want one I could probably fire up IBT for a pass before I go to bed


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Kana-Maru - are you saying you get 80GF @ 3.8 with HT on and Circa 10,000MB RAM in use by IBT?

I really don't understand the numbers IBT gives!

Cinebench R15 is 927ish at 4.0 for me, and a bit over 1k at 4.6GHz

@Carrotsfart yeah give us a figure, and quote clocks, HT and RAM figure used [the drop down is presets, but you can enter manual figures too]









@alancsalt Alright then, I'll burn less posts up


----------



## Carrotsfart

Ugh, when I finished overclocking it probably 3 weeks ago now it passed 20 passes of IBT on max no issues, had no issues with it since then either. Now I can't even pass a test to post my results. Not sure whether it's because it was never stable to start with or whether the board has destroyed the chip or what. I'll deal with it tomorrow and send through the results.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Carrotsfart :/

It might just be a glitch or a wrong setting. Cross check your LLC settings, RAM timings and voltages. If you have a Gigabyte board ensure you have DES running to control the VRMs correctly.

It might well be an easy fix


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Ugh, when I finished overclocking it probably 3 weeks ago now it passed 20 passes of IBT on max no issues, had no issues with it since then either. Now I can't even pass a test to post my results. Not sure whether it's because it was never stable to start with or whether the board has destroyed the chip or what. I'll deal with it tomorrow and send through the results.


If it wasn't stable it might have corrupted OS files, if you can get into the OS run an sfc /scannow command in an admin level elevated command prompt


----------



## Carrotsfart

It could well be a corrupt file in the OS, it randomly spat my product key out the other day, deactivating windows. I assumed it was something to do with my OC settings changing around making it think there was different hardware :/

Update: file checker says everything's hunky dory. I'm going to stick my boot drive in the Intel SATA 2 ports tomorrow and see how it goes. Since I overclocked I did swap from IDE to AHCI using the reg edit fix, so that may be part of the issue. Good thing I've got a week before I go back to uni hey?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I would imagine it's a hardware thing if

1 - it passed when you would up the volts

2 - IBT isn't really a lot to corrupt, it's a straight flood of the chip with a massive calculation, not a lot else goes on.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Some Qs

I cant post with ram at higher speed than 1750 mhz, are there any settings to tweak for this?
Secondly, it seems lower bclk, higher multi is more stable than lower multi higher bclk.
Again, which settings can help with high (200) bclk?

I can do 160 bclk on my x5670 with all voltages default and all power features enabled (turbo c states etc.).
I do have llc level 1 enabled but it might not even need that. Very pleased with this result.
With these settings i get around 40 gflops HT on 70 off (ibt max). 1600 ram single channel 8g 9-9-9.

4.4 ghz with 200 blck still seems to be very hard. Also, when it crashes in IBT, it is always a nasty blue screen or hard lock crash.
I tried 184 bclk with turbo enabled and with similar voltages got wrong result in IBT but no BSOD or hard lock.
I really think 200 bclk is somewhat less stable.

Currently using relatively small freezer 13 cooler, which is performing great. Seems hardly wore than evo 212.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 1.52v on the RAM and QPI? 85C = no no no. You should never go above 81c-82c. You'll definietly want 75c or lower and 78c [as gofasterstripes stated] or lower is decent as well. I knew those clocks [4.8-4.6] wouldn't be stable with the low voltage usage.


That meant to say 1.352, RAM was 1.65, and I think it's my RAM that isn't 100%,since I can't find the proper timing settings.

Will try again when my new RAM shows up. I'm sure I will have to back off to 4.4 - 4.5 due to Temps. I may also get an AIO to keep the temps in check.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Set your core/uncore to default and try memtest. IIRC its on the Ubuntu bootable .iso, or d/l the bootable version, from somewhere...


----------



## OCmember

Any of you guys running water cooling setups? Custom or AIO?

I've been asking a lot of questions trying to figure out the best parts for a custom loop. I decided on a Heatkiller 3.0, and the MCR 320 Drive Rev3 Pump and Res integrated into the Rad. Sound like a good combo? I almost went for redundant pumps with an Apogee Drive II but didn't get much feed back on it..


----------



## 2010rig

Alright, I've backed off to 4.5, and just did a run with *HT OFF.*

Can anyone post an IBT run on High @ 4.5 with HT ON & OFF? Just curious to see the Gflops.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Kana-Maru - are you saying you get 80GF @ 3.8 with HT on and Circa 10,000MB RAM in use by IBT?
> 
> I really don't understand the numbers IBT gives!


I'm saying that I get 80Gflops @ 3.8Ghz with HT on. There are more programs that can test Gflops than IBT. I simply use IBT + 10 runs to get a GFLOP average.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Any of you guys running water cooling setups? Custom or AIO?
> 
> I've been asking a lot of questions trying to figure out the best parts for a custom loop. I decided on a Heatkiller 3.0, and the MCR 320 Drive Rev3 Pump and Res integrated into the Rad. Sound like a good combo? I almost went for redundant pumps with an Apogee Drive II but didn't get much feed back on it..


I was thinking custom loop last year. I was going to purchase one of those XSPC Raystorm kits. There were a few that caught my eye. My PC is on while I'm away from it most of the time so I didn't want to worry about leakage. I decided to stick with my AIO CPU cooler. My next GPU will definitely be AIO as well. I've posted how well the AIO cools my CPU. The delta fan inside my case keeps my North-bridge in check. AIO is simply easier for me when it comes to upgrading or changing out specific components in my case.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> You're comparing apples and plutonium. The GTX 970 _does_ have 4GB, but 512MB of it is significantly slower than the other 3584MB. You only experience decreased performance if the GPU has to access that 512MB, which isn't very often and makes the issue not big. If the GPU had to frequently access that VRAM, then it would be a problem and I highly doubt the video card would have ever hit the market.


4k wasn't that mainstream as it is now, i was one of the early adapter for 4k and right away i noticed issues when i was running them in sli and often times it would push past 3.7gb.

it only wasn't a real issue cause at the time no one was pushing past that 3.5gb barrier. but as 4k becomes more mainstream more and more people will notice it. hence why it's not a good investment


----------



## gofasterstripes

@2010rig that's too high for me, sorry. Can't help









@Kana-Maru I think the RAM in use is also crucial. Benchmarking with IBT seems not to be it's forte. Cinebench is a fairly straightforward test of computational throughout, I think I prefer it


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I was thinking custom loop last year. I was going to purchase one of those XSPC Raystorm kits. There were a few that caught my eye. My PC is on while I'm away from it most of the time so I didn't want to worry about leakage. I decided to stick with my AIO CPU cooler. My next GPU will definitely be AIO as well. I've posted how well the AIO cools my CPU. The delta fan inside my case keeps my North-bridge in check. AIO is simply easier for me when it comes to upgrading or changing out specific components in my case.


I am in the same boat of easy. I wanted something similar to the designs of AIO. Also didn't want to run too many tubes. Putting the tubing over my







DangerDen or Bitspower Barbs







, was very difficult. Even when heating the tubing up with a hair dryer and then sliding the tubing over the barbs. That's why I jumped when I seen the MCR 320 Drive Rev2 radiator with a built/integrated reservoir and pump. I wanted redundant pumps and thought about the Apogee Drive II with an integrated pump. Still would like to have gone with it but after searching around I came upon the Heatkiller 3.0 block which I then remembered was KING for 1366. I just hope the installation design doesn't allow me to over-tighten the block to the board which is one reason why I love the Megahalems. You can't over-tighten it.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Some Qs
> 
> I cant post with ram at higher speed than 1750 mhz, are there any settings to tweak for this?
> Secondly, it seems lower bclk, higher multi is more stable than lower multi higher bclk.
> Again, which settings can help with high (200) bclk?
> 
> I can do 160 bclk on my x5670 with all voltages default and all power features enabled (turbo c states etc.).
> I do have llc level 1 enabled but it might not even need that. Very pleased with this result.
> With these settings i get around 40 gflops HT on 70 off (ibt max). 1600 ram single channel 8g 9-9-9.
> 
> 4.4 ghz with 200 blck still seems to be very hard. Also, when it crashes in IBT, it is always a nasty blue screen or hard lock crash.
> I tried 184 bclk with turbo enabled and with similar voltages got wrong result in IBT but no BSOD or hard lock.
> I really think 200 bclk is somewhat less stable.
> 
> Currently using relatively small freezer 13 cooler, which is performing great. Seems hardly wore than evo 212.


Have you tried loosening your RAM timings? My RAM can run CAS 6 at 1600MHz just fine, but I have to loosen it to CAS 7 somewhere between 1650 and 1700. I loosen the other timings as well.

It's hard to help you figure out a good overclock with a high BCLK and low multiplier if we don't know what your maximum BCLK is. Have you isolated your max BCLK? To do this, you turn your multiplier down and raise your BCLK by 10 until you get instability. This puts you in the right ballpark. Go back down to your last stable BCLK and raise it by 5. If it's still unstable, drop it down by 1 until you find stability. Alternatively, you can go up by 1 from your last stable BCLK and do that until you find instability. This will isolate your maximum BCLK. Then you can start mixing and matching BCLK and multiplier to figure out which settings you like best.

Also make sure your uncore frequency is double your RAM frequency. If you still can't find stability, try decreasing your uncore frequency a little bit. When you decrease the uncore ratio, you have to loosen RTL (round trip latency) slightly. You want your uncore ratio as close to 2:1 as possible, preferably 2:1. Higher than 2:1 would give slightly better performance, but the faster your RAM the less leeway you'll have because you can't run your uncore frequency over 4000MHz.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ Have you done more research Nvidia as of late. I love how you basically called me a liar and said my ramblings didn't something something something research. Then when I post the actual results you go all hush hush. Then again it's easy to dismiss Nvidia crap move on to something else only to see history repeat itself.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ^ Have you done more research Nvidia as of late. I love how you basically called me a liar and said my ramblings didn't something something something research. Then when I post the actual results you go all hush hush. Then again it's easy to dismiss Nvidia crap move on to something else only to see history repeat itself.


I gave up on the discussion because it was clear neither would convince the other of changing their mind. I imagine that hasn't changed. Benchmarks indicate the 780 Ti beat the 970, but that's neither here nor there. I don't know why you bother bringing it back up.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I gave up on the discussion because it was clear neither would convince the other of changing their mind. I imagine that hasn't changed. Benchmarks indicate the 780 Ti beat the 970, but that's neither here nor there. I don't know why you bother bringing it back up.


I gave you links and did a little research for you. Still you called me liar and I never take that lightly. There's nothing to see. A 960 shouldn't outperform a 780 and a 4GB 3.5GB 970 shouldn't outperform a 780 Ti. That simply shouldn't happen/ Nvidia Marketing at it's best. smh. It's ok you can give up on the discussion again. Just don't call me a liar because you don't know something.


----------



## kckyle

i'm looking at ssd again. are you guys sure there are no affordable pcie ssd that can work with x58 platform?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I gave you links and did a little research for you. Still you called me liar and I never take that lightly. There's nothing to see. A 960 shouldn't outperform a 780 and a 4GB 3.5GB 970 shouldn't outperform a 780 Ti. That simply shouldn't happen/ Nvidia Marketing at it's best. smh. It's ok you can give up on the discussion again. Just don't call me a liar because you don't know something.


A 960 doesn't outperform a 780 and a 970 doesn't outperform a 780 Ti so all is well and good on that front. I don't know why you continue to bring this up. I let it die because nothing productive will come from this. I don't understand the need to revive it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I finally got around to setting up my SATA III PCIe card tonight. I'll post a few benchmarks before I head to bed:

http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg

I'm using a SINGLE Samsung SSD 850 EVO by the way. I'll test RAID 0 later. So far everything is working perfectly. I got *4,074.34* in Anvil. Not bad.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> A 960 doesn't outperform a 780 and a 970 doesn't outperform a 780 Ti so all is well and good on that front. I don't know why you continue to bring this up. I let it die because nothing productive will come from this. I don't understand the need to revive it.


I posted the links. Read them. Keep looking at your overall picture if you choose. Nvidia must optimize their older cards ESPECIALLY the top of the line cards and the flagships. SMH. You support this behavior I get it.


----------



## kckyle

http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Digital-Predator-SHPM2280P2H-240G/dp/B00V01C4RK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1436936716&sr=8-1&keywords=pcie+ssd

will this work on x58?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Digital-Predator-SHPM2280P2H-240G/dp/B00V01C4RK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1436936716&sr=8-1&keywords=pcie+ssd
> 
> will this work on x58?


I don't see why it wouldn't work with a X58. You should still get really good benchmark numbers. Looks like it'll pay for itself as long as you don't run into any major problems.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't see why it wouldn't work with a X58. You should still get really good benchmark numbers. Looks like it'll pay for itself as long as you don't run into any major problems.


yeah just ordered one, i wonder if i can swap in other m.2 size for bigger capacities, i'll report back on friday to see if its really working or not.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> yeah just ordered one, i wonder if i can swap in other m.2 size for bigger capacities, i'll report back on friday to see if its really working or not.


Sounds good. I think I might pick up one [maybe not that same brand] whenever I upgrade my GPUs.

Edit: You ordering one is making me want to order one!


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sounds good. I think I might pick up one [maybe not that same brand] whenever I upgrade my GPUs.
> 
> Edit: You ordering one is making me want to order one!


in the reviews i seen couple people reporting it works with their rampage 3 and p6x58d, i'm tired of stuck in 250mb/s wonder how much change i'll see with 1400mb/s

don't order one yet, let me report back to see if everything is cherry first


----------



## gofasterstripes

@chessmyantidrug@Kana-Maru

If you dig through this you'll see that you're both a bit right and a bit wrong. The 970 CAN surpass the 780 Ti, but the 960 [4GB Ed.] doesn't beat the 780.

And of course NVIDIA should continue to support their older cards, but I'm thinking chess knows that too.

Now, here's

a bunch of flowers and a box of chocolates, let's all be Dudely and abide, eh?

Love and peas, Sam/gfs


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @chessmyantidrug@Kana-Maru
> 
> If you dig through this you'll see that you're both a bit right and a bit wrong. The 970 CAN surpass the 780 Ti, but the 960 [4GB Ed.] doesn't beat the 780.


960 doesn't beat a 780 eh? Ok check below.

960 outperforming a 780 and a 970 outperforming a 780 Ti @ 1080p: http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page2.html
970 outperforming a 780 Ti @ 1440p: http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page3.html

That shouldn't happen period. Thankfully after so many complaints and after so many months Nvidia released a "Kepler fix" driver that still doesn't fix all issues. It also doesn't bring back the performance from older drivers. There was issues with the 900 series outperforming the previous flagships [$699+ cards] on the Nvidia forms. Nvidia deleted a lot of the post, but they kept popping up. The 970 is neck and neck with a $699+ GPU that was released 10 months prior. In some cases beating it.

Quote:


> And of course NVIDIA should continue to support their older cards, but I'm thinking chess knows that too.
> 
> Now, here's
> 
> a bunch of flowers and a box of chocolates, let's all be Dudely and abide, eh?


Love and peas, Sam/gfs

LOL pretty much. He got a good deal on the 970. I was "this" close to purchases 970 SLI as well last year. After Nvidia basically gave reviewers the WRONG specs and knowingly dismissed the fact that the remaining much needed 500MBs [in certain situations] run at only 1/7th the speed. They got sued and offered refunds........I figured I would wait. Now that I'm seeing performance decreasing and I've been having all kinds of issues with their drivers I think I'm going to wait even longer and go AMD this time around.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> in the reviews i seen couple people reporting it works with their rampage 3 and p6x58d, i'm tired of stuck in 250mb/s wonder how much change i'll see with 1400mb/s


To be honest 250MB/s - 550MB/s is pretty god for just about anything the average person needs. I guess if you'll be moving big data around it's good. I move a lot of data around due to the types of programs I use and the work I do. The extra speed definitely won't have us X58 users upgrading anytime soon due to SATA speeds















Quote:


> don't order one yet, let me report back to see if everything is cherry first


Too late. It's suppose to be delivered tomorrow.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

One set of benchmarks is clearly gospel to some people. Let's disregard all the others that don't back my statement otherwise I might be proven wrong. I wish that whole discussion would just die already like I thought it did a few pages ago. Having misinformation thrown in your face repeatedly gets old after a while.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 960 doesn't beat a 780 eh? Ok check below.
> 
> 960 outperforming a 780 and a 970 outperforming a 780 Ti @ 1080p: http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page2.html
> 970 outperforming a 780 Ti @ 1440p: http://www.techspot.com/review/1000-project-cars-benchmarks/page3.html
> 
> That shouldn't happen period. Thankfully after so many complaints and after so many months Nvidia released a "Kepler fix" driver that still doesn't fix all issues. It also doesn't bring back the performance from older drivers. There was issues with the 900 series outperforming the previous flagships [$699+ cards] on the Nvidia forms. Nvidia deleted a lot of the post, but they kept popping up. The 970 is neck and neck with a $699+ GPU that was released 10 months prior. In some cases beating it.
> Love and peas, Sam/gfs
> 
> LOL pretty much. He got a good deal on the 970. I was "this" close to purchases 970 SLI as well last year. After Nvidia basically gave reviewers the WRONG specs and knowingly dismissed the fact that the remaining much needed 500MBs [in certain situations] run at only 1/7th the speed. They got sued and offered refunds........I figured I would wait. Now that I'm seeing performance decreasing and I've been having all kinds of issues with their drivers I think I'm going to wait even longer and go AMD this time around.
> To be honest 250MB/s - 550MB/s is pretty god for just about anything the average person needs. I guess if you'll be moving big data around it's good. I move a lot of data around due to the types of programs I use and the work I do. The extra speed definitely won't have us X58 users upgrading anytime soon due to SATA speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late. It's suppose to be delivered tomorrow.


LOL YOU SUCK.

damn you next day shipping, w-e i'll get mine on friday, hopefully not encounter any problems and mobo detects the drive right away without much meddling


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK then, I promise I'll say no more on the subject









*goes bowling*


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> One set of benchmarks is clearly gospel to some people. Let's disregard all the others that don't back my statement otherwise I might be proven wrong. I wish that whole discussion would just die already like I thought it did a few pages ago. Having misinformation thrown in your face repeatedly gets old after a while.


It's not misinformation and it's not gospel. I've performed the benchmarks myself and Nvidia clearly either forgot about Kepler or purposely gave the 900 series the upper hand. After my issues it appears it was done on purpose. I told you to do the research and look around. I'm not going to every review site FOR YOU to prove that the 960 - 970 outperforms the 780 - 780 Ti in some games. There has been many discussions and frustration surrounding Nvidia. Don't call me a liar or try to downplay it now....... "One set of benchmarks is clearly gospel to some people". One set of benchmarks. I posted several links. You just don't want to read or look for more results. It's clear as daylight, but now since you are rocking the 970 I'm sure your judgement is clouded. Defending 3.5GBs instead of the Advertised 4GB is simply laughable and shows the state of average Nvidia user mindset. Yes I'm running Nvidia SLI, but that doesn't mean I'm brainwashed enough to ignore their crappy ways.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> LOL YOU SUCK.
> 
> damn you next day shipping, w-e i'll get mine on friday, hopefully not encounter any problems and mobo detects the drive right away without much meddling










I couldn't help myself and the shipping was so so cheap. I just had the money laying around. I've decided that I want the Fury X. I'm passing up Nvidia this time. I was eyeballing a Gigabyte 980 Ti OC and a EVGA 980 Ti Hybrid, but not after the past months of shame. Since the Fury X will be sold out for awhile I guess I'll get this.

I'm hoping I don't hit any problems, but I doubt if I do have any issues. It's going to be way more speed than I need, but for the high end programs I use I'd like to see how well they will perform.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's not misinformation and it's not gospel. I've performed the benchmarks myself and Nvidia clearly either forgot about Kepler or purposely gave the 900 series the upper hand. After my issues it appears it was done on purpose. I told you to do the research and look around. I'm not going to every review site FOR YOU to prove that the 960 - 970 outperforms the 780 - 780 Ti in some games. There has been many discussions and frustration surrounding Nvidia. Don't call me a liar or try to downplay it now....... "One set of benchmarks is clearly gospel to some people". One set of benchmarks. I posted several links. You just don't want to read or look for more results. It's clear as daylight, but now since you are rocking the 970 I'm sure your judgement is clouded. Defending 3.5GBs instead of the Advertised 4GB is simply laughable and shows the state of average Nvidia user mindset. Yes I'm running Nvidia SLI, but that doesn't mean I'm brainwashed enough to ignore their crappy ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I couldn't help myself and the shipping was so so cheap. I just had the money laying around. I've decided that I want the Fury X. I'm passing up Nvidia this time. I was eyeballing a Gigabyte 980 Ti OC and a EVGA 980 Ti Hybrid, but not after the past months of shame. Since the Fury X will be sold out for awhile I guess I'll get this.
> 
> I'm hoping I don't hit any problems, but I doubt if I do have any issues. It's going to be way more speed than I need, but for the high end programs I use I'd like to see how well they will perform.


yeah i'm going fury x route as well, after the 970 thing with nvidia i think i'll go back to team red for awhile.

the only thing i'm a bit reluctant about is whether i'll notice much day to day difference between sata 2 to pcie. not to mention i'm downgrading from 960gb to 240gb.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I did my own research. I considered getting a 780 Ti for quite a while since my research indicated it was slightly better than the 970, but I didn't want such a power hungry card. In the end I opted for the power efficiency of the 970 knowing the video memory issue is extremely unlikely to affect me.


----------



## prznar1

Installed xeon today and i have problems. My connection is getting seriously unstable

ping is jumping from 50 to over 9000 and back to 50 again

I have already lowered the qpi speed to lower temps on x58 chip and put a fan over it to even cool it further

so far it doesnt changed much. Also havent changed CPU back to i7 920. Hope i havent broke somehting in mobo. Never broke something before while changing cpu/gpu/cleaning and stuff like that...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> the only thing i'm a bit reluctant about is whether i'll notice much day to day difference between sata 2 to pcie. not to mention i'm downgrading from 960gb to 240gb.


I doubt if you see "much" difference. Well my SATA III PCIe seems more "snappier", but then again it was running a fresh OS install. Everything runs quickly on fresh installs. When it comes to moving large files and handling large amounts of data you could see a difference. Of course you have the obvious speed-ups such as faster installs. I posted the speed from my SATA III PCIe [single non RAID]. I used a CD to install the OS and it only took 10 minutes. Slow CD speeds.
Quote:


> yeah i'm going fury x route as well, after the 970 thing with nvidia i think i'll go back to team red for awhile.


Nice. I think it's a good move for gamers sake. Nvidia is going to far with their Apple+Dell-like proprietary software and hardware [G-sync]. I hope more devs learn from this in the future and stop alienating a decent amount of players by using so much Nvidia software. Then again Nvidia pays out so much for advertisements that it's probably difficult to say no.

Fury X is matching and even beating Nvidia [780 Ti\Titan X] at high resolutions in maxed out games. Reminds me of what the 295x2 did to the Titan-Z last year and I guess I can say this year as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Installed xeon today and i have problems. My connection is getting seriously unstable
> 
> ping is jumping from 50 to over 9000 and back to 50 again
> 
> I have already lowered the qpi speed to lower temps on x58 chip and put a fan over it to even cool it further
> 
> so far it doesnt changed much. Also havent changed CPU back to i7 920. Hope i havent broke somehting in mobo. Never broke something before while changing cpu/gpu/cleaning and stuff like that...


What do you mean ping? Are you talking about Deferred Procedure Call? If so I've heard about this happening. Just set everything to stock and see how the PC performs. Do you have the latest BIOS update?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I did my own research. I considered getting a 780 Ti for quite a while since my research indicated it was slightly better than the 970, but I didn't want such a power hungry card. In the end I opted for the power efficiency of the 970 knowing the video memory issue is extremely unlikely to affect me.


Well keep thinking about yourself because that type of marketing affects everyone. That's my biggest issue. That's pretty deceiving marketing as well. It will also have a effect on future marketing. Nvidia now knows that they can get away with anything thanks to their fans. If AMD does anything wrong or similar ot this you can count on countless headlines.

I love how you did your own research, but knew nothing about the issues users have discussed here with you. Just flat out lies right? Yeah I know. Common sense should tell you, as I told you a few pages back, that a $699.99+ GPU shouldn't be "slightly better" than a $329.99 - $379.99 GPU. Especially if you factor their release date into the equation. What's seriously the point of paying top dollar if Nvidia will gimp the drivers while lying to the public about the specs, whoops miscommunication, attempting to justify their actions and advertising 4GBs instead of 3.5GBs for their newer cards.

Knowing that the cards won't hurt YOU means nothing when there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of gamers checking out the cards. Unknowingly purchasing a GTX 970 or SLI configs only to be bogged down once leaving the 1080p resolution. 1440, 1600 and even 2160p would be possible with 4GBs. 3.5GBs will definitely limit you and make you lower more settings that you'd want.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What do you mean ping? Are you talking about Deferred Procedure Call? If so I've heard about this happening. Just set everything to stock and see how the PC performs. Do you have the latest BIOS update?


So far im running at stock. had to lower qpi to lowest setting (4.8 GT/s) because x58 chip was overheating. And ping in game, one infact. SWTOR so this narrows my problems. Other games are free from this problem (even better - lower then on i7 920 ). Lag is kind of strange, its for a moment normal, then its going sky high, then back to normal and high again...


----------



## gofasterstripes

@prznar1 x58chipset is ok for 70C

Check CPU core and uncore volts are below 1.3

then

Try Prime95 : Blend for 8 hours. If you can't run that you're nowhere near stable.

CPU temp must remain below 78 at all times, ESPECIALLY a stock


----------



## prznar1

running small fft now, cpu is below 70 all time (jumping from 65 to 68 on each core) no issues so far.


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK. If it runs for an hour or two, leave it running blend over night


----------



## prznar1

Cant. Im sleeping in same room. However i think that i have something seriously messed up in OS. Gonna do clean installation in weekend (new ssd coming) and see whats what.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> So far im running at stock. had to lower qpi to lowest setting (4.8 GT/s) because x58 chip was overheating. And ping in game, one infact. SWTOR so this narrows my problems. Other games are free from this problem (even better - lower then on i7 920 ). Lag is kind of strange, its for a moment normal, then its going sky high, then back to normal and high again...


Yeah that "might" be due to DCP or something. It causes certain things like Audio, or the LAN, or any component to basically have a huge lag\latency. I had the issue with my L5639, but I solved the issue. My issue was that the video was lagging behind the audio when I watched a Youtube video. I had a few other minor issues like static\fuzzy audio output.

Just follow what gofasterstripes said for now.


----------



## prznar1

However this problem is visible in only SWTOR.


----------



## eizen

Well I was in the club for about a day..then I tried to overclock my x5650 and it stopped working. I guess I killed it. Reset the bios and the machine just wouldn't bootup. Put back in my i7 920 and everything was working fine.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eizen*
> 
> Well I was in the club for about a day..then I tried to overclock my x5650 and it stopped working. I guess I killed it. Reset the bios and the machine just wouldn't bootup. Put back in my i7 920 and everything was working fine.


What kind of an oc did you do to kill it?!


----------



## eizen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hazardz*
> 
> What kind of an oc did you do to kill it?!


I used these settings:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?s=1843715ecc925f5cac591f36b55b6e34&p=37354979&postcount=10
Except for the CPU PLL which I left on auto. RAM was just left with higher timings, lower clock and default voltage.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hazardz*
> 
> What kind of an oc did you do to kill it?!


That's what I'd like to know! I pushed 1.4825v through mine and it still works fine...


----------



## eizen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> That's what I'd like to know! I pushed 1.4825v through mine and it still works fine...


Yeah...not sure what happened. But I'll try and see later if a days rest brought it back to life...uhu lol


----------



## 2010rig

My RAM just got delivered finally.

Will report back with batch ID. FYI, these are my BIOS settings. I've never gone above 1.8 for the PLL V.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @2010rig that's too high for me, sorry. Can't help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Kana-Maru I think the RAM in use is also crucial. Benchmarking with IBT seems not to be it's forte. Cinebench is a fairly straightforward test of computational throughout, I think I prefer it


What's your highest OC @gofasterstripes?

@Kana-Maru unless I've missed it, have you posted your BIOS settings anywhere?

General question, what is the best TIM to get? I used the one that came with my NH-D14 which is 5 years old now.


----------



## EvilMonk

Give it a try, some might work
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @prznar1 x58chipset is ok for 70C
> 
> Check CPU core and uncore volts are below 1.3
> 
> then
> 
> Try Prime95 : Blend for 8 hours. If you can't run that you're nowhere near stable.
> 
> CPU temp must remain below 78 at all times, ESPECIALLY a stock


As you said 70c is alright, I had higher temps before when my motherboard was in a smaller case and its been just fine for more than 2 years before I moved it into a full tower


----------



## Wickedtt

Hey ive had 5 xeons so far but my newest addition is a x5660 @ 4.9ghz 1.435v. But im on a 360mm rad and temps still like to creep in the low 80's. What kind of temps were you getting with your antec kana?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> @Kana-Maru unless I've missed it, have you posted your BIOS settings anywhere?


Never.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wickedtt*
> 
> Hey ive had 5 xeons so far but my newest addition is a x5660 @ 4.9ghz 1.435v. But im on a 360mm rad and temps still like to creep in the low 80's. What kind of temps were you getting with your antec kana?


4.9Ghz with only 1.435v. I can get 4.8Ghz @ 1.368v.

*Average Temps using IBT 100% Max*
Stock = 37c
3.8Ghz = 48c
4Ghz = 49c
4.6Ghz = 64c
4.8Ghz = 70c

Obviously the temps are much lower when I'm not benchmarking


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I love how you did your own research, but knew nothing about the issues users have discussed here with you. Just flat out lies right? Yeah I know. Common sense should tell you, as I told you a few pages back, that a $699.99+ GPU shouldn't be "slightly better" than a $329.99 - $379.99 GPU. Especially if you factor their release date into the equation. What's seriously the point of paying top dollar if Nvidia will gimp the drivers while lying to the public about the specs, whoops miscommunication, attempting to justify their actions and advertising 4GBs instead of 3.5GBs for their newer cards.
> 
> Knowing that the cards won't hurt YOU means nothing when there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of gamers checking out the cards. Unknowingly purchasing a GTX 970 or SLI configs only to be bogged down once leaving the 1080p resolution. 1440, 1600 and even 2160p would be possible with 4GBs. 3.5GBs will definitely limit you and make you lower more settings that you'd want.


By that logic, i7-5960X users should be really upset that their processor doesn't demolish the i7-5820K.

And once again, I'm not an Nvidia fan, I'm a price-to-performance fan. For people whom the video memory issue would have been a problem, they shouldn't be getting the card in the first place because their gaming resolution is likely above 1080p.

Now please stop bringing this back up. As much as I don't enjoy it, I'm sure others don't enjoy reading it. Let's agree to disagree. We clearly won't agree on anything else.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> And once again, I'm not an Nvidia fan, I'm a price-to-performance fan.


777:thumb:

























































































































Sure !


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> By that logic, i7-5960X users should be really upset that their processor doesn't demolish the i7-5820K.
> 
> And once again, I'm not an Nvidia fan, I'm a price-to-performance fan. For people whom the video memory issue would have been a problem, they shouldn't be getting the card in the first place because their gaming resolution is likely above 1080p.
> 
> Now please stop bringing this back up. As much as I don't enjoy it, I'm sure others don't enjoy reading it. Let's agree to disagree. We clearly won't agree on anything else.


You are speaking for others now? If people don't want to read something, trust me, they will skip right past it.

Now I see you are still trying to justify this so I'll address your 5960X - 5820K remark. The difference between the two is the fact that the stated *SPECS ARE TRUE*, unlike the 970 initial specs smh. The i7-5960X has more cores, PCIe lanes and L3 cache than the 5820K. The 5820K is a budget Hexa core and Intel purposely gimped the lanes. Long story short you'll get much better performance and gaming performance on the i7-5960X. That also shows in gaming benchmarks, but I'm sure you won't do the research on that either.
Quote:


> For people whom the video memory issue would have been a problem, they shouldn't be getting the card in the first place because their gaming resolution is likely above 1080p.


Yeah except some of those people got the wrong info went out and spent hundreds on the card later to find out that the card is gimped to death after 3.5GBs. Some people paid more for SLI setups. Which is why Nvidia was SLAPPED with a class action lawsuit and Nvidia was forced to reach out and offer refunds. Yeah you can Google and research that yourself as well before you start calling people liars again.

Also this is my topic. You don't dictate what is brought up and what is not. Don't like it, leave my topic now. You can use your price per performance line all you want, but at the end of the day you are just accepting a new low standard from yours truely = Nvidia - The way it's meant to be played. Maybe Nvidia will make up for this, but I doubt it. It's all about money money money. Oh that's right they haven't and won't take responsibility. They will only release the reason why they got it wrong several times and most people will accept it. Shady.

Edit:

You know what fine. I'll drop it, but don't call me a liar just because you don't understand or know something. That's all I ask. Good day sir.


----------



## kckyle

kana did you get your pcie ssd yet? mine is coming on friday. from the research it seems its a hit or miss with x58, some mobo will work some don't.

if this works i'm skipping skylake cannonlake kaby lake you name it lol, with 1400mb/s to play around with.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> kana did you get your pcie ssd yet? mine is coming on friday. from the research it seems its a hit or miss with x58, some mobo will work some don't.
> 
> if this works i'm skipping skylake cannonlake kaby lake you name it lol, with 1400mb/s to play around with.


Not yet. It's going to be here tomorrow morning or afternoon sometimes. I'm going to test it out after work. I have received my PCIe SSD III card . Here are a few results from my benchmarks:

http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg

That's using a single Samsung SSD 850 EVO. Pretty much 535 MB/s Read and 541 MB/s Write according to ATTO. 512K & 4K QD32 benchmarks in CrystalDisKMark was very good as well.

I'm still waiting on Skylake-E to see what it will offer, but it appears I'll be more interested in Cannonlake at this point. X58 is still serving me well. As far as the PCIe SSD goes I hope I can get near the 1400 MB/s Read and hopefully 600 MB/s - 1000 MB/s writes. The X58 has plenty of bandwidth for the tech.


----------



## cb750rob

@Kana-Maru @chessmyantidrug

Guys Please stop this now.

I have just gone back and read through all the posts and all I see is that you have two different viewpoints born out of your own experiences.

Both of you have previously helped a lot of people on this platform with good advice and put in a lot of time and effort. In fact I would say this has been one of the most neutral and informative threads I have read........

I'm sorry Kana i don't agree with what you are doing at the moment. I respect that this is "your" thread/topic, I love the fact that you have encouraged other subtopics because it all helps the X58 Xeon users get more out of the platform.

I have had a read back over the discourse between both of you and I can't see chess calling you a liar and I think your last post is out of order.

In fact, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the subtopic (and whether nvidia is right or wrong) I think it is you that has become gradually more aggressive just because chess is not agreeing to your point of view.

However, this is members forum and people will have differing views.

As for this:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Also this is my topic. You don't dictate what is brought up and what is not. Don't like it, leave my topic now.


That sir is a childish rant and you are doing yourself a disservice by it.

My own two cents: if we could all have the balls to take the moral high ground we would all be using amd fx processors right now and this topic wouldn't even exist.
However we are human and selfish and greedy and all of those other things that we say we don't like, we do when it suits us. Whether it is price vs performance or brand loyalty we choose what we want at the time.

Now please act like Gentlemen and stop.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Not yet. It's going to be here tomorrow morning or afternoon sometimes. I'm going to test it out after work. I have received my PCIe SSD III card . Here are a few results from my benchmarks:
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg
> 
> That's using a single Samsung SSD 850 EVO. Pretty much 535 MB/s Read and 541 MB/s Write according to ATTO. 512K & 4K QD32 benchmarks in CrystalDisKMark was very good as well.
> 
> I'm still waiting on Skylake-E to see what it will offer, but it appears I'll be more interested in Cannonlake at this point. X58 is still serving me well. As far as the PCIe SSD goes I hope I can get near the 1400 MB/s Read and hopefully 600 MB/s - 1000 MB/s writes. The X58 has plenty of bandwidth for the tech.


ew...only 500mb/s, how sata 6ish lol

i see couple people reporting being detected but it goes in and out quite a bit, my resolution is put the computer on sleep and shut down like once a month,

actually i don't even know why i'm spending all this money on pc anyway, i'm leaving for out of state grad school in a month it really beats the point lol


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Not yet. It's going to be here tomorrow morning or afternoon sometimes. I'm going to test it out after work. I have received my PCIe SSD III card . Here are a few results from my benchmarks:
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg
> 
> That's using a single Samsung SSD 850 EVO. Pretty much 535 MB/s Read and 541 MB/s Write according to ATTO. 512K & 4K QD32 benchmarks in CrystalDisKMark was very good as well.
> 
> I'm still waiting on Skylake-E to see what it will offer, but it appears I'll be more interested in Cannonlake at this point. X58 is still serving me well. As far as the PCIe SSD goes I hope I can get near the 1400 MB/s Read and hopefully 600 MB/s - 1000 MB/s writes. The X58 has plenty of bandwidth for the tech.


Which PCIe card did you get again?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hazardz*
> 
> Which PCIe card did you get again?


well I GOT the kingston predator 240gb pcie SSD, gonna be here on friday, but Kana apparently ordered it too and chose next day shipping. so it looks like hes gonna get a crack at it before i even get to open mine


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Not yet. It's going to be here tomorrow morning or afternoon sometimes. I'm going to test it out after work. I have received my PCIe SSD III card . Here are a few results from my benchmarks:
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg
> 
> That's using a single Samsung SSD 850 EVO. Pretty much 535 MB/s Read and 541 MB/s Write according to ATTO. 512K & 4K QD32 benchmarks in CrystalDisKMark was very good as well.
> 
> I'm still waiting on Skylake-E to see what it will offer, but it appears I'll be more interested in Cannonlake at this point. X58 is still serving me well. As far as the PCIe SSD goes I hope I can get near the 1400 MB/s Read and hopefully 600 MB/s - 1000 MB/s writes. The X58 has plenty of bandwidth for the tech.


Good results. On par with Marvell 9182 @ R3E BE.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Hey guys, thanks for sharing all the wealth of info. Here are some pics of my X58 rig:

Build (Specs are in Sig under "Kid Dynomite"):

Some more pics:


http://imgur.com/KDWuQ


Running IBT @very high:

I normally get around 81GFlops, but I had some stuff running at this time it would seem.

Kana~ I finally managed to build out my mATX x58 rig, but unfortunately it would seem I can't hit that 4.4ish @1.35Vish with this Xeon X5670. As such I settled for 1.312V for 4.2 (I was able to do it at 1.280V, but kept getting WHEA alerts in my Event log). I'll post my BIOS photo soon, but as it stands, I'm doing +0.2250mV on offset Vcore, 1.16V on IOH, 1.2875V on the QPI/DRAM, 1.45V on the DRAM Bus. Let me know if you have advice for me for trying to hit 4.4, I'd like to hit 200x22 to keep things nice, but perhaps this mobo OR cpu OR both are just not able to hit that.

Edit~ I'm also having problems waking from S3 Sleep on this rig. I had this problem with another Rampage III Gene running an X5670 w/GT 430 (for a friend). I've tried Bios 0502, and left everything at auto. I'm fresh out of ideas, and would like some help if there are some Rampage II/III Gene owners.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hey guys, thanks for sharing all the wealth of info. Here are some pics of my X58 rig:
> 
> Edit~ I'm also having problems waking from S3 Sleep on this rig. I had this problem with another Rampage III Gene running an X5670 w/GT 430 (for a friend). I've tried Bios 0502, and left everything at auto. I'm fresh out of ideas, and would like some help if there are some Rampage II/III Gene owners.


nice Job!!

What Graphics drivers are you using? AMD have just updated to catalyst 15.7 which solved some sleep issues for me


----------



## ghabhaducha

Hmm, I'm on a modded .inf Catalyst 15.15 Driver, I'll try to update to 15.7 and see if it solves anything. Interestingly, in the other system I had a X5670+RIIIG+6x2GB Corsair XMS3 I was using a Zotac GT430, and I still had a similar problem of not waking from sleep. I tried the bios that came with it when I bought it off of ebay (0502) and then later on the newest one (1003), and both had the same problem. Now, I do know that my 290x is running a UEFI vbios, which may cause the problems, but I don't think the GT 430 was. I'm gonna play around with 15.7 Drivers, and maybe try using a non-UEFI 290x bios. Goal is I wanna get S3 sleep mode working, and I can't seem to find too much literature on this online for my motherboard. For the record, S3 sleep works perfectly on my Sabertooth X58 w/X5650/HD6970 rig (gave to my dad).


----------



## prznar1

Swtor lag problems are gone. Fired the game in the morning, no problems with lag. Looks like server side problems.

Also im so pleased with this CPU, fired two games at same time, played YouTube video, was running some other minor stuf and PC was running strong. Games i was running are both quite heavy on CPU. Wot and swtor and both were running at stable 60 on max settings xD. No way i could do that with 920.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@2010rig 4.6GHz at 1.36-1.392v [unloaded and loaded]. LLC was off.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/3900_100#post_23867995

For Firestrike it seemed to make nearly no difference.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@ghabhaducha

Epic build!


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> nice Job!!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @ghabhaducha
> 
> Epic build!


Thanks guys!! All thanks to people like yourselves!

gofasterstripes~Now if only I can hit that 4.4! It doesn't seem like I will be able to <1.35V-ish. I just tried to put my memory timings to 10-10-10-28 @1600 (samsung green ram), uncore to 2400, qpi to 7200, vcore to 1.368V, v_qpi to what's in my IBT, v_ioh and v_ich to 1.15V, and finally 200x22, ran IBT @standard, and it failed. Oh well, looks like 4.2 it is. Still pretty fast, and I think I will be sticking with this for my mATX until there is a decent replacement (6-core minimum







)


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hmm, I'm on a modded .inf Catalyst 15.15 Driver, I'll try to update to 15.7 and see if it solves anything. Interestingly, in the other system I had a X5670+RIIIG+6x2GB Corsair XMS3 I was using a Zotac GT430, and I still had a similar problem of not waking from sleep. I tried the bios that came with it when I bought it off of ebay (0502) and then later on the newest one (1003), and both had the same problem. Now, I do know that my 290x is running a UEFI vbios, which may cause the problems, but I don't think the GT 430 was. I'm gonna play around with 15.7 Drivers, and maybe try using a non-UEFI 290x bios. Goal is I wanna get S3 sleep mode working, and I can't seem to find too much literature on this online for my motherboard. For the record, S3 sleep works perfectly on my Sabertooth X58 w/X5650/HD6970 rig (gave to my dad).


In my experience, buggy graphics drivers cause a lot of issues like this. And that is with both the red and the green team before anyone starts.....









You have to be even with your criticism here you know.









Two things:

1. check all your drivers are up to date including chipset ones - get them from Intel or whoever if you have to, not just your boards website as they can be a bit old in my humble experience.

2. I wish I was your Dad!

Good luck


----------



## gofasterstripes

@ghabhaducha

Can't you get the uncore to 3200? You'll get a worthwhile performance boost.

They usually manage 3200 I think. Mine is, on about 1.25v.

I would be EXTRA careful with uncore volts [vtt]. 1.3 is about the limit if you account for overshooting volts in addition to the BIOS settings.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Those were just for 4.4 stability. No, normally these are my settings:

X5670: 200*21 = 4200 (w/speedstep/c-states/etc enabled)
RAM: 200*8 = 1600 8-8-8-24-2T 6x4GB Samsung Green Ram
QPI: 200*18 = 3600 (x2, since QPI works twice per clock, so 7200)
Uncore: 200*16 (8x2) = 3200

v_core: +0.2250V offset
v_qpi: 1.2875V
v_ioh: 1.16V
v_dram: 1.45V
Rest = Auto

And the stress test results (temps+volts) are seen in my above post with pictures. I just toned down the Uncore, DRAM timings, while keeping the voltages the same to isolate only the CPU when trying to hit 4400, and it still failed...lol (well at 1.368V, but above that i'm not really comfortable). I recently acquired a X58A-UD7 rev1.0 from the marketplace, and I plan on building out a rig in my powermac g5 case (watercooled of course







), but that's a bit down the road; UNLESS I find a cheap Xeon X56xx that does 4.4 @1.3V, in which case I will be replacing the 3770k + MVE in my main FT02 rig with the Xeon + UD7v1


----------



## gofasterstripes

Good feedback. We have similar settings, though I am on UD7 V2 ["Or UD5 with stupid heatpipe in the box" as it also known].

To the future


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Good feedback. We have similar settings, though I am on UD7 V2 ["Or UD5 with stupid heatpipe in the box" as it also known].
> 
> To the future


you take that back it's not stupid!

it cooled my northbridge by 10c


----------



## gofasterstripes

Turn your CPU fan around











Not hot, like, eer 50c ish at 200bclk n some volts.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Good feedback. We have similar settings, though I am on UD7 V2 ["Or UD5 with stupid heatpipe in the box" as it also known].[/quote
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> you take that back it's not stupid!
> 
> it cooled my northbridge by 10c
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OOOH NOOO! Not again!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strangely my ex58-ud5's northbridge was about 10c lower than my ud3r is. However it didn't like the s3,s5,s7 settings being turned on at the same clocks so I got shot of it.
Click to expand...


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> In my experience, buggy graphics drivers cause a lot of issues like this. And that is with both the red and the green team before anyone starts.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be even with your criticism here you know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two things:
> 
> 1. check all your drivers are up to date including chipset ones - get them from Intel or whoever if you have to, not just your boards website as they can be a bit old in my humble experience.
> 
> 2. I wish I was your Dad!
> 
> Good luck


Hmm, I will definitely keep you posted in the upcoming couple of days with my progress. I will update all the drivers, including chipset drivers, and see what happens. I just tried to put my 290x to the non-uefi bios, and the sleep issue still occurs. To give a better description, when I put the computer to sleep (and this is a fresh install of Win7 Ultimate SP1, installed when i assembled the rig a couple weeks back), it immediately starts flashing the power LED--kinda like S1 sleep mode--but everything stays on, including the fans. If I press any keys on my keyboard, the system doesn't come out of sleep, it just kinda sits there. If i press the power button, nothing happens, and same with hard reset. I literally have to turn off the unit by holding the power button (or flipping the PSU switch), and then restarting the computer. At first I thought it was my OC, so I reset the CMOS, changed the boot order and enabled AHCI, and it still failed. I've tried this same thing on my friend's HTPC that I'm building with the same motherboard + cpu combo, just a different video card (GT 430), and I still get the same problem. But the testing continues! Fortunately the SSD is so fast, that I don't really have to use S3 sleep (Oh and hibernate has been disabled).

Haha, ya I wanted to set up my family with Xeon's since I discovered the cheap Xeon X58 trade back in late 2013 on [H]. Initially I managed to acquire the following:
- 2x X5650's for a friend, and a friend's dad who were using i7-920/i7-950 since back in like 2008/2009. Modded both of their EVGA X58 E758 Rev1 to be compatible.
- 1x EVGA E758 Rev1.1 for my sister + X5650
- 2x EVGA E757 Rev1.0 for my dad and mom + 2x X5650's (ended up moving my mom to a Sony SVS13, since she travels and a desktop is too inconvenient).
- 1x EVGA E758 Rev1.0 for myself + X5650 (what I'm listed in the Xeon X58 Club with)

Since then, I found the following, and have started selling off my family's EVGA boards (I think I SHOULD break even for all but the RIIIG's if my sales go as planned):
- 1x Rampage III Gene + X5670 + 6x2GB of Corsair XMS3 DDR3-1600 ram for $250 ([H])
- 1x Rampage III Gene for a friend's HTPC (Antec NSK2480) for $140 (ebay)
- 1x Sabertooth X58 (after seeing Kana-Maru's results







) for $125 (ebay)
- 1x P6X58D Premium for $150 (will replace my sister's EVGA) (ebay)
- 1x Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev1 for $155 (OCN)
and my FAVORITE score:
- 2x Rampage II Gene's for $75/each from ebay.
The seller listed them as "For Parts or Not Working" simply because they, the refurbisher, bought them as a bundle from some small company who put BIOS passwords as security. The refurbisher couldn't remove these passwords, and listed them for VERY cheap on ebay...with NOTHING wrong hardware-wise (generally not the case on ebay for X58 boards). HAHA, let's just say that after buying them, I set up a small test bench, and decided to take a crack at it. Upon turning on the system, I was greeted with "New CPU installed, please enter BIOS to load defaults" or something like that. When I entered, it asked for the BIOS password. I tried removing the CMOS battery, but to no avail (perhaps I didn't remove it long enough). So I decided to "guess" the BIOS password, and after 3 trials, it just forced me to boot to a bootable device. Once I figured this out, I put a copy of AFUDOS.exe and force flashed the 1701 Rampage II Gene BIOS...and voila! Now I have 2x Rampage II Gene's for $75/each, haha!!

Bro, if you ever need help in finding a high quality X58 ATX board...hit me up anytime!!

*I guess what I'm really trying to say is, while I may not post on these forums as much as I should, I read them quite a bit. I attribute my ability to move my family and friends to X58 Xeon's (where they will be content for the next 5+ years at the rate they use their computers) to the awesome crowd on this thread and the X58 Xeon Club thread. Thank you guys SO MUCH for discussing and answering those questions that many of us lurkers have.*

Edit~
Oh and in case you were wondering, my sister's rig is actually inside an Dell XPS 630i chassis!

I managed to squeeze in the Dell XPS 730x 1000W unit after replacing it in my Blue Steel build (Also known as Newton N1000P-00, a subsidiary of Delta I believe). Once the P6X58D-Premium is in there, this build should last a LONG time at the rate that she uses it. Perhaps even hit 4.0-4.2 on that X5650? Not to mention, a total sleeper unit


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Turn your CPU fan around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not hot, like, eer 50c ish at 200bclk n some volts.


thats ok i did it my way











i'm running around 46-50c loaded.


----------



## ghabhaducha

YES! Love the McGyver thinking right there gentlemen!


----------



## gofasterstripes

All I can say to those last 2 of 3 posts is

wow

and

OK







'n we're RAM buddies - looks like the kit I have


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> you take that back it's not stupid!
> 
> it cooled my northbridge by 10c


For reals? Damn, I'm gonna have to consider this when I build up that UD7. Question, do the barbs just take 3/8" ID tubing?


----------



## cb750rob

@ghabhaducha

Have a look at your windows event logs to see if it helps you narrow down where the problem is.

Sure you know this but:

"eventvwr" from a command line (without the quotes) or

Open Event Viewer by clicking the Start button , clicking Control Panel, clicking System and Security, clicking Administrative Tools, and then double-clicking Event Viewer.‌ Administrator permission required If you're prompted for an administrator password or confirmation, type the password or provide confirmation.

It does occasionally produce useful info. Google anything that looks suspect.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Hmm, good idea, I will go ahead and do that. Will keep you posted buddy!


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> YES! Love the McGyver thinking right there gentlemen!


lol thanks, i'm a broke undergrad whos about to attend a crappy law school to be even more in debt so a wii remote box and a harddrive holder will have to do for now








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> All I can say to those last 2 of 3 posts is
> 
> wow
> 
> and
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'n we're RAM buddies - looks like the kit I have


do you have the low profile ones? i absolutely love them, basically i can throw any high end cooler in there and it will work.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> For reals? Damn, I'm gonna have to consider this when I build up that UD7. Question, do the barbs just take 3/8" ID tubing?


yeah the bridges gets pretty hot. if you touching it with your finger it will burn you. and yeah the barb is weird, idk what they made it that size. they should've used standard quarter tubing for convenience sake


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by kckyle View Post
> 
> you take that back it's not stupid!
> 
> it cooled my northbridge by 10c poke.gif
> 
> For reals? Damn, I'm gonna have to consider this when I build up that UD7. Question, do the barbs just take 3/8" ID tubing?


I was referring to the heatsink one, but there is also a waterblock, of sorts, in the box.

Both sit on top of another heatsink's fins :/ not ideal




Hence me just slapping a load of thermal grease on and making the CPU fan intake across the fins on the standard heatsink and getting the other two well-plumbed-in heatpipes/sinks



next to my two case fans. I guess I'm lucky it fits so well with the fan layout,

But if it works for you - enjoy









@kckyle Mine wasn't sold as low profile, but it looks the same as yours I think.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> lol thanks, i'm a broke undergrad whos about to attend a crappy law school to be even more in debt so a wii remote box and a harddrive holder will have to do for now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you have the low profile ones? i absolutely love them, basically i can throw any high end cooler in there and it will work.
> yeah the bridges gets pretty hot. if you touching it with your finger it will burn you.


Haha, I remember undergrad a few years back, I was doing the same thing. Here's a look at my ghetto rigging back in 2009 Feb as a broke undergrad:
Build:

Core 2 Q6600 @3.6 + EVGA 680i + OCZ 4x1GB DDR2. I managed to score a 9800GX2 for $275 or something through some price mistake (about the same time I discovered Slickdeals, I think in 2008?) Problem was, back then an 8-pin PCI-e was UNHEARD OF...I had this brand spanking new card, but no adapters/converters to use it. Not to mention my crap Cooler Master 650w was too crappy to have 8-pin PCI-e (Later replaced with a TX-750 that I used until last year, and is now with my dad's Sabertooth X58, still chugging along solidly).

So I decided to take matters into my own hands:

To this day, I'm surprised I didn't short/blow up/incinerate/explode anything. I mean I literally used the following:
6-pin PCIe -> GPU 6-pin PCIe
6-pin PCIe -> 8-pin extender (came with 9800GX2)
2x Molex -> 6-pin PCIe -> 2 ground pins on the 8-pin extender.
8-pin extender -> GPU 8-pin PCIe

It worked, and I ran this GPU for 15 months before buying an unlockable GTX 465 (GTX 470). Played through Crysis, Mirror's Edge, Assassin's Creed 1, etc on it @1920x1200. So believe, me I LOVE to see others' ghetto-rigging shenanigans, no need to justify!

PS-congrats on going to Law school bro! Nah don't fret, you may have loans, but you will have that JD which will open many doors! I'm working on trying to get into Medical school myself, been waitlisted a couple times, but I have a good feeling about the next one!


----------



## eizen

False alarm. I didn't kill my CPU. My mobos bios just sucks. I updated to the latest beta bios and it handled it better but in the end like others have posted this mobo ga-ex58-ud4p can't go beyond 150 blck.


----------



## gofasterstripes

!

Some design flaw?


----------



## cb750rob

Got my other xfx7850 DD installed in crossfire yesterday.



First impressions are my top card starved for air and rig is a lot hotter!

I have put a spacer in between the cards to try to help a bit as per @gofasterstripes ghetto clothespeg mod. (you see sam, there are alternative uses for that brand of cardboard packaging







)

I know its old hardware but I would like to share as it shows what can be achieved performance wise on a tight budget

If there are no objections I Will run some benches and put up results later.


----------



## gofasterstripes

*snorts loudly*

and,

yes, bench away.

PS your cards still look weird


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> @Kana-Maru @chessmyantidrug
> 
> Guys Please stop this now.
> 
> I have just gone back and read through all the posts and all I see is that you have two different viewpoints born out of your own experiences.
> 
> Both of you have previously helped a lot of people on this platform with good advice and put in a lot of time and effort. In fact I would say this has been one of the most neutral and informative threads I have read........
> 
> I'm sorry Kana i don't agree with what you are doing at the moment. I respect that this is "your" thread/topic, I love the fact that you have encouraged other subtopics because it all helps the X58 Xeon users get more out of the platform.:


Honestly. Please don't piggy back on a discussion that we both decided to end. I don't care about your opinion on the matter, but I will address it since you felt the need to piggyback after my last post + edit. If you don't agree with what I'm doing or saying then that's your problem not my problem. I'm actually excited today. Can't wait to see how this SSD performs on X58.
Quote:


> I have had a read back over the discourse between both of you and I can't see chess calling you a liar and I think your last post is out of order.


Then you need to simply read between the lines. Here is the quote: *"Perhaps the part about it not being true makes it untrue."* In other words I'm lying about what we were talking about. If you can't understand what he was saying in between the lines then I don't know what you tell you.

Quote:


> In fact, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the subtopic (and whether nvidia is right or wrong) I think it is you that has become gradually more aggressive just because chess is not agreeing to your point of view. However, this is members forum and people will have differing views.


Once again why you felt to post this....I have no idea. The situation is dead now so drop it.

Quote:


> That sir is a childish rant and you are doing yourself a disservice by it.
> 
> My own two cents: if we could all have the balls to take the moral high ground we would all be using amd fx processors right now and this topic wouldn't even exist.
> However we are human and selfish and greedy and all of those other things that we say we don't like, we do when it suits us. Whether it is price vs performance or brand loyalty we choose what we want at the time.


No sir that is the truth. What you are doing is childish. You felt the need to continue to discussion after the fact. You can miss me with that price per performance crap. If you accept Nvidia behavior you accept it. Fess up to it. Don't even try to shame me or call it a rant. You can miss me with that as well.

Also AMD isn't off my radar. I just happened to have went with Intel the last time around. My build before my X58 was a AMD powered machine. You get no fanboyish remarks from my. I hope AMD does good with Zen as well. I'm all for good and fair competition and if that's a problem with anyone PM me. Apparently posting it here and ending it will continuously have a few users piggybacking.

Good day to your sir as well. Now I need to read and catch up on the other post I missed.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Honestly. Please don't piggy back on a discussion that we both decided to end. I don't care about your opinion on the matter, but I will address it since you felt the need to piggyback after my last post + edit. If you don't agree with what I'm doing or saying then that's your problem not my problem. I'm actually excited today. Can't wait to see how this SSD performs on X58.
> Then you need to simply read between the lines. Here is the quote: *"Perhaps the part about it not being true makes it untrue."* In other words I'm lying about what we were talking about. If you can't understand what he was saying in between the lines then I don't know what you tell you.
> Once again why you felt to post this....I have no idea. The situation is dead now so drop it.
> No sir that is the truth. What you are doing is childish. You felt the need to continue to discussion after the fact. You can miss me with that price per performance crap. If you accept Nvidia behavior you accept it. Fess up to it. Don't even try to shame me or call it a rant. You can miss me with that as well.
> 
> Also AMD isn't off my radar. I just happened to have went with Intel the last time around. My build before my X58 was a AMD powered machine. You get no fanboyish remarks from my. I hope AMD does good with Zen as well. I'm all for good and fair competition and if that's a problem with anyone PM me. Apparently posting it here and ending it will continuously have a few users piggybacking.
> 
> Good day to your sir as well. Now I need to read and catch up on the other post I missed.


Excellent!!







I'll look forward to not reading any more on the matter and will eagerly look forward to ssd results with interest.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> ew...only 500mb/s, how sata 6ish lol
> i see couple people reporting being detected but it goes in and out quite a bit, my resolution is put the computer on sleep and shut down like once a month,
> actually i don't even know why i'm spending all this money on pc anyway, i'm leaving for out of state grad school in a month it really beats the point lol


Yup it's only rated for 540 MB/s Read and 520 MB/s Write. It performed very well indeed. I'll have to get around to testing RAID 0 on it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> well I GOT the kingston predator 240gb pcie SSD, gonna be here on friday, but Kana apparently ordered it too and chose next day shipping. so it looks like hes gonna get a crack at it before i even get to open mine


LOL I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.







I already had my eyes on a few SSDs similar to that one. Fury X was sold out so I basically pulled the trigger.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hey guys, thanks for sharing all the wealth of info. Here are some pics of my X58 rig:
> 
> Build (Specs are in Sig under "Kid Dynomite"):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some more pics:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/KDWuQ
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running IBT @very high:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I normally get around 81GFlops, but I had some stuff running at this time it would seem.
> 
> 
> 
> Kana~ I finally managed to build out my mATX x58 rig, but unfortunately it would seem I can't hit that 4.4ish @1.35Vish with this Xeon X5670. As such I settled for 1.312V for 4.2 (I was able to do it at 1.280V, but kept getting WHEA alerts in my Event log). I'll post my BIOS photo soon, but as it stands, I'm doing +0.2250mV on offset Vcore, 1.16V on IOH, 1.2875V on the QPI/DRAM, 1.45V on the DRAM Bus. Let me know if you have advice for me for trying to hit 4.4, I'd like to hit 200x22 to keep things nice, but perhaps this mobo OR cpu OR both are just not able to hit that.
> 
> Edit~ I'm also having problems waking from S3 Sleep on this rig. I had this problem with another Rampage III Gene running an X5670 w/GT 430 (for a friend). I've tried Bios 0502, and left everything at auto. I'm fresh out of ideas, and would like some help if there are some Rampage II/III Gene owners.


NICE!







The rig looks very nice. Settling for 4.2Ghz isn't really that bad. You are only missing 200Mhz and that won't matter too much IMO. You need to find out what your CPU takes to run 4.4Ghz stable. It might , wel it will, require more than [CPU voltage ]1.35v. If it does then that's going to be your call. Things get tricky with dynamic Vcore at higher voltages+frequecies. The frequency and voltages can cause issues randomly if it isn't tested for stability. Every CPU is different and requires different voltage. I think you may have hit your safe limit.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> Excellent!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll look forward to not reading any more on the matter and will eagerly look forward to ssd results with interest.


I'm patiently waiting. There's a lot happening today so hopefully it feels like a short day. Can't wait to see the results.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yup it's only rated for 540 MB/s Read and 520 MB/s Write. It performed very well indeed. I'll have to get around to testing RAID 0 on it.
> LOL I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already had my eyes on a few SSDs similar to that one. Fury X was sold out so I basically pulled the trigger.
> NICE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The rig looks very nice. Settling for 4.2Ghz isn't really that bad. You are only missing 200Mhz and that won't matter too much IMO. You need to find out what your CPU takes to run 4.4Ghz stable. It might , wel it will, require more than [CPU voltage ]1.35v. If it does then that's going to be your call. Things get tricky with dynamic Vcore at higher voltages+frequecies. The frequency and voltages can cause issues randomly if it isn't tested for stability. Every CPU is different and requires different voltage. I think you may have hit your safe limit.
> I'm patiently waiting. There's a lot happening today so hopefully it feels like a short day. Can't wait to see the results.


curious, what you meant by similar to that one, i know there is the gskill pheonix, and the asus one which has dumode, the intel 750 definitely won't work cause it requires uefi bios.

called kingston, gave me some general insight, apparently you can put them in raid 0..so i bought a 2nd one lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> curious, what you meant by similar to that one, i know there is the gskill pheonix, and the asus one which has dumode, the intel 750 definitely won't work cause it requires uefi bios.


There are other SSDs capable of greater speed. They cost $300-$600.

Quote:


> called kingston, gave me some general insight, apparently you can put them in raid 0..so i bought a 2nd one lol


That's actually pretty neat, but I hope you have the bandwidth to support two of them. Unless Kingston allows two SSDs on one PCIe card I don't see how a lot of people will see all of the benefits without some bottlenecking. One of my main reasons for buying this is because I wouldn't have to use RAID 0 to get great speeds. Meaning I will have access to TRIM. TRIM isn't supported in RAID mode unless you have a modded and tested BIOS. Even then that can hurt speeds a bit and might not be 100%. You seriously spent over $500+ to RAID these? That's high end GPU prices for me.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> There are other SSDs capable of greater speed. They cost $300-$600.
> That's actually pretty neat, but I hope you have the bandwidth to support two of them. Unless Kingston allows two SSDs on one PCIe card I don't see how a lot of people will see all of the benefits without some bottlenecking. One of my main reasons for buying this is because I wouldn't have to use RAID 0 to get great speeds. Meaning I will have access to TRIM. TRIM isn't supported in RAID mode unless you have a modded and tested BIOS. Even then that can hurt speeds a bit and might not be 100%. You seriously spent over $500+ to RAID these? That's high end GPU prices for me.


na more like amazon screwed up and send me two instead of one









so in the meantime i'm just gonna play around with the extra one before i send it back lol

what are the names of these ssd?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> na more like amazon screwed up and send me two instead of one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so in the meantime i'm just gonna play around with the extra one before i send it back lol


Nice. I thought you said you bought another one though? That's a big difference than Amazon screwing up. Have fun with them though.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice. I thought you said you bought another one though? That's a big difference than Amazon screwing up. Have fun with them though.


well technically i did "buy it" since they charged me twice lol

the other ssd u mentioned, will they work with legacy bios?


----------



## eizen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> !
> 
> Some design flaw?


If you were asking me...Maybe not because I can OC my i7 920 to 4Ghz and no trouble rasing the blck speed.* It's just with the x5650


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes dude, that was aimed at you.

At a guess it's something to do with the dual QPI.


----------



## Kana-Maru

*ALRIGHT* I have finally installed the HyperX Predator M.2 PCIe. This specific model promises 1400 MB/s Read and 600 MB/s Write. I'll upload all of the fancy pictures to my blog or something whenever I have more time. You get some pretty cool packaging which includes a free Activation Key for Acronis True Image HD. That's a nice bonus. Would you guys like to see if it works as advertised for our older, but still relevant X58 platforms? Wait for it.............Wait for it.........

Wait for it.....BAM Benchmarks:

AS SDD
http://s26.postimg.org/6k0wp89ih/AS_SSD_Upload.jpg

ATTO
http://s26.postimg.org/iaeu6m2ax/ATTO_Upload.jpg

CrystalDiskmark
http://s26.postimg.org/dd19li0bt/Crystal_Disk_Mark_Upload.jpg

Anvil
http://s26.postimg.org/z0q7vy0q1/Anvil_Upload.jpg

According to ATTO we are reaching 1400 MB/s Read and roughly 655 MB/s to 669 MB/s Write. The other benchmarks are roughly 1220 MB/s-1280MB/s Now I just need to migrate my RAID over to the a single drive and I'll be in good business. X58 life continues. There are even faster Read + Write SSDs available. I'm not ready to spin that type of cash at the moment. I'm still trying to buy a Fury X, but they are sold out everywhere.


----------



## kckyle

....i really. really despite u right now lol.

i should get mine tomorrow morning according to fedex tracking. should expect somewhere around 2800mb/s read 1200mb/s write according to the research i done.

with this speed, and usb 3.1 add on card, i'm not upgrading til my mobo dies. and this ud7 is pretty robust.

wait you have it as a boot drive yet?

nvm just read u need to migrate first.

did the mobo detect it in the bios as bootable?


----------



## gofasterstripes

What the hell are you doing with all that bandwidth guys?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> What the hell are you doing with all that bandwidth guys?


i wanna drag my porn files back and forth and see how fast it transfer. that is all


----------



## gofasterstripes

I guessed as much.


----------



## kckyle

i just realized something, this pcie ssd is going to be faster than my 1333mhz ram lol


----------



## jorpe

damn, im really jealous


----------



## 2010rig

I want one, what was the link again?


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> I want one, what was the link again?


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00V01C4RK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00V01C4RK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00


Thanks!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> 777:thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure !


My first video card was an HD 4870, which was kind of the undisputed price-to-performance king when it came out. My second video card was an HD 5870 I bought used because I: 1) wanted more graphics processing power and 2) didn't want to add much more of a power draw to my system. A comparable Nvidia card would have been the GTX 470, but I didn't feel like increasing power draw from my video card by 20% was a good idea. I never seriously considered Nvidia cards until the 900 series which brought incredible improvements in terms of power efficiency. I had every intention of buying an R9 380 until finding a GTX 970 for a price I was willing to pay. I still don't see how this makes me an Nvidia fanboy.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i just realized something, this pcie ssd is going to be faster than my 1333mhz ram lol


LOL, i'm not sure that's true bro, especially not in triple channel.

Ya, I'm CERTAIN that it isn't at this point:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Samsung/MV-3V4G3/7.html


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> My first video card was an HD 4870, which was kind of the undisputed price-to-performance king when it came out. My second video card was an HD 5870 I bought used because I: 1) wanted more graphics processing power and 2) didn't want to add much more of a power draw to my system. A comparable Nvidia card would have been the GTX 470, but I didn't feel like increasing power draw from my video card by 20% was a good idea. I never seriously considered Nvidia cards until the 900 series which brought incredible improvements in terms of power efficiency. I had every intention of buying an R9 380 until finding a GTX 970 for a price I was willing to pay. I still don't see how this makes me an Nvidia fanboy.


cool

You lost me on post #4395 so don't take anything I write to you seriously.


----------



## 2010rig

Hey guys, just wanted to update my latest OC's with 12 GB RAM 7-7-7-21.

I'm going to buy new TIM tomorrow, then I will do more extensive testing and longer IBT runs to find my new MAX OC.









I had to back off 4.6 due to temps. I'm down to *4.4 HT ON*, 1.272 V, QPI 1.3125, Max temp was 77. *82.7 GFLOPS*

4.435 *HT OFF* 1.264 V, QPI 1.3125 Max temp was 70. *94.5 GFLOPS*

For Reference:







Spoiler: Latest OC Screenshots


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think it might faster than this RAM, however.



@2010rig Lookin' good. Remarkably low volts for Vcc, I would try to get that Vtt down though, you're sailing close to the wind with that.

It should be possible.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I think it might faster than this RAM, however.


HAHA...you got me laughing







Yes, it's probably *definitely* faster than that ram.

@2010rig Those clocks look great, I'm honestly jealous, I can't seem to hit 4.4







I think the QPI should be fine below 1.35, and even at 1.3125V it should be within safe limits. But definitely try lower QPI volts if they work.


----------



## gofasterstripes

All I can say is I never went above 1.32 and still my 5660 died.

When I put a multimeter on my UD3R, I found that the Vtt was running higher than set in the BIOS unless heavily loaded.

Hence the warning.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> HAHA...you got me laughing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it's probably *definitely* faster than that ram.
> 
> @2010rig Those clocks look great, I'm honestly jealous, I can't seem to hit 4.4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the QPI should be fine below 1.35, and even at 1.3125V it should be within safe limits. But definitely try lower QPI volts if they work.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> All I can say is I never went above 1.32 and still my 5660 died.
> 
> When I put a multimeter on my UD3R, I found that the Vtt was running higher than set in the BIOS unless heavily loaded.
> 
> Hence the warning.


Thanks guys! After further tweaking I brought the VTT down to 1.29375 V, Core is at 1.272V, and hit 4.5 with 75 Max Temps. Also broke 95 Gflops now.









I can't lower the VTT further at this frequency...


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> All I can say is I never went above 1.32 and still my 5660 died.
> 
> When I put a multimeter on my UD3R, I found that the Vtt was running higher than set in the BIOS unless heavily loaded.
> 
> Hence the warning.


Ahh makes sense. I'll be sure to keep that in mind, thanks.


----------



## gofasterstripes

240GB M500 on X58 SATA 2


1TB WD Black on X58 SATA 2


1TB Samsung Spinpoint on X58 SATA 2


2TB Seagate Barracuda on X58 SATA 2

Results seem to vary by 10% between runs, so don't take it that literally.

The WD used to be faster, looks like it's wearing out. I'm gonna go do a SMART test on it :/


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> cool
> 
> You lost me on post #4395 so don't take anything I write to you seriously.


So then I guess you don't know the issue with 970's. You poor thing.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> So then I guess you don't know the issue with 970's. You poor thing.


Chess...... Stop being naughty


----------



## spdaimon

LOL!

@virpz he was talking about the 970's and the whole 3.5+.5 GB RAM deboggle. I have to agree with him, most of the time you aren't going to use that extra .5 so performance isn't going to suffer really. It really depends on the game, but I haven't been able to go above 2GB with my 780TIs with 3 monitors. It was kind of shady on Nvidia's part to sell it with 512MB running like 1/7th slower. Why not just sell it as 3.5GB? My 260 came with 896MB, why not tack on the extra 104MB for a GB at a slower speed and call it a 1GB card? lol. Come to think of it, my 295 (got it used cheap) says it has 1700 something MB, but in reality, you are going to use it in SLI 99% of the time, so its really only 896MB usable. Guess its all marketing. Just have to know how to decipher it.

I've been testing Nvidia's drivers this morning, at least on a 980... going from 353.38 to 353.49, my Firestrike score jumped over 2,200 points! Course, these are hotfix drivers so result isn't valid. Interested to see how the 780 does.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> So then I guess you don't know the issue with 970's. You poor thing.


Now that's false advertising about me. You fool thing









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> @virpz so performance isn't going to suffer really. It really depends on the game...


I have heard that before; *"issue is an issue, but it's so rarely an issue that it's practically a nonissue"*.


----------



## spdaimon

Yeah, sorry. Wasn't trying to repeat what he said, just what I observed from personal experience. I haven't been able to push my 780 TIs that high. That said, I did get the 980 TI but not for the VRAM.


----------



## kckyle

]
It's here


----------



## Kana-Maru

Good luck running them in RAID 0.

Results for a single Hyper X Predator SSD:

AS SSD
http://s26.postimg.org/6k0wp89ih/AS_SSD_Upload.jpg

ATTO
http://s26.postimg.org/iaeu6m2ax/ATTO_Upload.jpg

CrystalDiskmark
http://s26.postimg.org/dd19li0bt/Crystal_Disk_Mark_Upload.jpg

Anvil
http://s26.postimg.org/z0q7vy0q1/Anvil_Upload.jpg

Just when you thought X58 couldn't get any better. I need to upgrade some of my programs and run the test again, but overall I'm sure everything will be the same.

I've moved over from a RAID 0 OS to a non RAID 0 OS. My HDDs and SDDs are still paired in RAID 0 though. Well except my Samsung SSD 850 EVO since it doesn't need RAID 0.

Here are the results from my Samsung SSD 850 EVO

http://s26.postimg.org/ce74dziuh/Upload.jpg


----------



## gofasterstripes

Those figures are insane.


----------



## kckyle

Shoot how do u check if ur pcie lane is 8x or 1x

i think one of my pcie is only on 1x, but cannot find the option to change it in my bios.

here is my first test run


----------



## Kana-Maru

I believe you have a bottleneck sir. I told you that you'll be limited [bottlenecked] awhile ago. The bandwidth isn't free so at some point something has to give. The Read\Write speeds looks very nice though.

I'm fine running just one now. Maybe in the future I'll upgrade, but I highly doubt that I'll need to.

It's crazy how good the single\non-RAID Samsung EVO is with the 4K and 4KQD32 benchmarks. Nearly matching a pair of Predators in the 4KQD32 and beating dual predators in the 4K benchmark. .


----------



## kckyle

my 4k read is a bit slower than yours, where is this bottle neck coming from.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> Shoot how do u check if ur pcie lane is 8x or 1x
> 
> i think one of my pcie is only on 1x, but cannot find the option to change it in my bios.
> 
> here is my first test run


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> my Firestrike score jumped over 2,200 points!


wat


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> Shoot how do u check if ur pcie lane is 8x or 1x
> 
> i think one of my pcie is only on 1x, but cannot find the option to change it in my bios.
> 
> here is my first test run


Congratz !

Even bottle necked it makes my samsung 850 evo 500Gb look like an ATA 66 HDD.


----------



## kckyle

kana. everytime 4k read start benching i hear coil whine or some type of noise coming from the cpu. any ideas?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Now that's false advertising about me. You fool thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have heard that before; *"issue is an issue, but it's so rarely an issue that it's practically a nonissue"*.


If it never happens, it's not an issue. Practically a nonissue. You just might catch on yet.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> kana. everytime 4k read start benching i hear coil whine or some type of noise coming from the cpu. any ideas?


Nope. That's pretty weird. I never noticed anything like that with any of my SSDs benchmarks to date. CPU and everything else runs fine and cool.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my 4k read is a bit slower than yours, where is this bottle neck coming from.


I have no idea. I don't know everything you are running on your PC or what you have installed on your MB.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> If it never happens, it's not an issue. Practically a nonissue. You just might catch on yet.


I see you clearly can't leave my topic. Ha. Just stop. You can defend Nvidia false advertisement as long as you want, heck you might be part of their defense in the class action lawsuit case, but that doesn't make it a non-issue. If I or other gamers purchased two 970 4GB 3.5GBs and pushed the graphical settings @ 1440p, 1600p or 4K I'd be pretty upset as well. Actually I was upset as it was happening. People were upset when they found out they didn't have access to the advertised full 4GB speed. Craps out at 3.5GBs. I game at 1440p\1600p mostly so if pay for something I expect it to work. I also expect people online to defend Nvidia to death.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i wanna drag my porn files back and forth and see how fast it transfer. that is all


That is the reason I have one 24 and one 36 Tb Hp StorageWorks MSA60 SANs at home hooked up to a 2Gb BBWC SAS2 interface on a HP DL380 G6 with 4 SATA 6Gbps SSDs in RAID 0 running copies in loop while I drool at the speed














(I have 4 spares SSDs in case something goes wrong but I don't run a raid 10 since I don't want to cause premature wear on them, I have daily backup jobs going to the MSA 60s but since they are not critical servers and are just servers I use for lab/personal stuff/website and personal databases and that I can get back online within hours through restore of my backups its fine for me.)


----------



## gofasterstripes

The first half of that reads like you have 60TB of pornography.

Oh man...


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> If it never happens, it's not an issue. Practically a nonissue. You just might catch on yet.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nope. That's pretty weird. I never noticed anything like that with any of my SSDs benchmarks to date. CPU and everything else runs fine and cool.
> I have no idea. I don't know everything you are running on your PC or what you have installed on your MB.
> I see you clearly can't leave my topic. Ha. Just stop. You can defend Nvidia false advertisement as long as you want, heck you might be part of their defense in the class action lawsuit case, but that doesn't make it a non-issue. If I or other gamers purchased two 970 4GB 3.5GBs and pushed the graphical settings @ 1440p, 1600p or 4K I'd be pretty upset as well. Actually I was upset as it was happening. People were upset when they found out they didn't have access to the advertised full 4GB speed. Craps out at 3.5GBs. I game at 1440p\1600p mostly so if pay for something I expect it to work. I also expect people online to defend Nvidia to death.


i put one in my p6x58d build. got 74mb/s 4k write and 35mb/s 4k read! sequential was a bit lower though.

i think it's a gigabyte thing vs asus thing.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The first half of that reads like you have 60TB of pornography.
> 
> Oh man...


I wish








While I do have some I'd be in serious trouble if my wife found out I had to delete our complete wedding / vacations photo library and stupid women tv shows to make room for porn


----------



## kckyle

I solved my 4k problem, I needed a sli bridge


----------



## Kana-Maru

Haha


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> I solved my 4k problem, I needed a sli bridge


rofl


----------



## kckyle

so this is the score i got on my asus p6x58d premium


and this on my gigabyte ud7


same drive. different results. i'm gonna go into my ud7 bios and see what i can do.

and this is the result of the 2nd drive


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's crazy how good the single\non-RAID Samsung EVO is with the 4K and 4KQD32 benchmarks. Nearly matching a pair of Predators in the 4KQD32 and beating dual predators in the 4K benchmark. .


i don't think it's a fair comparison to be using my data, something is obviously limiting my 4k run.



this is done by http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/kingston-hyperx-predator-m-2-pcie-ssds-in-raid-0-you-thought-one-was-fast/3/

of course they are on z97 or x99.

i think there is something in my bios i have to mess around.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> If it never happens, it's not an issue. Practically a nonissue. You just might catch on yet.


If it's not an issue then there is nothing wrong with it.
If there is nothing wrong with it then no issues can be detected.
If an issue can't be detected then there is no false advertising.

With all that said we come to realize that you don't need to come up with ridiculous excuses nor you need apologize.

Got it ???

Nvidia foolboy


----------



## gofasterstripes

You know what? Apple should never have left PowerPC.

See my profile pic to see where _my_ allegences are


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i don't think it's a fair comparison to be using my data, something is obviously limiting my 4k run.
> 
> 
> 
> this is done by http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/kingston-hyperx-predator-m-2-pcie-ssds-in-raid-0-you-thought-one-was-fast/3/
> 
> of course they are on z97 or x99.
> 
> i think there is something in my bios i have to mess around.


4 Crucial MX100 256Gb in raid 0 on my MSI Z97-G55 SLI Plus motherboard.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> You know what? Apple should never have left PowerPC.
> 
> See my profile pic to see where _my_ allegences are


Still have 2 PowerMac G5 a dual 2.7 Ghz and a Quad 2.5 Ghz, a PowerMac G4, a PowerBook G4 1.67 and a PowerMac G3 and they are all still working...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> If it's not an issue then there is nothing wrong with it.
> If there is nothing wrong with it then no issues can be detected.
> If an issue can't be detected then there is no false advertising.
> 
> With all that said we come to realize that you don't need to come up with ridiculous excuses nor you need apologize.
> 
> Got it ???
> 
> Nvidia foolboy


But hes always right...


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> But hes always right...


i think its best if we stay out of their little disagreement lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

If Fury X will stay sold out like the 970\980\290X and so on I might just wait for the Fury X2 dual card. Apparently the card is in such high demand that it's constantly sold out all over the place. We've seen this movie before.









SSD speed and HDD speed is great. Now I need my watercooled GPU.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> If Fury X will stay sold out like the 970\980\290X and so on I might just wait for the Fury X2 dual card. Apparently the card is in such high demand that it's constantly sold out all over the place. We've seen this movie before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SSD speed and HDD speed is great. Now I need my watercooled GPU.


Sad that AMD's financials are what they are. Their market cap today was something like $1.6 billion or close to that. Right after reading that, I read Apple is forecasted to make $52.5 billion in profit this year.

What a contrast!


----------



## Kana-Maru

I don't even have a Apple product in my home. Apple has a ton of people willing to pay crazy amounts for their products.

As for AMD, if demand stays high for their graphic cards and Fury X\Nano\X2 & 390\390X sell well AMD could be in a good position. Fury X appears to be selling like hot cakes. Let's see how long this goes on. AMD next CPU looks promising as well. We will have to see what happens. I'm hearing rumors that several companies are offering to purchase AMD. I hope ATI splits and goes back to being their own boss.


----------



## kckyle

speaking of apple

plugged the kingston into my mac pro for a test run, everything felt much more snappier. guess what a hog osx is.



a bit slower, not sure what happened, still much faster than the sata 2 i had it hooked to before.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't even have a Apple product in my home. Apple has a ton of people willing to pay crazy amounts for their products.
> 
> As for AMD, if demand stays high for their graphic cards and Fury X\Nano\X2 & 390\390X sell well AMD could be in a good position. Fury X appears to be selling like hot cakes. Let's see how long this goes on. AMD next CPU looks promising as well. We will have to see what happens. I'm hearing rumors that several companies are offering to purchase AMD. I hope ATI splits and goes back to being their own boss.


ATI won't be able to split since it doesn't exist anymore... ATI was absorbed completely by AMD. ATI was Canadian, I had family working for ATI, AMD just absorbed everything and disolved everything ATI for good when they started the APUs...


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> speaking of apple
> 
> plugged the kingston into my mac pro for a test run, everything felt much more snappier. guess what a hog osx is.
> 
> 
> 
> a bit slower, not sure what happened, still much faster than the sata 2 i had it hooked to before.


Its not the same test... they don't do give you all the details in those tests so you never know if its sequential and what size / type of data is used to benchmark...


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Its not the same test... they don't do give you all the details in those tests so you never know if its sequential and what size / type of data is used to benchmark...


now that you mentioned it, i was curious where the 4k and sequential and other markers went lol. so apple of them to cover everything up


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> now that you mentioned it, i was curious where the 4k and sequential and other markers went lol. so apple of them to cover everything up


Blackmagic disk speed test isn't made by Apple...


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Blackmagic disk speed test isn't made by Apple...


i can't help but think the dev's philosophy being somewhat influenced by apple.

edit:

i think random 4k write, this is as best it can go, any higher you would need nvme, which x58 don't support since we don't have uefi.


----------



## Carrotsfart

@gofasterstripes Once I finished OCing I turned LLC back to standard rather than level 2 because I read somewhere it puts extra stress on the CPU. Put it back to level 1 and it passed, so all is good. I'll have to run a few more passes and some Prime just to make sure. The amount of RAM seems to affect the GFlop score massively, when my PC had 7.5GB free it was pushing 70 GF, now it's considerably less :/ Turns out as soon as I put my SSD on the Intel SATA ports all the issues i was having with windows fixed themselves. What the hell is the deal with the marvel controller, seems to be absolute trash? Oh well, at least I don't have to do a full reinstall of windows!

As for results:




VTT = 1.235 V
Vcore (Bios) = 1.2565
Vcore CPUz = 1.216 - 1.232 V
RAM: 1600 MHz 9/9/9/24
Running at 3.8 GHz (doesn't seem to like 4.0 at all)


----------



## gofasterstripes

Good work mate







. You may need to bump bios core voltage slightly as turning LLC down/off will allow vcore to droop/deviate more, but its perhaps better than having voltage spikes caused by the regulators adjusting late to core unloading. No LLC means no core regulator feeback loop and therefore more droop but no overshoot spikes.

As for the score in IBT, it's probably useless except unless all the settings are exactly the same. Better to use Cinebench or something similar to compare cpu performance between us.

Enjoy it


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Good work mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . You may need to bump bios core voltage slightly as turning LLC down/off will allow vcore to droop/deviate more, but its perhaps better than having voltage spikes caused by the regulators adjusting late to core unloading. No LLC means no core regulator feeback loop and therefore more droop but no overshoot spikes.
> 
> As for the score in IBT, it's probably useless except unless all the settings are exactly the same. Better to use Cinebench or something similar to compare cpu performance between us.
> 
> Enjoy it


861 in Cinebench R15 at 3.8 GHz now, before I had all drivers updated and such it was 879, it does 922 at 4.0 GHz, but isn't stable in the long term.

Potentially my last question, If I set Vcore to standard to enable dynamic Vcore, the standard Vcore varies literally every time I turn my computer on. When I first overclocked, standard Vcore was 1.1165, then it dropped to 1.0825, Just now I looked and it was 1.2325 (I changed something and a lot of the bios settings reset themselves) it kind of worries me that it changes however it feels :/


----------



## gofasterstripes

Your results seem normal.

I score 927 at 4.0GHz core with 3.2 uncore.

Dynamic vcore isn't something I've used. I seem to remember @cb750rob used it? In theory it sounds like the best way to power the cpu, but u have to trust the voltage curve is correct for the frequency curve as the load changes.

I just used no LLC and allow vdroop from 1.29 to 1.264 loaded (cpu-z)

The varying figures sound like what i would expect. If the voltages are safe and it works i would worry.

3.8ghz is more like 98% as fast as 4.0 for real world.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> 861 in Cinebench R15 at 3.8 GHz now, before I had all drivers updated and such it was 879, it does 922 at 4.0 GHz, but isn't stable in the long term.
> 
> Potentially my last question, If I set Vcore to standard to enable dynamic Vcore, the standard Vcore varies literally every time I turn my computer on. When I first overclocked, standard Vcore was 1.1165, then it dropped to 1.0825, Just now I looked and it was 1.2325 (I changed something and a lot of the bios settings reset themselves) it kind of worries me that it changes however it feels :/


Your results seem normal!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Guys, I gotta unsubscribe from this mailing list and get more work done









You all enjoy those nice Xeons, and I catch up with this again sometime soon.

Thanks everyone for the help, support and for humoring me









I'll leave you with this...


SUICIDE RUN :????????????????????????????????????????


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Guys, I gotta unsubscribe from this mailing list and get more work done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You all enjoy those nice Xeons, and I catch up with this again sometime soon.
> 
> Thanks everyone for the help, support and for humoring me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll leave you with this...
> 
> 
> SUICIDE RUN :????????????????????????????????????????


I sincerely hope this is not your own chip!









Keep in touch and good luck with the course-work.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Guys, I gotta unsubscribe from this mailing list and get more work done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You all enjoy those nice Xeons, and I catch up with this again sometime soon.
> 
> Thanks everyone for the help, support and for humoring me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll leave you with this...
> 
> 
> SUICIDE RUN :????????????????????????????????????????


I might not be able to see if it's 1.456 or 1.496 since I'm in 4k on my 2 monitors so which one is it. and if its 1.496 well I hope you ain't running that for too long. Well, you might be fine for some days if its just on the vcore and you ain't going mental with QPI, RAM and other components but hey... its your CPU


----------



## BaldMan

Its 1.456v









Hey seeing you guys running these predators, I wouldn't mind asking a question ?

I want to install a predator in my pc, but also plan on ordering another GTX 970 and waterblock to run SLI.

If I populate both of the pcie x16 slots with the graphic cards they run in pcie 2.0 x16

If I pupulate a 3rd, this will reduce the speed of the 2x slots to PCIE 2.0 x8, and the last one PCIE 2.0 x4, which should be fine for the predator SSD Yeah (this is correct yeah?) ?


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> Its 1.456v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey seeing you guys running these predators, I wouldn't mind asking a question ?
> 
> I want to install a predator in my pc, but also plan on ordering another GTX 970 and waterblock to run SLI.
> 
> If I populate both of the pcie x16 slots with the graphic cards they run in pcie 2.0 x16
> 
> If I pupulate a 3rd, this will reduce the speed of the 2x slots to PCIE 2.0 x8, and the last one PCIE 2.0 x4, which should be fine for the predator SSD Yeah (this is correct yeah?) ?


If I understood correctly when I asked a week back, The x58 Chipset has 40 PCIe lanes. So if you had 2 graphics cards, they would run at 16x each which is 32x, leaving 8x remaining for your SSD.

Kana posted his results above for the predator SSD, he has SLI GTX 670's in his machine, so you could expect similar results i'd imagine.


----------



## BaldMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> If I understood correctly when I asked a week back, The x58 Chipset has 40 PCIe lanes. So if you had 2 graphics cards, they would run at 16x each which is 32x, leaving 8x remaining for your SSD.
> 
> Kana posted his results above for the predator SSD, he has SLI GTX 670's in his machine, so you could expect similar results i'd imagine.


Cheers! I have been reading threads on this stuff all day, I was nice and confused.

Thanks for the clarification, got one in the cart now. Just gotta hit the button....


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> Its 1.456v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey seeing you guys running these predators, I wouldn't mind asking a question ?
> 
> I want to install a predator in my pc, but also plan on ordering another GTX 970 and waterblock to run SLI.
> 
> If I populate both of the pcie x16 slots with the graphic cards they run in pcie 2.0 x16
> 
> If I pupulate a 3rd, this will reduce the speed of the 2x slots to PCIE 2.0 x8, and the last one PCIE 2.0 x4, which should be fine for the predator SSD Yeah (this is correct yeah?) ?


the predator only needs 4x lane pcie 2.0, if you populate 16+16 = 32 you have 38 lanes in total so 38-32 = 4 which works out just right.


----------



## iSlayer

38 - 32 = 6

Man, i'm jealous of you x58 brothers, x79 thread is so dead :'(.


----------



## kckyle

got a Great deal on this, just couldn't pass up.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Did you get 3 of them?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iSlayer*
> 
> Man, i'm jealous of you x58 brothers, x79 thread is so dead :'(.


Yeah it's going on 2 years of constant activity here. The X58 is only less than 10% slower than the X79 so a lot of people, including myself, have decided to skip right past X79 and X99. Not that SSD speed is up to par we probably won't be moving for awhile. {see below]

http://s26.postimg.org/6k0wp89ih/AS_SSD_Upload.jpg

http://s26.postimg.org/iaeu6m2ax/ATTO_Upload.jpg

I'm thinking about getting a SSD that has over 2000 MB/s and 1200+ MB/s write. Just a thought at the moment.


----------



## kckyle

Lol yes


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Did you get 3 of them?


I think he already had 2 240Gb already and now he got this kickass 480Gb... I am thinking of getting the m.2 version since I saw what he posted a couple days ago. I still have to read on it to see if the PCIe version would make a big difference.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> Lol yes


Ohhhhhhh







God that is sweet looking


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Did you get 3 of them?
> Yeah it's going on 2 years of constant activity here. The X58 is only less than 10% slower than the X79 so a lot of people, including myself, have decided to skip right past X79 and X99. Not that SSD speed is up to par we probably won't be moving for awhile. {see below]
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/6k0wp89ih/AS_SSD_Upload.jpg
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/iaeu6m2ax/ATTO_Upload.jpg
> 
> I'm thinking about getting a SSD that has over 2000 MB/s and 1200+ MB/s write. Just a thought at the moment.


the only other ssd that i would see its an upgrade from the kingston is the samsung sm951. which have over 2k read, but it only has 90k for iops?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> Lol yes
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice, but it just seems so wasteful on the X58 platform. $750 simply on SSD speed that will be bottlenecked. Plus some programs won't benefit from it. When it comes to Steam and gaming [or anything with a lot of tiny files] the SSDs will struggle regardless. There are so many other upgrades I would spend that cash on.

For instance if I really need to go super speed with no limitations I'll go this route on my Sabertooth:

http://s26.postimg.org/kgwkh75m1/Speed.jpg


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice, but it just seems so wasteful on the X58 platform. $750 simply on SSD speed that will be bottlenecked. Plus some programs won't benefit from it. When it comes to Steam and gaming [or anything with a lot of tiny files] the SSDs will struggle regardless. There are so many other upgrades I would spend that cash on.
> 
> For instance if I really need to go super speed with no limitations I'll go this route on my Sabertooth:
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/kgwkh75m1/Speed.jpg


not sure about the bottleneck, i'm getting the advertised speed in both seqential and random, the 480 gb 4k score benched much closer to what you were getting, and not sure where you getting the 750 price tag from its 500 on amazon


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm getting approx. $750 from it's actual price per unit. To each his own. If you got deals nice.

Edit:
I take it back. It's not a waste.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm getting approx. $750 from it's actual price per unit. To each his own. If you got deals nice.
> 
> Edit:
> I take it back. It's not a waste.


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00V01C6M8?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00

im confused where is this 750 dollar figure coming from lol. aren't you within the states?


----------



## 2010rig

Update on the final stable OC









Computer has been running for 2 days, and I have a bunch of programs open right now in the background, wanted to see if IBT would pass.

Max temps were 73


----------



## Kana-Maru

Prime 95 Torture Test [some of everything] 48 hours. IBT v2.54 Maximum 6 hours, OCCT Stability Test 10 hours.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Prime 95 Torture Test [some of everything] 48 hours. IBT v2.54 Maximum 6 hours, OCCT Stability Test 10 hours.


Ain't nobody got time for that, lol.

I'll do that in the next few days, I'm mainly monitoring temps right now.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00V01C6M8?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
> 
> im confused where is this 750 dollar figure coming from lol. aren't you within the states?


In Canada price is 713.99$ and once you add taxes (Shipping is included) it's jumping to 805$


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Ain't nobody got time for that, lol.
> 
> I'll do that in the next few days, I'm mainly monitoring temps right now.


God damn, unless you have another rig and a dedicated AC to cool down the heat generated by that one it's going to be a lot of trouble to stress test it for that long...









I know that when I am doing HD encoding with my 3 Mac Pros and my xServe on Apple Compressor it's turning my home office into a freaking greenhouse... And they are not overclocked...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Ain't nobody got time for that, lol.
> 
> I'll do that in the next few days, I'm mainly monitoring temps right now.


Neither do I. That's why you split it up. While you are sleeping or during work hours.


----------



## kckyle

update on the ssd, to all asus p6x58d owners, do not get the kingston predator pcie ssd, you will be very sorry.

i spend the entire afternoon reinstalling and trying to get it to work. apparently after a successful installation, if you try swapping pcie slots, or trying to secure the pcie screws. everything goes out of whack and the boot becomes corrupted. looks like i'm sticking to sata 2 for my p6x58d build. i see couple reviews on amazon stating the same, so i guess i'm not the only one.

however its working like a champ on my x58 ud7.


----------



## Dotachin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> update on the ssd, to all asus p6x58d owners, do not get the kingston predator pcie ssd, you will be very sorry.
> 
> i spend the entire afternoon reinstalling and trying to get it to work. apparently after a successful installation, if you try swapping pcie slots, or trying to secure the pcie screws. everything goes out of whack and the boot becomes corrupted. looks like i'm sticking to sata 2 for my p6x58d build. i see couple reviews on amazon stating the same, so i guess i'm not the only one.
> 
> however its working like a champ on my x58 ud7.


+rep saved me some bucks

It's a shame really.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> update on the ssd, to all asus p6x58d owners, do not get the kingston predator pcie ssd, you will be very sorry.
> 
> i spend the entire afternoon reinstalling and trying to get it to work. apparently after a successful installation, if you try swapping pcie slots, or trying to secure the pcie screws. everything goes out of whack and the boot becomes corrupted. looks like i'm sticking to sata 2 for my p6x58d build. i see couple reviews on amazon stating the same, so i guess i'm not the only one.
> 
> however its working like a champ on my x58 ud7.


Oh that sucks








I guess it will be the same on a P6T then...
I still have that board and I'm not using it for the moment, I wanted to get a PCIe SSD and make a fileserver with a bunch of HDDs and a P410 SAS controller I have in a drawer that's not being used...


----------



## kckyle

i just want to put out there that this is what i have witness so far and from two reviews on amazon who also have p6x58d mobo, its rather finicky to get it to work. your mileage may vary of course. however the asus's mobo is rather temperamental compare to the gigabyte.

i think it may be an asus thing. review on amazon also states a reviewer's rampage 3 formula also having trouble recognizing frequently.

but it's working like a charm on my mac pro 4.1 which is basically a dual cpu x58 and ofcourse like i mentioned before my ud7.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i just want to put out there that this is what i have witness so far and from two reviews on amazon who also have p6x58d mobo, its rather finicky to get it to work. your mileage may vary of course. however the asus's mobo is rather temperamental compare to the gigabyte.
> 
> i think it may be an asus thing. review on amazon also states a reviewer's rampage 3 formula also having trouble recognizing frequently.
> 
> but it's working like a charm on my mac pro 4.1 which is basically a dual cpu x58 and ofcourse like i mentioned before my ud7.


My Mac Pro 2010 already has 2 Apricorn Velocity X2 SATA 6Gbps PCIe cards with 2 Crucial M550 512 Gb, a USB 3.0 4 ports card and a MacVidCards GTX 770 4Gb so I can't put anything else inside since my 4 PCIe Slots are full.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dotachin*
> 
> +rep saved me some bucks
> 
> It's a shame really.


i'm not saying it won't work very well in your case, but do proceed with caution.


----------



## Carrotsfart

1 TB of PCIe SSD storage....and here I am debating whether to spend $180 on a 280x or not...


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> 1 TB of PCIe SSD storage....and here I am debating whether to spend $180 on a 280x or not...


1tb of sata 3 ssd is cheap, i got one for 260 dollars after mail in rebate.

now 1tb of pcie ssd on the other hand...about the cost of an entire computer in most cases


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> 1tb of sata 3 ssd is cheap, i got one for 260 dollars after mail in rebate.
> 
> now 1tb of pcie ssd on the other hand...about the cost of an entire computer in most cases


Yeah, that's still amazing, I was hoping prices to go down when the revodrive came out and it always remained somekind of a niche market...
I didn't have a particular interest in them for my PC but since I do a lot of rendering with my Mac Pro I need storage to be as fast as possible... For now I have a raid0 of 512Gb M550 on 2 dedicated Apricorn Velocity X2 PCIe cards but I wouldn't mind faster and pay more.


----------



## 2010rig

First successful IBT Maximum 20 Runs @ 4.5 with Temps under 78.

1.304 V Core, 1.30625 VTT, 1.65V RAM, 1.82 PLL


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm still pretty frustrated that all of the Fury X GPUs are still sold out. I guess this isn't a bad thing since I'm still waiting to see how much better the Fury X2 [dual GPU] will be over the 295x2. From the numbers I've seen a single Fury X will be perfectly fine for the higher resolutions I use.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@2010rig That's awesome. Best Hz/V I've seen I think.


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @2010rig That's awesome. Best Hz/V I've seen I think.


Agreed. Won the hexaphonic lottery. Congrats @2010rig









My 5660 only goes to 4.3 at those Volts. Fortunately, for me, 4.3 is better than 4.5, otherwise I'd be on eBay all week betting on 5675s


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @2010rig That's awesome. Best Hz/V I've seen I think.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Agreed. Won the hexaphonic lottery. Congrats @2010rig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 5660 only goes to 4.3 at those Volts. Fortunately, for me, 4.3 is better than 4.5, otherwise I'd be on eBay all week betting on 5675s


Thanks guys! Just remember that is with HT *OFF* though. Took me a while, as it would not stabilize below 1.3V for both the core and VTT. Plus, I had a feeling the RAM wasn't stable @1.64V, once I put it to 1.65V it made a huge difference! (7-7-7-24)

I lucked out, my 930 was a low voltage chip as well.









Patience is key, try to find a new one if possible.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Thanks guys! Just remember that is with HT *OFF* though. Took me a while, as it would not stabilize below 1.3V for both the core and VTT. Plus, I had a feeling the RAM wasn't stable @1.64V, once I put it to 1.65V it made a huge difference! (7-7-7-24)
> 
> I lucked out, my 930 was a low voltage chip as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patience is key, try to find a new one if possible.


Need to turn HT on. You don't buy a hexcore only to have HT off.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Need to turn HT on. You don't buy a hexcore only to have HT off.


I was thinking the same thing. I have seen that time and time again with no HT you can use lower voltages. With HT on it requires a little bit more to keep stable. HT is needed to make the most out of these processors. Well at least HT is needed for the types of programs I use. Even for gaming HT has it's benefits.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Need to turn HT on. You don't buy a hexcore only to have HT off.


I will find my max OC with HT ON afterwards, it'll be closer to 4.4

Btw, not all games benefit from HT, 6 strong cores should be plenty to drive most games.

For 24/7 use, I always run my rig with HT OFF, as it is less strain on the system.

When I do renders, and working with Adobe CC, HT is a must.


----------



## jkmelbs

hey guys, epic thread, convinced me to give this a try! I've probably read about 50 pages across the 500+ that exist. Some good advice but quite a bit contradictory too so i'm hoping for some more current advice. eg one guy posting pics of a cpu pll of 1.84, someone else saying 1.4 is all it needs. My last o/c foray was with my 300A celeron, so i'm a bit out of practise....

i bought a x5675 a few weeks ago to give this thing ago, but i'm not having much luck, so looking for some suggestions on where I can tweak to bring up the speed and reduce the heat

my temps @ 4.2 (21x200) peak at 80c (+55 over ambient) and this is with the case sides off etc. vcore is set @ 1.35 in the bios but reported as 1.28 under load and 1.344 at boot (ibt @ max is stable - ~5hr run). This will get too hot with the sides back on.

I get thermal shutdown if i go a notch or two higher in the vcore and up the multiplier to 22

here's where I'm at with the 4.2



setup is
Gigabyte X58A-UD5 rev2 (FD)
24gb ram 6x4 patriot sector7 http://www.patriotmemory.com/product/detail.jsp?prodline=5&catid=34&prodgroupid=197&id=971&type=1
leadtek 8400gs (pc will not be used for gaming or any gfx intensive tasks. just need something i can plug a monitor into and boot into windows)
550w coolermaster rs psu
nzxt h2 mid tower case
$30 tower air cooler (gammaxx400 - installed for vertical airflow so the hot air goes out the top vent, the tiny vcard means plenty of airflow)
240gb plextor m5s ssd

(there's a dvd drive which i'll take out and a few unplugged 1tb drives in there atm)

I'm hoping for a 4.4 oc but not sure if my setup makes that viable. The case isn't the best for airflow - it's marketed as a silent case but i have so few things in there at the moment and i've removed all the caddies & 5.25 in bay drive covers, the psu apparently isn't the best either and the full ram banks will probably limit it too. But i'm hoping the lack of GFX requirements. Not able to upgrade the case/psu/cooler at this time

I believe my max stable blk is 215 (12x215), but 190 and above seem to need a lot of juice and bring up the temps

i'm also confused about the available multipliers. the turbo steps for the x5765 are 2/2/2/2/3/3 (so max it'll go is the base multiplier of 23 + 3 if you're only using 2 cores and have turbo on).
Does that mean if i want to leave core parking enabled then the max multiplier i can go to is 23? I only get access to 25 if i turn turbo on, but no combination of eist/cstates etc resulted in a system that underclocked when not in use and DIDNT go to x26 when under load. I could either have it at x25 24/7 (and 107w consumption) or x23 with core parking.

I think i can get x25 @ 176 stable, but that's with the speed fixed at 4.4 24/7 (due to core parking being disabled), and that sucks too much juice because this machine will be on 24/7 but will only get a few hrs use each day. Temps are ok (hover around 60ish), but ram is downclocked to ~1400. Can't get it stable with ram at 1760

191x23 might be a goer with the ram at ~1530, but that makes the temps jump into the low-mid 70s

How should I go about this? Is there anything i can do to reduce my vcore/temps @ 22x200? Or a way i can get access to the x24 & 25 multis while leaving core parking enabled? Because I'd really like to run the ram @ its rated speed

Thanks


----------



## 2010rig

I would test 23 x 191 for 4400 and try to get that stable.

Aim for 1.33 core V, 1.32 VTT, 1.84 PLL

Have you got the timings set right with your RAM? Also, you should run your RAM at 1.65V.

Can you use the 25 multiplier with Turbo Boost?

Always use the Odd Multipliers, 21, 23, 25, with the lowest bclk possible.

You may also need a better cooler, my NH-D14 has 3 fans on it. ( 2 x 140 mm's + 120mm )

Do you have 2 fans on that cooler?


----------



## jkmelbs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> I would test 23 x 191 for 4400 and try to get that stable.
> 
> Aim for 1.33 core V, 1.32 VTT, 1.84 PLL


thanks i'll give it a shot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Have you got the timings set right with your RAM? Also, you should run your RAM at 1.65V.


goes from 1.64 to 1.66







, and yeah, i've manually set the timings to 8-9-8-24 which is what it's rated at @ 1600
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Can you use the 25 multiplier with Turbo Boost?
> 
> Always use the Odd Multipliers, 21, 23, 25, with the lowest bclk possible.


Yes, but it's either @ 25 all the time, or for the power saving features to work (downclock to x12 when not in use) i need to enable the x26 as well. That'll probably be too unstable when something is only running on 1 or 2 cores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> You may also need a better cooler, my NH-D14 has 3 fans on it. ( 2 x 140 mm's + 120mm )
> 
> Do you have 2 fans on that cooler?


No just one.

Can't really spend anymore on this. I can move an internal case exhaust fan (at the moment it's at right angles to the heatsink) so that it's attached to the vent at the top of the case.

Code:



Code:


_............._
|
[<]  #######
[<]  #######
[<]  #######
|    #######
|   [^][^][^]
|
|

(side on view of case. [<] is the case exhaust fan, [^] is the heatsink fan. # is the heatsink. ... is a case vent.


----------



## ericeod

I thought this info would be helpful for those curious about the even multi (and really down to the x20 multi which always seemed to create OC problems for the infamous i7 920)

Odd vs Even multipliers... must read:
*Xtreme Systems* "Core i7/X58 Overclocking Thread - post #876" post by _dejanh, 12 December 2008_
A snippet from the post
Quote:


> *3. What the heck is the deal with the 20x multiplier then?*
> 
> This one is a real kicker (in a funny way). Yes, 20x multiplier is special, in more than one way, but mostly in the way people are trying to use it. You see, there is nothing wrong with the 20x multiplier. Indeed, it works, just like all other multipliers, perfectly fine. It is the DRAM multiplier and BCLK that people are combining with it that causes problems when combined with the QPI multiplier and the Uncore speed. At 20x200MHz, our default memory multiplier is 8 and our memory is at 1600MHz. The Uncore speed becomes 16x200MHz or 3.2GHz (or 2xDRAM at minimum). Therefore, remembering our (safe) ratios of 8:9 Uncore to QPI we see that the QPI link speed must be a minimum of 3.6GHz or higher. In case of 20x200MHz the Uncore and QPI are exactly in this ratio and with the added stress on the core, cache, IMC, DRAM, etc. this becomes a problem. At this point clock oscillations become much more prominent and if the QPI link speed falls below the 9:8 ratio to Uncore at any point in time combined with the added stress on the components the system can and likely will become unstable. Hence, at 20x200MHz with a default memory, Uncore and QPI multipliers we cannot really have a 100% stable system.


----------



## 2010rig

You definitely want to add a 2nd fan to your cooler.

Here are my BIOS settings, all power saving features are disabled.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@ericeod

Strange, my i7 920 D0, 5660* and 2x5650 have all been happy at 200*20 on Gigabyte boards at reasonable volts. I also tried odd multipliers but I just got the same results with lower Uncore/RAM speeds.

I mean, its anecdotal, but then so is his post about it.

*killed by poor Uncore voltage regulation.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

Hey guy's, please help me understand. I have read some responses that people had the same problem or similar. I don't have a ES sample. I recently purchased a Asus Rampage II Gene and updated the bios to the latest. I also purchased a Xeon X5660 and when I open up Core Temp 1.0 RC6 or CPU-Z 1.72, all I am seeing is 4 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon X5660 was purchased on Ebay from a power seller and claimed the processor's were pulled from servers. Am I doing something wrong or have the wrong bios settings. Currently overclocked 21*201=4252ghz,,,, memory [email protected] I want to make sure it's not myself that's the problem before I go complaining and ask for a refund or replacement CPU.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> Hey guy's, please help me understand. I have read some responses that people had the same problem or similar. I don't have a ES sample. I recently purchased a Asus Rampage II Gene and updated the bios to the latest. I also purchased a Xeon X5660 and when I open up Core Temp 1.0 RC6 or CPU-Z 1.72, all I am seeing is 4 cores and 4 threads. The Xeon X5660 was purchased on Ebay from a power seller and claimed the processor's were pulled from servers. Am I doing something wrong or have the wrong bios settings. Currently overclocked 21*201=4252ghz,,,, memory [email protected] I want to make sure it's not myself that's the problem before I go complaining and ask for a refund or replacement CPU.


Post a SS of cpu-z and also check in the bios under cpu configuration and make sure you have all cores enabled.


----------



## bill1024

Did you after the bios flash, pull the plug, pull the battery, hit the star button to drain the caps. Hit the bios reset switch/jump pins for 30 seconds?
If not try doing that.
Then reinstall battery, plug in PSU cord start unit go in bios and select fail safe , change setting for your SSD so it is not IDE and see if the other cores show up.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

Hey guy's thanks for the fast responses. I went back into the bios and enabled C1E support, CPU TM Function, and Intel SpeedStep Tech. I am not 100% sure I named all that I enabled to get it to work. Now Coretemp is reading and showing 6 temperatures, Cpu-Z is showing 6 Cores 6 Threads. Is this correct or did I leave something out and which of these settings can I or should I disable? I previously was using i7-2700k @4700ghz and ram @1866. Encoding a Blu-ray MKV to DVD-9 using AVStoDVD.
i7-2700k @4700ghz / ram @1866
1st pass 30.81
2nd pass 57.01
total 1.27.31

[email protected] / ram @2015
1st pass 23.47
2nd pass 45.56
total 1.10.55

The total is what AVStoDVD shows right underneath 1st and 2nd pass in HCenc encoder. If I had to estimate time savings of around 14 - 15 minutes or X5660 finished 14 - 15 minutes faster than i7-2700k.


----------



## 2010rig

Enable Hyper Threading to see 6 cores 12 threads, it takes slightly more voltage to get stable.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

OK, I tried to enable HT but upon reboot my video card got too hot and just stayed on a black screen with the curson just blinking. I made sure it wasn't my setting's as I changed everything back. Felt the card and it was really hot. It was a cheap Geforce 9600gt 512mb. I am not a gamer, just encode video for myself and cartoon's/movies for my 3 yr old. Looking to spend $100 at most. Looking at this site to help me but am confused.
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

I been looking at EVGA GeForce GT 730 1GB GDDR5 64bit for $70. Please any help, Thanks a bunch everyone.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> OK, I tried to enable HT but upon reboot my video card got too hot and just stayed on a black screen with the curson just blinking. I made sure it wasn't my setting's as I changed everything back. Felt the card and it was really hot. It was a cheap Geforce 9600gt 512mb. I am not a gamer, just encode video for myself and cartoon's/movies for my 3 yr old. Looking to spend $100 at most. Looking at this site to help me but am confused.
> http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php
> 
> I been looking at EVGA GeForce GT 730 1GB GDDR5 64bit for $70. Please any help, Thanks a bunch everyone.


A GTX 730 is a workstation grade GPU, it's not powerful enough for any real gaming usage. You should look for a card which has ambient cooling if you're not gaming in my opinion, something which uses a large heat sink rather than a fan. It'll reduce the overall noise of your system, and they're generally quite cheap too.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> OK, I tried to enable HT but upon reboot my video card got too hot and just stayed on a black screen with the curson just blinking. I made sure it wasn't my setting's as I changed everything back. Felt the card and it was really hot. It was a cheap Geforce 9600gt 512mb. I am not a gamer, just encode video for myself and cartoon's/movies for my 3 yr old. Looking to spend $100 at most. Looking at this site to help me but am confused.
> http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php
> 
> I been looking at EVGA GeForce GT 730 1GB GDDR5 64bit for $70. Please any help, Thanks a bunch everyone.


don't mess with the pci-e voltage, you will regret it


----------



## 2010rig

Look for a used 750 Ti.

You can get one for $115...
http://m.newegg.com/ProductList?Keyword=750%20ti&sortField=PRICE


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Look for a used 750 Ti.
> 
> You can get one for $115...
> http://m.newegg.com/ProductList?Keyword=750%20ti&sortField=PRICE


That's good for low power and is a pretty good card.

If you want more performance look for a used 270x, 280, or 285 or about that same price. I've seen them go for about $100-$130 on the used market and they would destroy the GT 730, and are much better than the 750ti.

For NVIDIA you could find used GTX 670s, 760, or even some 680, for that price as well.

The 750ti does consume much less power though and is a much smaller card if that's what you need.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> That's good for low power and is a pretty good card.
> 
> If you want more performance look for a used 270x, 280, or 285 or about that same price. I've seen them go for about $100-$130 on the used market and they would destroy the GT 730, and are much better than the 750ti.
> 
> For NVIDIA you could find used GTX 670s, 760, or even some 680, for that price as well.
> 
> The 750ti does consume much less power though and is a much smaller card if that's what you need.


Agreed. 7950's can be had for that price and they are basically a 280. I picked one up a year ago for about $90, now they go for a bit more but not by much.

Just make sure to get one with a good cooler in case it was used for mining _(Windforce rev2 was pretty good)._


----------



## ghabhaducha

I agree with the secondhand 7950/R9 280/R9 285 advice if you are looking for power. However, if you want an Nvidia gpu, EVGA is having a sale on their B-Stock page: http://www.evga.com/Products/ProductList.aspx?type=8 The 750ti is $100, and packs a punch for it's efficiency.

In either case, do NOT purchase a GT 730 for $70.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> I agree with the secondhand 7950/R9 280/R9 285 advice if you are looking for power. However, if you want an Nvidia gpu, EVGA is having a sale on their B-Stock page: http://www.evga.com/Products/ProductList.aspx?type=8 The 750ti is $100, and packs a punch for it's efficiency.
> 
> In either case, do NOT purchase a GT 730 for $70.


Agreed. However, I don't think I'd invest in a 750ti right now, it's not a bad card but it just doesn't cut it for current games. A 7950/280/760/670 are the bare minimum for 1080p at medium to high settings on current games if you want a solid 60fps.

Of course it doesn't sound like they play many games, so anything decent will do. That 750ti would be plenty.


----------



## 2010rig

He said he doesn't play games, and does encoding on a previous NVIDIA card, so I'm guessing he's using CUDA software. The 750 TI would be a huge upgrade, while it uses very little power for around $100...


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> He said he doesn't play games, and does encoding on a previous NVIDIA card, so I'm guessing he's using CUDA software. The 750 TI would be a huge upgrade, while it uses very little power for around $100...


It really depends on the software. Usually OpenCL and CUDA are very close. In the case of the 750ti vs something like a 7950, there will be no comparison. Most of the time the GPU makes very little difference for video rendering anyway, sometimes it can have a negative effect if you have a powerful CPU.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

If its just CPU encoding, heck yeah get a GTX 750, save the money and you don't even need the ti version. You could find those used for really cheap.

If you do need CUDA get a used 670/760 or 680 those are pretty reasonable as well.

Sorry we didn't see that post about no games! Hopefully we did get you to thinking about what you can get used for just a little bit more.


----------



## Carrotsfart

As I was saying before, try opting for a card which has passive cooling. You're not looking for compute performance so I'd imagine there would be a few cards which only use a heat sink, no fans. Removing moving parts means a quieter system and less points for potential failure which is a plus. Could be something to look into?


----------



## Supersaiyan888

Hello everyone, I am happy that you all are giving me feedback. I don't game except on PS3 only. I did a little research that compared GTX 660, 750 TI, and R7 265. I was strongly weighing the performance vs power efficiency. I will listen and not get the cheap card I posted. Here is my rig, hope it helps

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## Supersaiyan888

Hello everyone, I am happy that you all are giving me feedback. I don't game except on PS3 only. I did a little research that compared GTX 660, 750 TI, and R7 265. I was strongly weighing the performance vs power efficiency. I will listen and not get the cheap card I posted. Here is my rig, hope it helps

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> Hello everyone, I am happy that you all are giving me feedback. I don't game except on PS3 only. I did a little research that compared GTX 660, 750 TI, and R7 265. I was strongly weighing the performance vs power efficiency. I will listen and not get the cheap card I posted. Here is my rig, hope it helps
> 
> Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
> Zumax 600w PSU
> Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
> Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
> Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
> OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
> 500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
> AOC 22" LED monitor


If you haven't already, don't purchase that power supply. The power supply is like the heart of your computer, if it fails, your computer no longer works. If it fails spectacularly, you risk losing everything. You don't have to spend a lot of money on a good power supply, but you should aim to get the highest quality one in your price range.

Also, getting a cheap graphics card isn't necessarily a bad thing, just make sure you do your research on what you're getting. I used to get a lot of 2nd hand computers. In the past year I've gone from a silent GT 520 to a GTS 450 and finally to my GTX 750 Ti, all were Asus, the first two were second hand out of drafting machines and were very good cards.

I recently got a machine which I'm upgrading for a friend which had an Asus GT 630 in it and it has the single loudest fan on it I've ever heard. The card gave me a splitting headache after an hour because of the frequency and volume of the fan. Power Efficiency is important to me, but not as much as the volume of the component anymore.

The cards which have been mentioned previously are really entry to mid level gaming GPU's and are probably overkill for what you're doing. I'm not terribly sure what would fit your needs well though, so I can't offer more than I already have unfortunately.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

Yes, I already have the bootleg PSU, plan on upgrading in 3 months. I found a EVGA Geforce GTX 650TI video card. Model 02G-P4-3653-KR on craiglist for $45 dollars. Is this good.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> Yes, I already have the bootleg PSU, plan on upgrading in 3 months. I found a EVGA Geforce GTX 650TI video card. Model 02G-P4-3653-KR on craiglist for $45 dollars. Is this good.


Upgrade the power supply first, I wouldn't take any chances... As Carrotsfart said it's the heart of your computer and you wouldn't want to blow up any components... For the GPU well it's a start but you might wan't to get the 750 Ti. It's a little better in the long run and it will give you more


----------



## Supersaiyan888

OK, my power supply need's immediate attention. I'm still a little unsure on graphic's card, but now all of you are saying trash the PSU, So what should I be looking for in regards to power supply?
That generic power supply is 8+ yrs old and has taking me through x58 with [email protected], Upgraded to ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 with [email protected], now back to x58 Rampage II Gene with X5660. Should I be going for 800, 1000, or more powersupply?

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## Supersaiyan888

It was suggested by several member's that I should first upgrade my power supply before I try to get a new video card. Will either of these 2 power supplies be good enough for the graphic's card you guy's recommended?

http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-SuperNOVA-Crossfire-Warranty-110-B2-0850-V1/dp/B00KYK1CC6/ref=sr_1_11?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1437840130&sr=1-11&keywords=Power+Supply&refinements=p_72%3A1248879011

or

http://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Professional-Watt-Modular-HX850/dp/B0090I9W66/ref=sr_1_118?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1437840430&sr=1-118&keywords=Power+Supply&refinements=p_72%3A1248879011

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> It was suggested by several member's that I should first upgrade my power supply before I try to get a new video card. Will either of these 2 power supplies be good enough for the graphic's card you guy's recommended?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-SuperNOVA-Crossfire-Warranty-110-B2-0850-V1/dp/B00KYK1CC6/ref=sr_1_11?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1437840130&sr=1-11&keywords=Power+Supply&refinements=p_72%3A1248879011
> 
> or
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Professional-Watt-Modular-HX850/dp/B0090I9W66/ref=sr_1_118?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1437840430&sr=1-118&keywords=Power+Supply&refinements=p_72%3A1248879011
> 
> Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
> Zumax 600w PSU
> Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
> Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
> 12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
> Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
> OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
> 500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
> AOC 22" LED monitor


You don't need anything with that much wattage, take a look at this one:
http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-SuperNOVA-Modular-Supply-220-G2-0550-Y1/dp/B0106RDI3W/ref=sr_1_3?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1437841385&sr=1-3&refinements=p_89%3AEVGA%2Cp_n_feature_keywords_two_browse-bin%3A6906984011

It's based on the Superflower Leadex Gold platform so it's very high quality, has eco mode which turns off the fan when under 45c and it comes with a 7 year warranty.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> Yes, I already have the bootleg PSU, plan on upgrading in 3 months. I found a EVGA Geforce GTX 650TI video card. Model 02G-P4-3653-KR on craiglist for $45 dollars. Is this good.


btw - what software are you using to encode your videos?


----------



## Supersaiyan888

@2010

I use Handbrake, BD-RB, and AVStoDVD, These have given me the best looking encodes, I am obsessed sometimes in comparing my encodes, and will sometimes have 3 - 5 encodes and try to pinpoint the best looking one. My wife get's frustrated with me because I ask her opinion and she say's they all look the same when really she doesn't even try to spot anything or notice a difference, LOL.









Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## 2010rig

You will get your best Encodes using your CPU. Handbrake does support OpenCL & CUDA.

BD-RB, and AVStoDVD support CUDA, so it all depends on what you find within your budget.

If all you want to spend is $45, the 650 TI will be fine.

Try and get HT enabled and stable, with my cooling I'm at 4.4, temps are in the 60's with every day use. ( Hit 79 momentarily with IBT 20 runs )


----------



## Supersaiyan888

@2010

So are you saying that those programs support Cuda but I should continue just using CPU only with HT enabled. Also should I still upgrade my power supply if I grab a 650 TI? Looking at this one: B-stock

http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=02G-P4-3658-RX

Also looking at B-stock power supplies, any suggestions

http://www.evga.com/Products/ProductList.aspx?type=8

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## 2010rig

You still need a card to help with rendering, but your best encodes will come from CPU only.

With the 650Ti your PSU should be fine. However, I would get a better power supply though, one that is 80 Plus certified, since you're overclocking.


----------



## EvilMonk

The power supply is a thing to replace for sure, don't keep that no name thing you have in your case you are just playing with fire.

If you want to go with the 650 Ti you can go ahead but it's pretty much outdated. The good thing with the 750 Ti is that it's based on the Maxwell architecture which support and offers a lot more than the old 650 Ti based on the Kepler architecture.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

I plan on getting a video card and a power supply. Just didn't wont to spend unnecessarily if I didn't have to. Was strongly considering the 650 Ti because I don't game and all those cards mentioned seem to be overkill for my needs, It's bothering me to have my pc just sit and collect dust while I find a video card and power supply, I wanted you guys opinion on the 650 TI boost and posted the link, but within like 10 minutes it went to auto notify. I just looked up 80 Plus certified and see how important it is, Going to make sure I pick one that is 80 Plus certified. One member suggested this one and I think I it's the best deal for me,
http://www.ncixus.com/products/?usaffiliateid=1000031504&sku=97531&vpn=110-B2-0750-VR&manufacture=eVGA&promoid=1338&ir_clickid=wHr2EYUrnxnvytlz3l3Fp2v4UkXzqy1xyWQvzk0&ir_cid=3092&ir_affid=27795

Now Video card's still unsure about, since the 650 TI is not in stock anymore, Don't game at all and don't won't to spend unnecessarily.

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> I plan on getting a video card and a power supply. Just didn't wont to spend unnecessarily if I didn't have to. Was strongly considering the 650 Ti because I don't game and all those cards mentioned seem to be overkill for my needs, It's bothering me to have my pc just sit and collect dust while I find a video card and power supply, I wanted you guys opinion on the 650 TI boost and posted the link, but within like 10 minutes it went to auto notify. I just looked up 80 Plus certified and see how important it is, Going to make sure I pick one that is 80 Plus certified. One member suggested this one and I think I it's the best deal for me,
> http://www.ncixus.com/products/?usaffiliateid=1000031504&sku=97531&vpn=110-B2-0750-VR&manufacture=eVGA&promoid=1338&ir_clickid=wHr2EYUrnxnvytlz3l3Fp2v4UkXzqy1xyWQvzk0&ir_cid=3092&ir_affid=27795
> 
> Now Video card's still unsure about, since the 650 TI is not in stock anymore, Don't game at all and don't won't to spend unnecessarily.
> 
> Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
> Zumax 600w PSU
> Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
> Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
> 12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
> Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
> OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
> 500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
> AOC 22" LED monitor


Check your local Craigslist ads. I know the 650/650ti are pretty easy to find! Even Ebay has a ton of them!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nvidia-gtx-650-/161767616874?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item25aa19f16a

http://www.ebay.com/itm/GeForce-GTX650-2GB-384Bit-DDR3-PCI-E-with-Games-/161750231576?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item25a910aa18

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EVGA-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-650-TI-1G-P4-3653-KR-1GB-GDDR5-SDRAM-/321812004038?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aed7d7cc6


----------



## Carrotsfart

@Supersaiyan888 You should be looking for no more than 550W for a power supply. It isn't the wattage of your power supply which is bad, it's the quality of the components it is made of. If you go for a 500 or 550W power supply from a high quality manufacturer such as Seasonic, EVGA, Corsair or Silverstone it'll be more than adequate. The issue with low quality power supplies such as the Zumax you currently have is that they may not be rated for continuous operation at the advertised wattage which is typically the case. Upgrading the power supply is really just for peace of mind, as you said your GPU is blown and without one your computer can't be used, so why upgrade a PSU for a computer which can't even be used yet.

Unfortunately that 650 Ti would have been perfect for you. It's a shame you couldn't snap it up. Everyone here is really focused with gaming performance, which is irrelevant for you. Having the newest architecture may be nice, but when you're doing CPU encoding it's not necessary, especially if you're coming from a 9600GT which everyone seems to be forgetting.


----------



## Supersaiyan888

@Carrot

Thanks for understanding. Everyone has been very helpful and gave me a lot to consider. Got tied up with the family yesterday so didn't get to order anything. The power supply that was suggested to me had a rebate and is the best deal for me in my target price range, but that deal end's tomorrow. I think I am too late because the deal end's tomorrow and I think they would say I didn't submit in time. So just guessing with shipping and all I think I would at least have been at around $50. So would this be good enough for $60, I'm a prime member so free 2 day shipping.

http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-BRONZE-Warranty-Supply-100-B1-0600-KR/dp/B00EON40CS/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1437915063&sr=8-6&keywords=80+plus

Also just got a message, I can grab a EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti used for $68 free shipping. What do you guy's think. No warranty but reliable company.

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## ghabhaducha

Bro, you are still in time. The NCIX EVGA PSU rebates are valid for purchases made from July 16 - July 29, 2015. You can also get an additional $10 off by using the code "NEWCUST10JULY" after making a new account on the website.

Personally I wouldn't get any of the B1/G1 PSUs, like the one you listed, and buy either a B2 or a G2 unit. The OEM behind those are better than the older units. @shilka can explain a bit better than I can.

EVGA 750G2
or
EVGA 750B2

Also keep in mind that shipping should be free above $75 using "LMFZQ"
Slickdeals Link

Edit~
Here is Shilka's thread that I was referring to:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1541939/evga-supernova-lineup-explained/0_100


----------



## Supersaiyan888

@ghab

I tried all the codes and was rejected. Free shipping was only valid July 24 - 26. New customer code rejected because saying "Cannot be combined with Premier Partner Pricing. " So $76.99 + UPS Ground $12.49 = $89.48 - $30 rebate = $59.48 Debating on what to do. Savings is around the price of the link I posted with 2 day shipping and 546 customer reviews with almost perfect 5 star's. I know it doesn't have you guys B2 ratings, so I'm just confused on what to do. Thank you for your help.

Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
Zumax 600w PSU
Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
AOC 22" LED monitor


----------



## thetwistedblue

Hi guys,

I'm using an X5660 in an MSI x58 Pro-E. I have a single stick of 2GB, 1600 Mhz, 1.6V Corsair XMS3 in there for testing. So far, the only changes from stock I think I've made are to boost the base clock frequency up to 180 and the memory multiplier down to 3 for testing. The voltages are all still on auto.

My problem is that if I push the frequency any higher (say up to 185), when the system reboots I get a "bad BIOS checksum error". From there I have to reset the CMOS and reload my settings at 180.

Has anyone seen this problem before? My overclock is decent enough but I'm hoping I can push it higher and the problem will be solved by just swapping out my CMOS battery or something nice and easy.


Spoiler: BIOS pics


----------



## ghabhaducha

Spoiler: SuperSaiyan888



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Supersaiyan888*
> 
> @ghab
> 
> I tried all the codes and was rejected. Free shipping was only valid July 24 - 26. New customer code rejected because saying "Cannot be combined with Premier Partner Pricing. " So $76.99 + UPS Ground $12.49 = $89.48 - $30 rebate = $59.48 Debating on what to do. Savings is around the price of the link I posted with 2 day shipping and 546 customer reviews with almost perfect 5 star's. I know it doesn't have you guys B2 ratings, so I'm just confused on what to do. Thank you for your help.
> 
> Thermaltake Armor Series VA8000BWS Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
> Zumax 600w PSU
> Swiftech MCP655-B + Dual 120mm Fan Radiator
> Asus Rampage II Gene + X5660
> 12gb Samsung Low Voltage 30nm MV-3V4G3/US
> Kingston HyperX 120gb SSD
> OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD
> 500GB Hitachi laptop HDD
> AOC 22" LED monitor






Well that sucks. Definitely PM shilka, he'll know what PSU to get at what price.



Spoiler: thetwistedblue!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thetwistedblue*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> I'm using an X5660 in an MSI x58 Pro-E. I have a single stick of 2GB, 1600 Mhz, 1.6V Corsair XMS3 in there for testing. So far, the only changes from stock I think I've made are to boost the base clock frequency up to 180 and the memory multiplier down to 3 for testing. The voltages are all still on auto.
> 
> My problem is that if I push the frequency any higher (say up to 185), when the system reboots I get a "bad BIOS checksum error". From there I have to reset the CMOS and reload my settings at 180.
> 
> Has anyone seen this problem before? My overclock is decent enough but I'm hoping I can push it higher and the problem will be solved by just swapping out my CMOS battery or something nice and easy.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS pics






Check out a previous post of mine. Not sure if the MSI X58 Pro-E suffers from something similar:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Speaking from personal experience, the MSI Big Bang XPower X58 DOES support a Xeon X5650 with the latest bios, with a catch.
> 
> On the original Nehalem 45nm, the uncore was usually set to 2x memory multiplier, but the Westmere-EP's can run at 1.5x memory multiplier if need be. Given that the stock memory multiplier is 10x (133x10 = 1333), the Uncore multiplier doubles to 20x (133x20 = 2666). This is completely fine at stock; however, when you try to OC it, you will obviously want to lower the memory multiplier (e.g. 200x8 = 1600), but the Uncore won't lower to the "double" @16x (12x or 1.5 times memory multi is ENTIRELY out of the question) and will stay at 20x (meaning 200x20 = 4000). For me this was completely unstable at voltages I was comfortable with, so for that build I was only able to OC the X5650 to 160x20 = 3200, with a memory of 160x10 = 1600, and an Uncore of 160x20 = 3200. I ended up giving this system to a family member for CAD use, and decided to keep my Sabertooth X58 for my own X5650 @4.4
> 
> I hope that helps.


----------



## thetwistedblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> 
> Check out a previous post of mine. Not sure if the MSI X58 Pro-E suffers from something similar:


Hi ghabhaducha, thanks for the reply!

My BIOS has a 'memory ratio' option, which I assumed was the memory multiplier, but with a base clock of 180 and a memory ratio of 3 I'm getting a memory clock of 1080 ( = 180 x 6).

Although I have no control over the uncore, it _appears_ to be reducing down to 2x memory frequency and the BIOS reports it as 2160. Do you think this is the same as with your problem, and the BIOS is just reporting incorrectly?

And with regards to the error reporting, did your board fail to boot and spit out a 'BIOS checksum error' as mine did?

Thanks very much.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Hmm, that's interesting. Mine didn't actually lower the uncore, and when i got BSOD's they were normally increase QPI voltage codes (x124, i think). Perhaps yours does support changing the uncore frequency. What did you set your QPI multiplier to? I didn't see it in the screenshots.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Guys, with our six core chips, is it quicker to run PhysX on the GPU or CPU?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Guys, with our six core chips, is it quicker to run PhysX on the GPU or CPU?


I haven't tried lately, but it was faster to just let the GPU handle PhysX from my test last year. Intels newer CPUs can handle the data better with less latency than our CPUs\platform. You can try it out and let us know the outcome if you want.


----------



## ericeod

Just a little info to pass along from my experience:

I recently built a system using an eVGA x58 FTW3 (eVGA claims board supports Xeons) and a more obscure OEM (for HP) X5679. It seems I am extremely limited on what I can tweak. I am running the latest bios (83), but cant adjust the multi, the uncore or memory divider. I can disable/enable the turbo, can adjust voltages and can adjust the base clock.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Guys, with our six core chips, is it quicker to run PhysX on the GPU or CPU?


Depends if you run GPU intensive games and if you have 1 or 2 GPUs...
I'd say GPU...


----------



## Tiny Trang

Hey there,

I'm new to this forum and joined specifically to post in this thread. I just had a few questions regarding overclocking on the Asus P6T Deluxe V2. I was able to snag a complete system about 8 months ago that included an Asus P6t V2 with an Intel i7 920, Evga Gtx 460 GPU, 12GB of ram, 650W Corsair PSU all in a pretty snazzy Antec 900 case for $200







. I was surprised to see just how awesome this old computer was running. However, my gpu seems to giving out now as I cant seem to run both of my monitors at the same time anymore. I bought a used Xeon x5660 for $65 today and was hoping to throw that into the system as I see a very noticaable drop in performance when I watch a YouTube video and surf the internet on one monitor, 60% of the cpu was being used from just running a youtube video and about 10ish google chrome tabs.

What I'm essentially asking is, should I buy a Cooler Master Seidon 240m, I could get it for $89.99 with a $25 rebate making it $64.99, or save some money and get the Hyper 212 Evo to overclock the x5660 that I will be receiving in my Asus P6t Deluxe V2 or should I just be happy with the stock speed of the x5660 over my current 920 and put the cpu cooling money toward a better gpu? I would just like to be able to game at 1080p 60fps on almost max settings.

EDIT: I forgot to add that if I were to go for the Seidon 240M as a cooler I would have to get a new case as well because it does not seem like the Antec 900 supports a 240mm rad. I would probably get either the Enthoo Pro or the Define R5 if I were to get a new case.


----------



## DR4G00N

Get the hyper 212, it should work fine for 3.8-4.0GHz (at least) on the x5660 and use the money you saved towards a new gpu.
I'd go for at least an HD 7870 or GTX 660 for a worthwhile upgrade.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Get the hyper 212, it should work fine for 3.8-4.0GHz (at least) on the x5660 and use the money you saved towards a new gpu.
> I'd go for at least an HD 7870 or GTX 660 for a worthwhile upgrade.


Will overclocking to 3.8-4.0 on the x5660 be a major upgrade over the stock 920? Would it be able to run a R9 390 without bottlenecking it? I'm currently getting 40C idle and 80C-90C under load. Will the oc'ed x5660 with the 212 evo see better temps?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Will overclocking to 3.8-4.0 on the x5660 be a major upgrade over the stock 920? Would it be able to run a R9 390 without bottlenecking it? I'm currently getting 40C idle and 80C-90C under load. Will the oc'ed x5660 with the 212 evo see better temps?


Wow that's hot! I'm guessing your using the stock cooler? At 4GHz you'd see quite a noticeable difference in games over the stock 920 and it will handle an R9 390 just fine, my x5650 @ 4.1GHz doesn't bottleneck my OC'ed 780 Ti 99% of the time.

The temps should be a fair bit lower under load, I'd guess about 70-75c max @ 4GHz 1.25v.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Yeah I'm on the stock cooler







. The thermal paste is really old as well. Thank you for your help. With the 212 evo doesn't it just blow the hot air around the inside of the case making the inside of the case hotter in turn causing the cpu and gpu to heat up?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Yeah I'm on the stock cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . The thermal paste is really old as well. Thank you for your help. With the 212 evo doesn't it just blow the hot air around the inside of the case making the inside of the case hotter in turn causing the cpu and gpu to heat up?


Indeed it does, but that's why you have case fans to circulate the air before it heats up.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Indeed it does, but that's why you have case fans to circulate the air before it heats up.


Ahhhhh good point. TIme to do some research on the best fan configs now.


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Will overclocking to 3.8-4.0 on the x5660 be a major upgrade over the stock 920? Would it be able to run a R9 390 without bottlenecking it? I'm currently getting 40C idle and 80C-90C under load. Will the oc'ed x5660 with the 212 evo see better temps?


Well I think the R9 390 and 390x are starting to be on the limit for GPUs... You'll be fine I think but the next generations I think our Westmere EP and X58 platforms will start to slowly show their age. For now I don't think it will bottleneck though


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Ahhhhh good point. TIme to do some research on the best fan configs now.


Did you ever think about going with a watercooling? I had a 212 evo before my H100i and H110, I tested a lot of configs for fans and did some lapping on the CPU / waterblock and tried push / pull than pull / push and other setups for my radiator and case fans with probe thermometers and I really managed to drop my temperatures a lot compared to the temperatures I had before. I had to spend a lot of money on different case fans to find a good noise / performance ratio for my fans though but I found good cougar fans in 120 and 140 mm to put inside my NZXT cases and radiators for my rigs and they work great with my fan controllers.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Did you ever think about going with a watercooling? I had a 212 evo before my H100i and H110, I tested a lot of configs for fans and did some lapping on the CPU / waterblock and tried push / pull than pull / push and other setups for my radiator and case fans with probe thermometers and I really managed to drop my temperatures a lot compared to the temperatures I had before. I had to spend a lot of money on different case fans to find a good noise / performance ratio for my fans though but I found good cougar fans in 120 and 140 mm to put inside my NZXT cases and radiators for my rigs and they work great with my fan controllers.


Just a couple posts up I talked about my dilemma and asked what I should do. I have an Antec 900, but it doesn't support any radiators larger than a 120mm so if I were to get a Cooler Master Seidon 240M I would also have to grab a new case with radiator support. I need a gpu much more than I need a new cpu but I got a good deal on a x5660 so I jumped on it. Now I'm just trying to figure out if I should spend the cpu cooling money for cpu cooling or put it toward a better gpu. I can grab a Hyper 212 Evo for $20, a Gtx 760 for $150, and an Antex Gx500 for $20 or free if I buy two items from the same guy. I'm mostly going to use my computer for programming as I'm going to major in Computer Science once I get to college, but I'm a senior now so it won't be long. I do most of my programming work in BlueJ and IntelliJ


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Just a couple posts up I talked about my dilemma and asked what I should do. I have an Antec 900, but it doesn't support any radiators larger than a 120mm so if I were to get a Cooler Master Seidon 240M I would also have to grab a new case with radiator support. I need a gpu much more than I need a new cpu but I got a good deal on a x5660 so I jumped on it. Now I'm just trying to figure out if I should spend the cpu cooling money for cpu cooling or put it toward a better gpu. I can grab a Hyper 212 Evo for $20, a Gtx 760 for $150, and an Antex Gx500 for $20 or free if I buy two items from the same guy. I'm mostly going to use my computer for programming as I'm going to major in Computer Science once I get to college, but I'm a senior now so it won't be long. I do most of my programming work in BlueJ and IntelliJ


Yeah I understand what you are talking about. I graduated University in 2002 and money was hard to get by at that time







I was doing delphi and c++ though.







You know what is the most important for you. Do you think it's the cooling and new case or the GTX 760?


----------



## 2010rig

I would spend a bit more on the cooling, see what you can get for $50 - $60.

You should cool the Xeon properly for higher more stable overclocks.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xair+cooler+1366.TRS0&_nkw=air+cooler+1366&_sacat=0

I take it the guy is selling you the Hyper 212 for $20?

Up to you, with that cooler, aim for a 4.0 - 4.2 OC with HT stable, should be doable.


----------



## tbob22

I'd take a look at the Raijintek Ereboss, it is a great cooler for these CPU's at the $40 price point. It is able to keep my x5670 at about 70c at 4.4ghz with IBT. It is not far off from my NH-U14s at nearly half the price. It fits on my P6T Deluxe V2 without issues.

The downside is the installation is not very intuitive, but it works once it's installed. Make sure to check that it'll fit in your case as it is rather massive.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Yeah I understand what you are talking about. I graduated University in 2002 and money was hard to get by at that time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was doing delphi and c++ though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know what is the most important for you. Do you think it's the cooling and new case or the GTX 760?


The cooling and new case are only an after thought of the new cpu. Is the Gtx 760 any good for today's games?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> The cooling and new case are only an after thought of the new cpu. Is the Gtx 760 any good for today's games?


Its not a bad GPU so yes I would say it's good


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> Well I think the R9 390 and 390x are starting to be on the limit for GPUs... You'll be fine I think but the next generations I think our Westmere EP and X58 platforms will start to slowly show their age. For now I don't think it will bottleneck though


With this in mind, should I be throwing anymore money into this build? I'm currently getting about $400 a month from my job which means in about 3 months I'll have 1.2k plus what I have saved up to spend on some nice components. If my current setup is becoming outdated perhaps I should just hold off on making this thing a beast and just pick up a R9 270 for $100 or Gtx 770 for $160? Or should I just go balls to the walls now and get Gtx 780ti in sli?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> With this in mind, should I be throwing anymore money into this build? I'm currently getting about $400 a month from my job which means in about 3 months I'll have 1.2k plus what I have saved up to spend on some nice components. If my current setup is becoming outdated perhaps I should just hold off on making this thing a beast and just pick up a R9 270 for $100 or Gtx 770 for $160? Or should I just go balls to the walls now and get Gtx 780ti in sli?


I think somewhere in-between. Something with 3gb+ vram to hold up for a while. A 970/290/390 would be a pretty good investment if you game a bit.

A second hand or on sale 7950 (280) is never a bad idea as they are hard to beat for the $100 they go for.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I think somewhere in-between. Something with 3gb+ vram to hold up for a while. A 970/290/390 would be a pretty good investment if you game a bit.
> 
> A second hand or on sale 7950 (280) is never a bad idea as they are hard to beat for the $100 they go for.


Thanks for the advice! I think I may end up grabbing a second hand 7950. I'm not a huge triple a gamer. I mostly play league of legends and occasionally play some more gaphic intensive games like mortal kombat x and bf4, but the gtx 460 I have has been holding me back. The 970/290/390 wont do much for me anyway







.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> With this in mind, should I be throwing anymore money into this build? I'm currently getting about $400 a month from my job which means in about 3 months I'll have 1.2k plus what I have saved up to spend on some nice components. If my current setup is becoming outdated perhaps I should just hold off on making this thing a beast and just pick up a R9 270 for $100 or Gtx 770 for $160? Or should I just go balls to the walls now and get Gtx 780ti in sli?


Hey, I know you were talking a out coolers a few posts back. Just go out and buy one of the highest end coolers out there. The Noctua NH D14, or NH D15, the Phanteks Dual tower cooler (I forget the model but its great, I own one), the Cryorig R1,Thermalright Silver Arrow.

All of these are around the $75-$85 price and they are better than those AIOs and perform more quietly.

You canalso look in the$50 range and those are top end single tower coolers.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Thanks for the advice! I think I may end up grabbing a second hand 7950. I'm not a huge triple a gamer. I mostly play league of legends and occasionally play some more gaphic intensive games like mortal kombat x and bf4, but the gtx 460 I have has been holding me back. The 970/290/390 wont do much for me anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


If you consider that, just make sure to grab one with a good cooler. The Windforce Rev2 (avoid rev1) was one the better cards where the VRM's were actually cooled properly, so even if it was used for mining it shouldn't have any issues.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> If you consider that, just make sure to grab one with a good cooler. The Windforce Rev2 (avoid rev1) was one the better cards where the VRM's were actually cooled properly, so even if it was used for mining it shouldn't have any issues.


Did some research and it seems that most people say that sapphire's vapor-x cards stay cooler than gigabytes. Ebay seems to have a plethora of sapphire cards, but not many gigabyte ones.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Did some research and it seems that most people say that sapphire's vapor-x cards stay cooler than gigabytes. Ebay seems to have a plethora of sapphire cards, but not many gigabyte ones.


That could be, I do know that the Windforce was very good when I had it and it was nearly silent. The Vapor-X should work fine too, but it might be a bit louder.

I had the Windforce at 1100/1500 24/7 at stock volts and it never broke 65c with Furmark while being very quiet.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

My vote goes for the Sapphire card! I do like the look of the Tri-x cooler, and I wanted to buy a 290 tri-x, but I dont game that often!

The reason being, is that the Sapphire is the cooler that all other 290s are compared to, its kind of like how EVGA is the most popular Nvidia vendor.
So the prevalence of used Tri-x vs Windforce may be because of the simple reason that one was more popular than the other. Note I didnt say better, since they are pretty similar in terms of performance, but you know what the general consensus is! It may be just hype, or there may be some truth to it.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> My vote goes for the Sapphire card! I do like the look of the Tri-x cooler, and I wanted to buy a 290 tri-x, but I dont game that often!
> 
> The reason being, is that the Sapphire is the cooler that all other 290s are compared to, its kind of like how EVGA is the most popular Nvidia vendor.
> So the prevalence of used Tri-x vs Windforce may be because of the simple reason that one was more popular than the other. Note I didnt say better, since they are pretty similar in terms of performance, but you know what the general consensus is! It may be just hype, or there may be some truth to it.


I agree that the Tri-X 290 wipes the floor with the Windforce 290. But I think the Windforce 7950 rev2 is a bit better than the Vapor-X 7950. In reviews it is typically 5-6c cooler and maybe slightly quieter. Overall they are both fine cards and are well within the safe temperature range.


----------



## DR4G00N

Hmm, today i just discovered that the diagnostic led display on my Classy 4-way mobo doesn't only show tcase temps but northbridge and vrm temps also if they get hot enough.
I found this out when I looked down at it and it said 70c







, checked aida64 and the tcase was only 51c-ish but both the NB and Vrm's were @ 69-70c...

On another note, I bought another 8GB's of ram identical to my current kit so I'm hoping it'll work just fine @ 1866MHz CL9 1.5v


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Hmm, today i just discovered that the diagnostic led display on my Classy 4-way mobo doesn't only show tcase temps but northbridge and vrm temps also if they get hot enough.
> I found this out when I looked down at it and it said 70c
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , checked aida64 and the tcase was only 51c-ish but both the NB and Vrm's were @ 69-70c...
> 
> On another note, I bought another 8GB's of ram identical to my current kit so I'm hoping it'll work just fine @ 1866MHz CL9 1.5v


My chipset on my X58 SLI3 gets to 67c so I don't think it's wrong with your motherboard


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> My chipset on my X58 SLI3 gets to 67c so I don't think it's wrong with your motherboard


Yeah, the X58 chipset gets pretty toasty in general.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EvilMonk*
> 
> My chipset on my X58 SLI3 gets to 67c so I don't think it's wrong with your motherboard


Yeah, before I reapplied the tim it would hit 80c+ at times without a fan blowing on it. Now it doesn't pass 65c with good airflow.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> With this in mind, should I be throwing anymore money into this build? I'm currently getting about $400 a month from my job which means in about 3 months I'll have 1.2k plus what I have saved up to spend on some nice components. If my current setup is becoming outdated perhaps I should just hold off on making this thing a beast and just pick up a R9 270 for $100 or Gtx 770 for $160? Or should I just go balls to the walls now and get Gtx 780ti in sli?


The way I see it, you might as well get whatever video card you want now. You'll be able to carry that over into whatever your next build is anyway. I doubt our processors will be a serious bottleneck for a while, though. If our Xeons or PCI Express 2.0 bottleneck Pascal or Arctic Islands, then I will start thinking about my next upgrade.


----------



## trzzz

Been working on getting an optimum overclock on my p6t deluxe v2 and .x5670 combo been able to run the cpu on both the 20 and 21 multiplier as well as a as a bclk of up to 215 and i've run into a strange issue...

Anything over 200 BCLK will stop my computer from being able resume from sleep (pc turns on, but black screen only shows which only pressing the power button for 5 seconds resolves). I've tried:

S3 state selection an deselection
resume from pcie/ide enable
lowering the dram clock
lowering the cpu multiplier
raising every relevant voltage within given parameters
increased the pcie frequency
pll set to auto and lowest setting (read somewhere it can interfere with sleep resume)
even disabling write back cache on my boot disk in windows

nothing works :O

any advice would be much appreciated....


----------



## 2010rig

@trzzz Try using the 23X with a lower bclk instead. The higher the bclk, the hotter and more unstable your system will get.

Pretty sure on *most mobo's*, anything over 210 bclk gets pretty hot and unstable.

Try to find stability with 23 x 191


----------



## trzzz

appreciate the response, but my system is rock stable (prime95, newest version 12 hours plus) at over 200 bclk....i would have preferred using a higher bclk to inch that little bit of performance out of my system...

and there literally seems to be a hard coded issue that i've not been able to find anything about wherever i looked...200 bclk works fine 201 bclk no resume from sleep....bit annoying really


----------



## 2010rig

Well try the higher multiplier anyway to see if you still get the no resume from sleep error.









It's all about troubleshooting

I've always preferred the highest multiplier with lowest bclk option.

I tried running a test and clocked it to 4400 ( 21 x 210) so far it's not stable


----------



## Benjanand

Hello!

Would MSI X58 Pro ms-7522 be a good pair with Xeon X5660?


----------



## EvilMonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benjanand*
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Would MSI X58 Pro ms-7522 be a good pair with Xeon X5660?


Hello,
I'm not sure any of us has an MSI X58 motherboard,,, sorry


----------



## Dengar3

Hello all,

I've been reading and checking over this website and few others in regards to building a X58 system. Of course I am looking at using a xeon x56xx series, however the goal of this is create the most powerful budget build. I'm primarily using it for CAD programming (most NX which if I understand correctly is very core count based). I managed to get my hands on an ASUS P6X58D-E and I was planning on overclocking into the 4 ghz region. So, being a bit on a budget, I was curious as to what the power consumption would be. I browsed and searched as best as I could, however I did not seem to find a direct answer or even answers that seemed to similar to each other. If I am beating a dead horse I apologize, however I would to like keep the price of this build down by getting a quality power source that isn't over kill or under performing. Other useful specs: 12 gigs of RAM (at least, may jump to 24 down the road), either GTX 970's in SLI or R9 380 (4 gig version) in crossfire, I would also like to water cool, and have a few periphals and a variety of Harddrives. Thank you for your time and help!


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Benjanand*
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Would MSI X58 Pro ms-7522 be a good pair with Xeon X5660?


Not a lot of info out there....

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040665737&postcount=564


----------



## gofasterstripes

One PCIE Riser ordered - getting serious heat buildup in the top GPU [#1] now I've started playing The Witcher 3 with EVERYTHING's on max, so I guess it's to be expected.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/AONS-PCI-E-Extension-Adapter-Connector/dp/B00TEYVMUK/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1438340453&sr=8-4&keywords=pcie+riser

Will let you know how it pans out.










@Dengar3

I am 4GHz @ 1.28V, 3200 Uncore, 12GB 1600MHz RAM, SLI 970, 3xHDD, 1xSSD, 1xDVD Drive + Wireless. Power consumption at the wall is <500W at all times, more like 450 peak. As measured by my UPS.

I have an 850W Seasonic SS850-am


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dengar3*
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I've been reading and checking over this website and few others in regards to building a X58 system. Of course I am looking at using a xeon x56xx series, however the goal of this is create the most powerful budget build. I'm primarily using it for CAD programming (most NX which if I understand correctly is very core count based). I managed to get my hands on an ASUS P6X58D-E and I was planning on overclocking into the 4 ghz region. So, being a bit on a budget, I was curious as to what the power consumption would be. I browsed and searched as best as I could, however I did not seem to find a direct answer or even answers that seemed to similar to each other. If I am beating a dead horse I apologize, however I would to like keep the price of this build down by getting a quality power source that isn't over kill or under performing. Other useful specs: 12 gigs of RAM (at least, may jump to 24 down the road), either GTX 970's in SLI or R9 380 (4 gig version) in crossfire, I would also like to water cool, and have a few periphals and a variety of Harddrives. Thank you for your time and help!


not sure if i understand, are you trying to aim at lowest power consumption possible? if thats the case you should've went haswell lol.

but on the x58, you'll need a gold rated psu, platinum if you can afford it. makes a difference in the long run. evga g2 is a good psu. almost all x5675 can do 4ghz at 1.2-1.24ghz. my x5650 needed 1.3v clock for clock.


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://wccftech.com/exclusive-nvidias-amds-perspectives-gameworks-bottom-issue/


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/exclusive-nvidias-amds-perspectives-gameworks-bottom-issue/


Thanks!
That was good reading


----------



## Dengar3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> not sure if i understand, are you trying to aim at lowest power consumption possible? if thats the case you should've went haswell lol.
> 
> but on the x58, you'll need a gold rated psu, platinum if you can afford it. makes a difference in the long run. evga g2 is a good psu. almost all x5675 can do 4ghz at 1.2-1.24ghz. my x5650 needed 1.3v clock for clock.


Basically I was just wanting to know how much power the processor will be consuming at the higher clock speeds. Right now I am looking at 850 watt gold PSU. I figured power conusmption would go out the window the second I wanted to use multigraphics cards, however I don't want to go overkill with the PSU, just a big enough one that will also give me about a 10-15% extra head room.
I was originally looking at doing a haswell build, but the price that I will end up spending on the motherboard and processor for this build, would have been the price for the haswell processor alone.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dengar3*
> 
> Basically I was just wanting to know how much power the processor will be consuming at the higher clock speeds. Right now I am looking at 850 watt gold PSU. I figured power conusmption would go out the window the second I wanted to use multigraphics cards, however I don't want to go overkill with the PSU, just a big enough one that will also give me about a 10-15% extra head room.
> I was originally looking at doing a haswell build, but the price that I will end up spending on the motherboard and processor for this build, would have been the price for the haswell processor alone.


with a x5675. a 4ghz oc consumes around 1.2v. to put that in perspective a 5675 stock's peak voltage is around 1.15-1.19v.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Dengar3

Did you see my post? I have pretty much the config you're looking at.

Also:



Really struggling to get more than 110W for the CPU @ 4GHz/1.28v . No idea if this value includes the uncore power consumption, you may be able to measure with HWInfo, but I CBA, soz


----------



## Dengar3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Dengar3
> 
> Did you see my post? I have pretty much the config you're looking at.
> 
> Also:
> 
> 
> 
> Really struggling to get more than 110W for the CPU @ 4GHz/1.28v . No idea if this value includes the uncore power consumption, you may be able to measure with HWInfo, but I CBA, soz


I somehow missed to your post, however that is actually much lower than i thought! I was expecting something in the 200W range, so I can probably get away with as little as 750W PSU. Thank you!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dengar3*
> 
> I somehow missed to your post, however that is actually much lower than i thought! I was expecting something in the 200W range, so I can probably get away with as little as 750W PSU. Thank you!


A quality 750w psu should be more than enough. I haven't had an issue with both my CPU and r9 390 maxed out at the same time with my 5 year old Toughpower. I also have 5 hdds and an SSD, as well as a dedicated soundcard. Voltages are stable throughout.









If you are going multi-gpu, 750w should be OK unless you are running multi 290/390/780's then you may want to look at 850w at minimum with x58/hexacore at 4ghz+.


----------



## Dengar3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> A quality 750w psu should be more than enough. I haven't had an issue with both my CPU and r9 390 maxed out at the same time with my 5 year old Toughpower. I also have 5 hdds and an SSD, as well as a dedicated soundcard. Voltages are stable throughout.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are going multi-gpu, 750w should be OK unless you are running multi 290/390/780's then you may want to look at 850w at minimum with x58/hexacore at 4ghz+.


Sounds great thanks! I may just go Crossfire R9 380's, nothing too powerful, but they should get any rendering I need done, along with allowing for some above average gaming!


----------



## Kana-Maru

I just ran one of my GTX 670 2GB Reference @ stock with 3Dmark DX12 API Overhead Test. With the latest Windows 10 Nvidia drivers here are my results:

CPU: 4Ghz
*Single GTX 670 2GB Ref @ stock settings*

*DirectX 11 Multi-Thread* = 1,109,323 Draw Calls a second
*DirectX 12* = 10,933,305 Draw Calls a second

Amazing. That is a 886% increase.

I tried running SLI, but DX12 causes the Nvidia drivers to crash during the second part of the test so I can only get the DX11 test:

*GTX 670 2GB 2-Way SLI Ref @ stock settings*
*DirectX 11 Multi-Thread* = 1,304,664 Draw Calls a second
*DirectX 12* = Nvidia latest Windows 10 drivers CRASH.

I will say that the crash recovery is much quicker in Windows 10 than Windows 7. It's minor, but noticeable. From other people who has ran the test it appears that Mantle isn't that far off from DX12. Mantle is much better than DX11.


----------



## akromatic

just wondering if the platform still viable for 390 crossfire or 980ti sli with a sock clock xeon. im getting a x5650. also what is the max supported ram? i hope i can get 48gb on it.


----------



## 2010rig

The max supported ram is 288 GB
http://ark.intel.com/m/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI#@product/specifications


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> just wondering if the platform still viable for 390 crossfire or 980ti sli with a sock clock xeon. im getting a x5650. also what is the max supported ram? i hope i can get 48gb on it.


The platform can handle it, but not at stock clocks. For those cards you'll need a solid overclock to at least 4.2 GHz. Almost all of the chips here can handle that speed. The 980ti will run in SLI with no issues as far as I know, but for the 390, make sure your motherboard does NOT have a NF200 bridge chip. Since AMD is using the PCIe bus to connect the cards together, the bridge chip causes problems. Without the chip you shouldn't have any problems, though.

Most motherboards can handle 48GB, but officially they all max out at 24GB. This is because you couldn't buy 8GB sticks of ram when the boards were made, so they weren't tested for compatibility. The Xeons, being server chips, can handle a lot more than that, so you'll be limited by your motherboard.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> just wondering if the platform still viable for 390 crossfire or 980ti sli with a sock clock xeon. im getting a x5650. also what is the max supported ram? i hope i can get 48gb on it.


Not at stock speeds. You'll be looking at 4ghz+ to reduce the bottleneck. 980ti sli is probably going to create quite a bottleneck. 390 crossfire shouldn't be too bad though.

990x @ 4.4 and 290x Crossfire
5820k @ 4.4 and 290x Crossfire

You can see the physics score on the 5820k is about 10-15% higher, but the graphics score is only 2% higher on the 5820k

Crossfire 290/290x/390/390x/980 is getting to the limit of what this platform handle without a significant bottleneck, even in a rather GPU centric benchmark like Firestrike.

990x @ 4.4 and 980ti SLI
5820k @ 4.4 and 980ti SLI

You can see here the physics score is about the same as the previous runs, but the graphics score is now a much larger 14% higher on the 5820k.

Unless you can get these CPU's up to 5ghz or so, 980ti in SLI is going to create a large bottleneck. Even at that speed there might be something else bottlenecking the cards.


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> The max supported ram is 288 GB
> http://ark.intel.com/m/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI#@product/specifications


but would my chipset/board /bios handle it?

board = asus rampage 2 gene
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> The platform can handle it, but not at stock clocks. For those cards you'll need a solid overclock to at least 4.2 GHz. Almost all of the chips here can handle that speed. The 980ti will run in SLI with no issues as far as I know, but for the 390, make sure your motherboard does NOT have a NF200 bridge chip. Since AMD is using the PCIe bus to connect the cards together, the bridge chip causes problems. Without the chip you shouldn't have any problems, though.
> 
> Most motherboards can handle 48GB, but officially they all max out at 24GB. This is because you couldn't buy 8GB sticks of ram when the boards were made, so they weren't tested for compatibility. The Xeons, being server chips, can handle a lot more than that, so you'll be limited by your motherboard.


how much would i lose at stock clocks? my board doesnt support overclocking or at least not any more. my i7 920 died/degraded on that board when i attempted a 4ghz overclock (and i didnt push more than 1.3v) and the combo wouldnt boot without an untouched and untweaked bios now since i've loaned it off to someone. the board had some bios corruption so im suspecting the board is dieing but still perfect for stock clocks.

i assume 4.2ghz would only give it parity with current gen stock clocked CPU in performance ie sandy/ivy/haswell i7?

my board doesnt have a NF200 chipset and i've previously crossfired hd5870 and SLI gtx260 on that board though crossfire gave me much grief that no games were playable so im hoping that the newer generation cards would be problem free as this is my only board that supports multi GPU as the rest of my rigs are all ITX based. this is assuming the platform is capable of driving 4k gaming

yeh im abit worried that my mobo wouldnt like having more then 24GB as it sometimes panic with 10GBs in it currently (3x2GB + 2x2GB)


----------



## Bal3Wolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> just wondering if the platform still viable for 390 crossfire or 980ti sli with a sock clock xeon. im getting a x5650. also what is the max supported ram? i hope i can get 48gb on it.
> 
> 
> 
> Not at stock speeds. You'll be looking at 4ghz+ to reduce the bottleneck. 980ti sli is probably going to create quite a bottleneck. 390 crossfire shouldn't be too bad though.
> 
> 990x @ 4.4 and 290x Crossfire
> 5820k @ 4.4 and 290x Crossfire
> 
> You can see the physics score on the 5820k is about 10-15% higher, but the graphics score is only 2% higher on the 5820k
> 
> Crossfire 290/290x/390/390x/980 is getting to the limit of what this platform handle without a significant bottleneck, even in a rather GPU centric benchmark like Firestrike.
> 
> 990x @ 4.4 and 980ti SLI
> 5820k @ 4.4 and 980ti SLI
> 
> You can see here the physics score is about the same as the previous runs, but the graphics score is now a much larger 14% higher on the 5820k.
> 
> Unless you can get these CPU's up to 5ghz or so, 980ti in SLI is going to create a large bottleneck. Even at that speed there might be something else bottlenecking the cards.
Click to expand...

benchmarks are a little off also because your using windows 7 on one and windows 10 on the other 3dmark scores higher on windows 10 then it does on windows 7 and as stuff uses dx12 that prefers more cores over single threads that might let the xeons max out the higher end gpus at lower clocks.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> benchmarks are a little off also because your using windows 7 on one and windows 10 on the other 3dmark scores higher on windows 10 then it does on windows 7 and as stuff uses dx12 that prefers more cores over single threads that might let the xeons max out the higher end gpus at lower clocks.


Hmm, maybe. Heres a 5820k with Windows 7 and only at 4.1ghz.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5110742
The memory clock is a bit higher, but it shouldn't make that much difference.


----------



## akromatic

how much of a penalty would i be expecting compared to a stock clocked i7 3770 that im currently using?

stock clocked xeon and mildly overclock of say 3.8ghz

had to remind myself how hot these things get..... stock clocks ~40c idle ~90c load (prime95) on a coolermaster seidon 120v. no way stock cooler would keep it under control.

i need a new case if i am to install my custom loop. I already have all the parts.

edit: confirms my suspicions..... quick and dirty OC i couldnt boot with anything more then 3.6ghz (180 bclk) @ 1.3v. dropping volts or upping bclk just a tad wouldnt even let me boot. current cooler would just thermal throttle the chip.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> how much of a penalty would i be expecting compared to a stock clocked i7 3770 that im currently using?
> 
> stock clocked xeon and mildly overclock of say 3.8ghz
> 
> had to remind myself how hot these things get..... stock clocks ~40c idle ~90c load (prime95) on a coolermaster seidon 120v. no way stock cooler would keep it under control.
> 
> i need a new case if i am to install my custom loop. I already have all the parts.
> 
> edit: confirms my suspicions..... quick and dirty OC i couldnt boot with anything more then 3.6ghz (180 bclk) @ 1.3v. dropping volts or upping bclk just a tad wouldnt even let me boot. current cooler would just thermal throttle the chip.


Those numbers sound really really high. Under IBT my chip (3.8 GHz, 200 BCLK, 19x multiplier, 1.2565 Vcore, 1.235 VTT) Reaches 61*C on the hottest core, the majority of the cores sit around 53*C (my thermal paste application is terrible I know). I've got a Noctua NH-D14 cooling it with both of the low noise adapters on the fans.


----------



## gofasterstripes

'Sup?

I modded the GPU installation as the board only had a single spare slot between the cards and it left <10mm for airflow to the top card.

I used a (version with additional power plug to increase voltage stability)


I have been able to move the upper card a slot further up, towards the CPU, this required standoffs to allow it to fit without trying to dremel my UD7









The PCIE edge and socket protrude down as normal, so to site the upper card in the location of the next slot up [where there is a PCI slot already on the board], I have to hold the card away from the MoBo so the socketed end of the extender fits.

Then it needs anchoring securely since it's no longer secured by being plugged into the board.







There's the usual rubber band suspension to take the load at the other end.

And lastly there's a bracket around the case at the back, so the GPU is effectively anchored solidly in two places at the outside end and suspended at the other. Lucky they're small and light GPU's













With the effort to find/use neater hardware, this would be almost a pro job, but I was unwilling to go out and get any so I just used what was in the jar of screws, hence the untidy appearance.

Result - about 10c drop in temps OR 10% increase under boost. I can hold 106% GPU power whereas before it would be throttling to 96% because the top card was over temp. Now I can hold 106% at 83c with the fans a little slower









For Google search / other people with same problem:

modify adapt hack x58 Gigabyte motherboard increase space airflow ventilation Nvidia SLI AMD ATI Crossfire PCIe extender extension cable reduce temperature


----------



## Sendfire

I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 1.0) motherboard. The Xeon X5660 is not listed as a supported CPU for this board but I've seen some reports of it working just fine.

Is anyone here using one of the Xeon X56x0 processors with this mobo?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Sendfire I can confirm Rev 1.6 works..... Try aiming google at this thread, I think you'll find other people have the v 1,0 working. My tip for that board would be to read through my posts showing you how to measure the Vtt/ Uncore voltage and ensure it's running to spec. Mine was over BIOS volts and probably contributed to my first Xeon breaking.

EDIT http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9

@cb750rob Have you seen my previous post? Might be of use to you









@Kana-Maru Sorry mate, I can't find your CPU/GPU PhysX test results - would you mind linking them? Ta.

You can also add these MoBos to the "compatible" list:

X58A- UD7 Rev. 2 [latest BIOS]
EX58-UD3R Rev. 1.6 [latest BIOS]


----------



## cb750rob

@Sendfire X5660 works on my EX58-Ud3R rev 1.6 just fine with the latest bios. Had to flash it with an i7920 before it was recognized though.

@gofasterstripes I like your setup Sam - looks good.









Not an option for me as if I move the card down the bottom card is then starved of airflow due to the proximity of my PSU











Temps on the top card hitting 90 - 100c and climbing









Ran it like that for 2 days before I pulled second card out as the noise was driving me nuts.

Didn't really notice any difference playing games as I am only single monitor 1080p anyway.

I have just overclocked the single card now to 1050core and 1450mem and appreciating the silence.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Have some benches and temps below of the 2x r7850's in crossfire if anyone is interested:

3dmark 11


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Vantage:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Firestrike:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Heaven:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Valley:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob

I moved my top card up, looks like you could do the same?

You will need to hold it above the NB/PCI, but that's possible if you can make a standoff with threaded bolts and pairs of nuts to clamp it as I did.

I have edited the description above to make it a little clearer exactly what was done.


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob
> 
> I moved my top card up, looks like you could do the same?
> 
> You will need to hold it above the NB/PCI, but that's possible if you can make a standoff with threaded bolts and pairs of nuts to clamp it as I did.


Necessity being the mother of invention? That's the engineer in you trying to break out!









TBH I didn't think of that and I off'd the second card on flebay last week lol

Looking at it I think the extension connector would foul some caps anyway.

Good thought though


----------



## gofasterstripes

@cb750rob Sorry to hear this came just a little late for you









I'm pretty sure you could make it work, if you ever feel the need to upgrade the GPU's you might find it handy.

Peace, out.

Sam


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @cb750rob I'm pretty sure you could make it work, if you ever feel the need to upgrade the GPU's you might find it handy.


It is a good thought Sam. I think I will probably wait to see what happens with the directx 12 thing now though. Although I am not over-impressed with windows 10 so far. But I am one of those start menu fans


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sendfire*
> 
> I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 1.0) motherboard. The Xeon X5660 is not listed as a supported CPU for this board but I've seen some reports of it working just fine.
> 
> Is anyone here using one of the Xeon X56x0 processors with this mobo?


It will work. My wife's running an X5675 on a GA-X58A-UD5 rev 1.0 with the F7J BIOS.


----------



## boasarang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sendfire*
> 
> I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 1.0) motherboard. The Xeon X5660 is not listed as a supported CPU for this board but I've seen some reports of it working just fine.
> 
> Is anyone here using one of the Xeon X56x0 processors with this mobo?


i have the 2 Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 1.0) each running a x5650.


----------



## Sendfire

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boasarang*
> 
> i have the 2 Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 1.0) each running a x5650.


Great! That's what I wanted to hear. The rev 1.6 that was mentioned does list it as supported but the 1.0 does not. I couldn't see any reason it wouldn't run it though.


----------



## lococol

Hi all, I am new to overclocking Xeons. I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5. I previously had an I7-930 and although it runs hot, I can overclock it no problems. Then recently I read through a lot of forums about installing an x56XX chip in my motherboard , I read a lot and thought I would take the chance. Anyway I bought an x5670 and prior to putting it in I updated my bios to Ff1 which is the latest one for my board on the gigabyte website. I have loaded default settings in bios and it boots fine, however if I change anything related to BCLK or VOLTAGES it refuses to boot. The standard ‘overclock failed warning pops up and it reboots to last know good setting. This happens even if I change manual BCLK control from disabled to enabled and keep the BLCK at 133. Its very bizarre. I can enable EMP to PROFILE 1 and it still boots My memory is triple channel 3x2GB GEIL DDR3-1600 rated at CL8-8-8. Basically if I change anything remotely to do with overclocking it refuses to boot, however it is happy to run at stock with the turbo on at 3.2Ghz. Any help would be hugely appreciated as I have read about 200 pages of forums and while I have had some clues here and there I am pretty clueless on the whole. Also does anyone knoe if the F13 modified bios will run in my board? Thanks a lot


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lococol*
> 
> Hi all, I am new to overclocking Xeons. I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5. I previously had an I7-930 and although it runs hot, I can overclock it no problems. Then recently I read through a lot of forums about installing an x56XX chip in my motherboard , I read a lot and thought I would take the chance. Anyway I bought an x5670 and prior to putting it in I updated my bios to Ff1 which is the latest one for my board on the gigabyte website. I have loaded default settings in bios and it boots fine, however if I change anything related to BCLK or VOLTAGES it refuses to boot. The standard 'overclock failed warning pops up and it reboots to last know good setting. This happens even if I change manual BCLK control from disabled to enabled and keep the BLCK at 133. Its very bizarre. I can enable EMP to PROFILE 1 and it still boots My memory is triple channel 3x2GB GEIL DDR3-1600 rated at CL8-8-8. Basically if I change anything remotely to do with overclocking it refuses to boot, however it is happy to run at stock with the turbo on at 3.2Ghz. Any help would be hugely appreciated as I have read about 200 pages of forums and while I have had some clues here and there I am pretty clueless on the whole. Also does anyone knoe if the F13 modified bios will run in my board? Thanks a lot


I've heard of that happening on some of the earlier x58 Gigabyte boards. Is it a Rev 1?


----------



## lococol

Oh sorry I missed that. no its revision 2.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lococol*
> 
> Oh sorry I missed that. no its revision 2.


Hmm, not sure. Results seem to be mixed from what I'm reading. May want to PM Hazard over at hardforum as he seemed to try it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

You might want to post that question in

http://www.overclock.net/t/706509/the-official-gigabyte-ga-x58a-ud3r-ud5-ud7-ud9-owners-club/

Also - I have a UD7 Rev 2, which is very similar, so I might be able to check something for you if you wish [bit busy at the moment, though]

UD5:


UD7


Have you done an "optimised defaults" yet in the BIOS? Disable all the ports/drivers you don't need and go from there. You might be accidentally setting the PCI/Marvell SATA speed too high or something?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Another Topic -

http://en.community.dell.com/cfs-file/__key/telligent-evolution-components-attachments/13-4491-00-00-20-24-87-40/12g_5F00_bios_5F00_tuning_5F00_for_5F00_performance_5F00_power.pdf

This Dell document has some interesting information, which I *think* is of use for us.

Bits I spotted:

QPI does effect cache access speed [explains why peeps keep saying higher QPI makes systems a little faster]

C-States "Enabling C1E and/or C-States is known to be detrimental for memory latency and frequency jitter, which can impact some latency-sensitive workloads outside of the scope normally classified as latency sensitive workloads operated by High Frequency Traders. Thus, if you are willing to trade increased power consumption for potentially better performance in some cases, disabling C-states in a Custom System Profile may be appropriate. "

Hmmm.....


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lococol*
> 
> Hi all, I am new to overclocking Xeons. I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5. I previously had an I7-930 and although it runs hot, I can overclock it no problems. Then recently I read through a lot of forums about installing an x56XX chip in my motherboard , I read a lot and thought I would take the chance. Anyway I bought an x5670 and prior to putting it in I updated my bios to Ff1 which is the latest one for my board on the gigabyte website. I have loaded default settings in bios and it boots fine, however if I change anything related to BCLK or VOLTAGES it refuses to boot. The standard 'overclock failed warning pops up and it reboots to last know good setting. This happens even if I change manual BCLK control from disabled to enabled and keep the BLCK at 133. Its very bizarre. I can enable EMP to PROFILE 1 and it still boots My memory is triple channel 3x2GB GEIL DDR3-1600 rated at CL8-8-8. Basically if I change anything remotely to do with overclocking it refuses to boot, however it is happy to run at stock with the turbo on at 3.2Ghz. Any help would be hugely appreciated as I have read about 200 pages of forums and while I have had some clues here and there I am pretty clueless on the whole. Also does anyone knoe if the F13 modified bios will run in my board? Thanks a lot


Reset bios set your drives to sata or ide as needed. Try setting your ram voltage manually and then start upping the bclk by 5 at a time and see if you can get any movement.


----------



## lococol

I will try that and get back to you tomorrow maybe.Thanks for the help guys


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lococol*
> 
> I will try that and get back to you tomorrow maybe.Thanks for the help guys


Edit: Nevermind.. Misread something.


----------



## lococol

Just one more question for anybody that might know. I wonder if anyone knows if a gigabyte EX58-UD5 modified bios will work on an GA-X58A-UD5 (Rev 2)

Thanks a lot.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have never tried a modified BIOS, but I think with the Dual-BIOS feature you're relatively safe?

You just need to google and make sure you can re-flash the Primary BIOS if you have recovery-booted from the Secondary because the Primary is unsuitable or not compatible.

I don't KNOW if that is possible, but it should be


----------



## cb750rob

Just remember once it is bricked..... It's Bricked


----------



## lococol

Thanks guys, I cant play fallout on a brick, I think I will leave that one. I will play about with the bios settings as suggested earlier.


----------



## Kana-Maru

So look at what came in the mail today:

Lovely Box Art:
http://s26.postimg.org/4re4ohtpl/Box.jpg

Safety during shipping:
http://s26.postimg.org/a42z2mhm1/Inside_Box.jpg

http://s26.postimg.org/cgaz07u7d/Fury_X.jpg

Nice protectors \ dust covers for the HDMI, DisplayPort, PCIe-connectors:
http://s26.postimg.org/jyu48ulk9/Radeon.jpg

Compared to one of my old 670s. Do you remember when the 670s was getting all of the talk about being a small card?
http://s26.postimg.org/kxahb4yw9/Comparison.jpg

Installed and running. Nice LEDs
http://s26.postimg.org/3mk2j478p/Installed.jpg

Retired 670s:
http://s26.postimg.org/rin7aweqx/670s_retired.jpg


----------



## Firehawk

@Kana-Maru: You should leave one of the 670s in there to run PhysX. Nice card, I hope you enjoy it. Now show us some benches.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> @Kana-Maru: You should leave one of the 670s in there to run PhysX. Nice card, I hope you enjoy it. Now show us some benches.


What are these "benchmarks" you speak of? Nah I've ran a few benchmarks. I need to run a few more test as well. I've been pretty busy today. I thought about leaving the 670 in for PhysX, but I thought Nvidia locked out PhysX whenever the second card wasn't Nvidia. I'm sure their are hacks, but dang Nvidia has been doing some pretty shady stuff lately. You would think that they would want you to purchase a Nvidia card to use for PhysX, but nope......if you have AMD no PhysX. I'll see if their away around the PhysX lockout when using AMD. If you know how let me know.

As far as benchmarks goes I'm running everything at stock. I might overclock tomorrow or something. So far so good. The temperatures are amazing. The performance is really good as well.


----------



## Starbomba

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> So look at what came in the mail today:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Lovely Box Art:
> http://s26.postimg.org/4re4ohtpl/Box.jpg
> 
> Safety during shipping:
> http://s26.postimg.org/a42z2mhm1/Inside_Box.jpg
> 
> http://s26.postimg.org/cgaz07u7d/Fury_X.jpg
> 
> Nice protectors \ dust covers for the HDMI, DisplayPort, PCIe-connectors:
> http://s26.postimg.org/jyu48ulk9/Radeon.jpg
> 
> Compared to one of my old 670s. Do you remember when the 670s was getting all of the talk about being a small card?
> http://s26.postimg.org/kxahb4yw9/Comparison.jpg
> 
> Installed and running. Nice LEDs
> http://s26.postimg.org/3mk2j478p/Installed.jpg
> 
> Retired 670s:
> http://s26.postimg.org/rin7aweqx/670s_retired.jpg


Let's see how this ends, i kinda want one for my own main rig









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> @Kana-Maru: You should leave one of the 670s in there to run PhysX. Nice card, I hope you enjoy it. Now show us some benches.


Meh, with the few games with PhysX active? Nah. Plus, IMHO, the prime time for PhysX is long gone. Computers nowadays are fast enough to handle more complex physics calculations, especially when rocking a 6c/12t CPU running at 4 GHz+

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What are these "benchmarks" you speak of? Nah I've ran a few benchmarks. I need to run a few more test as well. I've been pretty busy today. I thought about leaving the 670 in for PhysX, but I thought Nvidia locked out PhysX whenever the second card wasn't Nvidia. I'm sure their are hacks, but dang Nvidia has been doing some pretty shady stuff lately. You would think that they would want you to purchase a Nvidia card to use for PhysX, but nope......if you have AMD no PhysX. I'll see if their away around the PhysX lockout when using AMD. If you know how let me know.
> 
> As far as benchmarks goes I'm running everything at stock. I might overclock tomorrow or something. So far so good. The temperatures are amazing. The performance is really good as well.


I tried a hack recently, pairing a R9 290 with a GTX 780, running AC Black Flag. Game somehow ran slower than running the 290 or 780 alone. I don't really recommend that.

Really looking forward to see how that X58 rides that Fury X.


----------



## Firehawk

My mistake. There used to be a hack to make it work, but Nvidia in their wisdom has found a way to stop that. They have to give people some reason to buy their cards after all.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> I tried a hack recently, pairing a R9 290 with a GTX 780, running AC Black Flag. Game somehow ran slower than running the 290 or 780 alone. I don't really recommend that.


Well so far I have it working with some older games. The GPU usage isn't that high, but the older games did recognize it. Batman: Arkham Asylum lets you know if you have a PhysX card or drivers installed or not. That works fine. I turned PhysX on it's highest settings and the GPU was running at it's max clock speed. No lag from the Fury X. It appears the PhysX was working fine through the 670. I can't get

Quote:


> Really looking forward to see how that X58 rides that Fury X.


So far everything looks promising. I'll try to get some synthetics done.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> My mistake. There used to be a hack to make it work, but Nvidia in their wisdom has found a way to stop that. They have to give people some reason to buy their cards after all.


It still works. I just need to figure out how to make it work with newer games like Batman: Arkham Knight. I get 2 of the 4 settings.


----------



## Firehawk

If its running without the 670 installed then its your CPU doing the grunt work. From what I've heard its limited to one core and strongly favors CUDA so that could explain why you only have access to 2 settings.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ Check out what I stated above. The 670 is installed and PhysX appears to be working on some games. I'm not to sure about the newer games though. Batman: AK does lack a few options. I don't think they are nothing I'll miss. Nvidia is on top of all of their patches. Pretty lame that they won't allow gamers to use a card for PhysX if their running AMD. Batmak: AK is still broken at the moment. I've finally reached a crashing point of no return. Hopefully the game is re-uploaded to Steam with fixes later this month.

This Fury X is one cool running GPU. I tought the temps would be much higher since it's pulling air from inside the case and through the rad. That isn't the case.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Alright I've finally got "some" benchmarks ready to show you guys. I'm running my Fury X @ stock settings. I ran a few synthetic benchmarks, in-game benchmarks and my Real Time Benchmarks™. I'll try to run more test when I get more time. Here's what I have so far.

http://s26.postimg.org/4re4ohtpl/Box.jpg
http://s26.postimg.org/cgaz07u7d/Fury_X.jpg

http://s26.postimg.org/p7yby7iqx/3_DMark_Fire_Strike_v1_1.jpg

*3DMark Fire Strike*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz - DDR3-1670Mhz
*Score: 15,073*

Compared to my GTX 670 2-Way SLI highest score the Fury X is about 32% faster. Only 3.8% slower than the GTX 980 Ti Reference.

*3DMark Fire Strike Extreme*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz - DDR3-1670Mhz
*Score: 8,020*

The Fire Strike Extreme score is only 7% slower than the impressive MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming OC. The Fury X is about 2.2% faster than the slower GTX 980 Ti Reference.

*3DMark Fire Strike Ultra*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz - DDR3-1670Mhz
*Score: 4,360*

The Fire Strike Ultra score is only 2.6% slower than the MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming OC. I'm sure mature drivers will decrease the difference even further.

*3DMark Future Test - API Overhead Future Test*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz - DDR3-1670Mhz
*Score: 15,229,344*

Impressive DX12 Draw Calls. The Fury X is about 40% faster than my older GTX 670s SLI. I think DX12 will benefit a lot of AMD users. Let's just hope Nvidia doesn't shove GameWorks into most of the popular titles.

*Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 - 1080p Extreme HD*
X5660 @ 4.8Ghz - DDR3-1670Mhz
FPS: 80.0
Score: 3348
Min FPS: 35.6
Max FPS: 147.9

I just ran a quick Valley test. Heaven Benchmark kept crashing. I'll probably need to re-install it.

*Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor [Ultra Setting] - 3840×2160 [4K]*

http://s26.postimg.org/gqytnae21/4_K_Settings.jpg
http://s26.postimg.org/rf2km4o15/4_K_Settings_Advanced.jpg

AMD R9 Fury X @ *Stock Settings* [Catalyst 15.7.1 [7/29/2015] Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1670Mhz
Gameplay Duration: 25 minutes
Captured 71,944 frames
*FPS Avg: 48fps [47.84]*
FPS Max: 73fps
FPS Min: 16fps
*FPS Min Caliber ™: 23fps*
*Frame time Avg: 20.9ms*

http://s26.postimg.org/cx5de4wq1/Shadows_of_Mordor_Chart.jpg

I thought I'll reply some SoM to see how the Fury X 4GB HBM handles the texture pack that requires 6GBs of GDDR5. At 4K the game is very playable. The experience was smooth and I noticed no input lag or issues while playing. There was no micro stutter. Even though this game requires a lot of horsepower to play @ 1400p & 1600p, the Fury X temperatures were great. Well below 60c throughout my Real Time Benchmark. The built in benchmark was spot on giving me an average of 48.73fps. Compared to my GTX 670s 2GBs the experience was much better since I didn't have to lower any graphical settings to enjoy this beautiful game. I'm running the Fury with stock settings. I can only imagine how much better it will be once the OC limitations are removed.

So that's all I have for now. I have other games that I'll get around to testing. Hitman: Absolution, Thief, Tomb Raider and Bioshock all still seem to be popular in many reviews although they're older games now. I really love the GPU temps and how it maintains the constant core clock. Whenever AMD decides to unlock more of the OC limitation I'm sure we will see more performance. HBM manhandles Me: Shadow or Mordor 6GB Ultra Texture pack at 4K. I'd love to test Batman: Arkham Knight, but the game is constantly crashing now. The game has been buggy for sometime now and everyone is waiting on a Steam patch. Overall the performance is great. I might add another Fury X card. At the moment I have no reason to add another card. Even at 4K our X58 + PCIe 2.0 still performs much better than I expected.


----------



## Dotachin

Congrats!


----------



## Kana-Maru

^Thanks


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks Kana, that's interesting and well presented as usual.

You might want to try this, too









http://www.guru3d.com/files-get/unreal-engine-4-elemental-tech-demo-download,1.html


----------



## greywarden

Was that 4K DSR? If so, you'll probably have better fps on an actual 4K monitor since DSR uses a small amount of resources to downsample.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Thanks Kana, that's interesting and well presented as usual.
> 
> You might want to try this, too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/files-get/unreal-engine-4-elemental-tech-demo-download,1.html


Thanks for that link. I'll download it and definitely get back to you with the results.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greywarden*
> 
> Was that 4K DSR? If so, you'll probably have better fps on an actual 4K monitor since DSR uses a small amount of resources to downsample.


DSR is Nvidia tech. VSR is AMD tech. I know what you mean. Compared to a few review sites my results [48fps] actually matches a i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz + X79. So yeah that's a $1000.00+ CPU and $260+ MB. A i7 5960x @ 4.4Ghz which is also another $1000.00 CPU + a expensive $389+ X99 will crank out around 53fps on average.

I'm pretty sure that our architecture, latency and PCIe 2.0 also has something to do with the scores. Matching a $1000.00+ i7-4960X is fine with me whether it's native or not. I game at 1440p\1600p normally anyways. Fury X handled the 4K champ on our 2008 platform like a champ.


----------



## Firehawk

Looks like a good upgrade over your 670s. Were those benches as the card alone or with one 670 in for Physx as we were discussing earlier?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Looks like a good upgrade over your 670s. Were those benches as the card alone or with one 670 in for Physx as we were discussing earlier?


Oh it's a very nice upgrade over the 670s SLI for sure. All benchmarks were performed with the Fury X running alone. My 670s are in their boxes. Retired, but they are still great for 1080p\1440p\1600p. I gave up on running the AMD Fury X and the 670 as a PhysX card. Nvidia killed that a long time ago and it requires way to much work for newer titles. Older titles probably works fine, but Nvidia disabled PhysX whenever a non-Nvidia card [AMD] is present. A dumb move if you ask me, but I'm not Nvidia. Nvidia also changed how PhysX is installed on the PC to prevent future hacking. Honestly after playing Batman: Arkham Knight with Nvidia Gameworks [that crippled performance] and playing without GameWorks [670 SLI & Single Fury X] the game played much better and still looked amazing.

Why were you wondering if the 670 was being used for PhysX? Are the scores higher than you imagined?


----------



## gsfancy

Hi Everyone!

I have been reading the forum for that past few days and it has convinced me to upgrade my i7 950 to a x5660, which will be here this week. So far I have read about 130 of the 430 pages on this thread, there is a ton of good information here. I am new to OCing and I am sure I will be posting many questions for you over the upcoming weeks.

In case anyone is wondering my rig will consist of the following:
Asus Sabertoth x58
12 GB (6x2GB) G.Skill Rip Jaws 1600 7-8-7-24-2N 1.6v
Xeon x5660 (coming soon)
Cooler Master v6 CPU Cooler
Sapphire Tri-x R9 280x
Corsair HX750
Cooler Master HAF 922

I am looking to get this puppy stable around 4 - 4.2 and then maybe push it some more depending on how things look. Thanks for all of your work and knowledge, I look forwarding to providing updates when I get the new CPU

.


----------



## OCmember

@gsfancy Good Luck & have fun, Fancy! I'm sure you'll be able to hit those numbers. The Sabertooth is probably the best board for 6 core Xeons on 1366 socket


----------



## Starbomba

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Hi Everyone!
> 
> I have been reading the forum for that past few days and it has convinced me to upgrade my i7 950 to a x5660, which will be here this week. So far I have read about 130 of the 430 pages on this thread, there is a ton of good information here. I am new to OCing and I am sure I will be posting many questions for you over the upcoming weeks.
> 
> In case anyone is wondering my rig will consist of the following:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Asus Sabertoth x58
> 12 GB (6x2GB) G.Skill Rip Jaws 1600 7-8-7-24-2N 1.6v
> Xeon x5660 (coming soon)
> Cooler Master v6 CPU Cooler
> Sapphire Tri-x R9 280x
> Corsair HX750
> Cooler Master HAF 922
> 
> 
> 
> I am looking to get this puppy stable around 4 - 4.2 and then maybe push it some more depending on how things look. Thanks for all of your work and knowledge, I look forwarding to providing updates when I get the new CPU
> 
> .


Welcome to the Hex-Core madness









4 GHz seems pretty much the baseline for any CPU based on Nehalem tech. The only CPUs that had issues were the i7-920 C0 stepping.

After 1 Clarkdale, 2 Lynnfield, 1 Blomfield and 1 Westmere CPUs, and 1 P55 along with two X58 motherboards, none had issues whatsoever reaching 4 GHz. Some were a bit crafty to get higher, but ye olde "200x20" formula always worked wonders.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Why were you wondering if the 670 was being used for PhysX? Are the scores higher than you imagined?


I was just curious if it affected the results at all. I already knew what the Fury X was capable of, I saw the reviews when they first came out. Its still impressive what a single card can do now.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Its still impressive what a single card can do now.


That is true. I wanted to Crossfire it with another Fury X, but there is no need to at the moment. I might someday. The performance has been very good so far.


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Starbomba*
> 
> Welcome to the Hex-Core madness
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 GHz seems pretty much the baseline for any CPU based on Nehalem tech. The only CPUs that had issues were the i7-920 C0 stepping.
> 
> After 1 Clarkdale, 2 Lynnfield, 1 Blomfield and 1 Westmere CPUs, and 1 P55 along with two X58 motherboards, none had issues whatsoever reaching 4 GHz. Some were a bit crafty to get higher, but ye olde "200x20" formula always worked wonders.


hmm idk i've always struggled to reach 4ghz on my D0 920 and now my x5650. last time i attempted 4ghz i think degraded my mobo and 920 as it started to behave weirdly and i've not pushed more than 1.35v to the CPU.

currently trying to push 4ghz+ on my x3650 and the best i got so far is 3.8ghz @ 1.35v. temps are fine though at around 60c and my mobo = asus rampage 2 gene


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lococol*
> 
> Hi all, I am new to overclocking Xeons. I have a Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5. I previously had an I7-930 and although it runs hot, I can overclock it no problems. Then recently I read through a lot of forums about installing an x56XX chip in my motherboard , I read a lot and thought I would take the chance. Anyway I bought an x5670 and prior to putting it in I updated my bios to Ff1 which is the latest one for my board on the gigabyte website. I have loaded default settings in bios and it boots fine, however if I change anything related to BCLK or VOLTAGES it refuses to boot. The standard 'overclock failed warning pops up and it reboots to last know good setting. This happens even if I change manual BCLK control from disabled to enabled and keep the BLCK at 133. Its very bizarre. I can enable EMP to PROFILE 1 and it still boots My memory is triple channel 3x2GB GEIL DDR3-1600 rated at CL8-8-8. Basically if I change anything remotely to do with overclocking it refuses to boot, however it is happy to run at stock with the turbo on at 3.2Ghz. Any help would be hugely appreciated as I have read about 200 pages of forums and while I have had some clues here and there I am pretty clueless on the whole. Also does anyone knoe if the F13 modified bios will run in my board? Thanks a lot


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Hmm, not sure. Results seem to be mixed from what I'm reading. May want to PM Hazard over at hardforum as he seemed to try it.


I'm on here too!

The X58A-UD5 I have is a revision 1.0 with the F7J BIO and is in my wife's rig she uses everyday which means I don't have a lot of down time to tinker with it. I tried OCing it and the same thing happened. I haven't had any time to troubleshoot it and running it stock vs OC makes zero difference for what my wife uses the computer for. Her rig is in my sig.

I'm not sure anyone here recalls but a few weeks back I had the same issue with my EX58-UD3R revision 1.0 on the F12Q BIOS. It ran happily at 25 x 160 for weeks but when I tried to push it to 165, it gave me the error and kept giving me the error until I did the full clear CMOS and pull out battery thing. Worked at 25 x 160 for a few days and then the error came back. Again, I have not had time to troubleshoot so it's running at stock for now. Rig in my sig as well.

I'm sorry I can't be of more help. I'll update if my situation changes.


----------



## DR4G00N

8gb's of the ram I ordered arrived. It booted right up @ 1866MHz CL9 1.5v with the kit I already had, didn't have to change anything in the bios.

16GB's 4x4GB slots 1,2,3 & 4 / 1866MHz CL9 9-9-24 1T 1.5v / 1.25v VTT.
I will give them a try at CL8 or 7 in a sec, I know they did 1915 CL8 so it should be possible.









Edit: Now at 8-9-9-24.


----------



## lococol

I got it working and I am now running my x5670 @4Ghz with HT on using a coolermaster hyper evo 212 on my GA-X58A-UD5 (rev2). The main thing that wasnt letting me change any overclocking options without a failed post and an overclock failed warning was the fact that I hadnt changed the QPI Clock Ratio. I saw someones settings online and gave them a try (without hoping for too much). I changed QPI Clock Ratio = x36 and Uncore Clock Ratio = x18. I didnt expect it to post but it DID







I changed the BCLK to 140 no probs, 150 no probs, 160 no probs. I got it up to 180 but it got too hot. My noctua DH-15 is sitting downstairs on the table waiting for its new job, I didnt know that Noctua dont supply the 1366 adapter out of the box and I have had to order it from them (for free but a huge inconvenience) and it should arrive in a week or so. For the benchmarkers out there I managed to get 930 in Cinebench R15 when I was running at 4.1Ghz. which is up there with current intel processsors at stock in the £200-£300 region. Very happy. Anyone with this board just remember to turn turbo to ENABLED so you can run it at 24x multiplier constantly. Great thread and great people. Very helpful.


----------



## lococol

I forgot to mention that I am currently running a modded bios also which is Ff3.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I managed to get 930 in Cinebench R15 when I was running at 4.1Ghz


I get 927 at 4.0 [200*20], so it looks like 7.2 GT/s QPI (36*200 BCLK) is worth about 2.5% in that test [assuming you're at 170*24]

Interdasting


----------



## OCmember

@gofastserstripe How is your UD7 Rev 2.0? I just got one a week ago for a very very good price 100% fully functional mint shape and i haven't gotten the chance to install it yet. The board is a beauty!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> 8gb's of the ram I ordered arrived. It booted right up @ 1866MHz CL9 1.5v with the kit I already had, didn't have to change anything in the bios.
> 
> 16GB's 4x4GB slots 1,2,3 & 4 / 1866MHz CL9 9-9-24 1T 1.5v / 1.25v VTT.
> I will give them a try at CL8 or 7 in a sec, I know they did 1915 CL8 so it should be possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Now at 8-9-9-24.


How are the secondary timings? I recently got a CL8.8.8.24, 8GB stick that runs at 1.35v 1600MHz but the secondary timings are horrible and noticeably different with gaming. Mainly the tRFC timing. It's 208. My old kit, which is now re-installed, has a tRFC timing of 77


----------



## gofasterstripes

@OCmember

Scweeeet







Mine's fine. Enjoy.
I have been playing The Witcher 3 with EVERYTHING on ultra [1900*1200] SLI GTX 970, boosted to 110% + Memory @ +250 [7250 I think]

Aweseome.

Also - I just got Geralt Laid


----------



## OCmember

@gofastserstripe haha, ok then!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How are the secondary timings? I recently got a CL8.8.8.24, 8GB stick that runs at 1.35v 1600MHz but the secondary timings are horrible and noticeably different with gaming. Mainly the tRFC timing. It's 208. My old kit, which is now re-installed, has a tRFC timing of 77


The tRFC is at 143 atm, I may try and reduce it by some.
Tried 8-8-9-24 but the system hanged on the post screen, probably just needs more voltage.


----------



## virpz

2012 made twins showed up here.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Going to mount these already before I start to get attached.


----------



## Space Marine

Anyone here is using a P6T (any version) on windows 10?
Any problems with missing drivers?


----------



## gsfancy

Finally got my x5660 installed and booted with defaults to check temps and everything. Curious what temps should be? I feel that I am running pretty high already at 37c idle and 62c during 10 pass very high IBT 2.54.

I thought the idle temp was high so cleaned and polished my Cooler Master v6 and re applied mx4 with the dot method with the same results. Can anyone speak to these temps before I start OCing?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Anyone here is using a P6T (any version) on windows 10?
> Any problems with missing drivers?


No issues yet.. I had more issues with my brand new 390. I don't use the on-board sound though, so I'm not sure if that's supported.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Finally got my x5660 installed and booted with defaults to check temps and everything. Curious what temps should be? I feel that I am running pretty high already at 37c idle and 62c during 10 pass very high IBT 2.54.
> 
> I thought the idle temp was high so cleaned and polished my Cooler Master v6 and re applied mx4 with the dot method with the same results. Can anyone speak to these temps before I start OCing?


Idle temps looks fine, especially if your fan is set to auto. Load looks a bit high for stock though. I would expect it to be in the mid 50's. What's your ambient?


----------



## gsfancy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Idle temps looks fine, especially if your fan is set to auto. Load looks a bit high for stock though. I would expect it to be in the mid 50's. What's your ambient?


Ambient room temp is 24 C at the moment.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Ambient room temp is 24 C at the moment.


I wouldn't worry about it too much. Overclock, try to keep your temps around 70c _(80c if you want to risk a bit)_ stressed and you'll be fine.


----------



## gsfancy

Mmm thanks. I only have a slight overclock to about 3.3 and I am already seeing temps at 79C. Maybe my cooler is not as good as I thought or I am terrible at applying paste and mounting coolers.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Mmm thanks. I only have a slight overclock to about 3.3 and I am already seeing temps at 79C. Maybe my cooler is not as good as I thought or I am terrible at applying paste and mounting coolers.


Wow, yeah.. That's really high. How much paste are you putting on there?
You aren't using auto voltage or something right?


----------



## gsfancy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Wow, yeah.. That's really high. How much paste are you putting on there?
> You aren't using auto voltage or something right?


Just a BB size of MX4 directly in the center.

Nope, I mannually set voltage. I just reset the board so running stock again and temps are idling at 42C. I will dive deeper this weekend when I get some more time.


----------



## OCmember

Ok wait. 4.4GHz gives 92 GFlops without Hyper threading. 52 GFlops at 4.3GHz WITH Hyper Threading ON???

EDIT: unstable

EDIT2: maxed all voltages and still reads 51 GFlops @ 4.3GHz HT on, WOW!!!


----------



## Kana-Maru

I get around 80Gflops @ 4Ghz & 3.8Ghz with HT. I'll run a test with HT off and see what I get.

Edit:

4Ghz HT enabled = Appox: 80Gflops.
4Ghz HT disabled = Approx: 83Gflops.

That's all I got for you.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I get around 80Gflops @ 4Ghz & 3.8Ghz with HT. I'll run a test with HT off and see what I get.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> 4Ghz HT enabled = Appox: 80Gflops.
> 4Ghz HT disabled = Approx: 83Gflops.
> 
> That's all I got for you.


How much ram tested? I swapped out my 2x8Gb kit for 2x2.

I am consistently getting 51 GFlpos









EDIT: ram speed is around 1300MHz


----------



## Kana-Maru

I did a quick standard. Do you want me to run Very High with no HT?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Just a BB size of MX4 directly in the center.
> 
> Nope, I mannually set voltage. I just reset the board so running stock again and temps are idling at 42C. I will dive deeper this weekend when I get some more time.


I've had better luck with a very thin line right down where the cores are. But it didn't make a huge difference, maybe 2-3c at most.

Could be that the IHS on your chip isn't straight.. My first x5670 was really bad _(F batch ~80c @ 4ghz 1.35v)_. I re-mounted my HS five times before just sending it back and paying the restocking fee and having them send a B batch.

That one was much better and is the one I'm currently running _(IBT ~68c @ 4.4 1.325v)._

On another note, I snagged a w3670 for $85. I'm pretty interested in seeing how it'll do. The batch numbers are very similar to my x5670, but who knows if that will mean anything.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I did a quick standard. Do you want me to run Very High with no HT?


Yeah, see what comes up.

I just swapped back in my 2x8 kit, testing 13333mb of ram, 4.2GHz HT on, Uncore 2400MHz, QPI 2900MHz, Memory 1600MHz @ cl8

EDIT: WOW, same schitt, 54GFlops

EDIT2: 3.8GHz gives me 56GFlops ???

Is it the board or the chip?

Or could it be that I'm only running dual channel?


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah, see what comes up.
> 
> I just swapped back in my 2x8 kit, testing 13333mb of ram, 4.2GHz HT on, Uncore 2400MHz, QPI 2900MHz, Memory 1600MHz @ cl8
> 
> EDIT: WOW, same schitt, 54GFlops
> 
> EDIT2: 3.8GHz gives me 56GFlops ???
> 
> Is it the board or the chip?
> 
> Or could it be that I'm only running dual channel?


I'm running dual channel on a UD3R, x5670 at 200x19 (3.8 GHz) and I get 60 something GFlops, I want to say either 62 or 67 GFlops. 8GB RAM 1600MHz, 9/9/9/24

I posted a photo of my results for stripes earlier in the thread if you want to look, it's between page 400 and here, I can't really narrow it down further though :/


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah, see what comes up.
> 
> I just swapped back in my 2x8 kit, testing 13333mb of ram, 4.2GHz HT on, Uncore 2400MHz, QPI 2900MHz, Memory 1600MHz @ cl8


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> I'm running dual channel on a UD3R, x5670 at 200x19 (3.8 GHz) and I get 60 something GFlops, I want to say either 62 or 67 GFlops. 8GB RAM 1600MHz, 9/9/9/24
> 
> I posted a photo of my results for stripes earlier in the thread if you want to look, it's between page 400 and here, I can't really narrow it down further though :/


I believe you. I seen the pics and remember trying to help out with it. Oddly HT off I get 92GFlops. Not sure if it's the chip or board at this point. I do have an extra chip and board I could trouble shoot but if anyone has an idea it would save the time and trouble


----------



## akromatic

i need serious help in overclocking my system.

i've been trying to break though 3.8ghz with my x5650 on an asus rampage 2 gene. i still couldnt break past that even with custom watercooling and since i've recased itand though i just keep it at 3.8ghz for now with known working 3.8ghz settings and it spat "cmos err" at me

waited 24 hours with a VGA swap to get past that cmos err to reflash the bios and now it just crashes at windows boot screen even with stock clocks.

i believe the mobo has degraded before as i know used to be able to reach 4ghz with my 920 D0 stable for a few days before it would no longer boot at 4ghz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Well, you need to eliminate things.

Have you still got your i7?


----------



## gsfancy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I've had better luck with a very thin line right down where the cores are. But it didn't make a huge difference, maybe 2-3c at most.
> 
> Could be that the IHS on your chip isn't straight.. My first x5670 was really bad _(F batch ~80c @ 4ghz 1.35v)_. I re-mounted my HS five times before just sending it back and paying the restocking fee and having them send a B batch.
> 
> That one was much better and is the one I'm currently running _(IBT ~68c @ 4.4 1.325v)._
> 
> On another note, I snagged a w3670 for $85. I'm pretty interested in seeing how it'll do. The batch numbers are very similar to my x5670, but who knows if that will mean anything.


Mmm interesting, I have a Noctua DH15 arriving tomorrow so I am going to try that out and see if there is any difference. I got the chip for dirt cheap from a buddy so I may try lapping the IHS if the temps do not seem any better.

Thanks for the help tbob22


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I believe you. I seen the pics and remember trying to help out with it. Oddly HT off I get 92GFlops. Not sure if it's the chip or board at this point. I do have an extra chip and board I could trouble shoot but if anyone has an idea it would save the time and trouble


That happened to me when I was trying to find stability, eventhough IBT passes, your OC may not be 100% stable, and you have to tweak your chip further. Also, make sure no other programs are running when running IBT.

These are all Maximum runs.

X5660 @ 4.5 HT OFF = 96 Gflops



X5660 @ 4.4 HT ON = 82 Gflops



I also found these for reference:


----------



## OCmember

@gofastserstripe If you were talking to me yes I do and I think i'll have to swap the chips out to test, unfortunately

@2010rig Great, thanks for the pics and info.

I think it might be a bad chip. @ 4Ghz Core, & 3GHz Uncore I pushed the max voltage limits (1.375v 1.35v) and it still wouldn't go beyond 54GFlops with HT on. At stock settings and speeds it pushes 47GFlops with HT on. But with HT OFF it will do 92 @ 4.4GHz

Still wondering which component is bad, the chip or the board. I remember my i7 970 doing 80s to 90s with HT on


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @gofastserstripe If you were talking to me yes I do and I think i'll have to swap the chips out to test, unfortunately
> 
> @2010rig Great, thanks for the pics and info.
> 
> I think it might be a bad chip. @ 4Ghz Core, & 3GHz Uncore I pushed the max voltage limits (1.375v 1.35v) and it still wouldn't go beyond 54GFlops with HT on. At stock settings and speeds it pushes 47GFlops with HT on. But with HT OFF it will do 92 @ 4.4GHz
> 
> Still wondering which component is bad, the chip or the board. I remember my i7 970 doing 80s to 90s with HT on


Mine was doing that too, and I was freaking out thinking I had a bad chip.

I just kept tweaking voltages, until it ran in the 80's. Plus, by doing so, I found rock solid settings.









Keep tweaking it, since with HT OFF you're getting 90+.

Also, you may be using TOO MUCH voltage for 4 GHz, I'm currently using 1.32V for 4.4 HT ON.

http://valid.x86.fr/g2qm1h


----------



## OCmember

@2010rig I'll keep fiddling with it, thanks!









Also could it be that I'm not running IBT correctly? Or the revision is a bad one? Using 2.54, and for quickness i've been doing standard memory amount..


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @2010rig I'll keep fiddling with it, thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also could it be that I'm not running IBT correctly? Or the revision is a bad one? Using 2.54, and for quickness i've been doing standard memory amount..


Yeah, my scores are at Maximum. I'm sure dual channel is affecting it some, but can't be much since you got 90+ Gflops with HT OFF.

I'm guessing, you should be getting around 65 - 67 Gflops @ 4.0.

...

First run was 58 Gflops, ram timings were on auto.

2nd run added more voltage, and bam 52 Gflops, doing a 3rd run now ....


----------



## Christes

Hello everyone!

I'm currently running an i7 930 @ 3.9GHz, but I'm toying with the idea of grabbing a six core X56** CPU just for the hell of it. However, I have a few questions about these CPUs first. Apologies if these are really noobish, but this seems like the best place on the internet to ask them.

1. Will my ASUS P6T (not deluxe) work with such a CPU? It seems like it should from what I read, but it's good to check. The BIOS version is 1201 IIRC.

2. What CPU multipliers would be available to me with these CPUs? It's easy enough to deduce the stock multiplier, of course. I'm curious about what's available in the BIOS. For example, my i7 930 has a stock multiplier of x21, but x22 is also available in the BIOS. Likewise, the 5660 apparently has the same stock multiplier, but what else would be available?

3. The conventional wisdom for overclocking i7 9XX's seems to be that odd multipliers are better. Is this also true of X56** CPUs?

4. Do we think all of these CPUs just the same product binned differently? Or are there some divisions within them?

5. What's up with the official TDPs? 5650-5675 all list 95W, which jumps to 130W in the 5680. The 5679 sits bizarrely in between at 115W. (The 5679 seems kind of strange in general TBH) Are these TDPs just because of the clockspeeds, or do they reflect something else as well?

6. For overclocking, how significant is the benefit of getting a higher-rated X56** CPU? Obviously, I'd want the new CPU to at least match my current speed, and I'm willing to pay more money to ensure that.


----------



## OCmember

@2010rig Same thing. 4.2GHz HT on, 1.25v 57GFlops


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sorry @OCmember I had to lay down for work last night. I'll try to get around to running more test, but I I'm not seeing the results you are seeing. With HT on or off it's nearly the same performance when it comes to Gflops. I only tested 4Ghz. I'll try 4.6Ghz with HT on and off when I get home.

AMD R9 Radeon Fury X review incoming!!!! I've been benchmarking a lot of games and I'm going to read through all of the data and put some charts together on my blog. I'll link everyone once I finish all of my benchmarks. If there are any games you want me to benchmark let me know. If I don't have them maybe you'll let me borrow your game for benchmarking purposes.

I know many have already read the Fury X benchmarks from several sites, but I don't like how everyone benchmarks games. I also have higher results than some of the benchmarks I've read. Other times the results are identical. If there's something that you would like to be benchmarked let me know.


----------



## OCmember

@Kana-Maru Still fiddling around with the voltages. I doubt it but it might be the NB voltage

EDIT: nope

EDIT2: set the memory to 'Very high' and 74GFlops came up. Odd. Testing custom amount of memory 8192. Will edit post with results

EDIT3: looks like I'm right on par now with 4.2GHz. Hit 75GFlops with tighter ram timings, 1600MHz @ cl7.7.7.21 The trick was to use above 4Gb of memory. I retested with 'Standard' and 57GFlops came up.... weird.

Thanks all for the help!

Cheers :beer:


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Kana-Maru Still fiddling around with the voltages. I doubt it but it might be the NB voltage
> 
> EDIT: nope
> 
> EDIT2: set the memory to 'Very high' and 74GFlops came up. Odd. Testing custom amount of memory 8192. Will edit post with results
> 
> EDIT3: looks like I'm right on par now with 4.2GHz. Hit 75GFlops with tighter ram timings, 1600MHz @ cl7.7.7.21 The trick was to use above 4Gb of memory. I retested with 'Standard' and 57GFlops came up.... weird.
> 
> Thanks all for the help!
> 
> Cheers :beer:


I knew it wasn't a bad chip, same thing happened to me.


----------



## greywarden

I noticed that when OC'ing my 4690K it does like 105 Gflops and my X5650 only does 78 Gflops both around 4.3-4..4GHz

Do Gflops translate to real world use performance?


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Well, you need to eliminate things.
> 
> Have you still got your i7?


yeh i still do, anyway i manged to get it booting again and it can now only do a 3.7ghz OC while it previously did 3.8 stably. settings are all currently auto except for bclk and cpu voltage. when i tried messing with the other settings it just refuse to get past window loading and any less voltage it just refuses boot as well

http://valid.x86.fr/g5auq1


----------



## ghabhaducha

@Kana-Maru, don't compare yourself to those sites, your reviews are definitely much more exhaustive and meticulous. I look forward to reading what you come up with


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greywarden*
> 
> I noticed that when OC'ing my 4690K it does like 105 Gflops and my X5650 only does 78 Gflops both around 4.3-4..4GHz
> 
> Do Gflops translate to real world use performance?


That's because Sandy Bridge and newer processors use AVX instructions, which increase the Gflops.


----------



## virpz

Wondering if anybody was able to get newer ( post 2006 ) drivers on Win 10 ?

I can't figure out how to update drivers on Win 10/cannot find win 8.1 drivers.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> @Kana-Maru, don't compare yourself to those sites, your reviews are definitely much more exhaustive and meticulous. I look forward to reading what you come up with


Thanks man. That's encouraging for sure. I only do this for the community. X58 + gaming is still alive and kicking. I just spend the past few hours benchmarking the heck out of Crysis 3. It definitely takes some time to go through all of these games. I think my selection of titles will be a bit different from what most are expecting. It takes so long to benchmark, go through the data, disregard bad data, type everything up, upload charts etc and type up a article. I'm hoping I have enough time to get the review up.

I might have to delay it due to the amount of games I need to bench and time constraints. It's almost done. I have 5 more games I need to benchmark.


----------



## kckyle

cpuz just got a benchmark feature











i'm matching a 5930k @ stock. gotta love x58 lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Nice. You know I must find time to run that benchmark soon.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice. You know I must find time to run that benchmark soon.


i wanna see what the xeon get around 4.8ghz. i don't wanna go above 4.7ghz cause thn i'll push pass t he 1.35v limit.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm messing around with my Fury X at the moment. I'm trying to see how far I OC it. I'm not expecting much until AMD unlocks the voltage, but even at stock the performance and temperature is simple amazing! Bench results are incoming. [hopefully tomorrow afternoon sometime]

I'll probably head over to CPU-z and get the latest version soon.


----------



## DR4G00N

Just managed to get my 12GB's of ram to 2055MHz 11-11-11-28 1T 1.6v (I'll start lowering timings later).










Edit: Now at 2125MHz with the same timings.









Edit 2: 2200MHz


----------



## OCmember

@DR4G00N Is that the Classified 770 ?

I kick myself for not aggressively bidding on one off eBay. Mint condition from Canada


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @DR4G00N Is that the Classified 770 ?
> 
> I kick myself for not aggressively bidding on one off eBay. Mint condition from Canada


Nope it's the E762 Classified 4-Way which I bought in mint condition from the states earlier this year.

Had to stop at 2200MHz because of my boards 222 BLCK wall.









Time to start lowering the timings!


----------



## OCmember

@DR4G00N I think I seen one of those for sale on eBay. I shy'd away from reading bad reviews on new egg... i know not to but there were a ton of bad reviews


----------



## OCmember

Man, Hyper threading really puts the heat on. Hitting close to 60*c just gaming @ 4.2GHz 1.30v (i think 1.28v is possible)

edit: although i have my power config on high perf and idle disabled.. power config on power saver and it tops out at 42*c, wow, hmm,


----------



## DR4G00N

Got it down to 9-11-10-27 @ 2200MHz, can probably go lower on the timings maybe 9-10-9-27 or even 8-10-10-27.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Just managed to get my 12GB's of ram to 2055MHz 11-11-11-28 1T 1.6v (I'll start lowering timings later).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Now at 2125MHz with the same timings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit 2: 2200MHz


What is your rated default speed? What kind of RAM do you have.

After reaching 2200Mhz and seeing the performance I fell back down to 1600Mhz.


----------



## Space Marine

Anyone here is running an MSI x58 pro?
Is it compatible with six cores?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What is your rated default speed? What kind of RAM do you have.
> 
> After reaching 2200Mhz and seeing the performance I fell back down to 1600Mhz.


Default is 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5V with these Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 dimm's.

Finally settled in to 2200MHz 9-10-10-27 1T 1.6v. CL8 was causing errors even at 1.65v.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Default is 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5V with these Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 dimm's.
> 
> Finally settled in to 2200MHz 9-10-10-27 1T 1.6v. CL8 was causing errors even at 1.65v.


I thought you were still using those Samsungs. That's a great man. Congrats









I haven't really messed around with my new RAM frequencies that much. Now you are making me want to overclock RAM again which will probably end up with my banging my head for hours before everything is working properly. I promise you guys are always getting into something new every week. That's an amazing OC if you can keep it stable. Golden RAM.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I thought you were still using those Samsungs. That's a great man. Congrats
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't really messed around with my new RAM frequencies that much. Now you are making me want to overclock RAM again which will probably end up with my banging my head for hours before everything is working properly. I promise you guys are always getting into something new every week. That's an amazing OC if you can keep it stable. Golden RAM.


Yeah, I have four 4GB sticks atm but I have another two in the mail (should be here tuesday). Then I will try again but with the full 24GB's.









Actually, I have gotten two of these sticks to 2330MHz on my old AMD FM1 A55 board albeit the timings were at a fairly loose 9-13-13-35 1T.









Edit: A couple of benches,


----------



## OCmember

That's how the Crucial Tactical Ballistix are. 1.35v CL8.8.8.24 1600MHz they overclock like crazy up to 2400MHz


----------



## dude guy bro

Gonna be pulling the trigger on one of these (X5650) chips soon. For the longest time, I'd had a short in my P6T7 that I could not figure out, tho it otherwise worked perfectly until I had to shutdown, and it would want to power back up, so I would just kill power @ the PSU switch, as I only used it occasionally to game anyway...

Had to get it going the other day, cos I was reformatting my sig rig, and it was acting up and upon further googling, I realized the CMOS battery was likely dying. So, I head up to batteries plus, got a replacement, and whaddya know, the short is gone. Now I have a perfectly working, barely used P6T7


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> That's how the Crucial Tactical Ballistix are. 1.35v CL8.8.8.24 1600MHz they overclock like crazy up to 2400MHz


The Crucial Tactical Ballistix use Micron IC's which oc about the same as the samsungs.

My Samsung dimm's have the same IC's as Corsair's Dominator Platinum 4GB dimms which explains why they oc so well.








I wonder how far I could get these if I had a Ivy/Haswell chip with a golden IMC.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The Crucial Tactical Ballistix use Micron IC's which oc about the same as the samsungs.
> 
> My Samsung dimm's have the same IC's as Corsair's Dominator Platinum 4GB dimms which explains why they oc so well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how far I could get these if I had a Ivy/Haswell chip with a golden IMC.


How are your secondary timings? tRFC?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How are your secondary timings? tRFC?


tRFC is at 143 (Auto), it can probably do <100 but I don't really want to mess with it because the difference is negligible.


----------



## OCmember

Wow, these default to 208 at adv speeds and latencies.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> cpuz just got a benchmark feature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i'm matching a 5930k @ stock. gotta love x58 lol


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i wanna see what the xeon get around 4.8ghz. i don't wanna go above 4.7ghz cause thn i'll push pass t he 1.35v limit.


Well I finally got around to downloading and running the benchmark. Here's are my results:

*4Ghz:*

http://s26.postimg.org/5670yjm3t/4_Ghz_RAM_1400_Mhz.jpg

*4.8Ghz:*

http://s26.postimg.org/aivvcoa09/4_8_Ghz_RAM_1675_Mhz_Another_test.jpg

I'll test 3.8Ghz soon.


----------



## tbob22

An update on my w3670.. It's a bit disappointing, it overclocks about on par with the x5670 in my asrock board but is much hotter.

4.2ghz 175x24 needed 1.325v. It hit the low 80's in small ffts pretty quick so I stopped the test, this was also with the QPI at 1.2v and everything as low as possible other than the clockspeed.
I messed around with it for about an hour until I gave up and went back to my x5670.

Thermal paste cover/thickness looked good when I removed the heatsink. Idle temps were quite high as well, hitting the mid 40's while my x5670 at 4.2 idles around 30c.
Even running Cinebench resulted in upper 70's. My x5670 at 4.2 maxes at 55c in Cinebench.

Oh well, it was worth a try for the price. I'll probably sell it as I can make a few bucks.


----------



## tbob22

Ahh interesting I didn't realize CPU-Z had a benchmark.
My results at 4.2, as expected I guess.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Kana-Maru

*FINALLY!!!!*

I'm finished typing and uploading my Fury X benchmarks. Check it out here:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review

I put a lot of hard work into this review. It took many of my life hours lol.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *FINALLY!!!!*
> 
> I'm finished typing and uploading my Fury X benchmarks. Check it out here:
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review
> 
> I put a lot of hard work into this review. It took many of my life hours lol.


Nicely done. Looks like a nice card.


----------



## BaldMan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *FINALLY!!!!*
> 
> I'm finished typing and uploading my Fury X benchmarks. Check it out here:
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review
> 
> I put a lot of hard work into this review. It took many of my life hours lol.


Nice read!


----------



## DR4G00N

Just did a 10 min run of prime95 and the hottest core reached 82c!
4.17GHz 220x19 1.3625v, 1.35v VTT.

Having 2200MHz CL9 ram is nice but I don't think it's worth having the proc run so hot, and this is with an H110!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just did a 10 min run of prime95 and the hottest core reached 82c!
> 4.17GHz 220x19 1.3625v, 1.35v VTT.
> 
> Having 2200MHz CL9 ram is nice but I don't think it's worth having the proc run so hot, and this is with an H110!


Yep, having that VTT voltage at 1.35v can really put out some heat. I settled on 1.25v with my QPI at 3200mhz, that allows for 2000mhz and temps stay pretty low.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> i need serious help in overclocking my system.
> 
> i've been trying to break though 3.8ghz with my x5650 on an asus rampage 2 gene. i still couldnt break past that even with custom watercooling and since i've recased itand though i just keep it at 3.8ghz for now with known working 3.8ghz settings and it spat "cmos err" at me
> 
> waited 24 hours with a VGA swap to get past that cmos err to reflash the bios and now it just crashes at windows boot screen even with stock clocks.
> 
> i believe the mobo has degraded before as i know used to be able to reach 4ghz with my 920 D0 stable for a few days before it would no longer boot at 4ghz


i have a rampage 2 gene with a x5650, i have the multi set to 22 and 191 bclk, with 1.272 vcore and it is very stable, i couldnt oc more because im using it with a 212+ and temps are 65-70 with the cooler at 2000rpm, i got it up to 5022 mhz with 1 core and 1.51 volts, its not a good overclocker, i got my 2600k to 5.3 with 1.55 vcore and all the cores and ht, you should be able to get it to 4ghz without any problem


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> i have a rampage 2 gene with a x5650, i have the multi set to 22 and 191 bclk, with 1.272 vcore and it is very stable, i couldnt oc more because im using it with a 212+ and temps are 65-70 with the cooler at 2000rpm, i got it up to 5022 mhz with 1 core and 1.51 volts, its not a good overclocker, i got my 2600k to 5.3 with 1.55 vcore and all the cores and ht, you should be able to get it to 4ghz without any problem


what are your otther settings i'll try to mirror them and see how it goes.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Nicely done. Looks like a nice card.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> Nice read!


Thanks for checking out my review guys. I'll be posting more data soon. I still have to see how much better the scores will be with a modest OC. AMD has these GPU bogged down.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just did a 10 min run of prime95 and the hottest core reached 82c!
> 4.17GHz 220x19 1.3625v, 1.35v VTT.
> 
> Having 2200MHz CL9 ram is nice but I don't think it's worth having the proc run so hot, and this is with an H110!


Wow 82c. It was probably hotter than that in reality. That's just what the software "caught". You definitely don't want to be anywhere near 80c. Anything over DDR3-1600Mhz really isn't worth to be honest. Intel had plans and they lifted the bottlenecks on the X79 instead of revising the X58 platform. Money money money.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> what are your otther settings i'll try to mirror them and see how it goes.


load line calibration on
c1 and all the states on the cpu tab disabled
high temperature limit disabled
bclk 191
rams set to the lowest
multi set to 22
voltage set to absolute vid and 1.272 vcore

thats it, everything else is set to auto, i wanted to get it to 4.4 but i need a lot of voltage and it gets to +96º and freezes and restars itself


----------



## gofasterstripes

Might want to re-enable the H.Temp limit there, dude,


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Might want to re-enable the H.Temp limit there, dude,


it shuts down at 96° no matter what i set it too


----------



## gofasterstripes

We're having good longevity by avoiding temperatures above 80c.

Try and fix it.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> We're having good longevity by avoiding temperatures above 80c.
> 
> Try and fix it.


dude it never gets to that temp, at 4.2ghz and 1.272 volts it never gets more than 65-70°, it only got to that temp when i tried 4.6ghz with 1.4 volts


----------



## akromatic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *FINALLY!!!!*
> 
> I'm finished typing and uploading my Fury X benchmarks. Check it out here:
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review
> 
> I put a lot of hard work into this review. It took many of my life hours lol.


nice work, i understand that x58 is still viable for today's high end cards but what is the minimal CPU clockspeed to still be able to take advantage of these cards. you have an amazing overclock or at least to my standard while im struggling to break past 3.7ghz on my x5650


----------



## ghabhaducha

Excellent read Kana, thanks for putting that together.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> nice work, i understand that x58 is still viable for today's high end cards but what is the minimal CPU clockspeed to still be able to take advantage of these cards. you have an amazing overclock or at least to my standard while im struggling to break past 3.7ghz on my x5650


Well you'll want to use at least 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz for a single high end card. For dual card you'll want to aim for 4.2Ghz. 4.4Ghz with adequate cooling and reasonable voltages would be nice as well. Just to give you an example: I just finished playing Middle-earth Shadows of Mordor for about two hours or so. Here are my basic specs:

X5660 @ 4Ghz
Fury X @ Stock Clocks
Resolution: 2560x1440

These numbers are approximate.

FPS Avg around 85-95
FPS Max = 101
FPS Min: ??? I don't know

GPU Temp Avg: 41c-42c
GPU Temp Max 48:

CPU Temp Avg: 35c
CPU Temp Max: 44

I was playing the game 100% maxed out as well with the 6GB HD Texture Pack [gorgeous game!]. So as I said from my experience you'll only need around 3.8Ghz -4Ghz with high end cards. When I ran my dual GTX 670s 4Ghz was fine for those as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Excellent read Kana, thanks for putting that together.


No problem man. It definitely took many hours. I'll be adding more later in the week. I still have to complete the overclocked Fury X benchmarks and there's a few more games I'd like to test out as well. I can't wait for Batman: Arkham Knight to re-appear on Steam. My initial version is to buggy to run. I'll keep everyone updated.


----------



## akromatic

it would be nice if there is a CPU ghz scaling chart for dual and single GPU to understand how much performance hit


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> it would be nice if there is a CPU ghz scaling chart for dual and single GPU to understand how much performance
> hit


Well that would be nice, but that would take a lot of time. I have something similar that I tested last year. Check out my X5660 review below:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=7

That page will show you my Real Time Benchmarks™. If you scroll down you'll see where I used stock settings and various overclock settings for the same game. One game in particular amazed me. It was Battlefield 3. The stock CPU and overclock CPU [46Ghz] gave the same FPS average. DICE really knows how to optimize their games properly. There are a ton of other results there and it should give you an idea of the performance hit. I was using dual GTX 670s 2GB Reference GPUs.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That was fast. Lol thanks.


i know im late, but i'll be buying a x5675 today thanks to you. i will be waiting till end of 2015 for my x99 build. hoping they release 14nm x99 chips before then


----------



## s3rius

Hey guys. I've been inspired to join the Xeon club and got myself a cheap one from eBay just now.

I ran into some problems now, though. Maybe you guys can help me.

My rig is:


Old CPU: i7-920
New CPU: Xeon X5670
Asus P6T Deluxe (v1) (BIOS version 2209 - the newest available)
4x4GB 1600Mhz Corsair RAM
So, I took out my old processor, popped the new Xeon in. The system POSTs successfully and in my BIOS I can see that the CPU has been properly recognized by the board. However, once I try to boot into one of my operating systems (got Windows 7 and Ubuntu) things start to fail. Windows 7 simply quietly reboots my system; Ubuntu shows a black screen. Neither even gets to showing a loading screen logo.

I've tried to boot Ubuntu from USB as well, but same thing happens no matter if I try to run it from stick or install the OS. The CPU and RAM are on stock settings, overclocking was supposed to come afterwards. I've tried to reset all BIOS settings to default but that didn't help.

Everything works after popping in my old 920 again.

From what I've gathered on the interwebz, my board should be able to run that CPU, should it not? The CPU is second-hand but the buyer guaranteed he tests all processors before shipping them.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Hey guys. I've been inspired to join the Xeon club and got myself a cheap one from eBay just now.
> 
> I ran into some problems now, though. Maybe you guys can help me.
> 
> My rig is:
> 
> 
> Old CPU: i7-920
> New CPU: Xeon X5670
> Asus P6T Deluxe (v1) (BIOS version 2209 - the newest available)
> 4x4GB 1600Mhz Corsair RAM
> So, I took out my old processor, popped the new Xeon in. The system POSTs successfully and in my BIOS I can see that the CPU has been properly recognized by the board. However, once I try to boot into one of my operating systems (got Windows 7 and Ubuntu) things start to fail. Windows 7 simply quietly reboots my system; Ubuntu shows a black screen. Neither even gets to showing a loading screen logo.
> 
> I've tried to boot Ubuntu from USB as well, but same thing happens no matter if I try to run it from stick or install the OS. The CPU and RAM are on stock settings, overclocking was supposed to come afterwards. I've tried to reset all BIOS settings to default but that didn't help.
> 
> Everything works after popping in my old 920 again.
> 
> From what I've gathered on the interwebz, my board should be able to run that CPU, should it not? The CPU is second-hand but the buyer guaranteed he tests all processors before shipping them.


did you remove the bios battery and cleared your cmos settings?


----------



## OCmember

@s3rius reinstall both Windows 7 and Unbuntu


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> did you remove the bios battery and cleared your cmos settings?


I haven't yet. I'll try that tomorrow when I give the Xeon another go.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @s3rius reinstall both Windows 7 and Unbuntu


That might proof a bit difficult. I haven't tried a Windows installation disk yet (gotta burn another one) but the bootable USB stick that I always use to install Ubuntu ends up blackscreening too (no matter if I try to run the OS from stick or attempt a direct installation).


----------



## AlienPrime173

i can bet for a fact that it is becuse you have to clear cmos and remove battery for 5+ minutes. Did the same from 990x to my 960. didnt have to reformat though. also make sure your ram is at like 1066 6-7-6-20-1t or whatever if you arent running ecc. mem controllers on xeon arent made for higher than base clock especially non-ecc ram....


----------



## gofasterstripes

Sorry, I read that as: it was running up to 91c


----------



## gofasterstripes

I found no meaningful difference in Firestrike between 4 and 4.6 [sli 970's]


----------



## DR4G00N

I finally received my last two 4GB sticks of ram.








Currently @ 24GB 6x4GB 1866MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5v, 1.25v VTT. Stable.









Samsung IC batch numbers:
4x "K4B2G0846C-HCH9"
1x "K4B2G0846C-BCH9"
1x "K4B2G0846C-HCK0" (CK0 is for the 1600MHz modules but the sticker says CH9, so... yeah).

In all their green pcb glory. (Maybe I'll buy some cheap heat spreaders to make them look a bit nicer).



Edit: 2200MHz 9-10-10-27 1T 1.6v stable!!


----------



## t1337dude

After reading more info about DX12 and how it's supposed to benefit greatly from additional cores, I wonder if that even further future proofs us X5670 users. We've got decent clock speeds (after OC) AND additional cores...should be set for awhile, right? I wonder if we'll even get better performance than those with more modern quad-core chips...


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *t1337dude*
> 
> After reading more info about DX12 and how it's supposed to benefit greatly from additional cores, I wonder if that even further future proofs us X5670 users. We've got decent clock speeds (after OC) AND additional cores...should be set for awhile, right? I wonder if we'll even get better performance than those with more modern quad-core chips...


That's the plan buddy!







I can't wait for DX12 to be used by developers in all its glory.


----------



## tbob22

I decided to get a kill a watt to see how power hungry this platform really is. It's not nearly as bad as I was expecting.

Idle: 145w
Lots of USB stuff plugged in, all of the stuff in my sig plus a USB3 card, 5 120mm fans, and 3 140mm fans

Prime95 Small FFTs: 310w
Furmark: 495w
Furmark+Small FFTs: 660w

This is with the 390 at stock.. That seems like some crazy usage, but I guess it's about what I'd expect.
Obviously this is pretty much the highest wattage it will every see.

In most games it doesn't even break 400w total usage.

The accuracy is debatable on these things though.


----------



## dude guy bro

e: Just realized that I poasted this in perhaps not the most appropriate thread, so I've moved it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dude guy bro*
> 
> Been juggling around options with purchasing some of these CPUs, and this is sort of my POA. I've 3 X58 motherboards that I want to put these into, all capable (Rampage iii Gene, P6T7 WS, EX58-UD3R). So, thinking I'll pick up 2x ($80) X5650's on Amazon, together from the highest rated seller, and see which goes where, depending on the achievable clocks per voltage needed.
> 
> I'm hoping to get one that will hit at least 3.7 @ decent volts to replace one of my 930's, and the lesser of the two, I only need to hit 3.2ghz in the Gigabyte board @ stock OC settings, which it currently does 100% stable with a 920 c0.
> 
> After I get that sorted out, I'll likely pick up either a 5660, 5670, or 5675 depending on prices at that time. Before reading/searching this entire thread, what I'd like to know is, is there any one preferred seller for these chips, whether it be on Ebay, Amazon, or a forum such as this? And, the chips themselves, which ones are ppl having the best luck with? I hate to assume that overall the x5675 will be the safest bet for the highest clocks, cos you never know, and these are from the era where batch ID's helped the selection process.
> 
> Any help/advice will be greatly appreciated & repped.


----------



## Carrotsfart

You'll easily hit those clocks. I'd never overclocked before this build, I have a second hand x58a-UD3R which i have no clue about the previous history of it and my chip hit 3.8 GHz with no issues on 1.234Vcore, 1.235 VTT

The chip will boot in at 3.2 pretty much from stock. My board ran my x5670 with the 25x multiplier permanently on when I chose optimized defaults, the Vcore was really high though (1.31V).

As stripes always says, be careful with the EX58 board, the VRM's are poor so the voltage delivered to the core may be higher than the maximum you've set in the BIOS.


----------



## gofasterstripes

A DX12 Bench:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/DX12-GPU-and-CPU-Performance-Tested-Ashes-Singularity-Benchmark

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/212314-directx-12-arrives-at-last-with-ashes-of-the-singularity-amd-and-nvidia-go-head-to-head

I'd guess in most cases our 6 core chips will benefit less than weaker ones, but there will be a benefit. NVIDIA cards, much the same story.

AMD looks to get a substantial boost, however!

Things are sure to get interesting.....

@dude guy bro

In my testing the Vtt/Uncore regulation on my UD3R was not robust. The Vtt was higher than selected until heavy loading brought it down. It's probably operating at a higher error margin than it would be for a 45nm chip, as the 32nm/ECC Capable Uncore on the Xeons seems to either draw less current or just generally be less robust than the IMC on the i7/45nm chips. I also measured quite a lot of voltage ripple/noise on the output side of the CPU VRMs.

You could either be very conservative with the volts, or use a multimeter to check them. In my posts there is a picture or two that shows where to measure the voltage, it's behind the CPU socket, on the back of the Mobo, so you'll need a case with a cutout.

Don't get me wrong, the board works great, but it requires a conservative touch for 32nm Xeons.


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> did you remove the bios battery and cleared your cmos settings?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @s3rius reinstall both Windows 7 and Unbuntu


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> i can bet for a fact that it is becuse you have to clear cmos and remove battery for 5+ minutes. Did the same from 990x to my 960. didnt have to reformat though. also make sure your ram is at like 1066 6-7-6-20-1t or whatever if you arent running ecc. mem controllers on xeon arent made for higher than base clock especially non-ecc ram....


Right, so I tried these things. Resettng CMOS (both removing the battery and using the CLRTC pins on the board) did nothing to help, nor did setting the RAM to 1066MHz. I quickly burned Windows 10 on a DVD and tried to install it from there but the result is just as disheartening: it gets stuck on the Win10 logo for a minute, then the system quietly restarts.

Could it be that the Xeon has any stricter requirements about memory? I'm using 4x4GB modules in the slots A1,A2,B1,B2; leaving the C1 and C2 slots empty.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Right, so I tried these things. Resettng CMOS (both removing the battery and using the CLRTC pins on the board) did nothing to help, nor did setting the RAM to 1066MHz. I quickly burned Windows 10 on a DVD and tried to install it from there but the result is just as disheartening: it gets stuck on the Win10 logo for a minute, then the system quietly restarts.


I have the V1 P6T Deluxe, that I got used. The seller told me that the second NIC casued problems. So I would suggest disabling NIC #2, the SAS controller and all of the legacy hardware things in the BIOS that arent used. Turn off Asus Express Gate, and turn off full screen logo in the boot and see what is failing to initialize.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I finally received my last two 4GB sticks of ram.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently @ 24GB 6x4GB 1866MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5v, 1.25v VTT. Stable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samsung IC batch numbers:
> 4x "K4B2G0846C-HCH9"
> 1x "K4B2G0846C-BCH9"
> 1x "K4B2G0846C-HCK0" (CK0 is for the 1600MHz modules but the sticker says CH9, so... yeah).
> 
> In all their green pcb glory. (Maybe I'll buy some cheap heat spreaders to make them look a bit nicer).
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: 2200MHz 9-10-10-27 1T 1.6v stable!!


Which is the default speed of your modules?
Im using 6x4gb of samsung "magic ram" sticks but i couldnt really make them run past 1600 when i filled all 6 slots (were running at 2000 with just 2), and my VTT is already at 1,30
Any suggestion?


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> I have the V1 P6T Deluxe, that I got used. The seller told me that the second NIC casued problems. So I would suggest disabling NIC #2, the SAS controller and all of the legacy hardware things in the BIOS that arent used. Turn off Asus Express Gate, and turn off full screen logo in the boot and see what is failing to initialize.


Alright, I tried disabling the NIC 2 and a bunch of unused stuff but that didn't change anything.

The issue is ... there *is* nothing that fails to initialize - at least nothing is shown. Asus' Express Gate and full screen logo are disabled, and the system POSTs nicely and shows the proper CPU info (Mhz, name, etc) and RAM info. Everything goes just as it should until booting into an OS.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Alright, I tried disabling the NIC 2 and a bunch of unused stuff but that didn't change anything.
> 
> The issue is ... there *is* nothing that fails to initialize - at least nothing is shown. Asus' Express Gate and full screen logo are disabled, and the system POSTs nicely and shows the proper CPU info (Mhz, name, etc) and RAM info. Everything goes just as it should until booting into an OS.


Go full manual. Give it some vcore. Set the qpi to the slowest option, also set the uncore to the lowest option.
set the VTT voltage at something like 1.4 EDIT (1.35 is MAX!) and your ram at 1.6

If it still doesnt boot, maybe the IMC on the chip is broken and you have a dud.....

I have an x5650 on my V1 and everything runs fine. I dont have that great of a chip but I have run it at 200 BCLK.


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Go full manual. Give it some vcore. Set the qpi to the slowest option, also set the uncore to the lowest option.
> set the VTT voltage at something like 1.4 and your ram at 1.6
> 
> If it still doesnt boot, maybe the IMC on the chip is broken and you have a dud.....
> 
> I have an x5650 on my V1 and everything runs fine. I dont have that great of a chip but I have run it at 200 BCLK.


Well, paint me brown and call me a horse, but that did something!

I set pretty much everything to the lowest option and disabled all options/technologies that I could find, as well as reduce the number of enabled cores to 4. After that, I could boot into Ubuntu. Booting into Windows still failed, but at least I got the Windows splash screen now. Win7 might not be able to cope with the CPU switch all that well.

So I popped in the Win10 install disc and attempting to install it on an extra drive right now. Seems to work, although I'm not done yet. If I can get Win10 installed and to boot properly, I'll go back and start enabling features again until I find out what causes the issues. Might still be a defect core or whatnot.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Try 1.3 core / uncore first, its a lot safer.


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Well, paint me brown and call me a horse, but that did something!
> 
> I set pretty much everything to the lowest option and disabled all options/technologies that I could find, as well as reduce the number of enabled cores to 4. After that, I could boot into Ubuntu. Booting into Windows still failed, but at least I got the Windows splash screen now. Win7 might not be able to cope with the CPU switch all that well.
> 
> So I popped in the Win10 install disc and attempting to install it on an extra drive right now. Seems to work, although I'm not done yet. If I can get Win10 installed and to boot properly, I'll go back and start enabling features again until I find out what causes the issues. Might still be a defect core or whatnot.


Just be careful if you're running at 1.4 VTT. It's a bit high, i would be bringing it down as the first step after installing windows. I babied my chip though, I saw that it booted in at 1.31Vcore on auto and hard powered off my system. The x5660/70 chips are $200 in Aus, so it's hard to justify replacing a fried one.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carrotsfart*
> 
> Just be careful if you're running at 1.4 VTT. It's a bit high, i would be bringing it down as the first step after installing windows. I babied my chip though, I saw that it booted in at 1.31Vcore on auto and hard powered off my system. The x5660/70 chips are $200 in Aus, so it's hard to justify replacing a fried one.


YES please! I made a mistake saying 1.4.. MAX is 1.35

PLEASE DONT DO 1.4!

IM SORRY!


----------



## Kana-Maru

I see that there has been some talk about power usage. I actually recorded my power usage last year. You view the charts here:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=4

That was using dual GTX 670s in SLI. I have stock and overclocked settings. I wanted to run more test, but I never got around to doing it. I guess I'll run some new test with Fury X.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> A DX12 Bench:
> http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/DX12-GPU-and-CPU-Performance-Tested-Ashes-Singularity-Benchmark
> 
> http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/212314-directx-12-arrives-at-last-with-ashes-of-the-singularity-amd-and-nvidia-go-head-to-head
> 
> I'd guess in most cases our 6 core chips will benefit less than weaker ones, but there will be a benefit. NVIDIA cards, much the same story.
> 
> AMD looks to get a substantial boost, however!
> 
> Things are sure to get interesting..


Things are getting interesting for sure. Nvidia is crying foul to MSAA. Nvidia claims that MSAA is "buggy" although they have had SOURCE access to the code for a long time now. The developer, Dan Baker - co-founder of Oxide Games, has stated that MSAA is indeed working fine and has passed test from Intel, Microsoft, Nvidia and AMD. Only Nvidia is crying about it. Well I wonder why.........oh that's right in DX11 Nvidia wins hands down, but in DX12+MSAA really puts Nvidia at a disadvantage and they lose nearly every benchmark . There is no Nvidia GameWorks to hurt performance from both companies and AMD has had full access to the source code as well. They didn't have to deal with Nvidia's proprietary nonsense that ultimately locks out developers [unless they buy GameWork source code] and AMD.

DX12 is the future and AMD definitely has more access and people that is used to working with low level API. DX12 is similar to AMDs Mantle anyways. Now if we can get some Vulkan support soon. I wish Nvidia could just take a defeat. They are winning in DX11, but DX12 is showing us something different. When AMD complains about certain things I've noticed that the NV fanboys tells AMd to make better optimizations and drivers. However, when it's Nvidia complaining NV fanboys accept it, believe it [although the devs stated other wise, similar to Project Cars + AMD], and doesn't tell Nvidia to optimize drivers. Smh.

I've read some dumb fanboy'ish pro Nvidia remakes the past couple of and days and it's surprising how many people still support this companies after all of their negative behaviors. Not just now, but even back in the late 90s - early 2000s. They got better, but are back to their old ways. I'm waiting for more DX12 games to hit the market. I'd love to see what happens in the high end field at this point. Yes our hexa core 1st gen Intel CPUs will benefit from DX12, but I believe AMD CPUs\APUs will benefit as well. Especially if AMD can utilize all of their so called "cores".


----------



## s3rius

Situation update:

it seems I found the setting responsible for all the trouble. It's .... the number of cores.

My BIOS allows me to set the number of active cores anywhere from 1 to All. If I set it to 5 or All, the system dies when attempting to boot into Windows. If I have it on 4 (I tried 2 as well), the system boots fine.

I've tried with a bunch of different settings on/off but the result is always the same - enabling 5 or 6 cores ends in a silent reboot or occasionally getting stuck on the Windows loading screen.

I guess that sounds like a damaged processor?


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Situation update:
> 
> it seems I found the setting responsible for all the trouble. It's .... the number of cores.
> 
> My BIOS allows me to set the number of active cores anywhere from 1 to All. If I set it to 5 or All, the system dies when attempting to boot into Windows. If I have it on 4 (I tried 2 as well), the system boots fine.
> 
> I've tried with a bunch of different settings on/off but the result is always the same - enabling 5 or 6 cores ends in a silent reboot or occasionally getting stuck on the Windows loading screen.
> 
> I guess that sounds like a damaged processor?


Definitely sounds damaged. Have you updated the BIOS as well?


----------



## s3rius

I've tried with the two most recent BIOS versions. 2209 and 2101 or something like that.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Which is the default speed of your modules?
> Im using 6x4gb of samsung "magic ram" sticks but i couldnt really make them run past 1600 when i filled all 6 slots (were running at 2000 with just 2), and my VTT is already at 1,30
> Any suggestion?


Stock is 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5v.
What's your uncore frequency and ram voltage at? Running them at 1.5v may yield better results.


----------



## gofasterstripes

It could even have been modified, or be a fake? Where did it come from exactly?


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> It could even have been modified, or be a fake? Where did it come from exactly?


Got it from here: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/351391708206?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

I'm by no means an expert, but it doesn't look fake. The BIOS info and printing on the chip are just as they should be, CPU-Z lists the correct clock and multiplier.

I'm pretty much at wit's end here. I'll wait for other replies (you guys have helped me a lot already- thanks for that!) and if nothing helps I'll probably contact the seller tomorrow and inform him that the CPU is probably damaged.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Right, so I tried these things. Resettng CMOS (both removing the battery and using the CLRTC pins on the board) did nothing to help, nor did setting the RAM to 1066MHz. I quickly burned Windows 10 on a DVD and tried to install it from there but the result is just as disheartening: it gets stuck on the Win10 logo for a minute, then the system quietly restarts.
> 
> Could it be that the Xeon has any stricter requirements about memory? I'm using 4x4GB modules in the slots A1,A2,B1,B2; leaving the C1 and C2 slots empty.


Did you look in your motherboards manual to see what slots to use?
Seems to me with my EVGA and my Asus boards, for 3 sticks you keep the first slot empty by the CPU empty, and use the 2nd slot and every other slot after.
When you use 4 sticks you just add it to the black slot next to the CPU and leave the other sticks as is..
There will be sticks in set A, B and C.
Double check you manual.


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Did you look in your motherboards manual to see what slots to use?
> Seems to me with my EVGA and my Asus boards, for 3 sticks you keep the first slot empty by the CPU empty, and use the 2nd slot and every other slot after.
> When you use 4 sticks you just add it to the black slot next to the CPU and leave the other sticks as is..
> There will be sticks in set A, B and C.
> Double check you manual.


Yea, you're right - the recommended way is to populate A1/2, B1, C1. I switched my configuration to that but it did not change much. Nothing at all, to be exact. Running with all 6 cores enabled still kills the boot.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Yea, you're right - the recommended way is to populate A1/2, B1, C1. I switched my configuration to that but it did not change much. Nothing at all, to be exact. Running with all 6 cores enabled still kills the boot.


Have you checked the socket to see if there are any pins burnt o misaligned ?


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Have you checked the socket to see if there are any pins burnt o misaligned ?


Yea, I gave it a cursory check when I inserted the chip for the first time. The second time I took a closer look to see if I broke'd anything. But socket and chip seem to be in a flawless condition- at least from the outside. (unless things changed with the last time I inserted the processor but I'll see that when I remove it next time)


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *akromatic*
> 
> it would be nice if there is a CPU ghz scaling chart for dual and single GPU to understand how much performance hit


Firestrike one vs two 290x.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/5738226/fs/5725502

Draw Calls one vs two 290x

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/aot/65671/aot/64604

The result is less draw calls on DX API with crossfire on, more draw calls on Mantle API with crossfire on if compared to a single card.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Yea, I gave it a cursory check when I inserted the chip for the first time. The second time I took a closer look to see if I broke'd anything. But socket and chip seem to be in a flawless condition- at least from the outside. (unless things changed with the last time I inserted the processor but I'll see that when I remove it next time)


Dang.

Then we must assume that something is wrong with the processor.

I got two x5670 ( matched pair ) really new, 2012 batch, no marks at all for $ 200.
They came directly from Singapore via DHL and arrived with ridiculous good packing. I was amazed









You can try and see if he is willing to sell you a single unit - 140890236939

Edit: singapore, not malaysia


----------



## s3rius

Thanks for the tip.

I suppose one last question - considering the P6T Deluxe doesn't officially support Xeons.. is there a chance that my board is simply one that doesn't?

Since I have to contact the seller anyways I could just ask him for a replacement rather than a refund, although there is this nagging thought in the back of my mind that it's my hardware being responsible for the incompatibility.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Thanks for the tip.
> 
> I suppose one last question - considering the P6T Deluxe doesn't officially support Xeons.. is there a chance that my board is simply one that doesn't?
> 
> Since I have to contact the seller anyways I could just ask him for a replacement rather than a refund, although there is this nagging thought in the back of my mind that it's my hardware being responsible for the incompatibility.


Support is as bellow
Asus P6T Deluxe v1 - Since bios 2101
Asus P6T Deluxe v2 - Since bios 1003


----------



## s3rius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Support is as bellow
> Asus P6T Deluxe v1 - Since bios 2101
> Asus P6T Deluxe v2 - Since bios 1003


Well, it is not listed on Asus' support page: http://support.asus.com/Cpusupport/List.aspx?SLanguage=en&m=P6T%20Deluxe&p=1&s=29


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Well, it is not listed on Asus' support page: http://support.asus.com/Cpusupport/List.aspx?SLanguage=en&m=P6T%20Deluxe&p=1&s=29


As far as I know no manufacturer officially support the Xeons on X58.

If your board supports the gulftown processors and has two active QPI link's then you are probably good to go.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> As far as I know no manufacturer officially support the Xeons on X58.
> 
> If your board supports the gulftown processors and has two active QPI link's then you are probably good to go.


That's not true. Here is the CPU support list for Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1.0 and rev 2.0 respectively:
Socket 1366 - Intel X58 - GA-X58A-UD7 (rev. 1.0)
Socket 1366 - Intel X58 - GA-X58A-UD7 (rev. 2.0)

I'm not sure why they don't list Xeon X56xx, when there is are dual QPI Gainstown (e.g. E5540) and Westmere-EP (e.g. E5606) listed. They also list support for Xeon W3680/W3690 on both lists. In reality the X58A-UD7 (both v1 and v2) fully support the Xeon X56xx CPUs.

Unfortunately I couldn't find "official" Xeon compatibility on ASUS website for their boards, but I haven't come across an X58 ASUS board that didn't support them with a BIOS update.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> That's not true. Here is the CPU support list for Gigabyte X58A-UD7 rev 1.0 and rev 2.0 respectively:
> Socket 1366 - Intel X58 - GA-X58A-UD7 (rev. 1.0)
> Socket 1366 - Intel X58 - GA-X58A-UD7 (rev. 2.0)
> 
> I'm not sure why they don't list Xeon X56xx, when there is are dual QPI Gainstown (e.g. E5540) and Westmere-EP (e.g. E5606) listed. They also list support for Xeon W3680/W3690 on both lists. In reality the X58A-UD7 (both v1 and v2) fully support the Xeon X56xx CPUs.
> 
> Unfortunately I couldn't find "official" Xeon compatibility on ASUS website for their boards, but I haven't come across an X58 ASUS board that didn't support them with a BIOS update.


Well, gigabyte is one of the few I guess.

It is better to say that many asus boards are compatible with westmere processors while there is no official support.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Stock is 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 1T 1.5v.
> What's your uncore frequency and ram voltage at? Running them at 1.5v may yield better results.


My uncore is 3000, and my ram voltage is 1.5v (the minimum for my p6t)
Im currently running them at 1600 8 8 8 27 1T stable, couldnt make them stable at 7 8 8 21 (and with each memtest lasting 24h for 3 passes on 24gb of ram, i did got a bit tired of trying back then







)


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Well, gigabyte is one of the few I guess.
> 
> It is better to say that many asus boards are compatible with westmere processors while there is no official support.


The way I see it, your system likely won't even POST if a compatible CPU microcode isn't present in the BIOS. Case in point (albeit a very random and obscure case): I received an XPS 730x, and before I gutted it to fit a watercooled Z77 system inside, I tried out different CPUs in the motherboard. It seemed that the stock Dell motherboard would accept ANY i7-9xx, that is until I tried an i7-990x. It would seem that the system would post with an i7-9xx quad core, and an i7-970/980x, but not with an i7-990x. Since there was absolutely no difference between posting an i7-980x and an i7-990x besides the microcode in each CPU, I concluded that Dell "officially" supported the former and not the latter. In other words, if a motherboard is able to POST with the appropriate CPU name in the BIOS, it's officially supported (given that otherwise the lack of a microcode wouldn't allow it to POST, or it would show some other CPU). Another example is the manual injection of Xeon LGA771 microcodes into motherboard BIOSes from that era. Not official support because we have to manually inject the microcodes.

However, I think you and I are saying the same thing, but in two different ways, haha.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> However, I think you and I are saying the same thing, but in two different ways, haha.


Exactly.









Not directly related but the other day I tried a Xeon L5528 without checking and I ended up with one burnt processor and 3 burnt pins ( AT34, AR33, AN34 ) on my motherboard.

Pins on mobo wer power/vcc that landed on processor vss .

Avoid "Jasper Forest" Xeons 1366.
The pin table is totally different, they are in no ways compatible with the X58 or 5520nb.

LC5528
LC5518
LC3528
LC3518
EC5539
EC5549
EC5509
EC3539
P1053


----------



## Carrotsfart

I remember reading a while ago that there were some Engineering sample chips floating around, if I understand correctly, they're basically the same chip in every aspect except that they only have 4 cores, it could be possible that you have one of those chips? Hopefully someone can confirm whether my story is correct or not and we can go from there


----------



## gofasterstripes

See, while rebadging £60 secondhand Xeons doesnt make sense, rebadging £1200 NEW ones might.

If it identifies itself though, maybe the hypothesis is just wrong.


----------



## gsfancy

Finally got my x5660 up and running at 4GHz. This is my first real overclock so I am looking for some guidence on how to proceed with this OC. My orignal target goal was around 4-4.2GHZ.

To start my OC I set the BLCK to 180 UCLK to lowest (2165), CPU Volt 1.35, QPI/DRAM volt to 1.34. CPU ratio to 18, everything else auto and turned off speedstep and c states. I booted each time ran IBT 2.54 on Very High for 10 passes and when I suceeded I would reboot and up the BLCK by 10 until I failed or the temps got too hot. I got to BLCK 210 and the temps were a little high so I settled on BLCK of 200 for my OC.

I put the multipler/ratio to 20 and left it as that gave me my 4GHz target. Next I set my RAM to the stock settings DRAM Freq 1603, UCLK 3208, timing 7-8-7-24-2N and DRAM Volt 1.6. I was able to make 10 passes of IBT on Very High with hottest core hitting 73c, cpu temp at 70.5c and pulling 76 GFlops. I am not sure if these are good or if this is a proper way to OC, but this is where my inexperience comes into play.

I think my next step should be to start turning down the CPU and QPI voltages to the lowest stable? I also want to turn SpeedStep on but I am not sure how this affects voltages and what to adjust, etc?

Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## Bal3Wolf

i finaly got my x5675 100% stable i though it was befor till i tried to enocde a bluray and got some reboots ended up needing a little more vcore and i had to tweak my CPU Differential Amplitude. Funny thing prime95 was stable but when i used XviD4PSP to encode a bluray it crashed mutiple times till i found the right settings.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s3rius*
> 
> Thanks for the tip.
> 
> I suppose one last question - considering the P6T Deluxe doesn't officially support Xeons.. is there a chance that my board is simply one that doesn't?
> 
> Since I have to contact the seller anyways I could just ask him for a replacement rather than a refund, although there is this nagging thought in the back of my mind that it's my hardware being responsible for the incompatibility.


I know people with the p6t v2 and its working, seach on this forum and the x58 xeon owner forums and people claim that it works, i think every asus 1366 motherboard supports xeons, my rampage 2 gene is older than yours, from 2008, and it supports it, in running one in it and it works perfectly, you have a deffective or fake cpu


----------



## AlienPrime173

Just out of curiosity, i just acquired a xeon x5690 chip and i would like to just OC to 3.75GHz on all 6 cores to run 24/7. Running at 0.785v right now at 3.45GHz

what kind of voltage should i be looking at?


----------



## OCmember

@AlienPrime173 Hardly any at all. 4.2GHz takes 1.28v - 1.30v on average


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Just out of curiosity, i just acquired a xeon x5690 chip and i would like to just OC to 3.75GHz on all 6 cores to run 24/7. Running at 0.785v right now at 3.45GHz
> 
> what kind of voltage should i be looking at?


0.785v. Ha those are your Idle voltages. What are your max voltage. In my case that would mean my 4.8Ghz only needs 0.9v









Congrats on the OC.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @AlienPrime173 Hardly any at all. 4.2GHz takes 1.28v - 1.30v on average


^What he said. Even my X5660 start requiring a ton of voltage @ 4.2Ghz. Somewhere around 1.28v- 1.31v. 4Ghz doesn't require that much at all.


----------



## AlienPrime173

good to know thanks guys! i'm going to try OC a bit temps are crazy low! 32c max load on prime 95! Thought the sensors were messed at first haha


----------



## Carrotsfart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> good to know thanks guys! i'm going to try OC a bit temps are crazy low! 32c max load on prime 95! Thought the sensors were messed at first haha


About 1.234V if my chip is anything to go by


----------



## gofasterstripes

@AlienPrime173 That voltage is nutz. Is that really the loaded voltage?

@gsfancy. Sounds the right way to do it, yes. If i were you I'd drop that uncore voltage to 1.3, retest, then enable SpeedStep/c states. If still stable, drop vcore next, then back to uncore when youre sorted.

I think you still need to stay within 0.5v uncore vs DRAM, so i would not go below 1.1v uncore, probably 1.2ish is good.


----------



## AlienPrime173

3.46 is stock. System is showing .785. But youre right it was idle.. didnt know it would flucuate


----------



## Banedox

Yeah Alien, the Xeon, chips have all tones of built in core disabling and throttling etc etc, most of which you want to turn off in the bios for bench testing and the like.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Banedox*
> 
> Yeah Alien, the Xeon, chips have all tones of built in core disabling and throttling etc etc, most of which you want to turn off in the bios for bench testing and the like.


yeah for sure! Just keep the 6 cores, 12 threads stable at 3.75GHz and lowest possible temps is my plan


----------



## Banedox

my X5660 sits pretty at 3.8ghz hovering around 28-32C Idle, never goes over 50C on heavy heavy loads, but I am water cooling the chip, into 2 ridiculous 480mm rads, with only my 780ti in the loop as well


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Banedox*
> 
> my X5660 sits pretty at 3.8ghz hovering around 28-32C Idle, never goes over 50C on heavy heavy loads, but I am water cooling the chip, into 2 ridiculous 480mm rads, with only my 780ti in the loop as well


You are deliberately under-stressing your chip. You must have your rads bolted down, otherwise they'd probably leave to find useful work elsewhere.









My 5660 runs at 4.25 using only the power of artificial wind to cool. Need to crank up the clock for your rads to feel needed. 4.4 would be an easy stretch. What are the voltages at 3.8? <1.2?


----------



## cb750rob

Guys,
I have an ex58-ud3r rev 1.6 mobo I am running the FK bios and a Xeon X5660.

Can anyone tell me if an 8TB HDD would be recognized by this board?

Specifically the Seagate Archive V2 Enterprise Hard Drive - 8TB (ST8000AS0002)

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/8tb-%288000gb%29-seagate-st8000as0002-archive-v2-35-hdd-sata-iii-6gb-s-5900rpm-128mb-cache-ncq

As it stands I have HDDs of 2tb and 3tb sizes but nothing larger.

Also has anyone tried that seagate drive and what do you think if so?

Cheers in advance! thumb.gif


----------



## OCmember

Fooling with my clocks. Changed the CPU to 4.46GHz @ 1.34v, Dimm is 1.58v @ 2060MHz CL9.9.9.28, and the VTT is 1.285v doing 3GHz (uncore)

So reason why I'm posting is because I'm looking to make sure every area is getting enough voltage to run @ 2GHz with the memory. I know that's near or exceeding the speed limit so I am just curious what I could do to make sure it's stable e.g. if the north bridge needs a little more volts.

Thanks

here is my voltage settings:


----------



## RhinoJC

Gday all,

Long time reader of this thread and as a result i purchased the W3690 chip. I don't think i won out in the Silicon lottery. Running with standard intel recommended LLC with bios voltage sitting at 1.468 (cpuz 1.4). Chip at 4.4 ghz. I'm happy enough with it. Its water cooled with custom loop so the highest temp I've seen is 59 C.

Also got 3 X gtx 780 tis in sli. Managed a 21000 firestrike score with this combo. Not too bad. I think im getting a bit of a bottleneck from the x58 cpu combo but could be worse.

Just want to say thanks to kana and the other members posting on this thread for all the great info. Lots of little tweaks that helped with my oc stability. Cheers.


----------



## gsfancy

Anyone running a Xeon x56xx on Asus Sabertooth x58 verify if Turbo Boost works? I do not have any options in the Bios (1402) to enable/disable Turbo Boost. I know I had the option with my i7 950 but I cannot seem to get this setting to show up with my Xeon even at default settings.

EDIT:

I am running 200x20 and the turbo multiplier is at 21 for the x5660? If I understand correctly I will not get Turbo Boost until I up the multiplier to 21?


----------



## MicroCat

I can. It works with my Sabertooth X58/5660.

Under Advanced, select the PPM menu option, enable the speedysteps (SpeedStep™) - Select Traditional or Power Optimized. May or may not need C-step enabled too. Confirm SpeedStep™ is enabled in the AI Tweaker menu too.


----------



## Tiny Trang

I was wondering if anybody had any benchmarks or real world comparisons of an overclocked x5660 to the newer cpus. The only benchmarks I could find were at stock speeds and the point of getting xeon on an x58 is not to keep it stock. I'm asking because I'd like to know whether or not I should upgrade to the newer Z170 or x99 platforms. I have an x5660 but lack the necessary hardware to mount my after market heatsink on it for overclocking and really don't want to throw more money into an older system.


----------



## MicroCat

You can see a CB 11.5 comparo at anandtech...link removed for purposes of clean surfing and stuff.

The fastest Xeon 5670 (4.9Ghz) scores a 12.17 - the fastest quad, 4790k (5Ghz) scores a 10.97. My X5660 at 4.6 puts up an 11.53.

Check some 6700k threads around here and the web to find some CB 11.5 scores.

- edit: from a quick browse, 6700k gets a 10.12 CB 11.5 score at stock and 11.61 at 4.8Ghz.

From gurud3d review: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i7-6700k-processor-review-desktop-skylake,10.html


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Anyone running a Xeon x56xx on Asus Sabertooth x58 verify if Turbo Boost works? I do not have any options in the Bios (1402) to enable/disable Turbo Boost. I know I had the option with my i7 950 but I cannot seem to get this setting to show up with my Xeon even at default settings.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I am running 200x20 and the turbo multiplier is at 21 for the x5660? If I understand correctly I will not get Turbo Boost until I up the multiplier to 21?


Don't expect turbo unless you turn on EIST+Turbo and C-states. IIRC that's how I achieved the x24 Turbo. You need to set the CPU Ratio to AUTO as well if you want to have a easier time getting the x24 multiplier as well lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> I was wondering if anybody had any benchmarks or real world comparisons of an overclocked x5660 to the newer cpus.


At the time X79 had the latest CPUs on the market I ran a lot of test with HWBOT scores. Check out my results here:
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=5

X58 vs X79 was my main goal there.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> You can see a CB 11.5 comparo at anandtech:
> 
> The fastest Xeon 5670 (4.9Ghz) scores a 12.17 - the fastest quad, 4790k (5Ghz) scores a 10.97. My X5660 at 4.6 puts up an 11.53.
> 
> Check some 6700k threads around here and the web to find some CB 11.5 scores.
> 
> - edit: from a quick browse, 6700k gets a 10.12 CB 11.5 score at stock and 11.61 at 4.8Ghz.
> 
> From gurud3d review: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i7-6700k-processor-review-desktop-skylake,10.html


Please don't post -andtech- links in my topics. I can't stand the mods, perhaps owners there.

My X5660 @ 4.8Ghz + DDR3-1675Mhz gets 12.40pts in Cinebench R11.5. 6700K is a Quad so it's expected to get a lower score, but the scores are impressive for a Quad. The quads have increased since the 1st gen. The single core speeds matter as well. If the Quads are getting 10.12pts at stock and 11.61 with high overclocks let's see what Skylake-E Hexa Cores will bring. Looks promising, but who knows.


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Please don't post -andtech- links in my topics. I can't stand the mods, perhaps owners there.


Sorry. Got it. I've migrated over here since Purch purchased Anand - It's becoming *Ad*nand - clickbait articles filled with ads and less critical analysis than ever before.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Anyone running a Xeon x56xx on Asus Sabertooth x58 verify if Turbo Boost works? I do not have any options in the Bios (1402) to enable/disable Turbo Boost. I know I had the option with my i7 950 but I cannot seem to get this setting to show up with my Xeon even at default settings.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> I am running 200x20 and the turbo multiplier is at 21 for the x5660? If I understand correctly I will not get Turbo Boost until I up the multiplier to 21?


Turbo boost multiplier for x5660 is from x22 to x24. x21 is max non-turbo boost multiplier. Did you by any chance set CPU Ratio in the BIOS to 20?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Sorry. Got it. I've migrated over here since Purch purchased Anand - It's becoming *Ad*nand - clickbait articles filled with ads and less critical analysis than ever before.


I see. No problem. I have to remind people from time to time. They tried to claim ownership over my review and locked my topics after minor infractions that I didn't know could cause a instant lock. Even after reposting with no infractions they locked my topic anyways and refused to allow me to delete my review. Long story short you can't search on major search engines and find my review there anymore. They tried to claim my review as their own IP since I posted it there. I called BS and never I never returned to that ad-cash grab site.


----------



## RhinoJC

Good to know about that site. This definitely the place to be.


----------



## gsfancy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Turbo boost multiplier for x5660 is from x22 to x24. x21 is max non-turbo boost multiplier. Did you by any chance set CPU Ratio in the BIOS to 20?


LOL, CPU ratio is set to 20 in the bios..Being the nooby that I am, I did not realize that manually setting the CPU ratio will lock it regardless of what other settings are turned on. For some reason I thought setting the ratio to 20 would set the default and turbo would still kick in.

Just to confirm, to OC with turbo the CPU ratio would have to be set to AUTO?

Thanks.


----------



## s3rius

Hey, it's me- the guy from 4 pages prior again









Just wanted to give you a status update in case anyone's curious.

I got a replacement X5670 from the seller and it works like a charm at 3.8GHz right now. So I guess the previous one did have some damage.

Thanks for all your help troubleshooting.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gsfancy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Turbo boost multiplier for x5660 is from x22 to x24. x21 is max non-turbo boost multiplier. Did you by any chance set CPU Ratio in the BIOS to 20?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, CPU ratio is set to 20 in the bios.
Click to expand...

When you set that to 20, turbo boost will be disabled. If you set to 22 at least, it will enabled turbo boost automatically. If you set to Auto, then you'll get the whole turbo boost multiplier, x22 to x24. Make sure speedstep enabled.


----------



## gsfancy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> When you set that to 20, turbo boost will be disabled. If you set to 22 at least, it will enabled turbo boost automatically. If you set to Auto, then you'll get the whole turbo boost multiplier, x22 to x24. Make sure speedstep enabled.


Thanks, I completely misunderstood the multipliers!


----------



## darekpro

Hello,
Someone can tell what is power consumption for X5650 idle/stress no-OC/OC?

Thank you


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darekpro*
> 
> Hello,
> Someone can tell what is power consumption for X5650 idle/stress no-OC/OC?
> 
> Thank you


My goodness. I have an ENTIRE X5660 Review available. I guess I need to advertise it more throughout the topic [at it's new location of course]

Here are my RAW wattage usage charts from last summer.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=4

I tried different setups. Hopefully it helps tell you what to expect.

_Note: I was running GTX 670s 2-Way SLI during these results._


----------



## 4everAnoob

I have before me a P6T deluxe V2 with bent and broken







pins that so far I have not been able to boot succesfully.
I have made (very) small progress. At first it would only light the white LEDs and not beep at all no matter what.
After a few hours of fixing the pins it now beeps if you don't insert memory module in any of the 6 slots (so all the slots seem to work), and the blue memory LED lights up if you do insert a memory module. However, with both my E5640 and my X5670 (both 100% working) it won't POST. The BIOS version is unknown to me since I got this board second hand (dirt cheap







). So I'm hoping it could be the BIOS which is too old to support these chips. However, I would expect the board to beep anyway, which it doesn't.
I have done all the usual stuff CMOS reset bla bla all the obvious things.


----------



## bill1024

I have the p6DV2 also and it has to have the updated bios.
It did not beep at all, it had me worried when I first got it put the CPU in and no beep.
I picked up a bios chip of off ebay with the newest bios flashed.
If I remember right it was 13$ for the chip shipped.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have the p6DV2 also and it has to have the updated bios.
> It did not beep at all, it had me worried when I first got it put the CPU in and no beep.
> I picked up a bios chip of off ebay with the newest bios flashed.
> If I remember right it was 13$ for the chip shipped.


Glad to hear this, looking hopeful for this tortured p6t dlx








I'll first try to get a cheap i7 920 locally.


----------



## Wanderer1

Anyone know if i can strap an 8gb crucial ballistix stick on a p6t mobo?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> Anyone know if i can strap an 8gb crucial ballistix stick on a p6t mobo?


Why are you questioning if you can?


----------



## Wanderer1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Why are you questioning if you can?


Because that board normally takes 6 sticks of 4gb, not 8gb dimms, but ive seen people putting 8gb sticks on them, so i wanted a confirmation.


----------



## mohiuddin

Guys I have an xfx x58i motherboard. Out of curiosity I ordered a x5650. Sadly it won't POST. But on my friends x58ud3r flawless. As this is the great thread for 'xeon on x58'. I am hoping for a solution. I also opened a thread on this forum in different sub-forum


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Guys I have an xfx x58i motherboard. Out of curiosity I ordered a x5650. Sadly it won't POST. But on my friends x58ud3r flawless. As this is the great thread for 'xeon on x58'. I am hoping for a solution. I also opened a thread on this forum in different sub-forum


It's not on Kana-Maru's X58 56xx Xeon Board List - believe it's a Foxconn in origin and not sure that bodes well...


----------



## DR4G00N

Just bought a barely used Gigabyte GA-X58A-OC for only $76 USD to play around with. Heck it may just replace my E762 if it works nice enough (it even matches my Cougar fans







).


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> It's not on Kana-Maru's X58 56xx Xeon Board List - believe it's a Foxconn in origin and not sure that bodes well...


I know, man. Sad. Is there any way? Atleast any of you guys have the latest bios?


----------



## mohiuddin

Guys. Talked to xfx support for latest bios. It is a iso file in zip archive. They eid to burn to a blank DVD and reboot to that. But when I open the iso fIle with power iso it shows blank. But iso size is 1.8mb link is below..

http://xfxstorage.com/Support/BIOS/Motherboard/X58/X58IV22XFX.zip


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Guys. Talked to xfx support for latest bios. It is a iso file in zip archive. They eid to burn to a blank DVD and reboot to that. But when I open the iso fIle with power iso it shows blank. But iso size is 1.8mb link is below..
> 
> http://xfxstorage.com/Support/BIOS/Motherboard/X58/X58IV22XFX.zip


The BIOS file is hidden in the "boot section". You can use tools like PowerISO or similar to extract the boot information from the ISO. Then you can view the content in it.

If you just want to flash latest BIOS, just burn the ISO to a blank disc & boot your computer with it.

Files in the "boot section".


----------



## santi2104

The 8 people that said that this thread isnt useful are mad


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> The 8 people that said that this thread isnt useful are mad


I've realized that no matter what I do in life there will always be some haters& trolls around.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> The BIOS file is hidden in the "boot section". You can use tools like PowerISO or similar to extract the boot information from the ISO. Then you can view the content in it.
> 
> If you just want to flash latest BIOS, just burn the ISO to a blank disc & boot your computer with it.
> 
> Files in the "boot section".


Thanks man. I cant find any clue to open the bootsection in PowerISO. If it is not too much to ask, could u please upload the 'mx580910 rom' file(in the bottom of the files shown in the pic u uploaded) for me.?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've realized that no matter what I do in life there will always be some haters& trolls around.


U can't make everyone happy.
May some of those minority sold their x58 system just before u opened this thread,maybe someone is just jealous.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> The BIOS file is hidden in the "boot section". You can use tools like PowerISO or similar to extract the boot information from the ISO. Then you can view the content in it.
> 
> If you just want to flash latest BIOS, just burn the ISO to a blank disc & boot your computer with it.
> 
> Files in the "boot section".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks man. I cant find any clue to open the bootsection in PowerISO. If it is not too much to ask, could u please upload the 'mx580910 rom' file(in the bottom of the files shown in the pic u uploaded) for me.?
Click to expand...

Use UltraISO. Mount ISO to virtual drive (UltraISO by default install a virtual drive). Then you can save the boot information (extension *.bif*). Open the boot information (extension *.bif*) using UltraISO. You can extract the files.

If you still can not get the files, I'll upload when I'm in front of my computer.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wanderer1*
> 
> *ive seen people putting 8gb sticks on them, so i wanted a confirmation.*


Isn't that a confirmation in and of itself?


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Isn't that a confirmation in and of itself?


How dare you use logic.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> How dare you use logic.


Can you confirm what you mean by that?


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ He was simply joking with you.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hi guys - can I get a little advice?

After booting Linux Mint, then rebooting into W7, always get the "DES disabled!" Message and have to reboot again. Then I have to use EnergySaver 2.0 to toggle it back on. If DES isn't enabled in software I get loads of vdroop and my overclock isn't stable [though it is stable enough to boot and run the application, luckily].

Is there a workaround? Or a way to lock the setting fully on?

Ta


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ Sorry I can't help with that issue. I've never had to deal with anything like that.

*Fury X Review updated*. Batman: Arkham Knight was recently patched and I was able to run some stable benchmarks without the game crashing all over the place. I didn't run a 1080p benchmark, but I was definitely reaching 140fps @ 1080p. I game at higher resolutions. The patch works and the game is much smoother. There are many graphical settings to change and set now as well. The graphics and lighting has also been enhanced.

I ran all test with Nvidia GameWorks Enabled.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review


----------



## 99belle99

What is the best for price pcie ssd adaptor to give sata III performance on our aging x58 systems. I know recently a few got that expensive predator but I don't have that kind of money. I'm just looking for the best adaptor to give good performance.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What is the best for price pcie ssd adaptor to give sata III performance on our aging x58 systems. I know recently a few got that expensive predator but I don't have that kind of money. I'm just looking for the best adaptor to give good performance.


instead of buying a pci-e sata card buy a pci-e ssd, to get a decent card you have to spend 150+ dollars


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What is the best for price pcie ssd adaptor to give sata III performance on our aging x58 systems. I know recently a few got that expensive predator but I don't have that kind of money. I'm just looking for the best adaptor to give good performance.


Yeah the Predator is decently expensive for what it does and even though it's fast you'll never see the difference unless you use real world programs that rely on HDD\SDD speeds. You can get a decent SATA III card for $14.99 to $59.99. That's fairly cheap since most offers RAID setups and multiple drives. There are more expensive cards that go well above $59.99, but I doubt if you need to spend that much money for speed.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> instead of buying a pci-e sata card buy a pci-e ssd, to get a decent card you have to spend 150+ dollars


The PCie SATA III cards works just as well. Not everyone wants to spend a ton of cash on X58 to get speed they will barely notice. The prices can get ridiculous if you compare them to a actual SSD or SSD RAID 0. Sometimes it's just better [and cheaper] to get a SATA III adapter and use your existing SSD setup.


----------



## 99belle99

As an even cheaper option could I just use my marvel sata III chip that comes with my gigabyte x58ud7. I already have my boot drive ssd on there, could I just plug in a second ssd or will it cripple performance?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> As an even cheaper option could I just use my marvel sata III chip that comes with my gigabyte x58ud7. I already have my boot drive ssd on there, could I just plug in a second ssd or will it cripple performance?


Yes that would be a much cheaper option, but that Marvell controller will definitely bottleneck for sure. With one SSD you are fine, but if you try to add a second drive or setup a RAID it will definitely cripple performance. The best thing you can do is buy a cheap SATA III PCie card and connect your SSDs from there. Then disable the on-board Marvell SATA III controller from the BIOS.

So if you do indeed plan on using more than one SSDs get a PCIe card. You might want another drive for various reasons. Most gamers want it for specific gaming titles [faster loading, better performance etc]. I need the speed for specific high end programs.


----------



## gofasterstripes

No worries - can anyone else help with my last post RE Gigabyte boards?


----------



## mohiuddin

*@kizwan* thanks man. Updated, but still no xeon support, I can confirm. I tried, but it did not post with xeon.
But Almighty helped me in a different way. Got a sabertooth x58 in exchange with the xfx one with extra 50$ equivalent cash paid.bought x5650 for 80$ equivalent

*@Kana-Maru*. Can you post the exact bios setting u use for>
1. 4ghz
2. 4.4ghz
Please. Your board is also the same


----------



## duganator

http://m.ebay.com/itm/171914921331?_mwBanner=1
Would something like that be good for a dedicated twitch streaming/plex/vm box?


----------



## Carrotsfart

@gsfancy Kana-Maru's rig is a x5660 and an x58 Sabretooth. Any of his posts are relevant to you if that helps.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> *@kizwan* thanks man. Updated, but still no xeon support, I can confirm. I tried, but it did not post with xeon.
> But Almighty helped me in a different way. Got a sabertooth x58 in exchange with the xfx one with extra 50$ equivalent cash paid.bought x5650 for 80$ equivalent
> 
> *@Kana-Maru*. Can you post the exact bios setting u use for>
> 1. 4ghz
> 2. 4.4ghz
> Please. Your board is also the same


Kana's stated multiple times throughout the thread that he won't post his settings. You'll have to look at what everyone else has posted and see what your set up can come up with unfortunately


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ What @Carrotsfart said.........I love that name by the way lol. I've never posted my BIOS and never plan to post it. Overclocking is like a sport to me. I'll guide you and help you get to specific spot. I'll help you understand what to do and how to do it so you don't destroy your rig in the future. After you have the knowledge and a starting point you can continue to overclock in the future if you need to.

Also to be 100% honest hitting 4Ghz was as easy as raising my BCLK to 166Mhz. That's literally all I did lol when I first got my CPU awhile back. Westmere's is amazing. Of course you wouldn't want to do this as a permanent solution since you'll need to adjust some voltages for various reasons. Another reason posting my BIOS probably wouldn't help as much is that we have different rigs. Nothing is 100% alike. You'll have to do a little foot work first like finding your max BCLK and top frequency within Intel recommended voltage requirements.


----------



## gofasterstripes

This is the short way of starting doing it...

Load default settings in your BIOS and then disable any hardware you dont need (serial ports, extra SATA ports etc etc). Verify your system operates normally afterwards.

Leave all CPU functions, c states etc enabled. Disable LLC or any other method of 'fixing' / elimitating vdroop.

Disable Turbo. Use Realtemp to monitor your multiplier, ensure it goes no higher than x20 when testing with Intelburntest.

Then start overclocking:

Set vcc/core and vtt/uncore to 1.3v, set ram divider to give you the correct total speed for your ram at 200mhz bclk (ie if 1600mhz ram use x8). Set ioh to 1.24. Set QPI to x36.

Then start ramping up bclk from 133 in 10mhz increments. When you fail, go back 5 and test again. ALWAYS watch your temps and stay below 80 (abort if necessary) Use HW Monitor to observe your cpu volts. Do not use higher voltages, even if you see vcore is below what you have selected.

Testing- first test is intelburntest "standard", if you pass 10x, try intelburntest " maximum". If you pass 10x try prime95 blend for 8hours.

Report to us when you find your stable bclck frequency limit with those settings.

Do not proceed if you see temps over 80 in IBT, or volts over 1.3, just report.


----------



## gofasterstripes

NB - that should say RealtempGT


----------



## webhito

Hey folks, been searching around the forum for any info on compatibility with a guerilla g1 motherboard and a x5650 cpu, it doesn´t seem to be compatible from the cpu list on the vendors website but it is compatible with a 990x. Anyone have the same board and cpu that could let me know?

Thanks!


----------



## ericeod

Just wanting to check on my overclocked system results and see if it is my CPU or my motherboard bios which is locking out some features. here is what I have:
X5679 (SKU specific to HP vendor with microcode 206C2h)
eVGA x58 FTW3 (latest v83 bios with CPU microcode 14)

I am able to reach 4.2GHz OC with Turbo off, vcore set to 1.35v, all C-States enabled and virtualization enabled (will be running VM server OSes)

My uncore multi is locked and my memory divider is locked (2:8 because the chip officially supports 1066). This leaves me running my uncore at 2618 and my ram at 1396. Is this the limitation of my motherboard or is it because I'm running an off-SKU CPU? Would I be able to fix this by updating the CPU microcode to the latest? The normal SKU X5600 have a microcode of 206C2, but AIDA64 shows my CPU microdoe with an "h" at the end... 206C2h.


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Hey folks, been searching around the forum for any info on compatibility with a guerilla g1 motherboard and a x5650 cpu, it doesn´t seem to be compatible from the cpu list on the vendors website but it is compatible with a 990x. Anyone have the same board and cpu that could let me know?
> 
> Thanks!


Guerrilla G1 is a Gigabyte board. There haven't been many compatibility issues with boards from them, so you're probably ok, especially since it's one of the later models. But I don't know of anyone who's tried any of the gamer series boards with these chips, yet.

Make sure you have the latest BIOS installed and give it a go. It should work.

Let us know how it works out, and your overclocking results.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Just wanting to check on my overclocked system results and see if it is my CPU or my motherboard bios which is locking out some features. here is what I have:
> X5679 (SKU specific to HP vendor with microcode 206C2h)
> eVGA x58 FTW3 (latest v83 bios with CPU microcode 14)
> 
> I am able to reach 4.2GHz OC with Turbo off, vcore set to 1.35v, all C-States enabled and virtualization enabled (will be running VM server OSes)
> 
> My uncore multi is locked and my memory divider is locked (2:8 because the chip officially supports 1066). This leaves me running my uncore at 2618 and my ram at 1396. Is this the limitation of my motherboard or is it because I'm running an off-SKU CPU? Would I be able to fix this by updating the CPU microcode to the latest? The normal SKU X5600 have a microcode of 206C2, but AIDA64 shows my CPU microdoe with an "h" at the end... 206C2h.


206C2h = 0x206C2 in HEX









Ver 14 seems like the latest for CPUID 206C2.


----------



## brootalperry

Hey guys the max block on my R3F is 215. Do you guys know of any methods to possibly break this wall and the possible consequences?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Guerrilla G1 is a Gigabyte board. There haven't been many compatibility issues with boards from them, so you're probably ok, especially since it's one of the later models. But I don't know of anyone who's tried any of the gamer series boards with these chips, yet.
> 
> Make sure you have the latest BIOS installed and give it a go. It should work.
> 
> Let us know how it works out, and your overclocking results.


Thanks, I will give it a go.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Hey guys the max block on my R3F is 215. Do you guys know of any methods to possibly break this wall and the possible consequences?


Sure. I'm not sure what it's called on your board, but I'm sure you'll figure it out. You can try changing the CPU Differential Amplitude setting in increments. You can also change the CPU Clock Skew, but you'll also need to adjust IOH Clock Skew if you decide to change the CPU clocks skew. You can also try disabling the CPU Spread Spectrum.


----------



## gofasterstripes

"you'll also need to adjust IOH Clock Skew" = Adjust to match?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Just wanting to check on my overclocked system results and see if it is my CPU or my motherboard bios which is locking out some features. here is what I have:
> X5679 (SKU specific to HP vendor with microcode 206C2h)
> eVGA x58 FTW3 (latest v83 bios with CPU microcode 14)
> 
> I am able to reach 4.2GHz OC with Turbo off, vcore set to 1.35v, all C-States enabled and virtualization enabled (will be running VM server OSes)
> 
> My uncore multi is locked and my memory divider is locked (2:8 because the chip officially supports 1066). This leaves me running my uncore at 2618 and my ram at 1396. Is this the limitation of my motherboard or is it because I'm running an off-SKU CPU? Would I be able to fix this by updating the CPU microcode to the latest? The normal SKU X5600 have a microcode of 206C2, but AIDA64 shows my CPU microdoe with an "h" at the end... 206C2h.


What type of bios does your motherboard run on? AMI or Award? If AMI, then I might help including latest microcode into your bios.but if it is award, then sorry. As far as I know, latest 14rev solves the locked uncore issue.


----------



## mohiuddin

My sofar adjustments >>
1. 4ghz @ vcore 1.208
Uncore 3848mhz qpi vtt @1.27
Ram dual channel 1824mhz 8-9-9-24-rfc124 @1.6v
Cinebench r15 score 944

2. 4.4ghz vcore 1.35 cinebench r15 score 1025


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> My sofar adjustments >>
> 1. 4ghz @ vcore 1.208
> Uncore 3848mhz qpi vtt @1.27
> Ram dual channel 1824mhz 8-9-9-24-rfc124 @1.6v
> Cinebench r15 score 944
> 
> 2. 4.4ghz vcore 1.35 cinebench r15 score 1025


Turn that Uncore down to 3283.2Mhz [Westmere-EP recommended 1.8x] or 3648Mhz [2x] and you might be able to lower that QPI Vtt for starters. Not that 1.27v is super high or anything, but you'll want the voltages as low as you can. 4.4Ghz @ 1.35v is awesome if it 's stable. You'll probably want to shoot for 4.2Ghz to use less vCore and heat. For stability and less of a headache Uncore should be 1.8 times the DRAM frequency. Bloomfields used 2 times the DRAM freq. 1.8 is usually what you should focus on since it's default. Use IBT v2.54 on Very High [15 rounds] to help test for stability.

Don't be a mad man go crazy with overclocking. We must remember that we are using Intel's 1st generation architecture and won't be breaking any major records anytime soon with Nahalem.


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> What type of bios does your motherboard run on? AMI or Award? If AMI, then I might help including latest microcode into your bios.but if it is award, then sorry. As far as I know, latest 14rev solves the locked uncore issue.


Thanks for the offer, but it is an Award bios. I think it is the limitation of the off-SKU CPU. If it is important enough to me, I can always just pick up an X5675 or X5680 instead of trying to source out a new motherboard. I only recently put this rig together because I miss overclocking beyond an increased multi, so who knows what I'll try next with this setup!


----------



## webhito

Ended up buying a brand new Guerilla G1 board for $150 Shipped a 920 and a x5650, sadly the xeon was published a few hours after ordering the 920 or I would have skipped buying it entirely.
Anyways, paid around $300 whereas a matching board and cpu in Z97 would cost me around $830 ( Mexico prices ).

Even if I get 50% the performance of a stock 4690k I will be golden and have saved a ton of money.

Looking to get around a 3.8 ghz oc on the cpu, that should keep me from upgrading for a few years... ( prices here are ridiculous ).

Anyways... I need a few pointers of where to go, not familiar with this platform at all as to what to touch and what not, any good oc guides around?

Cheers!


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Anyways... I need a few pointers of where to go, not familiar with this platform at all as to what to touch and what not, any good oc guides around?
> 
> Cheers!


This is one of the best guides I've found. Straight forward and systematic.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sure. I'm not sure what it's called on your board, but I'm sure you'll figure it out. You can try changing the CPU Differential Amplitude setting in increments. You can also change the CPU Clock Skew, but you'll also need to adjust IOH Clock Skew if you decide to change the CPU clocks skew. You can also try disabling the CPU Spread Spectrum.


Thanks. I'll have to give this a closer look later once I've gotten some rest.

I'm going this will allow me higher clocks without having to go over the safe voltage limit, but I doubt it.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> This is one of the best guides I've found. Straight forward and systematic.


Thanks Firehawk!


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sure. I'm not sure what it's called on your board, but I'm sure you'll figure it out. You can try changing the CPU Differential Amplitude setting in increments. You can also change the CPU Clock Skew, but you'll also need to adjust IOH Clock Skew if you decide to change the CPU clocks skew. You can also try disabling the CPU Spread Spectrum.


Found the settings in my BIOS that you referred to, and it is labeled as enhancing bclk overclocking. I already had CPU and PCI spread spectrum disabled.
I'm not really sure where to even begin with changing the values of the other stuff that you mentioned.

What are the consequences for messing with them?
Also something in the back of my mind tells me that being able to push the bclk higher will still require me to pump a lot of voltage to the CPU....I mean at 21x215 I had to set the vcore to 1.45v just to boot into Windows...


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Found the settings in my BIOS that you referred to, and it is labeled as enhancing bclk overclocking. I already had CPU and PCI spread spectrum disabled.
> I'm not really sure where to even begin with changing the values of the other stuff that you mentioned.
> 
> What are the consequences for messing with them?
> Also something in the back of my mind tells me that being able to push the bclk higher will still require me to pump a lot of voltage to the CPU....I mean at 21x215 I had to set the vcore to 1.45v just to boot into Windows...


With turbo on, can you enable the 23 multiplier? Then lower your bclk, 215 bclk can get things toasty.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Turn that Uncore down to 3283.2Mhz [Westmere-EP recommended 1.8x] or 3648Mhz [2x] and you might be able to lower that QPI Vtt for starters. Not that 1.27v is super high or anything, but you'll want the voltages as low as you can. 4.4Ghz @ 1.35v is awesome if it 's stable. You'll probably want to shoot for 4.2Ghz to use less vCore and heat. For stability and less of a headache Uncore should be 1.8 times the DRAM frequency. Bloomfields used 2 times the DRAM freq. 1.8 is usually what you should focus on since it's default. Use IBT v2.54 on Very High [15 rounds] to help test for stability.
> 
> Don't be a mad man go crazy with overclocking. We must remember that we are using Intel's 1st generation architecture and won't be breaking any major records anytime soon with Nahalem.


Thanks bro
Yeah true.
I get around 12point less with 3200mhz uncore in cinebench r15.
So. For benchmark s sake, I did that.
Now for day to day use I set uncore 3200mhz , cpu voltage @1.208 on prime95 load(offset mode).
About 4.4ghz,don't want to do extensive testing now will do later. It is summer here. Ambient temperature is above 35c.in 3 round cinebench r15, temperature already touch 85c.
I kept LLC disabled. I heard that it does voltage spikes when enabled. Should I keep that disabled for day to day use?


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> With turbo on, can you enable the 23 multiplier? Then lower your bclk, 215 bclk can get things toasty.


No. With X5650 the turbo multiplier is x21. Right now I'm using 20x200 at 1.25v.

Edit: Or maybe it's x22...so that would be 22x205 I think....I'm not sure.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Ended up buying a brand new Guerilla G1 board for $150 Shipped a 920 and a x5650, sadly the xeon was published a few hours after ordering the 920 or I would have skipped buying it entirely.
> Anyways, paid around $300 whereas a matching board and cpu in Z97 would cost me around $830 ( Mexico prices ).
> 
> Even if I get 50% the performance of a stock 4690k I will be golden and have saved a ton of money.
> 
> Looking to get around a 3.8 ghz oc on the cpu, that should keep me from upgrading for a few years... ( prices here are ridiculous ).
> 
> Anyways... I need a few pointers of where to go, not familiar with this platform at all as to what to touch and what not, any good oc guides around?
> 
> Cheers!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Ended up buying a brand new Guerilla G1 board for $150 Shipped a 920 and a x5650, sadly the xeon was published a few hours after ordering the 920 or I would have skipped buying it entirely.
> Anyways, paid around $300 whereas a matching board and cpu in Z97 would cost me around $830 ( Mexico prices ).
> 
> Even if I get 50% the performance of a stock 4690k I will be golden and have saved a ton of money.
> 
> Looking to get around a 3.8 ghz oc on the cpu, that should keep me from upgrading for a few years... ( prices here are ridiculous ).
> 
> Anyways... I need a few pointers of where to go, not familiar with this platform at all as to what to touch and what not, any good oc guides around?
> 
> Cheers!


Where did you get new x58 motherboard?


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> With turbo on, can you enable the 23 multiplier? Then lower your bclk, 215 bclk can get things toasty.
> 
> 
> 
> No. With X5650 the turbo multiplier is x21. Right now I'm using 20x200 at 1.25v.
> 
> Edit: Or maybe it's x22...so that would be 22x205 I think....I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Correct, for x5650, turbo multiplier start at x21. Max turbo multiplier is x23 but if only 2 cores or 1 core active.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Correct, for x5650, turbo multiplier start at x21. Max turbo multiplier is x23 but if only 2 cores or 1 core active.


Not on the UD7


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Correct, for x5650, turbo multiplier start at x21. Max turbo multiplier is x23 but if only 2 cores or 1 core active.
> 
> 
> 
> Not on the UD7
Click to expand...

What happened on UD7?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Correct, for x5650, turbo multiplier start at x21. Max turbo multiplier is x23 but if only 2 cores or 1 core active.


The max turbo multi on the x5650 is 22x on all cores (x23 on one or two). I can say for certain that it runs at this multi on EVGA & Gigabyte boards, not so sure about asus ones though.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Correct, for x5650, turbo multiplier start at x21. Max turbo multiplier is x23 but if only 2 cores or 1 core active.
> 
> 
> 
> The max turbo multi on the x5650 is 22x on all cores (x23 on one or two). I can say for certain that it runs at this multi on EVGA & Gigabyte boards, not so sure about asus ones though.
Click to expand...

That is correct, basically pretty much what I said. Turbo multi start at x21. Basically from x21 to x22 on all cores.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The UD7 Rev. 2 seems to allow [email protected]

I hit 4.6GHz like that I think, 200x23.


----------



## kckyle

i got a new toy yesterday


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> The UD7 Rev. 2 seems to allow [email protected]
> 
> I hit 4.6GHz like that I think, 200x23.


Do you have validation screenshots? Depends on the software/bench you're running, if it only utilized one core or two cores, the multi can go up to x23, without you having to disabled the other cores manually.


----------



## gofasterstripes

No sorry I don't. I just tried to replicate with the settings I used for this

which I swear held x23 at 100% load; but the multi won't go over x20 now even when showing x22+Turbo in the BIOS, so I must have changed something [I hit the "Disable Turbo" button in RealTempGT once and that:
1) Crashed the machine
2) Had some weird permanent effects :/
]

Best try asking on the
http://www.overclock.net/t/706509/the-official-gigabyte-ga-x58a-ud3r-ud5-ud7-ud9-owners-club/0_100
thread to see if anyone else had it working. I honestly don't have the time anymore to fiddle with mine, I just leave it at 20*200.

Good luck!


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> No sorry I don't. I just tried to replicate with the settings I used for this
> 
> which I swear held x23 at 100% load; but the multi won't go over x20 now even when showing x22+Turbo in the BIOS, so I must have changed something [I hit the "Disable Turbo" button in RealTempGT once and that:
> 1) Crashed the machine
> 2) Had some weird permanent effects :/
> ]
> 
> Best try asking on the
> http://www.overclock.net/t/706509/the-official-gigabyte-ga-x58a-ud3r-ud5-ud7-ud9-owners-club/0_100
> thread to see if anyone else had it working. I honestly don't have the time anymore to fiddle with mine, I just leave it at 20*200.
> 
> Good luck!


If you have screenshots, that would be good but it's not necessary because it can happen. Not with Xeon but I noticed it more than once where CPU can turbo boost to the max without having to disable the other cores manually. If it happen again, look at the other cores frequency. You will see one (or two) core(s) running at max multi/frequency while the rest of the cores will throttle down to idle frequency. Like I said before, depending on what apps you're running, it can run at max turbo boost from few seconds to longer. Longer if windows doesn't interfere (by waking up the other cores), current & power below TDC & TDP limit, temp below limit & C3/C6 enabled.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I thought i validated it with IBT, but maybe im just wrong!


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The max turbo multi on the x5650 is 22x on all cores (x23 on one or two). I can say for certain that it runs at this multi on EVGA & Gigabyte boards, not so sure about asus ones though.


on the asus rampage 2 gene i can force the multi to 22 in all of the cores with the x5650, not the same with the msi x58 pro-e i had, the damn thing wont go over 20, it was locked and i couldnt touch it


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Found the settings in my BIOS that you referred to, and it is labeled as enhancing bclk overclocking. I already had CPU and PCI spread spectrum disabled.
> I'm not really sure where to even begin with changing the values of the other stuff that you mentioned.
> 
> What are the consequences for messing with them?
> Also something in the back of my mind tells me that being able to push the bclk higher will still require me to pump a lot of voltage to the CPU....I mean at 21x215 I had to set the vcore to 1.45v just to boot into Windows...


Well you face just about all of the consequences that comes with overclocking. Lost of data, risk or corruption......you know the good ol' bad stuff. If you are needed 1.45v for 4.5Ghz then you should've backed down awhile ago. That's a lot of voltage. If you don't understand sometimes and how they work it might be best to just leave them alone.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Thanks bro
> Yeah true.
> I get around 12point less with 3200mhz uncore in cinebench r15.
> So. For benchmark s sake, I did that.
> Now for day to day use I set uncore 3200mhz , cpu voltage @1.208 on prime95 load(offset mode).
> About 4.4ghz,don't want to do extensive testing now will do later. It is summer here. Ambient temperature is above 35c.in 3 round cinebench r15, temperature already touch 85c.
> I kept LLC disabled. I heard that it does voltage spikes when enabled. Should I keep that disabled for day to day use?


If it [LLC] is disabled then you need to follow Intel specification. Spiking will occur no matter what, but Intel specifications [which includes LLC] ensures you won't damage the CPU when changing from Idle to load vice versa. 85c is way to much and dangerous temps. Keep it below 80c, preferably below 73c. Everything else looks good. Nice vcore for the OC.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> i got a new toy yesterday


I wasn't thinking about that, but I want one now.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well you face just about all of the consequences that comes with overclocking. Lost of data, risk or corruption......you know the good ol' bad stuff. If you are needed 1.45v for 4.5Ghz then you should've backed down awhile ago. That's a lot of voltage. If you don't understand sometimes and how they work it might be best to just leave them alone.


That's not what I meant...but okay. Thanks for at least pointing me in the direction I needed to go. I'll just Google the rest myself and go from there.
No I don't know what those settings do apart from what they are labeled in the BIOS, but I won't learn anything from leaving them alone


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/3900_100#post_23867995

Intersting - found the old post that pic was part of. Looking at the 3DMark physics results now presents a bit of a conundrum -
was the CPU really at 4.4 and I just scored >10% for +10% clocks
OR
was the CPU really at 4.6 and it scored >10% for +15% clocks.
Either way, in that test is made no significant difference to the scores to go over 4.0.

However I now always run my 970's at +8%/+250MHz GPU/DRAM with a bit of Dremeling, PCIE extending and a nifty bit of cooling they don't hit 75C like that









Not happy that the multi is messup though, something I have done is overriding it down to 20 max








Quote:


> If it happen again, look at the other cores frequency


How do I see the multiplier for each core?


----------



## mohiuddin

@gofasterstripes, can you please run 3dmark11 physics test? I get 11k at 4ghz in dual channel RAM mode .
@Kana-maru, what llc setting should I use then? For day-to-day use?
And that vcore @1.208 is for 4ghz. Not 4.4ghz.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> @Kana-maru, what llc setting should I use then? For day-to-day use?
> And that vcore @1.208 is for 4ghz. Not 4.4ghz.


I knew that the 1.208v was for 4Ghz. Nice vCore as I said. Hopefully it's stable for longer than 3 to 6+ months. LLC is disabled on my rig and I run 4Ghz on a daily basis. So it's fine for day to day use if you aren't having any random restarts or BSODs.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> If it happen again, look at the other cores frequency
> 
> 
> 
> How do I see the multiplier for each core?
Click to expand...

Using monitoring tools for example Open Hardware Monitor & HWiNFO.


----------



## Kana-Maru

You can use RealTemp as well.


----------



## gofasterstripes

RealTemp only seems to show one multiplier, perhaps the fastest one? I´ll try the others if I need to explore this again.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> RealTemp only seems to show one multiplier, perhaps the fastest one? I´ll try the others if I need to explore this again.


Use the i7TurboGT program included with realtemp to see turbo multis on all cores.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Ok, will do! Cheers.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah I should've said something. Definitely use the i7-GT to get the temps on all cores.


----------



## virpz

I have noticed that Xeons will beat the 4790k in 3dmark
on what concerns physics score

www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/5725502/fs/5736954


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I have noticed that Xeons will beat the 4790k in 3dmark
> on what concerns physics score
> 
> www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/5725502/fs/5736954


I noticed that many years ago. The "Physics" test basically max out your CPU when running. The GPU is pretty much idle. The more cores the higher the score. Usually more than 6 cores won't net tons of positive increases. That guy 4790K was running @ 5Ghz. Goodness.

This is the reason I decided to compare the "Graphic Score" and the "Combined Score" in my Fury X vs 980 Ti reference [stock and overclocked] review. The Combined score usually favors Nvidia thanks to their highly optimized DX11 drivers and software reasons I'm sure. I wish they would make a benchmark that neglects the physics\CPU test. I'd rather keep the combined test which test both the CPU and the GPU.


----------



## 4everAnoob

My Xeon system is finally pretty much finished.
It is by no means a record breaking machine but it was never going to be one.
It was rather cheap however, the entire thing pretty much consists of second hand parts








The most expensive parts were the board, CPU, memory and GPU. I managed to get those for about 250 euros total.
I have also had good luck so far selling 775 parts which means I probably recouped a large part of this sum.
I'd say things still look very good for this platform, the only significant downside compared to modern platforms is the lack of PCIe 3.0, and right now this doesn't even matter, however in the (near) future it might.
Everything else has workarounds.

Quick tip if you didn't know already, but if you want to find the maximum power consumption of your PC the best way to get this is to run Furmark and IBT on very high and select number of threads: auto.
I get 500W+ at the wall when overclocked to 4.2 GHz, not very green







I guess the government should start taxing these systems soon as well lol.

GA-X58A-UD3R 2.0
3x 4G Corsair Vengeance 1600 DDR3 CL9
2x WD 640 Black
1x 40G Intel 320 SSD
1x GTX 670 windforce
Frostwin cooler (beast) with only 1 fan ATM


----------



## OCmember

When do 6 core Skylake processors come out, and what will they be called? Skylake-E ?


----------



## greywarden

Yeah, looks like Q3 2016 from a quick google search.


----------



## OCmember

I am seeing > 90% CPU usage on the games I am playing @ 4.5GHz

W3690
Windows 10
GTX 670


----------



## Kana-Maru

^What games are you playing that requires that much CPU usage?

Yeah Skylake-E is what I've been calling it the past few years. I'm sure Intel will keep the same naming scheme.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ^What games are you playing that requires that much CPU usage?
> 
> Yeah Skylake-E is what I've been calling it the past few years. I'm sure Intel will keep the same naming scheme.


Unreal Tournament 4 (UE4 engine), and RO2: Rising Storm (UE3 engine) Both are above 90% CPU usage. I've asked in the UT4 forums and others with newer chips are seeing as low as 25% usage (6700K)


----------



## Kana-Maru

I never got around to downloading and playing UT4. I believe it's going to eventually run DX12 right? 90% load on the CPU really high and hot I bet. I've never had issues running UE3 or UE4 titles. They are usually easy on the CPU. I guess I could download UT4 and compile it and tell you how it runs on my PC at 4Ghz.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ^What games are you playing that requires that much CPU usage?
> 
> Yeah Skylake-E is what I've been calling it the past few years. I'm sure Intel will keep the same naming scheme.
> 
> 
> 
> Unreal Tournament 4 (UE4 engine), and RO2: Rising Storm (UE3 engine) Both are above 90% CPU usage. I've asked in the UT4 forums and others with newer chips are seeing as low as 25% usage (6700K)
Click to expand...

CPU single thread performance between Skylake & Skylake-E probably the same. If this is the case, I don't think there's much performance boost going from quad to hexa. Unless you want Skylake-E, Skylake is what you want.

*Edit:* According to PassMark, 4790K still is the best single thread performance CPU than 6700K. Is this true?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I never got around to downloading and playing UT4. I believe it's going to eventually run DX12 right? 90% load on the CPU really high and hot I bet. I've never had issues running UE3 or UE4 titles. They are usually easy on the CPU. I guess I could download UT4 and compile it and tell you how it runs on my PC at 4Ghz.


Yeah, it's free. Would you mind? I've all sorts of crazy thoughts going through my head right now like selling it off but I'm going to go through all the trouble shooting ideas I can come up with. Even as far as wiping the OS. And also changing out the EVGA board to the Gigabyte UD7 I have that I bought a month ago and is still sitting around, ugh

Will update later with results on minor adjustments/tweaks


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> CPU single thread performance between Skylake & Skylake-E probably the same. If this is the case, I don't think there's much performance boost going from quad to hexa. Unless you want Skylake-E, Skylake is what you want.
> 
> *Edit:* According to PassMark, 4790K still is the best single thread performance CPU than 6700K. Is this true?


A guy with a 4690K said he was getting between 35-40% CPU usage with UT4, the guy with the 6700K was getting 25% usage (non scientific results i'm assuming)


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> CPU single thread performance between Skylake & Skylake-E probably the same. If this is the case, I don't think there's much performance boost going from quad to hexa. Unless you want Skylake-E, Skylake is what you want.
> 
> *Edit:* According to PassMark, 4790K still is the best single thread performance CPU than 6700K. Is this true?
> 
> 
> 
> A guy with a 4690K said he was getting between 35-40% CPU usage with UT4, the guy with the 6700K was getting 25% usage (non scientific results i'm assuming)
Click to expand...

That's enough to show 6700k should be better.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yeah, it's free. Would you mind? I've all sorts of crazy thoughts going through my head right now like selling it off but I'm going to go through all the trouble shooting ideas I can come up with. Even as far as wiping the OS. And also changing out the EVGA board to the Gigabyte UD7 I have that I bought a month ago and is still sitting around, ugh
> 
> Will update later with results on minor adjustments/tweaks


Nah I don't mind. I'll download it now. I'll have to test it remotely, but that's fine.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nah I don't mind. I'll download it now. I'll have to test it remotely, but that's fine.


My issue may have something to do with Windows Power config. Still fooling with it. I set it to balanced and the game never used over 30%


----------



## Kana-Maru

Mine is set to 100%. I watched a few games. Usage never went above, or maybe I should say hovered around 17%23% just by checking my CPU%. I haven't actually played the game. I only watched a few games @ 1080p remotely. I'll actually play later when I get off of work.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Mine is set to 100%. I watched a few games. Usage never went above, or maybe I should say hovered around 17%23% just by checking my CPU%. I haven't actually played the game. I only watched a few games @ 1080p remotely. I'll actually play later when I get off of work.


What power config/scheme do you use and have you manually made some of the attributes visible to adjust?

EDIT: I've used Park Control before

link not necessary - removed


----------



## Kana-Maru

I didn't have to do any of that. Either use Balance or setup your own. I use my own setup. I've never had to mess with any of the stuff in that link lol.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Apart from issues relating to how that machine is set up, is it also not the case that some new build software may only be optimised for the newest arch at the minute; perhaps via new instructions etc? That engine isn't finished yet is it?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Apart from issues relating to how that machine is set up, is it also not the case that some new build software may only be optimised for the newest arch at the minute; perhaps via new instructions etc? That engine isn't finished yet is it?


No, way way early for it. Probably another year before it's finalized, they are calling it 'Pre Alpha' When DX12 begins with a release it will then be 'Alpha'

I think I have to get the power config right. Don't remember what I had it set to before i restored the defaults but it was > 95% with both games


----------



## Kana-Maru

@OCmember

I finally got a chance to run UT4 @ 4K and 1080p. The CPU was roughly between 13% - 26% most of the time time. The average was 15%. I'm having none of the issues you are having. You might need to try a fresh install. It appears you could have ran a program that messed something up with you CPU settings.


----------



## webhito

Me
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Where did you get new x58 motherboard?


Mexico


----------



## OCmember

@Kana-Maru I found the same CPU usage % as you when I reset all my power configs to default settings. Gonna have to learn which ones have a positive impact on performance again.

Thanks a bunch for testing, Kana

Cheers!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Kana-Maru I found the same CPU usage % as you when I reset all my power configs to default settings. Gonna have to learn which ones have a positive impact on performance again.
> 
> Thanks a bunch for testing, Kana
> 
> Cheers!


Congrats and no problem. I never mind helping. Hopefully you find the culprit. Man that Unreal Engine 4 looks fantastic. I need to really get back into the Unreal Engine again. I miss UDK, but UE4 looks great.

All I need is some artist, modellers and probably animators. I'm sure I could program\code everything else.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Hey guys! So I finally installed my x5660 and currently have it running at 4.2 ghz at 1.*28*v on vcore and qpi voltage. I ran intel burn test on very high 10 times and it worked fine. I did not touch anything that has to do with ram as I'm not sure what anything does. On a side note, will the x58 motherboard, asus p6t deluxe v2 to be specific, benefit from a ssd or will it just bottloeneck the ssd speeds due to its age?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Hey guys! So I finally installed my x5660 and currently have it running at 4.2 ghz at 1.8v on vcore and qpi voltage. I ran intel burn test on very high 10 times and it worked fine. I did not touch anything that has to do with ram as I'm not sure what anything does. On a side note, will the x58 motherboard, asus p6t deluxe v2 to be specific, benefit from a ssd or will it just bottloeneck the ssd speeds due to its age?


Immediately turn down the vcore atleast below 1.5v. U are gonna fry your chip.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Hey guys! So I finally installed my x5660 and currently have it running at 4.2 ghz at 1.8v on vcore and qpi voltage. I ran intel burn test on very high 10 times and it worked fine. I did not touch anything that has to do with ram as I'm not sure what anything does. On a side note, will the x58 motherboard, asus p6t deluxe v2 to be specific, benefit from a ssd or will it just bottloeneck the ssd speeds due to its age?


Screenshots please


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Hey guys! So I finally installed my x5660 and currently have it running at 4.2 ghz at 1.8v on vcore and qpi voltage. I ran intel burn test on very high 10 times and it worked fine. I did not touch anything that has to do with ram as I'm not sure what anything does. On a side note, will the x58 motherboard, asus p6t deluxe v2 to be specific, benefit from a ssd or will it just bottloeneck the ssd speeds due to its age?


Turn down the QPI and Vcore to 1.35 or less
1.8 is way too high.

Sure get a SSD they work fine on our boards.


----------



## Tiny Trang

My bad guys, I didn't mean 1.8v. I meant 1.28v. I'm going to fix that before anybody else gets a heart attack.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I died.


----------



## ccRicers

I have a Z97 mobo but with a Pentium G3258 and looking to make an upgrade on a budget, and the 1366 Xeons impress me. Looks like I'll be more likely to push the clock further than my Pentium.

My choice of motherboards would be more limited as I can only go mATX for size. Which board would you recommend? I'm deciding between the Rampage III Gene and EVGA's X58 SLI Micro.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ccRicers*
> 
> I have a Z97 mobo but with a Pentium G3258 and looking to make an upgrade on a budget, and the 1366 Xeons impress me. Looks like I'll be more likely to push the clock further than my Pentium.
> 
> My choice of motherboards would be more limited as I can only go mATX for size. Which board would you recommend? I'm deciding between the Rampage III Gene and EVGA's X58 SLI Micro.


Good luck finding one. For the average asking price of one, you could buy a used 4770k.


----------



## ccRicers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultra-m-a-n*
> 
> Good luck finding one. For the average asking price of one, you could buy a used 4770k.


Are you referring to the mATX X58 mobos? I've seen some having been sold below $250 US. Though below $200 is ideal.

Even if that price is comparable to a brand new X99 board, I'd still end up saving money with a used X5650 or X5660, which could be had for $70-$80.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ccRicers*
> 
> Are you referring to the mATX X58 mobos? I've seen some having been sold below $250 US. Though below $200 is ideal.
> 
> Even if that price is comparable to a brand new X99 board, I'd still end up saving money with a used X5650 or X5660, which could be had for $70-$80.


I would go Rampage *II* , not III Gene, as its price is very good now.


----------



## ccRicers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> I would go Rampage *II* , not III Gene, as its price is very good now.


If it can OC just as well, them I'm in. I'm not sure about its loud-ish color scheme, but it's nothing Plasti-Dip can't fix.


----------



## bravesoul32

What is your guys option on Xeon x5690 for a workstation


----------



## OCmember

My option was that they were being sold on eBay and I bought one.


----------



## bravesoul32

Yeah I understand that there being sold in eBay but is it worth buying or should I get the newer gen tech sorry not much of a tech guy any help is welcome


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bravesoul32*
> 
> Yeah I understand that there being sold in eBay but is it worth buying or should I get the newer gen tech sorry not much of a tech guy any help is welcome


Ah, so you were wondering about our _*opinion*_ of the X5690?


----------



## bravesoul32

Yes


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bravesoul32*
> 
> Yes


Do you know what the word option means?


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Do you know what the word option means?


Surely you know he meant "opinion"

If you're already on X58,and depending on what CPU you have, the X5690 is worth getting.

If you're building brand new, you'll have to compare pricing, might be better off with a 6700K, or a 5820K even....


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> If you're building brand new, you'll have to compare pricing, might be better off with a 6700K, *or a 5820K even.*...


5820K? No....no no no KimonoNoNo. Just no. I wish tech sites would stop using that Intel limited budget Hexa core in benchmarks. My X58 performs better and there are much better choices than the 5820K. i7-6700K isn't bad for Quads though. Personally I'm never falling back to Quad cores.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 5820K? No....no no no KimonoNoNo. Just no. I wish tech sites would stop using that Intel limited budget Hexa core in benchmarks. My X58 performs better and there are much better choices than the 5820K. i7-6700K isn't bad for Quads though. Personally I'm never falling back to Quad cores.


If he doesn't have existing X58 hardware, it doesn't make sense to build an X5690 rig from scratch. ( I don't know what he has or doesn't have)

I don't know of better options than a 5820k for $400. That's the best bang for buck for a new Hex Intel system.

How does your X5660 perform better than a 5820K, comparing Max OC vs Max OC?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> If he doesn't have existing X58 hardware, it doesn't make sense to build an X5690 rig from scratch. ( I don't know what he has or doesn't have)
> 
> I don't know of better options than a 5820k for $400. That's the best bang for buck for a new Hex Intel system.


First of all I meant GAMING banchmarks. I never said anything made sense. GAMING wise there are better choices than the 5820K today. I'd easily pay the extra money for Intel's latest market scheme = A gimped Haxa Core. You'll want the raw performance and the gaming performance as well over time.

My max OC is 5.4Ghz and my max stable OC is 5Ghz - 5.2Ghz. The voltage is way to high so I usually only run 4.8Ghz.

Quote:


> How does your X5660 perform better than a 5820K, comparing Max OC vs Max OC?


I never said my X5660 performs better than a 5820K. Then again I guess it would depend on specific gaming setups.

Do you really want me to compare 1st gen-X58 LGA 1366 to 5th gen LGA 2011-v3. Obviously the latest architecture will beat 2008 architecture.


----------



## 2010rig

Ok, but he was asking about building a Workstation rig, the 5820K is obviously a much better choice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bravesoul32*
> 
> What is your guys *opinion* on Xeon x5690 for a workstation


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Once again*, I would spend the extra money instead of buying Intel gimped Hexa Core at a lower price point. Long term gaming *and performance* will hold up for the extra cash. 5930k or bust.


----------



## jjps50912

I have a question to ask.

I am now using [email protected] Vcore=1.424v, Vtt=1.32V with motherboard ASUS p6x58d premium.

and I found that my cpu can stable at 4.7ghz with Vcore 1.45v and Vtt=1.35V.

my question is that is it safe for me to overclock my cpu up to 4.7ghz for daily life use ?

Thank you !!


----------



## Kana-Maru

It's your build and you can do whatever you want with it














That's the cool part. The bad part is that it's outside Intel recommendation of 1.35v. So personally I wouldn't run my rig that high. I can actually get 4.6Ghz right under 1.35v if I follow Intel guidelines.

I wouldn't recommend it, but if you do decide to go that route don't be surprise if you have issues down the road with BSODs and\or OC issues.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *Once again*, I would spend the extra money instead of buying Intel gimped Hexa Core at a lower price point. Long term gaming *and performance* will hold up for the extra cash. 5930k or bust.


Yeah I would too, I plan on getting a 6930K, but as of right now, for a Workstation rig, where a *single card* will be used, the 5820K is the way to go *for the price*.

We don't know anything about his budget, or existing hardware, so we're just guessing.


----------



## jjps50912

ok

So you recommond Vcore to use for daily life is not above 1.35v?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjps50912*
> 
> ok
> 
> So you recommond Vcore to use for daily life is not above 1.35v?


Intel Reference - Recommended Vcore


----------



## gofasterstripes

Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?

Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


----------



## BaldMan

I run 4.4 @ 1.32v


----------



## OCmember

@gofasterstripes I was doing 4.5GHz, had to use 1.375v which is this W3690's Intel Max Limit Vcore. I'm back down to 4.2GHz @ 1.30v I think it can do 1.28-1.29 though


----------



## 4everAnoob

Is a Cooler Master Jetflo fan suitable for CPU cooling?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Is a Cooler Master Jetflo fan suitable for CPU cooling?


Seems a bit noisy. Why are you asking about if the fan is suitable? Why wouldn't it be?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BaldMan*
> 
> I run 4.4 @ 1.32v


How do you like your UD7 ? I bought one as a backup to this EVGA E760 A1. It's still in the anti-static bag


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How do you like your UD7 ? I bought one as a backup to this EVGA E760 A1. It's still in the anti-static bag


You should give the UD7 a shot, I switched my E762 for a X58A-OC and was able to oc 100MHz higher at the same vcore and lower the VTT by 0.055v.


----------



## Hazardz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?
> 
> Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


Same here for a few months then summer came along, it got hot and I put it back to stock of now. Didn't make much of a difference in the games I played so I haven't turned it back up again. Also, it's in an HTPC case so it's a little warmer than what you guys are getting.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> You should give the UD7 a shot, I switched my E762 for a X58A-OC and was able to oc 100MHz higher at the same vcore and lower the VTT by 0.055v.


I've been thinking about it. I just really like knowing where my volts are and the terminals on the EVGA make it so easy. I know the UD7 is a beast of a board and I am interested in seeing if it overclocks better.. just lazy i guess


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been thinking about it. I just really like knowing where my volts are and the terminals on the EVGA make it so easy. I know the UD7 is a beast of a board and I am interested in seeing if it overclocks better.. just lazy i guess


Unless you're using the same multimeter to compare the two boards back to back I wouldn't have thought those voltages are outside the boundaries of measurement error. Sorry :/


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?
> 
> Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


I keep mine at 4ghz @ 1.29v , two of them run 24/7 100% loaded running BOINC projects. Four of them run 24/7 Fall to Spring helping to heat my house.
Two have been going like that for over a year, and one going on two years.


----------



## webhito

So, I finally got the system up and running, glad I got that i7 920 as the bios did not recognize the x5650, leaving this here for people wanting to know of the Guerilla G1 compatibility with the Xeon X5650 works fine as long as its updated to F2.

Anyways, a weird thing I ran into is that pressing f12 to load the boot menu restarts my computer instead of loading the menu, I managed to bypass it going through the bios but wanted to know if anyone else has had any issues like this and how they fixed it.

Cheers!

NVM, realized windows was only recognizing 3 of the 6 cores so i did a bios reset, cleared up the boot menu issue as well.

All is well!


----------



## DR4G00N

Moved my SSD from a Sata 2 port to one of the marvell 9182 ports. What a difference!
4k speeds are about the same but it's noticeably snappier.


Spoiler: Sata 2 Benches











Spoiler: Sata 3 Marvell 9182 Benches








(Note: The 9182 controller uses two PCIE lanes unlike the older 9128 which only uses one.)

The SSD is nearly full if your wondering about the low write speeds, though TBH it was pretty low even when it was new.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Which MoBo is that on?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Which MoBo is that on?


The X58A-OC. Only the gigabyte G1. Assassin, Sniper, Guerilla & OC (also some very high end Asus boards) have the 9182. The UD9 and below only have the 9128 AFAIK.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Cheers dude, that was of use to me and to

http://www.overclock.net/t/706509/the-official-gigabyte-ga-x58a-ud3r-ud5-ud7-ud9-owners-club/3500_100#post_24442073

this guy [look up 2 posts].


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?
> 
> Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


My 24/7 clocks are at 4.4Ghz at 1.4V on my x5650. Been that way for a hear and a half. It has spent quite a bit of time above that though lol.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?
> 
> Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


My 5th X5670 ( batch 3211B207 ) I am able to reach 4.4GHZ -22x200 - Vcore 1.35V, vtt 1.815 . I noticed that after 4Ghz you need to provide alot more juice to get these things rock solid.
Another thing is that I am running 48GB ( 6x16gb ) without a single problem on a RIIIBE .

http://valid.x86.fr/cdcpgv

I Still have another processor from the same batch to test, it may be the choosen one


----------



## greywarden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> My 5th X5670 ( batch 3211B207 ) I am able to reach 4.4GHZ -22x200 - Vcore 1.35V, vtt 1.815 . I noticed that after 4Ghz you need to provide alot more juice to get these things rock solid.
> Another thing is that I am running 48GB ( 6x16gb ) without a single problem on a RIIIBE .
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/cdcpgv
> 
> I Still have another processor from the same batch to test, it may be the choosen one


Wow! What model of RAM stick is that? you mean 3x16GB?


----------



## superj1977

He meant 6x8GB its in the link.
Really want one of these CPU soon


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greywarden*
> 
> Wow! What model of RAM stick is that? you mean 3x16GB?


I mean 6x8GB







. Crucial BLS2KIT8G3D1609DS1S00
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superj1977*
> 
> He meant 6x8GB its in the link.
> Really want one of these CPU soon


That's correct.


----------



## webhito

Starting to work on my 5650 oc, have one question though, intel says it only supports up to ddr3 1333, is it ok to push it to 1600 or could something go wrong?


----------



## gofasterstripes

200x8 here n/p

<1.3vtt is a good idea


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Starting to work on my 5650 oc, have one question though, intel says it only supports up to ddr3 1333, is it ok to push it to 1600 or could something go wrong?


Yes you can run it higher. Mine is between 1400 and 1800.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Yes you can run it higher. Mine is between 1400 and 1800.


Thanks Bill.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Starting to work on my 5650 oc, have one question though, intel says it only supports up to ddr3 1333, is it ok to push it to 1600 or could something go wrong?


I run my 12GB's at 1910MHz CL9 most of the time but I can push it to 2100-2200MHz CL9 just fine.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I run my 12GB's at 1910MHz CL9 most of the time but I can push it to 2100-2200MHz CL9 just fine.


Thanks DR4G00N, what are the risks running memory at a much higher speed than the cpu is supposed to support?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Thanks DR4G00N, what are the risks running memory at a much higher speed than the cpu is supposed to support?


Nothing really, you may just get occasional crashes/program errors (Ex. Google chrome's extensions crashing) due to an unstable memory oc which is easily fixable by adjusting VDIMM, timings or the VTT.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Nothing really, you may just get occasional crashes/program errors (Ex. Google chrome's extensions crashing) due to an unstable memory oc which is easily fixable by adjusting VDIMM, timings or the VTT.


Awesome, was worried I could burn the Cpu´s IMC or something, much appreciated!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Not sure if i was clear, I also run my RAM at 1600, cl 8/8/8/24 1.25vtt, 1.64vDDR

The danger is if you push >1.3vtt, especially at >1333MHz


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Not sure if i was clear, I also run my RAM at 1600, cl 8/8/8/24 1.25vtt, 1.64vDDR
> 
> The danger is if you push >1.3vtt, especially at >1333MHz


Thanks gofasterstripes, not too savy with the terms lol, figured you were replying to someone else.

I have kept pretty much everything on auto, I am not too good at pushing numbers and this platform is different than my last z87 board ( had to sell due to financial issues ) so been reading and learning on what and what not to touch. The only things i actually moved were the uncore, cpu clock, QPI clock and base clock. No voltages were touched whatsoever, however in the Bios settings none seem to be above what they should be ( VTT is under 1.2. I know auto settings is kind of a time bomb but I believe that if they are under control and the system is not being pushed that hard there should not be any issue ( Currently only doing 3.5 ghz ).


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK, i just want to help. My RAM is 1600MHz and the setting for that is x8 multiplier from 200MHz BCLK. Thats what the first post said.

Oh and n/p is "no problem"

Goodnight all.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> OK, i just want to help. My RAM is 1600MHz and the setting for that is x8 multiplier from 200MHz BCLK. Thats what the first post said.
> 
> Oh and n/p is "no problem"
> 
> Goodnight all.


Thanks again, G´night!


----------



## loop16




----------



## superj1977

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Intel Reference - Recommended Vcore


VID is not Vcore.
You need to dig deep to find the Intel Min/Max ratings.

VID is a range in which your CPU will operate at stock as shipped by Intel.
Max vcore as recommended by Intel For Xeon 56XX CPU is more than VID range of 1.35v by 0.5v @1.4v.

You will need to read Vol 1 Datasheet to see the electrical spec








Same for all Intel, VID is not max Vcore but would not be a bad thing to accept VID as max vcore


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superj1977*
> 
> VID is not Vcore.
> You need to dig deep to find the Intel Min/Max ratings.
> 
> VID is a range in which your CPU will operate at stock as shipped by Intel.
> Max vcore as recommended by Intel For Xeon 56XX CPU is more than VID range of 1.35v by 0.5v @1.4v.
> 
> You will need to read Vol 1 Datasheet to see the electrical spec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same for all Intel, VID is not max Vcore but would not be a bad thing to accept VID as max vcore


If you click on the VID link you will see this text:

"*VID Voltage Range is an indicator of the minimum and maximum voltage values at which the processor is designed to operate. The processor communicates VID to the VRM (Voltage Regulator Module), which in turn delivers that correct voltage to the processor.*"

If there is any doubt in those words above I am not seeing it.


----------



## superj1977

Xeon 5600 Vol 1 Datasheet

Page 31,
2.5 Table 2-7
&
2.6 Table 2-8


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *superj1977*
> 
> VID is not Vcore.
> You need to dig deep to find the Intel Min/Max ratings.
> 
> VID is a range in which your CPU will operate at stock as shipped by Intel.
> Max vcore as recommended by Intel For Xeon 56XX CPU is more than VID range of 1.35v by 0.5v @1.4v.
> 
> You will need to read Vol 1 Datasheet to see the electrical spec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same for all Intel, VID is not max Vcore but would not be a bad thing to accept VID as max vcore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you click on the VID link you will see this text:
> 
> "*VID Voltage Range is an indicator of the minimum and maximum voltage values at which the processor is designed to operate. The processor communicates VID to the VRM (Voltage Regulator Module), which in turn delivers that correct voltage to the processor.*"
> 
> If there is any doubt in those words above I am not seeing it.
Click to expand...

*designed to operate* = stock. VID is not minimum and maximum voltage for overclock. The *absolute* maximum voltage which usually can be found in datasheet (see *superj1977*'s post above) is the max voltage you can use without damaging the CPU.

The difference between VID & Vcore is the VID is the value the CPU requested while Vcore is the actual voltage supplied to the CPU. The one you set in BIOS/XTU is Vcore.


----------



## 2010rig

I still wouldn't feel comfortable going above 1.35, especially if Temps are in the 80's


----------



## kizwan

As long as the voltage is below the absolute max limit, the CPU will be fine regardless temp. If the voltage is above the absolute max limit, the CPU may degrade faster or die regardless temp. As long as the CPU is working within specification, no harm will happen to the CPU. Remember CPU will thermal throttle or shutdown when temp reaches TJmax.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> *designed to operate* = stock. VID is not minimum and maximum voltage for overclock. The *absolute* maximum voltage which usually can be found in datasheet (see *superj1977*'s post above) is the max voltage you can use ]without damaging the CPU.
> 
> The difference between VID & Vcore is the VID is the value the CPU requested while Vcore is the actual voltage supplied to the CPU. The one you set in BIOS/XTU is Vcore.


The data sheet isn't there to satisfy the overclocker. It does not express the minimum and maximum voltages the chip is *DESIGNED TO OPERATE* at. *OPERATE*


----------



## jjps50912

The max Vcore=1.4V from intel

bot I have search some information, which tells that the max Vcore=1.45V

like this thread

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1820772&highlight=45

So I am just very confused about this.

Thank you.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Man I wish people would just stop spreading false information. I've typed up my thoughts on the info here:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information

Check out page two. I address the horrible information that spread around the net overclockers. For all of those datasheets for a second. Who cares. Intel decides how their chips will operate and what they will tolerate. Time and time again I see people saying 1.4v or 1.45 is the max. I need to update my post with more info, but I've been busy.

Long story short:

*Max Vcore [in BIOS!]* = *1.35v* [depends on the CPU - could be 1.36v\1.37v] Anything over 1.35v for most CPUs will increase heat and degrade quicker baby. Especially if it's 24/7 + constant voltage.

*CPU PLL* = 1.8v. Leave it alone. CPU PLL kills CPUs quicker than the Vcore. Yes you can push it all the way to 2.50v, but why would you even want to get close to 2.0v.

*PCIe Frequency* = Leave it alone @ 100Mhz. Some fools push it well above 105Mhz which will eventually lead to problems over time or worse....dead SSDs\HDDs and \or data loss. You can also destroy components on the MB as well. Good luck to those who change it. Best Bet = AUTO.

*QPI\Vtt voltage*: You want this well below 1.4v. Overclockers can push it well above 1.5v, but you are asking for death. Ideally you'll want to shoot below 1.3v. It can keep heat down as well.

*IOH Voltage*: You'll want this below 1.18v. No higher than 1.3v. Ideally as I said you'll want it at or below 1.18v. Best bet = AUTO.
*IOH PCIE Voltage*: Below 1.60v. Damage can occur above 1.68v. Best bet = AUTO.

*ICH Voltage*: You'll want this below1.20v if possible. Going above 1.30v - 1.35v is pushing it. Best bet = AUTO.
*ICH PCIE Voltage*: You'll want this below1.60v if possible. Best bet = AUTO.

*DRAM Voltage*: 1.65v or below. Some users go slightly over for stability at higher overclocks. If you are not paying attention your RAM can get extremely hot with poor ventilation or DRAM poor heat sinks. Should be with 0.5v of the uncore for sure if you are going above 1.65v IIRC.

Of course overclockers are free to do what they want to do and destroy anything they want. It's your gaming rig\workstation and your money. I'm sick of people quoting Intel and taking their words and charts out of context to justify "something". Some people want to feel good about damaging their CPUs. That doesn't give people the right to claim false info.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superj1977*
> 
> Xeon 5600 Vol 1 Datasheet
> 
> Page 31,
> 2.5 Table 2-7
> &
> 2.6 Table 2-8
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Just stop reading the PDF smh. People take it completely out of context.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superj1977*
> 
> Max vcore as recommended by Intel For Xeon 56XX CPU is more than VID range of 1.35v by 0.5v @1.4v.
> 
> You will need to read Vol 1 Datasheet to see the electrical spec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same for all Intel, VID is not max Vcore but would not be a bad thing to accept VID as max vcore


What the heck are you talking about. The max vCore is 1.35v period. The spike comes afterwards, but you never know when.

Once again go here and read.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-news/30-westmere-ep-x58-overclock-information

Go to page two . You don't have to take my word or anything, but I work closely with Intel from time to time and they have no problems answering any of my questions. Luckily I never really have questions since I already understand their tech overall. Sometimes to satisfy people it's better to come from the horses mouth than mines from time to time. So you are wrong my friend. The max is 1.35v. You can play the word games with voltage and VID as long as you want.

@OCmember is spot on. We had this discussions before in this topic so it's not a new discussion.


----------



## jjps50912

So

briefly speaking, just do not let Vcore over 1.35V.

rigtht ?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjps50912*
> 
> So
> 
> briefly speaking, just do not let Vcore over 1.35V.
> 
> rigtht ?


Yes that's right.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jjps50912*
> 
> So
> 
> briefly speaking, just do not let Vcore over 1.35V.
> 
> rigtht ?


Correct.

However, you shouldn't run 1.35v constantly for 24/7 use due to high voltage and heat issues. If you do run 1.35v 24/7 at least you know you won't be violating Intel's guidelines. Personally I'd want less than 1.27v for 24/7 use. At the moment I'm running 1.18v and 1.20v @ 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz 24/7 use. 100% max load never goes above 55c. If it's cool temps never rise above 55c. That's with 22c ambient temp.

*Edit:*
Just in case anyone is wondering my Gflops @ 3.8Ghz is roughly 80Gflops


----------



## webhito

Hi everyone!

How important is qpi clock ratio? Is it ok to leave it on auto?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Auto is fine if everything is working properly.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Auto is fine if everything is working properly.


Awesome, thanks Kana-Maru!


----------



## webhito

Got one more question for you Kana-Maru, what is your QPI/VTT while sitting at 3.8 ghz, is it higher than your vcore? Just trying to figure out how far they are from eachother.


----------



## superj1977

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> What the heck are you talking about. The max vCore is 1.35v period. The spike comes afterwards, but you never know when. sinks. Should be with 0.5v of the uncore for sure if you are going above 1.65v IIRC.


Well im just really showing what the Intel Spec sheet, says.

Thats _Intel_, as in the CPU manufacturer







Their CPU, their spec sheet.
What you choose to make of Intels spec sheet is down to your self and not something i would force down anyones throat.

What you say about about spike etc....totally with you there, not disagreeing what soever in fact the point you make is most important. Thats is not anything i am arguing with.
Im merely pointing out that the Intel recommended Max operational vcore is 1.4v and im not wrong.

EDIT: i think what you actually mean is that yes the max vcore is in fact 1.4v as per Intels spec sheet.. but you must not set 1.4v in bios if using LLC due to spikes before and after load meaning vcore would reach CPU at much higher levels and pose issue in long run? Which is correct. Yes.

Im reading posts again 2nd time and kinda thinking i have annoyed with my comments and i am sorry if i have caused you annoyance, i just wanted to show the Intel spec sheet, so sorry if i upset you. Great thread btw i have read much here in preparation for buying X56xx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The data sheet isn't there to satisfy the overclocker. It does not express the minimum and maximum voltages the chip is *DESIGNED TO OPERATE* at. *OPERATE*


Well, not wanting to argue really but....kind does look like quite the opposite. If im wrong then please show me. Looks like this part of the Intel Spec sheet for X56xx is specifically saying that the Min/Max core voltage for _*functional operation*_ is x.xx - x.xx


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Out of interest - what are people's *daily* clocks and core volts then? How long for?
> 
> Sam [me]: <1.28 @ 4.0 / Circa 6 Months


I've been running my X5679 (HP specific CPU SKU) daily at 4.2Ghz with 1.35v vcore. My ram is locked to 1066 divider, so I've got it at 1400 7-7-7-21 with 1.525v.


----------



## OCmember

@superj1977 You are interpreting the document wrong. You need to re-read it and understand what it's saying.

"Processor Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings" This does not cross over into the "Designed to Operate at" Can you operate your 56xx at 0.03 Vcc???

Again. Designed to Operate at = 0.750V-1.350V Have you ever recommended someone to run their chip at 0.03 Vcc? On the other side of the coin the chips can run above 1.4 Vcc but it is not designed to operate beyond the 1.35Vcc threshold. The 0.05Vcc tolerance is for spikes. And spikes do happen. Not only spikes happen but when a chip is under load the heat goes up and the chip requires more volts to function and will require more Vcc. My W3690 idles with 1.329v (Vcc) @ 4.4GHz, when it's under load it sucks 1.339v

"For functional operation, all processor electrical, signal quality, mechanical and thermal specifications must be satisfied." This self explains that it isn't Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings. Absolute isn't the same as Recommended


----------



## superj1977

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @superj1977 You are interpreting the document wrong. You need to re-read it and understand what it's saying.


Ah ok i gotcha. Please could you highlight the bit i do not understand then please and just say breifly what i dont get, that way i can read it again later.


----------



## OCmember

@superj1977 my previous post has been edited.


----------



## superj1977

Just decided, no point, this discussion will achieve nothing. Sorry to have wasted your time.
One thing to note regarding interpretation is that the LLC tolerance is actually 5% and not 0.5.

I mean 0.5 what?
And at that point ....im out.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Is that a flounce?

I think that's a flounce.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^Yeah it appears that could be the case.

Anyways.........

.....ummm....well I had some fun with my RAM again and overclocked it to DDR3 - 2005Mhz 8-10-8-24 1T. I could push it higher, but I love tight RAM timings more than lose timings. I'm not running 2005Mhz on a dally basis by the way.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Got one more question for you Kana-Maru, what is your QPI/VTT while sitting at 3.8 ghz, is it higher than your vcore? Just trying to figure out how far they are from eachother.


I'd have to check my BIOS. I can't remember. I have about 10 OC profiles saved in my BIOS.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ^Yeah it appears that could be the case.
> 
> Anyways.........
> 
> .....ummm....well I had some fun with my RAM again and overclocked it to DDR3 - 2005Mhz 8-10-8-24 1T. I could push it higher, but I love tight RAM timings more than lose timings. I'm not running 2005Mhz on a dally basis by the way.
> I'd have to check my BIOS. I can't remember. I have about 10 OC profiles saved in my BIOS.


Quite fine, I just want an aprox, no need to be specific, I wouldn´t think there could be a huge gap between them anyways since they should both be under 1.2 if possible.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@webhito What uncore frequency are you after?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks for the volts and clocks people. Keep them coming and maybe i'll do a graph


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @webhito What uncore frequency are you after?


I think I have it set to double the speed of the ram, I am trying to get a modest overclock ( 3.6 ), I only play at 1080p and with a 7970 I should be getting in a few weeks should be enough to get me there with 60 fps, if necessary I can always get a second card.

I kept pretty much everything on auto when I had it overclocked to 3.6 but now I am trying to manually set it as it was getting a little hot with my DBX-B heatsink. Thinking of around 1.175 vcore and the same for QPI/VTT, that´s why I was asking Kana-Maru for his voltages just so I could get an idea of which one is higher.

My ram is working at 1.5 V so it should still be fine as its still not 0.5 away from qpi/vtt.

Sorry for the late reply, had an early night and just got up.


----------



## webhito

On another subject, how well can a 3.6 x5650 handle a single 7970? would it be able to work with no bottleneck?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Thinking of around 1.175 vcore and the same for QPI/VTT, that´s why I was asking Kana-Maru for his voltages just so I could get an idea of which one is higher. .


Ok I checked out my BIOS. Nearly everything is set to AUTO. QPI\Vtt is Auto as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> On another subject, how well can a 3.6 x5650 handle a single 7970? would it be able to work with no bottleneck?


You can run a 7970 with your STOCK X5650 @ 1080p lol. 1080p is laughable. Even older GPUs like the 7970\GTX 670\680 can handle Crysis 3 with stock X58 Hexa core CPUs. So 3.2Ghz to 3.6Ghz is perfectly fine for your setup. High end gaming requires a little more horsepower [3.8Ghz - 4Ghz Single GPU or 4.2Ghz+ for SLI\CFX]

Don't even worry about bottlenecking a old card like the 7970 or the Ghz version.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Ok I checked out my BIOS. Nearly everything is set to AUTO. QPI\Vtt is Auto as well.
> You can run a 7970 with your STOCK X5650 @ 1080p lol. 1080p is laughable. Even older GPUs like the 7970\GTX 670\680 can handle Crysis 3 with stock X58 Hexa core CPUs. So 3.2Ghz to 3.6Ghz is perfectly fine for your setup. High end gaming requires a little more horsepower [3.8Ghz - 4Ghz Single GPU or 4.2Ghz+ for SLI\CFX]
> 
> Don't even worry about bottlenecking a old card like the 7970 or the Ghz version.


Awesome, no need to push her hard then, I really don´t wanna go the upgrade path as its just too expensive.

Thanks for checking those values, means I won´t have to fiddle around too much to get it working properly.


----------



## arnavvr

Just got a 980X for the steal of $60, should be here soon.


----------



## TMoney128

Hello everyone. Just bought a dirt cheap X5650 to replace my i7 920 clocked at 4Ghz and this thread has peaked my interest! Can't wait to get this bad boy in and see what she can do.


----------



## webhito

Got another question!

Is it me, or once you manually set the vcore in the bios this stays at that voltage only? it doesn´t drop even if eist and c states are active, is this normal with this platform?

Sorry, should go in depth a bit more I guess lol. Compared to my z77 and z87 boards I believe they had offset and downclocked with eist, seems there is no point using that on this platform since once you set it to manual there is no power saving afaik. Is this correct?


----------



## TMoney128

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Got another question!
> 
> Is it me, or once you manually set the vcore in the bios this stays at that voltage only? it doesn´t drop even if eist and c states are active, is this normal with this platform?
> 
> Sorry, should go in depth a bit more I guess lol. Compared to my z77 and z87 boards I believe they had offset and downclocked with eist, seems there is no point using that on this platform since once you set it to manual there is no power saving afaik. Is this correct?


Do you have VDroop/Voffset enabled?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TMoney128*
> 
> Do you have VDroop/Voffset enabled?


Dont think I have it set, let me check my bios as it does not ring a bell.

Just checked and no, I do not have that option in my Bios I do have a dynamic vcore setting however.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Got another question!
> 
> Is it me, or once you manually set the vcore in the bios this stays at that voltage only? it doesn´t drop even if eist and c states are active, is this normal with this platform?
> 
> Sorry, should go in depth a bit more I guess lol. Compared to my z77 and z87 boards I believe they had offset and downclocked with eist, seems there is no point using that on this platform since once you set it to manual there is no power saving afaik. Is this correct?


When you set manual Vcore, it won't downvolting when idle. The only downvolting you'll get is when Vdroop is enabled.

Not quite. Even with manual Vcore, if you have C-States enabled, the cores can still enter C-States which will reduce CPU power consumption. I don't know how much Watts reduced when idle but at least power saving still works.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> When you set manual Vcore, it won't downvolting when idle. The only downvolting you'll get is when Vdroop is enabled.
> 
> Not quite. Even with manual Vcore, if you have C-States enabled, the cores can still enter C-States which will reduce CPU power consumption. I don't know how much Watts reduced when idle but at least power saving still works.


The one thing I noticed in my Bios is that i have a dynamic vcore setting, this might be just what I was looking for and just might behave like offset does. Gonna check anyways how much power its pulling from the wall @ idle and load.

Thanks kizwan.

Nvm, Dynamic vcore seems to work automatically, gonna have to figure out how to use it.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> When you set manual Vcore, it won't downvolting when idle. The only downvolting you'll get is when Vdroop is enabled.
> 
> Not quite. Even with manual Vcore, if you have C-States enabled, the cores can still enter C-States which will reduce CPU power consumption. I don't know how much Watts reduced when idle but at least power saving still works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The one thing I noticed in my Bios is that i have a dynamic vcore setting, this might be just what I was looking for and just might behave like offset does. Gonna check anyways how much power its pulling from the wall @ idle and load.
> 
> Thanks kizwan.
Click to expand...

Can you record how much power its pulling from the wall with C-States (C3/C6) disabled & enabled at idle? Thanks.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Can you record how much power its pulling from the wall with C-States (C3/C6) disabled & enabled at idle? Thanks.


Sure, let me take a few pictures and I will post them.


----------



## webhito

Here they are kizwan, 1.175 manual vcore pushed to 3.33 and turbo to 3.6 ( max 3.8 )

First picture is idle with c states all active, 2nd is system under load ( Witcher 3 with a 7770 ) 3rd is with all cstates off and idle.

http://postimg.org/image/tzria3uwr/
http://postimg.org/image/fhub243ln/
http://postimg.org/image/xsb0puaez/

This next picture is at stock settings with everything on auto, no overclock whatsoever and idle ( c states all on )


Same settings but under load.



C states disabled:


----------



## kizwan

Thanks @webhito.







15W difference between C-States enabled vs. disabled quite higher than I expected.

rep+


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Thanks @webhito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15W difference between C-States enabled vs. disabled quite higher than I expected.
> 
> rep+


My pleasure, thanks also!


----------



## webhito

Added a few more pictures at stock settings. Dunno how to leave/edit it as a spoiler so I apologize for the mess.


----------



## kizwan

Nice. That's ok. It's better not using spoiler because not too many pics.


----------



## OpFor

The Xeon X5660 is amazing. I pushed it to 4.0 and it just plows through anything I throw at it. Add on the fact that I got the CPU for $75, a P6X58D Premium and 12GB RAM combo for $200, and it is one of the most budget friendly, yet performance-oriented builds I've put together. Highly recommend if you can get the parts for the right price, and this thing should stay relevant for quite a while.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OpFor*
> 
> The Xeon X5660 is amazing. I pushed it to 4.0 and it just plows through anything I throw at it. Add on the fact that I got the CPU for $75, a P6X58D Premium and 12GB RAM combo for $200, and it is one of the most budget friendly, yet performance-oriented builds I've put together. Highly recommend if you can get the parts for the right price, and this thing should stay relevant for quite a while.


Congrats, man! Love these chips









Have fun!


----------



## 2010rig

@gofasterstripes


----------



## webhito

Been seriously considering buying a GTX 970 however I have questions as usual.

Planned on purchasing a single 7970 for 1080p gaming, but saw a few recent games that are not pulling 60fps so I figured that its not a really good option now unless I could suffice with 30fps 720p or to just purchase another card down the road.

What kind of overclock would I need to push my x5650 to so I don´t get any kind of bottleneck? Anyone here have a 970, 780ti or a 290x that could tell me how good they perform?

Thanks!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Been seriously considering buying a GTX 970 however I have questions as usual.
> 
> Planned on purchasing a single 7970 for 1080p gaming, but saw a few recent games that are not pulling 60fps so I figured that its not a really good option now unless I could suffice with 30fps 720p or to just purchase another card down the road.
> 
> What kind of overclock would I need to push my x5650 to so I don´t get any kind of bottleneck? Anyone here have a 970, 780ti or a 290x that could tell me how good they perform?
> 
> Thanks!


3.8GHz would be sufficient. My 780 Ti @ 1305MHz only gets held back by my X5650 @ 4.2GHz in a few specific cases (MInd, It's still running over 60fps when that happens so it's no problem).


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> 3.8GHz would be sufficient. My 780 Ti @ 1305MHz only gets held back by my X5650 @ 4.2GHz in a few specific cases (MInd, It's still running over 60fps when that happens so it's no problem).


thanks DR4G00N, should be more than enough then, much appreciated!


----------



## arnavvr

Bought a 980X for $60 should I flip it and buy a Xeon or keep it.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> Bought a 980X for $60 should I flip it and buy a Xeon or keep it.


I would, that 980X was probably overclocked and abused.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> I would, that 980X was probably overclocked and abused.


The unlocked multiplier is the only thing that's keeping me from not selling it. I got it for the the same price as a X5660, so it was a good deal


----------



## 2010rig

It's definitely a great deal, way too hard to pass up. How well does it OC?

When you said "flip it" I'm sure you can get more than the $60 for it.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> It's definitely a great deal, way too hard to pass up. How well does it OC?
> 
> When you said "flip it" I'm sure you can get more than the $60 for it.


Should be here this weekend. Thats what I meant by flip it, I could probably get $180 for it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Been seriously considering buying a GTX 970 however I have questions as usual.
> 
> Planned on purchasing a single 7970 for 1080p gaming, but saw a few recent games that are not pulling 60fps so I figured that its not a really good option now unless I could suffice with 30fps 720p or to just purchase another card down the road. !


720p = no. GTX 970? Why at this point. The R9 390 would make much more sense now. The 970 only uses 3.5GBs of it's 4GB vRAM [false advertisement maybe]. Once you reach the 3.5GB-3.6GB mark the speed moves at snail speeds. This is indeed suitable for 1080p, but as games such as Crysis 3 @ 1080p and up coming high end games require more, this could\will be a problem. Also the 390 has 8GBs of vRAM and a wider Memory Interface. So if you did want to game at 1440p\4K you'll be better equipped with the R9 390. The 390 also has proper hardware to support DX12. AMD is known to keep their older cards up to date, but I can't say the same about Nvidia based on my experience with my dual GTX 670 SLI.

Choose any card that you want, but I just like to give gamers a heads up.
Quote:


> What kind of overclock would I need to push my x5650 to so I don´t get any kind of bottleneck? Anyone here have a 970, 780ti or a 290x that could tell me how good they perform?
> 
> Thanks


As far as the 290X is concerned, I'm hearing that it's still beast along with the 295X2. The 970 was beating the 780Ti for awhile in specific games. This was mostly due to Nvidia forgetting about the old tech and focusing solely on the new tech. Nvidia did eventually come around with some Kepler drivers months later, but I still had degrading performance with my Keplers so I switched this time around. I believe I've made a great decision.

For a single card as long as you 3.6Ghz or higher you have nothing to worry about. Depending on the types of games you play and the resolution you might want to hit, you'll want to be around 4Ghz for resolutions higher than 1080p + intense titles.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> Should be here this weekend. Thats what I meant by flip it, I could probably get $180 for it.


Easily


----------



## Schmuckley

4300 Mhz Daily or you're doing it wrong








p6x58d-mobos are very good.
I had an "e" and a Premium..they were both great.
245 fsb np.
It feels to me like those were the last of the really stable systems.
I got one of them x99 gimmicks..It's just not the same


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> 4300 Mhz Daily or you're doing it wrong


What Core volts is that at?


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Hello All,

I'm new and interested in having X56x0. I'm using a Fx8320E at 4.2Ghz with a 290X.
Do you think it's worth the investment ? Most of the game I played are good enough but some seems to require more horse power (increase the fps min).

Will this old mustang beat the crap out of the FX ?

Thanks

PS : Excuse my english I'm still learning !


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> I'm new and interested in having X56x0. I'm using a Fx8320E at 4.2Ghz with a 290X.
> Do you think it's worth the investment ? Most of the game I played are good enough but some seems to require more horse power (increase the fps min).
> 
> Will this old mustang beat the crap out of the FX ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> PS : Excuse my english I'm still learning !


Overall an X56XX cpu at 4.2GHz will demolish a 8320e even at 5GHz in everything. I'd buy an X5650 and a X58 motherboard for around $200-250, then sell the 8320E and mobo to recoup the cost.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> 720p = no. GTX 970? Why at this point. The R9 390 would make much more sense now. The 970 only uses 3.5GBs of it's 4GB vRAM [false advertisement maybe]. Once you reach the 3.5GB-3.6GB mark the speed moves at snail speeds. This is indeed suitable for 1080p, but as games such as Crysis 3 @ 1080p and up coming high end games require more, this could\will be a problem. Also the 390 has 8GBs of vRAM and a wider Memory Interface. So if you did want to game at 1440p\4K you'll be better equipped with the R9 390. The 390 also has proper hardware to support DX12. AMD is known to keep their older cards up to date, but I can't say the same about Nvidia based on my experience with my dual GTX 670 SLI.
> 
> Choose any card that you want, but I just like to give gamers a heads up.
> As far as the 290X is concerned, I'm hearing that it's still beast along with the 295X2. The 970 was beating the 780Ti for awhile in specific games. This was mostly due to Nvidia forgetting about the old tech and focusing solely on the new tech. Nvidia did eventually come around with some Kepler drivers months later, but I still had degrading performance with my Keplers so I switched this time around. I believe I've made a great decision.
> 
> For a single card as long as you 3.6Ghz or higher you have nothing to worry about. Depending on the types of games you play and the resolution you might want to hit, you'll want to be around 4Ghz for resolutions higher than 1080p + intense titles.


Reason for the 970 is the price tag, here it costs $376 taxes included while the 390x costs $517.
I am also aware of the 970´s 3.5 gb issue however its still on par with the 780 ti and like you said in some case better, however there are not many used 780 ti´s to purchase and the ones that are for sale are more expensive than the 970´s lol. The 390 is still more expensive than the 970 is, so I should either wait for prices to drop, the USD exchange to drop ( not likely ) or go used and grab a 7970 that are going for half the price of a gtx 970. 290x is out of the question, had two of them and they both ended up having issues with bsod´s due to their memory.


----------



## gofasterstripes

390x is pretty much a 7970.

Just get a good 7970GHz and be done. I had this:



Though they also did a 6GB version.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4270927

Score:7869
Graphics Score 8832
Physics Score 13988
Combined Score 3181

CPU 5650 Circa 4.0
7970GHz at +14% power limit 1190mhz core 1640mhz ram


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 390x is pretty much a 7970.
> 
> Just get a good 7970GHz and be done. I had this:
> 
> 
> 
> Though they also did a 6GB version.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4270927
> 
> Score:7869
> Graphics Score 8832
> Physics Score 13988
> Combined Score 3181
> 
> CPU 5650 Circa 4.0
> 7970GHz at +14% power limit 1190mhz core 1640mhz ram


Yea, I think I will lol, those scores are not far behind what I had in mind. Cheers gofasterstripes.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Reason for the 970 is the price tag, here it costs $376 taxes included while the 390x costs $517.


I thought currency could be the problem. Here in the US you can get a r9 390 for as low as $309.00 or under $300.00 with a rebate. The GTX 970 cost a bit more, but comes with some rebates as well. Both cards can be purchased for under $300.00 with current Fall sales. Nvidia has been a bit on the defensive by attempting to slash prices to entice gamers to overlook the better R9 390.

Quote:


> I am also aware of the 970´s 3.5 gb issue however its still on par with the 780 ti and like you said in some case better, however there are not many used 780 ti´s to purchase and the ones that are for sale are more expensive than the 970´s lol.


Well that's the funny and lame part. I'm sure you won't find the 780 Ti's for sale. They were an investment at this point. The 780 Ti should blow the 970 out of the water. Less than a 10 month release from one another. The $700 - $800+ 780 Ti High-End flagship was being beat out by a $329.99 mid-range card easily. That's simply laughable and the Nvidia fanboys were even funnier. Constantly defending their favorite GPU maker as if they were on the payroll. It makes me think twice before buying high end Nvidia cards now.

Quote:


> The 390 is still more expensive than the 970 is, so I should either wait for prices to drop, the USD exchange to drop ( not likely ) or go used and grab a 7970 that are going for half the price of a gtx 970. 290x is out of the question, had two of them and they both ended up having issues with bsod´s due to their memory.


Sorry to hear that. I can't speak for the BSODs, but it happens with just about every manufacturer from time to time. In the US the price different isn't a issue. I'm not sure were you live, but I'm also sorry to hear about your currency issues as well, If you do go 7970 go with the "Ghz" version. A good one will come with 6GBs and I have a friend that still loves his 7970Ghz. Good luck with whatever you get. I hope your investment is worth it for long term use. Otherwise you'll end up wanting to upgrade within the next year.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I thought currency could be the problem. Here in the US you can get a r9 390 for as low as $309.00 or under $300.00 with a rebate. The GTX 970 cost a bit more, but comes with some rebates as well. Both cards can be purchased for under $300.00 with current Fall sales. Nvidia has been a bit on the defensive by attempting to slash prices to entice gamers to overlook the better R9 390.
> Well that's the funny and lame part. I'm sure you won't find the 780 Ti's for sale. They were an investment at this point. The 780 Ti should blow the 970 out of the water. Less than a 10 month release from one another. The $700 - $800+ 780 Ti High-End flagship was being beat out by a $329.99 mid-range card easily. That's simply laughable and the Nvidia fanboys were even funnier. Constantly defending their favorite GPU maker as if they were on the payroll. It makes me think twice before buying high end Nvidia cards now.
> Sorry to hear that. I can't speak for the BSODs, but it happens with just about every manufacturer from time to time. In the US the price different isn't a issue. I'm not sure were you live, but I'm also sorry to hear about your currency issues as well, If you do go 7970 go with the "Ghz" version. A good one will come with 6GBs and I have a friend that still loves his 7970Ghz. Good luck with whatever you get. I hope your investment is worth it for long term use. Otherwise you'll end up wanting to upgrade within the next year.


Thanks Kana-Maru, Yea, Its just something to get by for the next 12 months or so, I used to upgrade every new release but ended up spending more money than was really worth it. Obviously not gonna play that game anymore lol, unless something really ground breaking comes out.

I have my eyes on a matrix platinum 7970, I believe its one of the best cards you can find, not a bad price either. Hopefully it doesn´t sell in the next 4 days.


----------



## Kana-Maru

No problem man and good luck. DX12 is right around the corner so hopefully you'll see a nice gain as well with the next year or so. AMD old and new hardware is DX12 ready. Well it's better equipped to handle parallel workloads.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Overall an X56XX cpu at 4.2GHz will demolish a 8320e even at 5GHz in everything. I'd buy an X5650 and a X58 motherboard for around $200-250, then sell the 8320E and mobo to recoup the cost.


Hello, Thanks for the reply !! I was thinking the same about the AMD combo., it performs well but it lacks raw power...


----------



## gofasterstripes

Apologies - it was a pre "GHz" card. But the box art is the right one.


----------



## superj1977

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 390x is pretty much a 7970.
> 
> Just get a good 7970GHz and be done. I had this:
> 
> 
> 
> Though they also did a 6GB version.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4270927
> 
> Score:7869
> Graphics Score 8832
> Physics Score 13988
> Combined Score 3181
> 
> CPU 5650 Circa 4.0
> 7970GHz at +14% power limit 1190mhz core 1640mhz ram


_TL;DR
a 390x is not "pretty much a 7970"_

The 280x was a beefed up 7970Ghz. both using Tahiti.

The 390x is a beefed up 290x which uses Grenada
280x and 290x totally different architectures.

290x/390x have about 30% more transistors on die than 7970/280x due to having an different die size, same fabrication size but bigger actual die to fit in extra transistors. The layout of the die is different also. 390x is most certainly not a 7970 ......although i really wish it was as i have one here right now in my sons rig. VaporX 7970Ghz



EDIT:

please, dont take my word for it, check wiki to see the spec and die layout etc


----------



## gofasterstripes

I really must stop posting in the middle of the night.

He's right, of course.

I guess I was thinking of the 280X.


----------



## Ultra-m-a-n

All this talk about teh 390, hehe I just picked up a 390 for my rig and I replaced my GTX 670 last night. I bought it used from one of the members here, in fact I bought the card from the thread starter of the 390/390x club


----------



## greywarden

I'll be installing all my new gear tonight, so excited! Might not bench it until tomorrow, though


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I really must stop posting in the middle of the night.
> 
> He's right, of course.
> 
> I guess I was thinking of the 280X.


Yea, I figured it was a typo, 280x is a re-branded 7970 as the gtx 770 is of the 680.

Sadly the matrix sold yesterday so I am SOL, gonna have to find a directcu II or just go for the 970.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks for your understanding.

Best of luck!


----------



## superj1977

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I really must stop posting in the middle of the night.
> 
> He's right, of course.
> 
> I guess I was thinking of the 280X.


Haha i do that also.

I just saw 390x is 7970 and went off on one....like i do at times








Just 2 out of 3 digits wrong, but one was right


----------



## DR4G00N

Finally broke 1000 points in cinebench with my freshly delidded X5670.

X5670 (Delid) @ 4.416GHz 1.35V (1.352V under load measured with my multimeter) 1.195V VTT
12GB 1840MHz 9-9-9-24-128 1T 1.5V


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Finally broke 1000 points in cinebench with my freshly delidded X5670.
> 
> X5670 (Delid) @ 4.416GHz 1.35V (1.352V under load measured with my multimeter) 1.195V VTT
> 12GB 1840MHz 9-9-9-24-128 1T 1.5V


Congrats!


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Just found an old Asus rampage III extrem ! Hope it'll be good to OC the Xeon !!








actual conf:
AMD FX8320E at 4.2Ghz
16Go 820Mhz 9-10-9-27
R9 290x 1120Mhz - 1500Mhz

With the AMD setup (just to compare later)
3DMARK VANTAGE - P28939
3DMARK 2013 - 8918
Cinebench R11.5 - 7.15
Cinbench R15 - 627

I'm impatient to play with the new CPU !!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> Just found an old Asus rampage III extrem ! Hope it'll be good to OC the Xeon !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actual conf:
> AMD FX8320E at 4.2Ghz
> 16Go 820Mhz 9-10-9-27
> R9 290x 1120Mhz - 1500Mhz
> 
> With the AMD setup (just to compare later)
> 3DMARK VANTAGE - P28939
> 3DMARK 2013 - 8918
> Cinebench R11.5 - 7.15
> Cinbench R15 - 627
> 
> I'm impatient to play with the new CPU !!


Nice









That AMD FX8320E @ 4.2Ghz is on par with a 1st Gen Bloomfield [i7-960] @ around 3.9Ghz IIRC.


----------



## webhito

Most the time I get my idea of how strong a gpu is not by reviews but by firestrike and other benchmarks... How in the world is this result possible?

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2435656

I had a 3970x ocd to 4.2 with a 780ti a year and a half ago and could not get that kind of result, not even with 2 cards.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Most the time I get my idea of how strong a gpu is not by reviews but by firestrike and other benchmarks... How in the world is this result possible?
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2435656
> 
> I had a 3970x ocd to 4.2 with a 780ti a year and a half ago and could not get that kind of result, not even with 2 cards.


That graphics score is way too high to be real. AMD Radeon HD 7970 Graphics Score: 30141


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That graphics score is way too high to be real. AMD Radeon HD 7970 Graphics Score: 30141


My point exactly lol, its just not possible, however it says valid, so I am not sure how they were able to obtain that result.


----------



## OCmember

So I might possibly have a failing Samsung SSD drive. Magician says it's "Good" but upon the second Windows 7 install to upgrade to WinX the install rebooted and did a disk check. I don't ever remember that happening. So in the meantime I'm searching for a new drive for my main rig. How is the Intel 750 PCIe 3.0 NVM x4 Express drive? Or should I go with a traditional 2.5" ssd drive?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Most the time I get my idea of how strong a gpu is not by reviews but by firestrike and other benchmarks... How in the world is this result possible?
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2435656
> 
> I had a 3970x ocd to 4.2 with a 780ti a year and a half ago and could not get that kind of result, not even with 2 cards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> My point exactly lol, its just not possible, however it says valid, so I am not sure how they were able to obtain that result.


Dude you are running a super old version of 1.1 lol.

The *current version* is "v1.5.915" Dated: around *6/06/2015*

The version your ran is "v1.3.708" *July 13 2014*
However your version "1.3.708" was based on build from 2012-2013 aka old GPU tech.

So yeah they have updated the program. I always wondered what my Fury X would get with the older benchmarks. I like the older benchmarks as well for a fair comparison against older tech\GPUs, but you must use the updated 3DMark to use your score man lol. You should get around to updating. I try to run some older FireStrike numbers against yours.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So I might possibly have a failing Samsung SSD drive. Magician says it's "Good" but upon the second Windows 7 install to upgrade to WinX the install rebooted and did a disk check. I don't ever remember that happening. So in the meantime I'm searching for a new drive for my main rig. How is the Intel 750 PCIe 3.0 NVM x4 Express drive? Or should I go with a traditional 2.5" ssd drive?


Disk checks doesn't mean the drive is dead, but I would definitely allow the disk checks to complete. Afterwards I would definitely make a backup immediately. I still don't trust SSDs as much as I trust reliable and proven HDDs. Hell I still have HDDs from more than 10 years ago that still holds data lol. I keep all of my personal and important data saved on HDDs in RAID 0 [they can move upwards toward 350+ Write and around 400MB\s Read].

All I can tell you is this.....you can't go wrong with a 7200RPM 64MB cache 1 to 3 TB HDD. 2.5 SSDs are fine as well. I got 600MB Read and 550+ Write IIRC with my Samsung EVO 850. No matter what....keep updates no older than 2 months.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Dude you are running a super old version of 1.1 lol.
> 
> The *current version* is "v1.5.915" Dated: around *6/06/2015*
> 
> The version your ran is "v1.3.708" *July 13 2014*
> However your version "1.3.708" was based on build from 2012-2013 aka old GPU tech.
> 
> So yeah they have updated the program. I always wondered what my Fury X would get with the older benchmarks. I like the older benchmarks as well for a fair comparison against older tech\GPUs, but you must use the updated 3DMark to use your score man lol. You should get around to updating. I try to run some older FireStrike numbers against yours.


Its actually not my benchmark but another users, I figured it was either some sort of hack, or an outdated firestrike. Just figured out you can check the version with result details lol.

These are mine:
4790k gtx 970 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3385136
G3258 gtx 970 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3383130
FX 8350 gtx 970 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3289904
3970x 2x 290x http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1814912

They aren´t current as I quit gaming a while back just to get back into it again.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I thought it was your score since you were talking about 7970s earlier in the topic.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I thought it was your score since you were talking about 7970s earlier in the topic.


Nah, I was merely reviewing scores wondering how competitive it was to nowadays hardware. Apparently a gtx 960 is a better card than the 7970 is.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Disk checks doesn't mean the drive is dead, but I would definitely allow the disk checks to complete. Afterwards I would definitely make a backup immediately. I still don't trust SSDs as much as I trust reliable and proven HDDs. Hell I still have HDDs from more than 10 years ago that still holds data lol. I keep all of my personal and important data saved on HDDs in RAID 0 [they can move upwards toward 350+ Write and around 400MB\s Read].
> 
> All I can tell you is this.....you can't go wrong with a 7200RPM 64MB cache 1 to 3 TB HDD. 2.5 SSDs are fine as well. I got 600MB Read and 550+ Write IIRC with my Samsung EVO 850. No matter what....keep updates no older than 2 months.


I think it was from one of my backup drives dying. I raid-1 backup drives and the source drive died. I have 8 total 1Tb drives and 4 of them are extra and 2 of the 4 were new formats. So I may have gotten lucky. I've disabled disc cache on the drives because I use a HDD power strip by Asus to turn them off when not in use. Saves on power consumption and background noise but I think it's best leaving the Disk and Windows cache disabled for something like that. Hmm.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That AMD FX8320E @ 4.2Ghz is on par with a 1st Gen Bloomfield [i7-960] @ around 3.9Ghz IIRC.


I take the decision thanks to your review and your website !!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I think it was from one of my backup drives dying. I raid-1 backup drives and the source drive died. I have 8 total 1Tb drives and 4 of them are extra and 2 of the 4 were new formats. So I may have gotten lucky. I've disabled disc cache on the drives because I use a HDD power strip by Asus to turn them off when not in use. Saves on power consumption and background noise but I think it's best leaving the Disk and Windows cache disabled for something like that. Hmm.


How much power are you really saving? Unless i use a USP I leave write caching enabled. I should really setup a RAID 5 backup solution soon. USB 3.0 makes backing up data to a single quicker than I thought it would.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> I take the decision thanks to your review and your website !!


Well thanks for reading it. It took a long time to run all of the benchmarks, make charts, answer questions and type everything. Be sure to check out my Fury X review as well. X58 is still capable of being a high end gaming machine. The X5660 still needs to be updated. The updates are long past due so I'll be getting around to adding even more info soon.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> How much power are you really saving? Unless i use a USP I leave write caching enabled.


I didn't disable cache to save on power. I turn the drives off with a HDD power strip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I didn't disable cache to save on power. I turn the drives off with a HDD power strip.


I know that you didn't disable the cache to save power. I was talking about when you said,
_"Saves on power consumption and background noise"_.

Now I'm wondering how noisy the drives are lol. I guess I should've been a bit more specific.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I know that you didn't disable the cache to save power. I was talking about when you said,
> _"Saves on power consumption and background noise"_.
> 
> Now I'm wondering how noisy the drives are lol. I guess I should've been a bit more specific.


Hehe







I guess I kinda thought that by not running them would also increase the longevity of the drives but the amount of time the one drive was on over a 4-5yr period wouldn't be enough to make it die, hmph, o well









I'm very sensitive to background noise, hence the GT 210 fanless GPU, and some silent Cougar fans that are on a speed control 2x140mm fans - love these things.

I guess disabling Windows and the Disk cache is safer in regards to when i power them off. No need to eject the drive via "Safely Remove Hardware and Eject Media"...


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well thanks for reading it. It took a long time to run all of the benchmarks, make charts, answer questions and type everything. Be sure to check out my Fury X review as well. X58 is still capable of being a high end gaming machine. The X5660 still needs to be updated. The updates are long past due so I'll be getting around to adding even more info soon.


I already did ! I think that the fury X will be the next card as the X58 is more capable to beat the AMD system.....

Can anyone tell me if the bios 1502 from the Asus R3E is compatible with the xeon X5xxx ? I can't find the aswer on asus website !


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> I already did ! I think that the fury X will be the next card as the X58 is more capable to beat the AMD system.....
> 
> Can anyone tell me if the bios 1502 from the Asus R3E is compatible with the xeon X5xxx ? I can't find the aswer on asus website !


Yes, I ran a X5650 (Westmere) on mine, and currently have a W3690 (Gulftown) on it. Pretty sure any of the Xeons X5xxx will work. I ran the X5650 with the 1502 bios, so I know that works...well until the X5650 died. I am currently using Bios 1601 on it. Its a unrealased unreleased ASUS BIOS that was later modded by Zen I believe is the guy, so you won't find it at ASUS. It updates the SATA controller firmware, but doesn't change CPU compatibility as far as I know.


----------



## webhito

Anyone here have 8gb modules working with their x58?

Another question regarding triple channel, if I have 2 kits of 2x3 ddr3 1600 do they all need to be the same brand or just per channel?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Anyone here have 8gb modules working with their x58?
> 
> Another question regarding triple channel, if I have 2 kits of 2x3 ddr3 1600 do they all need to be the same brand or just per channel?


I believe you can have two different brands in each channel, but for them to work well, you need to have similar specs, i.e. timings and voltage. I only had trouble once with this, and it was on a 990FX board, with the same brand and model. Go figure. Was Gskill RipjawX memory. Found that Gskill recommends matched pairs. I sold my two 2*4GB, and bought a 4*4GB set.

I saw a post here that one user has 48GB installed, so that would be 8GB * 6.


----------



## OpFor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Anyone here have 8gb modules working with their x58?
> 
> Another question regarding triple channel, if I have 2 kits of 2x3 ddr3 1600 do they all need to be the same brand or just per channel?


Currently have a Ripjaws and two sticks of HyperX (3x4 GB) and it works flawlessly.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> I believe you can have two different brands in each channel, but for them to work well, you need to have similar specs, i.e. timings and voltage. I only had trouble once with this, and it was on a 990FX board, with the same brand and model. Go figure. Was Gskill RipjawX memory. Found that Gskill recommends matched pairs. I sold my two 2*4GB, and bought a 4*4GB set.
> 
> I saw a post here that one user has 48GB installed, so that would be 8GB * 6.


Yea, but I don´t wanna risk buying 8gb modules and not have them work lol, its hard as hell to find triple channel modules already so I would have to buy a quad channel kit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OpFor*
> 
> Currently have a Ripjaws and two sticks of HyperX (3x4 GB) and it works flawlessly.


Yep, but that's mixed ram, not sure how that would work out, one channel is working as triple and the other as single? Or does it cancel out and just work as single ram?


----------



## OpFor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, but I don´t wanna risk buying 8gb modules and not have them work lol, its hard as hell to find triple channel modules already so I would have to buy a quad channel kit.
> Yep, but that's mixed ram, not sure how that would work out, one channel is working as triple and the other as single? Or does it cancel out and just work as single ram?


It's currently functioning fine in triple channel for all.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OpFor*
> 
> It's currently functioning fine in triple channel for all.


Sorry, I misunderstood what you said, thought you had a kit of 3x ripjaws and 2 kingstons, You have 3 dimms, 4gb each and working in triple channel, lucky you =).


----------



## DR4G00N

The G1.Assassin board supports 6*8GB just fine so I don't see why the Guerrilla wouldn't.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The G1.Assassin board supports 6*8GB just fine so I don't see why the Guerrilla wouldn't.


Yea, I ran into that info also, hopefully it does, guess I will be borrowing a module just to make sure, if it does I will buy a quad kit.

Cheers DR4G00N


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, but I don´t wanna risk buying 8gb modules and not have them work lol, its hard as hell to find triple channel modules already so I would have to buy a quad channel kit.
> Yep, but that's mixed ram, not sure how that would work out, one channel is working as triple and the other as single? Or does it cancel out and just work as single ram?


Yep..you would have to buy a quad channel set and a dual channel set. For a time, I used a 3 out of my fore mentioned quad set, but the last stick looked lonely in the drawer by itself. I finally found another triple set of Gskill Sniper. All three of my X58s are using Sniper DDR3-1600. I threw the quad set into my X79.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Yep..you would have to buy a quad channel set and a dual channel set. For a time, I used a 3 out of my fore mentioned quad set, but the last stick looked lonely in the drawer by itself. I finally found another triple set of Gskill Sniper. All three of my X58s are using Sniper DDR3-1600. I threw the quad set into my X79.


Not sure if I would populate all slots, 3 should be enough, 24 gigs should be fine. I did find 2 kits of 2x3 but I am not sure if 12gb will be better than 24 ( if I can get the 8gb modules working that is.

On another subject I got my hands on a triple slot ghz 7970 for a good deal ( here things are pretty expensive ) ended up costing around $170 USD, half the price of what a 970 would have cost, so far it has been doing a good job with 1080p so I dont think I will be needing the 970 unless the card either dies on me or games get more demanding ( I will not be upgrading to 2k or 4k for that matter for at least a few years, 1080p is plenty of detailed for me so far, 2k will just be too much.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Benches pls


----------



## mohiuddin

@webhito u get physics score of 11426 at what clock? Turbo 4.3 on all cores? Can u please run again only the physics benchmark with 4.7ghz turbo off?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Yes, I ran a X5650 (Westmere) on mine, and currently have a W3690 (Gulftown) on it. Pretty sure any of the Xeons X5xxx will work. I ran the X5650 with the 1502 bios, so I know that works...well until the X5650 died. I am currently using Bios 1601 on it. Its a unrealased unreleased ASUS BIOS that was later modded by Zen I believe is the guy, so you won't find it at ASUS. It updates the SATA controller firmware, but doesn't change CPU compatibility as far as I know.


How did that x5650 die?


----------



## ericeod

Those of you with 2 and 4 memory modules, I highly recommend you run dual channel and not fret about trying to run tri-channel. Here is some info on dual vs tri on the 1366 platform that should convince you...

The Truth about i7 (1366) memory, both dual channel vs tri channel


----------



## jorpe

I'm waiting for someone to say they got 48GB going successfully in a gigabyte x58a-ud5 mobo.


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://wp.xin.at/archives/880

"Intel X58 chipset and 48GB RAM: Impossible? No!"


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> @webhito u get physics score of 11426 at what clock? Turbo 4.3 on all cores? Can u please run again only the physics benchmark with 4.7ghz turbo off?


Its overclocked to 3.3 actually, turbo's to 3.6 on all cores and 3.8 max. I have no need pushing it to 4.0 or further as I don't need it and I don't have the appropriate cooling either.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Benches pls


From http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6095692
To http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6160401

7770 Full Load

7970 Full Load


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> How did that x5650 die?


Not sure exactly. I try to keep it within the acceptable ranges. I was running 20*200mhz @1.35v for a few months on and off, then I was using it for about a week straight in the BOINC Pentathlon, and I found it one morning with a black screen. Won't post. Thought maybe the R3E died on me..probably would have cried. I put the spare i7-920 in the board in it posted. Temps were around 80C at the hottest which was usually 1 core, the rest were 5-10C cooler.


----------



## gofasterstripes

BOINC killed my 5660. Yeah, OK 1.36VCC killed it, but it was fine till I ran BOINC.


----------



## innatetech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> *ALRIGHT* I have finally installed the HyperX Predator M.2 PCIe. This specific model promises 1400 MB/s Read and 600 MB/s Write..
> ...
> According to ATTO we are reaching 1400 MB/s Read and roughly 655 MB/s to 669 MB/s Write. The other benchmarks are roughly 1220 MB/s-1280MB/s Now I just need to migrate my RAID over to the a single drive and I'll be in good business. X58 life continues. There are even faster Read + Write SSDs available. I'm not ready to spin that type of cash at the moment. I'm still trying to buy a Fury X, but they are sold out everywhere.


Apologies for digging up an old post -- anyone know what effect, if any, populating the x4 slot on the X58 platform (specifically, a GB EX-58-UD3R board) has on the performance of the x16 slots? The mobo block diagram in the manual shows the x4 and x16 slots sitting on the same bus.


----------



## webhito

Updated post 5279 with power usage snaps.

One thing... Sadly the 280x/7970 owners thread seems to be dead, I do have an issue that maybe someone here can help me out with, my vrm temps are scary, card is warm at the most, however under load vrm 1 is normally sitting at 95c while vrm is at 27 and frozen, I tried reading it with an infrared temperature sensor and its not even hitting 40c on the backplate. Wondering if its a false reading or something must be going bad.

Card is a Direct CUII Top 7970.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmm - that sounds a bit ominous.

Have you done a sanity check - like let it all go cold then monitor the temps up from that to idle temp, then introduce a load and see if the other VRM kicks-in?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hmm - that sounds a bit ominous.
> 
> Have you done a sanity check - like let it all go cold then monitor the temps up from that to idle temp, then introduce a load and see if the other VRM kicks-in?


Have never heard of that sanity check, vrm 1 idles at 55c and ramps up to 102 with the regular fan profile, with it at 100% it hits 92c.
The other vrm does not move from 27c. I get this info from hwinfo and gpuz however gputweak gives me a different reading (50c under load ).

I do not have access to thermal pads so I do not want to pop the card open.


----------



## gofasterstripes

If the GPUTweak readings seem to behave as expected when you start from cold, idle and then load it up - I wouldn't worry about it.

You can also try Afterburner, though I don't know if it can read the VRMs.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If the GPUTweak readings seem to behave as expected when you start from cold, idle and then load it up - I wouldn't worry about it.
> 
> You can also try Afterburner, though I don't know if it can read the VRMs.


Yea, its really weird, and with my temperature gun i even read from the vrm heatsink itself and it was 30c under load. VRM 2 stays at the same but they are very different sizes. I think that if the backplate is not getting warm then its most definitely not overheating like its says.


----------



## mohiuddin

Sorry for your loss guys..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> BOINC killed my 5660. Yeah, OK 1.36VCC killed it, but it was fine till I ran BOINC.


So they are dying even when overvolting within safe limit? What is bionic anyway?


----------



## innatetech

Quote:


> Not sure exactly. I try to keep it within the acceptable ranges. I was running 20*200mhz @1.35v for a few months on and off, then I was using it for about a week straight in the BOINC Pentathlon, and I found it one morning with a black screen. Won't post. Thought maybe the R3E died on me..probably would have cried. I put the spare i7-920 in the board in it posted. Temps were around 80C at the hottest which was usually 1 core, the rest were 5-10C cooler.


According to Intel, max temp on that chip is 80.3C, right? So possibly the chip was slightly under spec, and hammering it in the Pentathlon was more than it could bear.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Sorry for your loss guys..
> So they are dying even when overvolting within safe limit? What is bionic anyway?


Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing. It's projects (SETI, [email protected], GPUGRID, Ect.) use your computer and many others for data processing. For more info go here: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/


----------



## virpz

I just sold my x58 rig and I must say that I miss it already...


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I just sold my x58 rig and I must say that I miss it already...


One does not simply sell a rampage 3 extreme black edition


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> One does not simply sell a rampage 3 extreme black edition


For $ 912 one sells the r3be and more, much more.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> For $ 912 one sells the r3be and more, much more.


912 thats a good sell, you could buy a 5820k and x99 with that, still, the rampage has some sentimental value i would think, at least i would have it


----------



## gofasterstripes

Ok, sounds good.
Just enjoy it









@mohiuddin

There is no *safe* "overvoltage", also the motherboard I was using was applying a higher voltage than was selected in the BIOS. See my very first posts...(and those of my alter-ego).

Lastly, I dont know the history of the chip.

Yeah, I think [email protected] is very hard on them. Its OK if everything is running/calibrated correctly, but if there's a problem it'll find it!

Some people here have been running it for years with no bother.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Ok, sounds good.
> Just enjoy it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @mohiuddin
> 
> There is no *safe* "overvoltage", also the motherboard I was using was applying a higher voltage than was selected in the BIOS. See my very first posts...(and those of my alter-ego).
> 
> Lastly, I dont know the history of the chip.
> 
> Yeah, I think [email protected] is very hard on them. Its OK if everything is running/calibrated correctly, but if there's a problem it'll find it!
> 
> Some people here have been running it for years with no bother.


I have a couple x5660 cranking at 100% 24/7 4ghz just under 1.3v for over a year.
Doing a primegrid challenge right now 118 cores going 100% loaded.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> 912 thats a good sell, you could buy a 5820k and x99 with that, still, the rampage has some sentimental value i would think, at least i would have it


I miss it already, it was such a fun board/platform to overclock. Yeah but 5820K is not really worth the exchange, my X5670 was pretty much on par with it.
I have the rampage V on it's way to me and looking for something with 8 to 10 cores / unlocked multiplier or atleast 3Ghz of base frequency per core.

Anyone has solid information about unlocked xeons on x99 ?


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I miss it already, it was such a fun board/platform to overclock. Yeah but 5820K is not really worth the exchange, my X5670 was pretty much on par with it.
> I have the rampage V on it's way to me and looking for something with 8 to 10 cores / unlocked multiplier or atleast 3Ghz of base frequency per core.
> 
> Anyone has solid information about unlocked xeons on x99 ?


i read something of unlocked x99 xeons, there is a owners club of that motherboard you bought, and people were overclocking the unlocked xeons and posting in that thread, i cant remember the models tho


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I miss it already, it was such a fun board/platform to overclock. Yeah but 5820K is not really worth the exchange, my X5670 was pretty much on par with it.
> I have the rampage V on it's way to me and looking for something with 8 to 10 cores / unlocked multiplier or atleast 3Ghz of base frequency per core.
> 
> Anyone has solid information about unlocked xeons on x99 ?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread
found the thread


----------



## greywarden

I remember seeing the R3BEs on eBay for $400 when this whoole X58-Xeon thing started... now you can't buy one for the black market price of a kidney, I know, I tried.

one a side note, here's my dual 980Ti (stock clocks) and X5650 @ 4.378GHz benchmark


----------



## prznar1

My 6c Xeon is going underwater this weeend, and ill see whats what with OC it







AIM is 4.4 GHz, hope that old ASUS will allow for such clocks.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *innatetech*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure exactly. I try to keep it within the acceptable ranges. I was running 20*200mhz @1.35v for a few months on and off, then I was using it for about a week straight in the BOINC Pentathlon, and I found it one morning with a black screen. Won't post. Thought maybe the R3E died on me..probably would have cried. I put the spare i7-920 in the board in it posted. Temps were around 80C at the hottest which was usually 1 core, the rest were 5-10C cooler.
> 
> 
> 
> According to Intel, max temp on that chip is 80.3C, right? So possibly the chip was slightly under spec, and hammering it in the Pentathlon was more than it could bear.
Click to expand...

That's Tcase, not max core temps. Likely killed because voltage overshoot when BOINC, assuming vdroop was disabled. I don't know whether that 1.35v is the value set in BIOS or the actual voltage the CPU get.

Anyway these CPUs should be treated with AIO or custom water cooling especially when overclocking + folding/BOINC.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Ok, sounds good.
> Just enjoy it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @mohiuddin
> 
> There is no *safe* "overvoltage", also the motherboard I was using was applying a higher voltage than was selected in the BIOS. See my very first posts...(and those of my alter-ego).
> 
> Lastly, I dont know the history of the chip.
> 
> Yeah, I think [email protected] is very hard on them. Its OK if everything is running/calibrated correctly, but if there's a problem it'll find it!
> 
> Some people here have been running it for years with no bother.


The 1.36v is what you set in BIOS or the actual voltage the CPU get?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I forget the exact voltage i measured, I think it was getting 1.36-1.38vtt when lightly loaded, with 1.35 set in BIOS.

EDIT -The voltages were measured with a multimeter, and were above what was selected in the BIOS. There was no way to measure Vcc in software that I was aware of.

Either way, I put the 4GHz i7 back in it and sold it. They were happy together


----------



## mohiuddin

now u have no x58 system? @gofasterstripes


----------



## gofasterstripes

No, now I have a new Mobo and 5650. With a spare 5650 just in case.


----------



## darekpro

Hello
guys what you think about this config:

X5650 + GIGABYTE X58-USB3
166x20 (22 turbo)
cpu vcore 1.25 in bios 1.232 in windows
qpi/vtt voltage 1.22
uncore x16
qpi x18



all is ok?


----------



## prznar1

The mobo is not ok, most of usb3 motherboards had problems with reaching 4 GHz, no matter if 45nm chip, or 32nm.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread
> found the thread


Thanks

Could not find any info about 2011-3 unlocked xeons, gonna try my luck with the 1680V3.

Btw the Rampage V looks so so bad, I would trade de Rog panel for a good sound card or waterblock on the board. Like the maximus vii formula


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darekpro*
> 
> Hello
> guys what you think about this config:
> 
> X5650 + GIGABYTE X58-USB3
> 166x20 (22 turbo)
> cpu vcore 1.25 in bios 1.232 in windows
> qpi/vtt voltage 1.22
> uncore x16
> qpi x18
> 
> 
> 
> all is ok?


Yeah, if you're happy. Most peeps are running faster but if you dont need it why bother spending the time doing it. I haven't heard of trouble with the USB3 boards but that might be because i never had one









Enjoy


----------



## DR4G00N

Bought a couple of L5520's to practice delidding but ended up not using them. So I tried oc'ing one on my Classy 4-way board for fun.

L5520 D0 (45nm) @ 4.207GHz, 19x221.43, 1.375v, 1C/2T

A hefty 85.67% increase over the stock 2.266GHz.









223MHz (222.5 actual) BCLK will not load into windows no matter what I did.


----------



## darekpro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah, if you're happy. Most peeps are running faster but if you dont need it why bother spending the time doing it. I haven't heard of trouble with the USB3 boards but that might be because i never had one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy


Yes this is ok for me I use pc 24/7 and all time ~70% cpu usage maybe next time I will try more


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have a couple x5660 cranking at 100% 24/7 4ghz just under 1.3v for over a year.
> Doing a primegrid challenge right now 118 cores going 100% loaded.


Do you crunch for a team? OCN is always looking for a few good men.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> That's Tcase, not max core temps. Likely killed because voltage overshoot when BOINC, assuming vdroop was disabled. I don't know whether that 1.35v is the value set in BIOS or the actual voltage the CPU get.
> 
> Anyway these CPUs should be treated with AIO or custom water cooling especially when overclocking + folding/BOINC.
> The 1.36v is what you set in BIOS or the actual voltage the CPU get?


For me, I had set 1.35 in the BIOS. Don't remember if I had vDroop on or not. I know on my X5660 rig I have it on. Is it better on or off? It was less stable on that board, a P6T.


----------



## xblue

Man, I have never been so confused on cpus in my life after venturing into this thread. 532 pages.

I have an I7 920 atm, and I could really use the 2 extra cores for VMware, but I don't have the money for a new pc, which would be a waste when I could spend $100 something on a new cpu and it will work just fine.

The fan I have now is a hyper 212, because the intel fan died early on. If I OC should I spend a little bit of money on a new fan? And whats better for OCing slightly and general gaming use? theres the 6 core w36xx series and 6 core x 56xx series. whats the difference for single cpu applications? the only difference I see is stock speeds are favored for the w series, but uses a lot more power in comparison. stock for stock, I'm assuming both the x and w series are better than my i7 920 at stock? I see the majority of people here use the x series, so im assuming thats for a reason, and not just the small $30 difference on ebay.

lastly, my mobo is this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131359 it should be aight for ocing, right?

thanks!

edit: I think this is a better question for the X vs W series. will an x series cpu at 3.5ghz(arbitrary number) be the same as a w series at 3.5ghz? if the same, whats safer/easier to oc?


----------



## OCmember

I think with the W series you don't have to make sure your board is modded or will accept it, it just will. Can I get a check on that?


----------



## bill1024

As long as he has the newest bios, the Asus P6T will run a xeon CPU


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have no experience with that board but AFAIK many of the Asus boards work just fine.

W vs X? X sounds cooler duuuude!
Really, its TDP and the X chips have Dual QPI for Multi Processor arrangements. It's a compatibility issue for some boards but there's also lots of them on eBay and they are cool running chips.

There's not much difference clock for clock with an i7 920, but if you go from a 2.66GHz i7 to a 4GHz Xeon, you'd have twice the theoretical throughput and +50% per core for single threaded. A decent i7 overclock compatible cooler should get you to 4GHz, as that can be done for less than the TDP of a 4GHz Xeon.

The golden rules are temps <=80 and both Volts =<1.35.

4-4.4GHz is still kickass for gaming and runs a modern SLI rig.

My bill is in the mail


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Do you crunch for a team? OCN is always looking for a few good men.


I do crunch for a team. I am one of the team captains. Thanks for asking.
Seems as a team we don't do POGs challenges any more. I may be able to help you guys out in one of those. Keep me in mind.

The primegrid challenge is over. I came in 13th place. My best placement so far.

http://www.primegrid.com/challenge/2015_7/top_users.html


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have no experience with that board but AFAIK many of the Asus boards work just fine.
> 
> W vs X? X sounds cooler duuuude!
> Really, its TDP and the X chips have Dual QPI for Multi Processor arrangements. It's a compatibility issue for some boards but there's also lots of them on eBay and they are cool running chips.
> 
> There's not much difference clock for clock with an i7 920, but if you go from a 2.66GHz i7 to a 4GHz Xeon, you'd have twice the theoretical throughput and +50% per core for single threaded. A decent i7 overclock compatible cooler should get you to 4GHz, as that can be done for less than the TDP of a 4GHz Xeon.
> 
> The golden rules are temps <=80 and both Volts =<1.35.
> 
> 4-4.4GHz is still kickass for gaming and runs a modern SLI rig.
> 
> My bill is in the mail


hmm, so basically I should just get whatever I can find cheapest, or get a W series if I can find one for just a little bit more? on ebay an x5660 is going for about $120 on average, with a w3670 going for about $130.. tough decision









yeah I could oc my 920, but I think having 2 more cores will really help with vmware.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah as far as I know that's correct, but best wait for some other confirmation from the others.

You really should overclock to 3.6 or something, you can probably do that at 1.25V or less! No reason not to, unless you don't have the time to do it.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> hmm, so basically I should just get whatever I can find cheapest, or get a W series if I can find one for just a little bit more? on ebay an x5660 is going for about $120 on average, with a w3670 going for about $130.. tough decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah I could oc my 920, but I think having 2 more cores will really help with vmware.


Here is a x5660 for 70$ free shipping. He has 47 of them so he would be a recycler and not some one that beat the snot out of it.
With the x5660 175 x 23 is 4ghz a very easy oc to get going. The x5660 will give you the 23 multiplier, I have had better luck with odd than even

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-594885-001-Intel-Xeon-X5660-2-8GHZ-12MB-6-Core-Processor-Chip-zy-/262085994117?hash=item3d058ae685


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah as far as I know that's correct, but best wait for some other confirmation from the others.
> 
> You really should overclock to 3.6 or something, you can probably do that at 1.25V or less! No reason not to, unless you don't have the time to do it.


not really lazy(ok sorta) but i kinda ran my 920 at 100c_ for several months 24/7, dunno how the thing still works









i guess ill keep my eye out on all of the models on amazon/ebay and get one if its cheap enough. do you recommend that I upgrade my coolermaster 212?

last month i bought a 25" asus 1440 monitor, so that ate up a lot of my money, and I just bought another 6gb of ram for $41, I had been watching newegg for 2 weeks, it was $50 and dropped to $40 today, so i finally got it.

now I need to get rid of this 1gb 6850, because thats killing my fps more than anything for new games, and the limiting factor for vmware because I dont have enough vram... i almost bought a 280x for $150, but I'm trying to hold out for cybermonday. hoping that I can get a gtx970 in the low $200 range, since they are already close to there during some weekend sales.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Here is a x5660 for 70$ free shipping. He has 47 of them so he would be a recycler and not some one that beat the snot out of it.
> With the x5660 175 x 23 is 4ghz a very easy oc to get going. The x5660 will give you the 23 multiplier, I have had better luck with odd than even
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-594885-001-Intel-Xeon-X5660-2-8GHZ-12MB-6-Core-Processor-Chip-zy-/262085994117?hash=item3d058ae685


ohh, so it doesn't matter that its an hp branded xeon?

his page is confusing " HP 594885-001 Intel Xeon X5660 2.8GHZ-12MB 6-Core Processor Chip zy " is the title and HP 594885-001 E5640 2.66GHz12MB80W PROC is whats listed later on down


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> not really lazy(ok sorta) but i kinda ran my 920 at 100c_ for several months 24/7, dunno how the thing still works


If it was at stock speed and volts, and allowed to throttle correctly at PROCHOT, it's probably fine.

Temperature is only one facet of the equation of damage and degradation. Stock parts can run near 100C 24/7 for years without issues...but the same temps could damage a heavily OCed part very rapidly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> ohh, so it doesn't matter that its an hp branded xeon?
> 
> his page is confusing " HP 594885-001 Intel Xeon X5660 2.8GHZ-12MB 6-Core Processor Chip zy " is the title and HP 594885-001 E5640 2.66GHz12MB80W PROC is whats listed later on down


By and large a Xeon X5660 is a Xeon X5660. Doesn't matter if it was intended for an HP system or from an HP pull or not. It's still a Xeon X5660 and will still work with anything any other Xeon X5660 would.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread
> found the thread
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Could not find any info about 2011-3 unlocked xeons, gonna try my luck with the 1680V3.
> 
> Btw the Rampage V looks so so bad, I would trade de Rog panel for a good sound card or waterblock on the board. Like the maximus vii formula
Click to expand...

Did read about the V3 before.

Edit: Sorry, can't find it again.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Did read about the V3 before.
> 
> Edit: Sorry, can't find it again.


Yes, I have read that from 1650 and up they are unlocked but can't find any confirmation. Also heard about unlucked Ivy Bridge Xeons.
That would be really nice to have an unlocked Xeon on 2011-3 . Guess ill have to wait


----------



## OCmember

There are 6 core Unlocked Xeons? What socket?


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> There are 6 core Unlocked Xeons? What socket?


6 & 8 core. x79 2011.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1564465/psa-unlocked-8core-for-x79-if-you-cared/60#post_24468561


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Yes, I have read that from 1650 and up they are unlocked but can't find any confirmation. Also heard about unlucked Ivy Bridge Xeons.
> That would be really nice to have an unlocked Xeon on 2011-3 . Guess ill have to wait


I read the other day that there are 8 core unlocked ivy for x79, but not for x99, for x99 you have to search haswell based xeons


----------



## webhito

Here again fellas!

Got a memory question for you!

Gaming/everyday use, what would you suggest? I have 4 gigs of ddr3 1600 and plan on upgrading, I have a few options, another 4gb dimm to add to the existing one, sell it and buy a set of 6gb 3x2 ddr3 1600 ( I can buy 2 kits also ). Or sell the module and buy an 8 gig module.

What are the benefits of triple channel over just having one module? Is it worth having to shell out some extra cash for the old almost obsolete triple channel set?

4gigs is barely enough for my games, played dying light and I am almost hitting 4gb, I am sure that at some point I have hit more and it lags like hell ( pagefile most likely ) so I need to upgrade asap.

Just wanted to know what your experience was so far and what your suggestions are.

The 7970 I picked up works like a charm, cant play with everything on full but compared to my 7770 damn is it better. Temperature wise it was fine, just hwinfo and gpuz were giving me false readings.


----------



## DR4G00N

@webhito
Sell it and buy two or three 4GB sticks of Samsung HCH9. I bought mine off ebay for $30-35 cad a stick.
It doesn't look good but it oc's sky high.


----------



## theister

Hello,

does anyone have expirience with an intel DX58SO*2* and Xeon X56xx ? I found some information that it's able to run the xeons with this board, but i can't find much about the overclocking performance of this board. I can pick up one for cheap, but due many negative reports linked with the original DX58SO i hesitate to pick it up.

Thank you very much for this thread.

regards.


----------



## 2010rig

It depends, how much can you get the board for? This was a $250 board, and is one of the better Intel boards, but Intel is close to the last choice I'd go with.









What are your other options?


----------



## theister

For now i am at an Asus Rampage II Gene, but i am not so happy with it due the lack of PCI-e Slots.

I also have the feeling it does not overclock as well as other mainboards mentioned here.
I was not able to get an 5660 (B-Batch) over 4,1 Ghz within 1,35 vcore, a 5687 (C-Batch, only 4Core) i buyed bought cheap for testing was at ~ 4,5 Ghz within 1,35 vcore.
But that's something that i am going to figure out later, cause i want a "bigger" board anyway.

the dx58so2 would be arround 90$, other options are an asus sabertooth for 140$ and Rampage III Extreme for 170$. All used.


----------



## 2010rig

$90 is pretty reasonable for that board, as you probably don't want to spend too much into x58. Either that or offer $150 for the Rampage III!


----------



## theister

its 170 for it









I forgot an ASUS P6X58D-E for 160$. Go for this as u have one by yourself?


----------



## ghabhaducha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> For now i am at an Asus Rampage II Gene, but i am not so happy with it due the lack of PCI-e Slots.
> 
> I also have the feeling it does not overclock as well as other mainboards mentioned here.
> I was not able to get an 5660 (B-Batch) over 4,1 Ghz within 1,35 vcore, a 5687 (C-Batch, only 4Core) i buyed bought cheap for testing was at ~ 4,5 Ghz within 1,35 vcore.
> But that's something that i am going to figure out later, cause i want a "bigger" board anyway.
> 
> the dx58so2 would be arround 90$, other options are an asus sabertooth for 140$ and Rampage III Extreme for 170$. All used.


Rampage II Gene uses essentially the same PCB as a Rampage III Gene. The only difference is the Marvell SATA3 and Renesas Electronics USB3 Controllers. If you don't believe me check out the below picture (RIIG on left, RIIIG on right):

Notice how the capacitors are ALMOST identical across both boards, and most importantly the VRM chips ARE identical. I own both of these, and I was able to confirm the overclock was the same over both boards.

I used an X5670 + Rampage III Gene in my TJ08B-E sig rig, and I was running at 1.3V 4.2GHz stable; and i'm pretty sure I didn't get a good-clocking X5670. Then again, perhaps you are right, and I'm wrong entirely, and that if I had used the X5670 in my Gigabyte X58A-UD7 Rev1.0 I would have indeed gotten better speeds. Either way I would have kept this mATX set up as is for the forseeable future, if I didn't get an offer I couldn't pass up on an i7-5960x from an Intel employee I know.

As for the deals you found...DEFINITELY get the Rampage III Extreme for $170. It's arguably one of the best motherboards made for the X58 chipset, and you won't go wrong. The P6X58D-E is also an excellent board @ $160 (I paid around $150 for my sister's build), but I would go for a RIIIE for $10 more. Just make sure it wasn't abused or anything. In any case, do NOT get the Intel OEM board. They make excellent processors, but their motherboards were meh at best compared to what was available from ASUS, Gigabyte, ASRock, MSI, etc. I hope that helps.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> its 170 for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I forgot an ASUS P6X58D-E for 160$. Go for this as u have one by yourself?


For $10 more get the Rampage III Extreme.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> @webhito
> Sell it and buy two or three 4GB sticks of Samsung HCH9. I bought mine off ebay for $30-35 cad a stick.
> It doesn't look good but it oc's sky high.


I don´t have access to those type of chips, I live in Mexico, down here we get all the mainstream stuff at a premium price.


----------



## theister

ok, sadly the rampage iii for 170 $ is not available any more, so my final options are :

Asus Sabertooth for 140 $

Asus P6XD-E for 160 $

Others, i think too expensive ones :

Gigabyte GA X58 UD5 (Rev 1) for 190 $

Rampage III Extreme for 270 $ and more

Gigabyte G1 Sniper for about 250 $ (the only pro for this is the better sata 3 controller?)

and finally one i think not worth the money (cause of uncore problems with xeons i think)

MSI X58 Platinium for 95 $

So i think the best choice moneywise is the P6XD-E and if i don't care the G1 Sniper?

Thanks for your help.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> ok, sadly the rampage iii for 170 $ is not available any more, so my final options are :
> 
> Asus Sabertooth for 140 $
> 
> Asus P6XD-E for 160 $
> 
> Others, i think too expensive ones :
> 
> Gigabyte GA X58 UD5 (Rev 1) for 190 $
> 
> Rampage III Extreme for 270 $ and more
> 
> Gigabyte G1 Sniper for about 250 $ (the only pro for this is the better sata 6 controller?)
> 
> and finally one i think not worth the money (cause of uncore problems with xeons i think)
> 
> MSI X58 Platinium for 95 $
> 
> So i think the best choice moneywise is the P6XD-E and if i don't care the G1 Sniper?
> 
> Thanks for your help.


try to tweak a little more the bios to get more out of it, i got my x5650 to 4.2ghz (22x191), in all the cores with 1.272 vcore, enable load line calibration, disable speedstep and spread spectrum, and the c1 states, the rampage 2 gene overclocks just like any other board if you know how to do it properly, heck, i had a msi x58 pro-e and the piece of crap wouldnt let me go further than 3.8ghz, that was 180 fsb and 21 multi, this board lets me lock it to 22, and the rampage 2 extreme lets you lock it to 23 (on the x5650, for all the cores, not 21 which is its factory multi), and i got it to 5ghz with the same board, so yea, a sabertooth or rampage 3 extreme would be better for higher overclocks, like 4.8 24/7 or something like that, but for daily 4.2-4-4 overclocks this board is more than enough


----------



## Beufesamiteur

The Asus R3E's been shipped... !! Can't wait to test it !! Is it better to buy a X5660 or a W3690 ? Will the W3690 be hotter than the X5660 ?

My plan is to run it at 4.5 24/7 which one could be the best ?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Since my X5670 is quite lousy (anything over 4.2 requires dangerous volts) I was thinking of selling it, and maybe buying another 6 core in half a year or so.
So I was wondering, in half a year's time, would the availability of these chips go up or down? And the price? Of course no one can know but I would like to see some theories.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Honestly, 4.2GHz is plenty, the most you will be able to pull around 1.30V-1.35V is 4.4-4.5, and those extra couple hundred MHz may give you more points on benchmarks, but in real-world usage, I highly doubt you will notice it. Personally I would just keep your X5670 until Intel releases "small i7" chips (e.g. i7-870, 2600k, 2700k, 3770k, 4770k, 4790k, 6700k) that are either A) 6 cores or B) have such strong IPCs that they are faster than a 6c/12t Westmere with only 4c/8t....and I would wait until I found one of these said chips for $200 before upgrading. I was pretty content with my X5670 @4.2 on my R3G + 24GB DDR3 Samsung Green Ram, and as I mentioned before would have kept for many years to come if it wasn't for me encountering a deal on a 5960x.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> The Asus R3E's been shipped... !! Can't wait to test it !! Is it better to buy a X5660 or a W3690 ? Will the W3690 be hotter than the X5660 ?
> 
> My plan is to run it at 4.5 24/7 which one could be the best ?


The W3690, imo


----------



## 4everAnoob

The thing is, I don't need the performance for anything really. I managed to get all my 1366 parts really cheap and had fun playing with everything. So if I can get a decent profit on the X5670 I might downgrade to a w3520 for the time being. I just hope when I do want to upgrade to hex core again that the prices don't go up dramatically (dont see any reason for that but never know).
Also, I might be able to get a R3E for next to nothing that I could sell with the X5670 for a gigantic profit.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> The Asus R3E's been shipped... !! Can't wait to test it !! Is it better to buy a X5660 or a W3690 ? Will the W3690 be hotter than the X5660 ?
> 
> My plan is to run it at 4.5 24/7 which one could be the best ?


W3680 (980X) and 3690 (990X) are identical other than the stock multi's. I'm pretty sure they both have unlocked multi's on the R3E, so you could save a few bucks by getting a 3680 instead.


----------



## webhito

Ended up grabbing 2 more 4gb chips as they did not have dual channel kits so now I have 12gb of ram, same chips, same codes and funny enough almost the same weeks of production.

How would I know if its working in triple channel?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Ended up grabbing 2 more 4gb chips as they did not have dual channel kits so now I have 12gb of ram, same chips, same codes and funny enough almost the same weeks of production.
> 
> How would I know if its working in triple channel?


If all three sticks are in the green slots it'll be in triple channel. Check CPU-Z's Memory tab to confirm.
Make sure you set the same timings for all three sticks as they can be set individually.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> If all three sticks are in the green slots it'll be in triple channel. Check CPU-Z's Memory tab to confirm.
> Make sure you set the same timings for all three sticks as they can be set individually.


Under memory its showing up as 666 not 1333 as it is under bios, should it be showing up as 1333? I have it at stock.

Under channel # it does say triple though =)


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Under memory its showing up as 666 not 1333 as it is under bios, should it be showing up as 1333? I have it at stock.
> 
> Under channel # it does say triple though =)


DDR = Double Data Rate
666 x 2 = 1332

It's being reported correctly


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> DDR = Double Data Rate
> 666 x 2 = 1332
> 
> It's being reported correctly


Sweet =D Saved a few bucks then lol, hopefully its stable =).

Thanks!


----------



## mustek550

Thank you so much for this article. I was unaware that such an upgrade was possible for my Asus P6T Deluxe V2. Well you guys gave me the confidence to order a Xeon X5660 to replace my I7 920. I just tossed it in today after a quick bios update and she fired right up!!!

Still running at stock speed but I plan to engage warp drive soon. 

A few quick bench test related to me.

Cinema 4D R17 Rectangle sample scene. In window render standard settings.

I7 920. 1:20
X5660. 0:51 NICE!

A short video sample in premiere CS 2015.

I7 920. 4:15
X5660. 3:15

Very nice improvements for around $100.

Also Im so happy with this board because I was able to install 2 8GB ram cards. Doubling my memory to 24GB.

I feel like I just bought a brand new PC for cheap.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mustek550*
> 
> Thank you so much for this article. I was unaware that such an upgrade was possible for my Asus P6T Deluxe V2. Well you guys gave me the confidence to order a Xeon X5660 to replace my I7 920. I just tossed it in today after a quick bios update and she fired right up!!!
> 
> Still running at stock speed but I plan to engage warp drive soon.
> 
> A few quick bench test related to me.
> 
> Cinema 4D R17 Rectangle sample scene. In window render standard settings.
> 
> I7 920. 1:20
> X5660. 0:51 NICE!
> 
> A short video sample in premiere CS 2015.
> 
> I7 920. 4:15
> X5660. 3:15
> 
> Very nice improvements for around $100.
> 
> Also Im so happy with this board because I was able to install 2 8GB ram cards. Doubling my memory to 24GB.
> 
> I feel like I just bought a brand new PC for cheap.


overclock it to 4-4.2ghz and it will perform much better


----------



## mustek550

How far do you think it will go safely with a stock i7 920 cooler on it? I have a big zalman that I want to put on but I have to take the whole mobo out and I'm not quite ready for that yet.


----------



## Kana-Maru

With the stock cooler you'll probably be able to reach 3.6Ghz if you overclock properly. Hopefully you won't need a lot of voltage to hit 3.6Ghz. You could squeeze out 3.8Ghz, but that's pushing it with a stock cooler if you are going to be doing some heavy duty things. Once you hit 4Ghz things will heat up and 4.2Ghz is guaranteed to use a decent amount of vCore. Just my opinions and this is coming from someone under water.

I'd use that Zalman if I were you.


----------



## Gre4ka

Hello, guys.

Hope this thread not only for 5xxx Xeons, but 3xxx too









I purchased my W3680 several years ago, used for some reason my small htpc and slowly build my main rig in Caselabs case when I have some time for it. Now I'm trying to successfully overclock my CPU to some sweet value









I read a lot of information regarding newer Gulftown/Westmere core, safe voltages, etc, but seems here many of you have a very large statistics and can give me an advices. The last CPU I overclocked was my i7-950, which is now replaced by W3680. 950 run smooth on 4.4GHz with 1.45vcore, it were not able to handle mem at 2000 (kingston hyper-x on elphida hyper chips) due to IMC or uncore part at any comfortable/safe VTT voltage (lower than 1.4-1.45).

my rig is: ASUS R3E with mod 1601 bios, 12Gb of Corsair 2000-9-10-9-27 1.65v ram in 3x4Gb sticks, 2 x NV GTX980 in SLI, 1000w silverstone strider gold evolution psu. CPU, MB, MEM, VIDEO - watercooled (2x140 & 4x140 rads, total 6x140 rad sections)

My first error was in that I choosed wrong strategy to derermine different parts stability, before overclocking core itself. I believed that memtest86 is a good test for mem testing and partially for uncore/imc part testing. This way I lost much time thinking I can't stabilize the Core freq & vcore, while errors came from IMC/uncore & memory. Tests I did for mem/uncore were not enough to exclude errors caused by them. I used linx for 5-10 iterations and prime95 large FFT's for 1-2 hours, then tryed to overclock the core and always failed at 4.4-4.5GHz at any reasonable voltage.

This week I thoughly test IMC/mem/uncore by prime95 custom preset - 1344-4096 problem size, 9216mb mem to use, 5mins for each problem size & at least 25 iterations in Linx (linpack). This strategy shown me that to hold QPI(VTT) at 1.3-1.34v I can't go at of higher than 3800MHz on uncore. Then I started to find stable Vcore for 4.4GHz on cores.

My W3680 seems to be full analog of i7-980*X* because it have an unlocked multiplier, it's not a ES, I purchased my in BOX version and my batch is *3111B333*. So instead of playing with bclk only I have an ability to play with multi too. But I find that stabilize CPU with high multi is harder than using both bclk & multi overclock.

My current "formula" that I'm trying to 100% test & stabilize for 24/7 use is:
BCLK = 175
MEM = 2:12 (12x) = 2100
UNCORE = 21x (1.75x) = 3680
QPI = 36x = 6300

To be sure what voltage my MB actually push to components I always test all voltages with multimeter, R3E MB have usefull V points to put multimeter on, so all voltages I post is MB value (real value) form.

Vcore = 1.39v (1.40v) Vcore LLC is ENABLED, so voltage is not dropping under any load
QPI/DRAM (VTT) = 1.33v (1.33v) QPI LLC is ENABLED by jumper, so voltage is not dropping under any load
MEM = 1.69v (1.71v) - I raised it due to get ram work on original timings and 1T command rate at the same time
CPU PLL = 1.81v (1.83v)
IOH = 1.24v (1.25v)
ICH = 1.14v (1.15v)

memory timings is 9-10-9-27-1T, all other is in AUTO and I'm happy how my R3E set them. They become as tight as possible & stable at the same time. The RLT A/B/C values for my uncore & VTT vcore set to 57/59/60.

Yesterday I set 1.375v (1.385v) vroce and passed 50 passes of LinX with 9216mb mem used, resulting in 87.2 Gflops and left Prime95 torture test for night. At the morning I noticed that one of the working threads failed with error after 1 hour I started the test.

Today I testing with 1.39v (1.40v) vcore and passed the same 50 passes of LinX and "survived" a lot of hours in Prime95 (I decided to test in custom mode and use large FFT range with 9216mb of memory). So, increasing Vcore actually helped. I also made some research & test's to determine when Prime95 do most of errors or blue screen/reboot and always it were a Large FFT's with most available RAM. Seems that small ffts are good for first visual overclock to determine +-0.1v on core for desired frequency. And only Large FFT's test the whole stability on all components together - Cores, IMC, uncore.

Cores temperatures in my case never goes higher than 78-79C in LinX and usually 3-4C lower (74-75C) in Prime95. So it seems to be ok too?

How do you think guys, should I test another BCLK * multies to possible get better Vcore (lower) than now at the same 4.4GHz ? Is 200 BCLK a good idea? Or it's only (and the one) way to overclock low multies CPU's, but not a good idea for some that have 23+ multies by default?

Regarding Uncore part - I read somewhere that holding it between 1.5x and 2x helps to lower VTT voltage, and setting them to 1.5 or 2x exactly require a lot of juice on VTT. So I always try to set it to about 1.7-1.75-1.8x range. In my current case with memory at 2100 the best reasonable value looks like 3680. The lower one is 3500 (I think I'll test it too to determine how lower I can go on VTT in this case), but it significantly reduces the overall performance. I testing performance impact with LinX (Gflops) and some AIDA64 tests & WinRAR benchmark mode. Every ~200MHz in lowering the Uncore results in about 0.5Gflops lose, and I calculated that every 1 Gflop is gained by every 55-60MHz of the core speed in 6-core CPU with HT enabled. So lowering uncore by every 1 multi down results in about 25-30MHz in "core speed". So we need some balance in all parts of CPU and the memory too. My mem can work at 1800-1866 at 8-9-8-24-1T timings also, but seems that it's slower than 2100-9-10-9-27-1T in some tests. And to keep uncore at good speed we need to hold it at 2x of mem speed in case of 1800-1866 mem...

What about to turn the HT off? I at most use my rig to play games / watch video and so on. I don't encode video, don't render or something else like that. But as I remember turning HT off raises possible core overclock and lowers required vcore and temps too. How do you use your Xeon's or other Westmere/Gulftown CPU's?

Sorry for large post, hope you can give some advices.
Thanks in advance!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Welcome to the OCN forum. I'll try to address some issues you are facing in your post. First I'd like to state that I am glad that you actually test for stability thoroughly, instead of running a 15 minute benchmark and claiming STABLE! Is there a reason you need a high overclock for 24/7 use?

Quote:


> Vcore = 1.39v (1.40v) Vcore LLC is ENABLED, so voltage is not dropping under any load
> QPI/DRAM (VTT) = 1.33v (1.33v) QPI LLC is ENABLED by jumper, so voltage is not dropping under any load
> MEM = 1.69v (1.71v) - I raised it due to get ram work on original timings and 1T command rate at the same time
> CPU PLL = 1.81v (1.83v)
> IOH = 1.24v (1.25v)
> ICH = 1.14v (1.15v)


CPU PLL is fine as well as IOH, ICH. Most people can leave IOH + ICH set to AUTO in most cases. With LLC ENABLED you have no protection when transitioning from idles to full load & vice versa. You could also have issues down the line due to spiking. Try increasing your QPI/DRAM Vtt as this could allow you to possibly lower your high Memory\DRAM voltage. I can't say much about the CPU vCore. You know how much vCore your CPU requires for stability. It's possible that a higher QPI - lower DRAM (mem) voltage could allow you to lower that Vcore. It's a stretch, but worth trying. I usually only see high voltages like yours for benchmarking purpose, not 24/7 usage. For 24/7 usage you'll "probably" want to stay close to or within Intel's voltage recommendations.

Quote:


> Cores temperatures in my case never goes higher than 78-79C in LinX and usually 3-4C lower (74-75C) in Prime95. So it seems to be ok too?


No. At 4.8Ghz I average 70c while running IBT v2.54. 4.4Ghz should have you somewhere between 67c - 72c. You might need better cooling or something. You don't want to be approaching 78c+. Try to set a goal for 65c-70c.Try cooling your ambient temp.

Quote:


> What about to turn the HT off? I at most use my rig to play games / watch video and so on. I don't encode video, don't render or something else like that. But as I remember turning HT off raises possible core overclock and lowers required vcore and temps too. How do you use your Xeon's or other Westmere/Gulftown CPU's?
> 
> Sorry for large post, hope you can give some advices.
> Thanks in advance! smile.gif


You can turn off HT if you want, but I you'll probably want to leave it on. I've heard that turning it off can lower CPU voltages. You know you could always drop 200Mhz and hit 4.2Ghz with probably more reasonable voltages. You are only running 2 GTX 980s. I'm sure 4.2Ghz + HT + your high memory frequency could handle that SLI setup easily. A lot of users don't mind going above Intel recommendation for 24/7 use.

I use my PC for a lot of different things. PC gaming is one of the reasons, but I don't game as much as I use to. I'm running a single AMD R9 Fury X @ 1440p + 4K and it performs great. I use my rig for programming, debugging, video rendering\encoding\editing etc, development, high end music creation and mastering. I use a ton of programs that LOVE to eat up RAM and vRAM. I have two sets of RAM. One for everyday use and another set for benchmarking when I test new GPUs. I was forced to recently upgrade my RAM capacity.


----------



## webhito

Boot wise how does everyones system handle post? For some reason mine takes an aweful long time to post (15-20 seconds and another 10 seconds to load windows on the ssd) I don´t recall having another motherboard doing this.


----------



## Kana-Maru

My boot is much quicker now since I stopped using the on-board RAID and Nvidia GPUs. The AMD GPU skips over somethings that Nvidia GPU needed to check every boot. I'll check my times for you. One sec.

Edit:
POST [RAM\Video\LPC\HDD\LPC check] takes around 15 seconds.
Splash screen + more POSTs approx 10secs
Boot times were literally 2 seconds if that long.
Total approx 27secs.

Things usually load quick if I'm running stock.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Boot wise how does everyones system handle post? For some reason mine takes an aweful long time to post (15-20 seconds and another 10 seconds to load windows on the ssd) I don´t recall having another motherboard doing this.


In my experience the issue was always related to borderline Vcore, IIRC


----------



## Gre4ka

*Kana-Maru*

thx for reply, I'm glad to receive any feedback!

Yes, my main goal is to make my system rock stable 24/7 in overclock like it work in stock.
I don't like & don't want to get random BSOD's / hang / reboot during gaming or something else. Also don't want to lost/corrupt data on SSD etc.

regarding AUTO settings for voltage - I think it's not a good idea. I always can check what MB set in auto with multimeter, but to be sure I prefer to set in manually.

I read that IOH/ICH should be up a little on high BCLK overclock, as well when we use high-end videocard(s) in SLI on our old X58 chipset.

How do you think, what's the safe 24/7 voltage for VTT? 1.35 as most say or 1.375-1.4v?

Regarding temps - 79c was for 4.5GHz 1.4+ v overclock test.
Also I always try to test overclock at the minimum pump speed & minimum fans speed. This is because I think that making it stable at higher possible temp than usual makes more stablility "space". If I test with max pump & fans speed, then I get it stable at (for example) at 70-72c, but when I decide to load CPU in a "quiet mode" with pump/fans at minimum in the future, I may probably get an error or something like that. And when I get stable CPU at 78-79c I'll be sure that it will be stable under all conditions and scenarios.

My idle (room air) temp is about 24c now. I'm using aquaero 6 with 4 termal sensors - 2 for water (radiator group out/in) and 2 for air (case air in, radiators air out) and my W3680 heats water up to 36c (34c cooled out by radiators) with air going from rad's at the 34c too. So it's really hot thing







in case of bad heat transfer (little contact/bad thermal interface) I think water would be cooler, but CPU temps highrer.

There 2 days I did some more research and I can 100% say that CPU PLL is a very important voltage. I think it's not so popular because most of MB's don't allow to lower it below standard value of 1.8x, or it's some kind of "cheat"







that allows so sweet overclocks, "legends" about super 1366 CPU's able to run 4.6GHz on 1.4v etc.

I selected the 175-180 bclk range for my CPU overclocking at the moment. I find it optimal to save native multiplier of 25x and get acceptable mem freq and qpi freq at the same time. 175-177 allows me 2100-2133 by mem at native 9-10-9-27 timings and 180 give me 1800 mem with tighter 8-9-8-24 timings.

Last days I tested my CPU much and realized that for 4.4GHz (175x25) I need 1.39v (1.40v real) voltage on core. This tests were done with 1.81v default PLL (1.83 real).
Today I decided to move as low as 1.31v for PLL and... CPU were stable, passes several hours of LinX w/o performance degradation, several hours of prime95 large FFT's too.

Then I tested another values: 1.45-1.49v - error in Linx. 1.51v - ok, 1.61 - possible stable. 1.65 - 1.80 - errors in LinX. Going higher than 1.81 seems to be ok up to 1.84-1.85v. 1.9x+ errors in Linx.
Now I decided to try to lower Core voltage from 1.39v to something less and set 1.35v just for FUN! at 1.81v on PLL such low 1.35v on core always ended with reboot/blue screen in LinX in 1-2 iterations.
But now... I'm stable in LinX for 2 hours (!!) already. I think it's a HUGE improvment, and possible I may thing again of reaching 4.5-4.6 with reasonable voltages. But I need more testing anyway.
I'll play with VTT & mem voltages too, while holding PLL at the same low value. Maybe they can go lower too.

At the moment my temps with minimal cooling are the following: 4.4GHz @ 1.39v & PLL 1.81v = 76c max after 1hr of LinX and 4.4GHz @ 1.35v & PLL 1.31v = 71c max after 1hr of LinX. 5c improvment !
Moving to full pump & fans speed usually takes off about 5-6c in my case. So aproximately there are about 65c max.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My boot is much quicker now since I stopped using the on-board RAID and Nvidia GPUs. The AMD GPU skips over somethings that Nvidia GPU needed to check every boot. I'll check my times for you. One sec.
> 
> Edit:
> POST [RAM\Video\LPC\HDD\LPC check] takes around 15 seconds.
> Splash screen + more POSTs approx 10secs
> Boot times were literally 2 seconds if that long.
> Total approx 27secs.
> 
> Things usually load quick if I'm running stock.


Yea, mine does take a little longer than that, 30 seconds or so, guessing its just the platform then.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> In my experience the issue was always related to borderline Vcore, IIRC


Mines all on stock, should not be related to that.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> regarding AUTO settings for voltage - I think it's not a good idea. I always can check what MB set in auto with multimeter, but to be sure I prefer to set in manually.
> I read that IOH/ICH should be up a little on high BCLK overclock, as well when we use high-end videocard(s) in SLI on our old X58 chipset.


I have a lot of things set to AUTO and I monitor the settings as well. Depending on the option I've never had the MB scare me. Usually when you set something to AUTO, except a few options like voltages, the MB will be conservative.

I've never really had to mess with IOH or the ICH much.
Quote:


> How do you think, what's the safe 24/7 voltage for VTT? 1.35 as most say or 1.375-1.4v?


You'll definitely want to be under 1.4v for sure. 1.375v shouldn't be to bad with proper cooling, but ideally you'll want to be as close to 1.3v as possible.
Quote:


> There 2 days I did some more research and I can 100% say that CPU PLL is a very important voltage. I think it's not so popular because most of MB's don't allow to lower it below standard value of 1.8x, or it's some kind of "cheat" biggrin.gif that allows so sweet overclocks, "legends" about super 1366 CPU's able to run 4.6GHz on 1.4v etc.


CPU PLL should stay around 1.8v. It is very important and it also kills faster than heat and high vCore combined. There's no cheat when it comes to overclocking on the 1366.

It looks like you are coming along well.


----------



## gofasterstripes

POST times on this platform are often long, which is annoying when setting an overclock up. When it's sorted you can just use suspend most of the time, which is instant.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> POST times on this platform are often long, which is annoying when setting an overclock up. When it's sorted you can just use suspend most of the time, which is instant.


Mine for some reason takes almost as long to come back from sleep as it does to cold boot, its extremely sluggish. Performance wise I have no complaints, works fine.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Mine for some reason takes almost as long to come back from sleep as it does to cold boot, its extremely sluggish. Performance wise I have no complaints, works fine.


Does it do this with all USB and drives disconnected apart from the boot drive? If my old iPod is plugged in my machine won't boot for about 5 minutes!


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Does it do this with all USB and drives disconnected apart from the boot drive? If my old iPod is plugged in my machine won't boot for about 5 minutes!


Would have to check this, I only have a wireless usb keyboard and 3 hdds. Crazy something would take that long to boot lol.

Same thing, pulled all the hard drives, one stick of ram, no usb plugged in and it still takes a long time to boot, a funny thing that happens though is when I press f12 to select boot device sometimes it will shut down instead of opening the menu.

Very weird.


----------



## ghabhaducha

Hey guys, I figured the sleep issue on X58. Just disabled "Hybrid Sleep" in the Power Settings, and now sleep works like a charm. Thanks for the input.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hey guys, thanks for sharing all the wealth of info. Here are some pics of my X58 rig:
> 
> Build (Specs are in Sig under "Kid Dynomite"):
> 
> Some more pics:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/KDWuQ
> 
> 
> Running IBT @very high:
> 
> I normally get around 81GFlops, but I had some stuff running at this time it would seem.
> 
> Kana~ I finally managed to build out my mATX x58 rig, but unfortunately it would seem I can't hit that 4.4ish @1.35Vish with this Xeon X5670. As such I settled for 1.312V for 4.2 (I was able to do it at 1.280V, but kept getting WHEA alerts in my Event log). I'll post my BIOS photo soon, but as it stands, I'm doing +0.2250mV on offset Vcore, 1.16V on IOH, 1.2875V on the QPI/DRAM, 1.45V on the DRAM Bus. Let me know if you have advice for me for trying to hit 4.4, I'd like to hit 200x22 to keep things nice, but perhaps this mobo OR cpu OR both are just not able to hit that.
> 
> *Edit~ I'm also having problems waking from S3 Sleep on this rig. I had this problem with another Rampage III Gene running an X5670 w/GT 430 (for a friend). I've tried Bios 0502, and left everything at auto. I'm fresh out of ideas, and would like some help if there are some Rampage II/III Gene owners.*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> nice Job!!
> 
> What Graphics drivers are you using? AMD have just updated to catalyst 15.7 which solved some sleep issues for me


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hmm, I'm on a modded .inf Catalyst 15.15 Driver, I'll try to update to 15.7 and see if it solves anything. Interestingly, in the other system I had a X5670+RIIIG+6x2GB Corsair XMS3 I was using a Zotac GT430, and I still had a similar problem of not waking from sleep. I tried the bios that came with it when I bought it off of ebay (0502) and then later on the newest one (1003), and both had the same problem. Now, I do know that my 290x is running a UEFI vbios, which may cause the problems, but I don't think the GT 430 was. I'm gonna play around with 15.7 Drivers, and maybe try using a non-UEFI 290x bios. Goal is I wanna get S3 sleep mode working, and I can't seem to find too much literature on this online for my motherboard. For the record, S3 sleep works perfectly on my Sabertooth X58 w/X5650/HD6970 rig (gave to my dad).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cb750rob*
> 
> In my experience, buggy graphics drivers cause a lot of issues like this. And that is with both the red and the green team before anyone starts.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be even with your criticism here you know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two things:
> 
> 1. check all your drivers are up to date including chipset ones - get them from Intel or whoever if you have to, not just your boards website as they can be a bit old in my humble experience.
> 
> 2. I wish I was your Dad!
> 
> Good luck


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hey guys, I figured the sleep issue on X58. Just disabled "Hybrid Sleep" in the Power Settings, and now sleep works like a charm. Thanks for the input.


Sadly my s3 works like poop, takes about as long to wake up from sleep as it takes a cold boot, solved it by setting it to S1 instead, still chugs a bit of power but I would rather pay the electricity bill than wait for it to boot lol.

My board does not have that hybrid option sadly, guess I am SOL.


----------



## ghabhaducha

No the hybrid sleep option is in Windows power settings.

Edit~ Are you saying that you don't have that option in power settings, as a RESULT of your board?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> No the hybrid sleep option is in Windows power settings.
> 
> Edit~ Are you saying that you don't have that option in power settings, as a RESULT of your board?


Nope, assumed it had something to do with the bios itself, will have to look into that setting, see if it helps at all with my wake up times.

Nvm, hybrid sleep is a mix of sleep and hibernate from what I read and should have nothing to do with my issue. Oh well, it has been the only downside of this platform so I guess I can't complain.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ghabhaducha*
> 
> Hey guys, I figured the sleep issue on X58. Just disabled "Hybrid Sleep" in the Power Settings, and now sleep works like a charm. Thanks for the input.


Not for me. I disabled Hybrid Sleep and Sleep still doesn't work properly. It's not a big problem since I normally Shut Down my PC when I know I'm not going to be using it. If I do accidentally leave it on the power saving features will kick in anyways [C-states and so on].


----------



## Gre4ka

I'm still trying to get stable 24/7 overclock, but seems something wrong... I can't undestand where the problem is and how to solve it.
I decided to stay at 4.4GHz max to keep VCore under or at 1.4v, also I decided to stay at max 2000 memory to avoid voltages over 1.65-1.66 on it.
Regarding Unclock and looking how it impacts performance but keeping in mind to not go over 1.35 QPI/DRAM I decided to left it in range about 3600-3800.
For mem on 2000 it will be lower than 2x multi, for mem like 1800 it will be 2x multi.

Last 3 days I thought I got my stable overclock but trying to start some tests again always resulted in errors/reboots.
I tried to stablilize 4.4GHz 200x22 1.39 vcore, with 2000-9-10-9-27-1T mem 1.65v, 3800 uncore 1.35v
CPU PLL I had tried was lowest possible 1.2v and default 1.81v

The problem is the following:
I run LinX with 100 iterations with 34000 problem size, it took 10 (!!) hours to complete and shown no errors.
Then I started Prime95 Tortute test with a custom settings (to allow more memory use in test, by default it starts with 2000mb of mem testing):
FFTs range 8 - 4096, mem to use 9216mb, time to test each FFT size 10 min (instead of 3min by default)
It run fine for several hours but then one of the worker threads stopped woth error (rounding 0.5 instead of 0.4)
It's always stop different worker and usually on different FFT size. Today it was 720k.

Could you give me an advice, where I should bump the voltage or maybe down a little?
When I give too low CPU Vcore with settings above, I may survive Linx as long as 5-20 iterations, but then it usually result in a blue screen or just reboots.
in 90% of time of low CPU vcore I get this message in windows logs:

Code:



Code:


A fatal hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Machine Check Exception
Error Type: Internal Timer Error
Processor APIC ID: 4

The details view of this entry contains further information.

The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck.  The bugcheck was: 0x00000124 (0x0000000000000000, 0xffffe00014214038, 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000). A dump was saved in: C:\Windows\Minidump\102515-6109-01.dmp. Report Id: 102515-6109-01.

It's always give me 0x124 stop code and in 90% of cases with too low vcore voltage the processor APIC ID is 4.

Prime usually stop it's working threads with rounding errors - the more the lower voltage is and very rarely stop with blue screen or reboots. But in case of low QPI/DRAM voltage or too tight timings/high memory freq/uncore it's usually reboots. In most cases it logs the same 0x124 stop error, or logs nothing. But when it logs, the processor APIC ID is unrealistic - it may be 16, 18 etc (while I have only 12 of "CPU" id's)

When I stabilize Linx to pass 100 iterations in about 10-12 hours I may crash in Prime95 after 6-8-12 hours of tests. When I survived in Prime95 for 12+ hours I may crush in LinX... This makes me insane.

How long guys you tested you rigs usually?

Here is my current BIOS template I work with (suggestions highly appreciated!!!):

Code:



Code:


Target CPU Frequency          4400MHz
Target DRAM Frequency           2005MHz

LN2 Mode:                       Disabled***
QPI Loadline Calibration:       Enabled***

AI Overclock Tuner              [Manual]
OC From CPU level Up            [Auto]

2D Performance Booster          [Disabled]
CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
CPU Turbo Power Limit           [Disabled]

>CPU Configuration----------------------------
CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
C1E Support                     [Disabled]
Hardware Prefetcher             [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Line Prefetcher  [Enabled]
MPS and ACPI MADT ordering      [Modern]
Intel(R) Virtualization Tech    [Enabled]
CPU TM Function                 [Disabled]
Execute Disable Bit             [Enabled]
Intel(R) HT Technology          [Enabled]
*Active Processor Cores         [All]
A20M                            [Disabled]
*Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) Tech    [Disabled]
Intel(R) C-STATE Tech           [Disabled]
----------------------------------------------

BCLK Frequency                  [200]
PCIE Frequency                  [100]
DRAM Frequency                  [2005]
UCLK Frequency                  [3609]
QPI Link Data Rate              [7218]

Memory Recheck                  [Enabled]
Memory Configuration Protect    [Disabled]

>DRAM Timing Control--------------------------
CAS# Latency                  9 [9]
RAS# to CAS# Delay           10 [10]
RAS# PRE Time                 9 [9]
RAS# ACT Time                27 [27]
RAS# to RAS# Delay            7 [7]
REF Cycle Time              160 [160]
WRITE Recovery Time          14 [14]
READ to PRE Time              8 [8]
FOUR ACT WIN Time            28 [28]
Back-To-BackCAS# Delay        0 [Auto]

Timing Mode                  1N [1N]
Round Trip Latency on CHA    58 [58]
Round Trip Latency on CHB    60 [60]
Round Trip Latency on CHC    61 [61]

WRITE To READ Delay(DD)       6 [Auto]
WRITE To READ Delay(DR)       6 [Auto]
WRITE To READ Delay(SR)      19 [Auto]
READ To WRITE Delay(DD)      10 [Auto]
READ To WRITE Delay(DR)      10 [Auto]
READ To WRITE Delay(SR)      10 [Auto]
READ To READ Delay(DD)        7 [Auto]
READ To READ Delay(DR)        6 [Auto]
READ To READ Delay(SR)        4 [Auto]
WRITE To WRITE Delay(DD)      7 [Auto]
WRITE To WRITE Delay(DR)      7 [Auto]
WRITE To WRITE Delay(SR)      4 [Auto]
----------------------------------------------

CPU Differential Amplitude      [Auto]
CPU Clock Skew                  [Auto]
IOH Clock Skew                  [Auto]
------------ Extreme Engine Digi+ ------------
Digi+ PWR Mode                  [T-Balanced]
PWR Volt. Control               [10V]
Load-Line Calibration           [Full]
CPU Voltage OCP                 [Enabled]
CPU PWM Frequency               [500KHz]

Extreme OV                      [Disabled]
Extreme OC                      [Auto]

CPU Voltage             1.382   [1.39375]
CPU PLL Voltage         1.204   [1.20575]
QPI/DRAM Core Voltage   1.336   [1.34375]
DRAM Bus Voltage        1.640   [1.64300]

>DRAM REF Voltages----------------------------
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
----------------------------------------------

IOH Voltage             1.244   [1.24550]
IOH PCIE Voltage        1.508   [1.51050]

ICH Voltage             1.138   [1.13950]
ICH PCIE Voltage                [1.51050]

---------- Spread Spectrum Control -----------
CPU Spread Spectrum             [Disabled]
DRAM Spread Spectrum            [Disabled]

My CPU-Z and CPU-Tweaker with settings above:


----------



## jorpe

Is anyone in this thread using their xeon x58 beast as an ESX host?


----------



## Space Marine

Did anyone used a 6core xeon on a GA-EX58-UD4?
I have read about lot of people using UD3s and UD5s, but im not sure the the UD4 actually works.
Even if it supports 980x and 990x, some posts online says it might not like 6 core xeons.
But 4 cores xeons somehow are working so, i dunno if that does make any sense


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mustek550*
> 
> Thank you so much for this article. I was unaware that such an upgrade was possible for my Asus P6T Deluxe V2. Well you guys gave me the confidence to order a Xeon X5660 to replace my I7 920. I just tossed it in today after a quick bios update and she fired right up!!!
> 
> Still running at stock speed but I plan to engage warp drive soon.
> 
> A few quick bench test related to me.
> 
> Cinema 4D R17 Rectangle sample scene. In window render standard settings.
> 
> I7 920. 1:20
> X5660. 0:51 NICE!
> 
> A short video sample in premiere CS 2015.
> 
> I7 920. 4:15
> X5660. 3:15
> 
> Very nice improvements for around $100.
> 
> Also Im so happy with this board because I was able to install 2 8GB ram cards. Doubling my memory to 24GB.
> 
> I feel like I just bought a brand new PC for cheap.


pretty good, I'm almost identical to you, i have a p6t(Not deluxe), and an i7 920 and i've been waiting to get a 56xx series, just don't want to tear out my mobo and take that stupid cpu cooler backplate off. also got 3 more 2gb sticks to make 12 and still keep tri channel, a gtx 970.. quite the improvements! $250 for a 970, $40 for ram(im actually pushing 7+gb in games with the new card, so it was worth it) and ~100 for whenever i get a new cpu. $400 for upgrades and my pc will be way better than any $500-600 budget build, and prettttttttyyyy close to a new mid range ~1000 build.

just wish I had a mobo with built in wifi, bluetooth and sata3









sorry if this isn't allowed here, anyone have a x56xx for sale? have paypal/live in the US.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to get stable 24/7 overclock, but seems something wrong... I can't undestand where the problem is and how to solve it.
> I decided to stay at 4.4GHz max to keep VCore under or at 1.4v, also I decided to stay at max 2000 memory to avoid voltages over 1.65-1.66 on it.
> Regarding Unclock and looking how it impacts performance but keeping in mind to not go over 1.35 QPI/DRAM I decided to left it in range about 3600-3800.
> For mem on 2000 it will be lower than 2x multi, for mem like 1800 it will be 2x multi.
> 
> Last 3 days I thought I got my stable overclock but trying to start some tests again always resulted in errors/reboots.
> I tried to stablilize 4.4GHz 200x22 1.39 vcore, with 2000-9-10-9-27-1T mem 1.65v, 3800 uncore 1.35v
> CPU PLL I had tried was lowest possible 1.2v and default 1.81v
> 
> The problem is the following:
> I run LinX with 100 iterations with 34000 problem size, it took 10 (!!) hours to complete and shown no errors.
> Then I started Prime95 Tortute test with a custom settings (to allow more memory use in test, by default it starts with 2000mb of mem testing):
> FFTs range 8 - 4096, mem to use 9216mb, time to test each FFT size 10 min (instead of 3min by default)
> It run fine for several hours but then one of the worker threads stopped woth error (rounding 0.5 instead of 0.4)
> It's always stop different worker and usually on different FFT size. Today it was 720k.
> 
> Could you give me an advice, where I should bump the voltage or maybe down a little?
> When I give too low CPU Vcore with settings above, I may survive Linx as long as 5-20 iterations, but then it usually result in a blue screen or just reboots.
> in 90% of time of low CPU vcore I get this message in windows logs:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Internal Timer Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck.  The bugcheck was: 0x00000124 (0x0000000000000000, 0xffffe00014214038, 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000). A dump was saved in: C:\Windows\Minidump\102515-6109-01.dmp. Report Id: 102515-6109-01.
> 
> It's always give me 0x124 stop code and in 90% of cases with too low vcore voltage the processor APIC ID is 4.
> 
> Prime usually stop it's working threads with rounding errors - the more the lower voltage is and very rarely stop with blue screen or reboots. But in case of low QPI/DRAM voltage or too tight timings/high memory freq/uncore it's usually reboots. In most cases it logs the same 0x124 stop error, or logs nothing. But when it logs, the processor APIC ID is unrealistic - it may be 16, 18 etc (while I have only 12 of "CPU" id's)
> 
> When I stabilize Linx to pass 100 iterations in about 10-12 hours I may crash in Prime95 after 6-8-12 hours of tests. When I survived in Prime95 for 12+ hours I may crush in LinX... This makes me insane.
> 
> How long guys you tested you rigs usually?
> 
> Here is my current BIOS template I work with (suggestions highly appreciated!!!):
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Target CPU Frequency          4400MHz
> Target DRAM Frequency           2005MHz
> 
> LN2 Mode:                       Disabled***
> QPI Loadline Calibration:       Enabled***
> 
> AI Overclock Tuner              [Manual]
> OC From CPU level Up            [Auto]
> 
> 2D Performance Booster          [Disabled]
> CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
> CPU Turbo Power Limit           [Disabled]
> 
> >CPU Configuration----------------------------
> CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
> C1E Support                     [Disabled]
> Hardware Prefetcher             [Enabled]
> Adjacent Cache Line Prefetcher  [Enabled]
> MPS and ACPI MADT ordering      [Modern]
> Intel(R) Virtualization Tech    [Enabled]
> CPU TM Function                 [Disabled]
> Execute Disable Bit             [Enabled]
> Intel(R) HT Technology          [Enabled]
> *Active Processor Cores         [All]
> A20M                            [Disabled]
> *Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) Tech    [Disabled]
> Intel(R) C-STATE Tech           [Disabled]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> BCLK Frequency                  [200]
> PCIE Frequency                  [100]
> DRAM Frequency                  [2005]
> UCLK Frequency                  [3609]
> QPI Link Data Rate              [7218]
> 
> Memory Recheck                  [Enabled]
> Memory Configuration Protect    [Disabled]
> 
> >DRAM Timing Control--------------------------
> CAS# Latency                  9 [9]
> RAS# to CAS# Delay           10 [10]
> RAS# PRE Time                 9 [9]
> RAS# ACT Time                27 [27]
> RAS# to RAS# Delay            7 [7]
> REF Cycle Time              160 [160]
> WRITE Recovery Time          14 [14]
> READ to PRE Time              8 [8]
> FOUR ACT WIN Time            28 [28]
> Back-To-BackCAS# Delay        0 [Auto]
> 
> Timing Mode                  1N [1N]
> Round Trip Latency on CHA    58 [58]
> Round Trip Latency on CHB    60 [60]
> Round Trip Latency on CHC    61 [61]
> 
> WRITE To READ Delay(DD)       6 [Auto]
> WRITE To READ Delay(DR)       6 [Auto]
> WRITE To READ Delay(SR)      19 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(DD)      10 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(DR)      10 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(SR)      10 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(DD)        7 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(DR)        6 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(SR)        4 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(DD)      7 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(DR)      7 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(SR)      4 [Auto]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> CPU Differential Amplitude      [Auto]
> CPU Clock Skew                  [Auto]
> IOH Clock Skew                  [Auto]
> ------------ Extreme Engine Digi+ ------------
> Digi+ PWR Mode                  [T-Balanced]
> PWR Volt. Control               [10V]
> Load-Line Calibration           [Full]
> CPU Voltage OCP                 [Enabled]
> CPU PWM Frequency               [500KHz]
> 
> Extreme OV                      [Disabled]
> Extreme OC                      [Auto]
> 
> CPU Voltage             1.382   [1.39375]
> CPU PLL Voltage         1.204   [1.20575]
> QPI/DRAM Core Voltage   1.336   [1.34375]
> DRAM Bus Voltage        1.640   [1.64300]
> 
> >DRAM REF Voltages----------------------------
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> IOH Voltage             1.244   [1.24550]
> IOH PCIE Voltage        1.508   [1.51050]
> 
> ICH Voltage             1.138   [1.13950]
> ICH PCIE Voltage                [1.51050]
> 
> ---------- Spread Spectrum Control -----------
> CPU Spread Spectrum             [Disabled]
> DRAM Spread Spectrum            [Disabled]
> 
> My CPU-Z and CPU-Tweaker with settings above:


Leave the CPU PLL alone. Set it to AUTO [1.8v]. Try lowering your Uncore to 3600Mhz and raise QPI\Vtt 1.36v or 1.37v. Enable "CPU TM Function". If you aren't having any temp problems then leave it disabled if you want. For CPU testing purposes set your RAM to 11-11-11-27 2t or lower the clocks to 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 2t to eliminate the memory. You can try setting IOH and ICH settings to AUTO as well. If you have a "PCI Spectrum" option, try disabling that as well.

For memory be sure to run MemTest86! It's great.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to get stable 24/7 overclock, but seems something wrong... I can't undestand where the problem is and how to solve it.
> I decided to stay at 4.4GHz max to keep VCore under or at 1.4v, also I decided to stay at max 2000 memory to avoid voltages over 1.65-1.66 on it.
> Regarding Unclock and looking how it impacts performance but keeping in mind to not go over 1.35 QPI/DRAM I decided to left it in range about 3600-3800.
> For mem on 2000 it will be lower than 2x multi, for mem like 1800 it will be 2x multi.
> 
> Last 3 days I thought I got my stable overclock but trying to start some tests again always resulted in errors/reboots.
> I tried to stablilize 4.4GHz 200x22 1.39 vcore, with 2000-9-10-9-27-1T mem 1.65v, 3800 uncore 1.35v
> CPU PLL I had tried was lowest possible 1.2v and 1.81v


My suggestion is this : set it to 3200 Uncore and test, if still problems set cpu to 4200 or 4000 and test. You should be able to eliminate the error. Looks like you're pushing riiiight to the limit.

Personally I'd set them both down a notch and get on with using it. The likelyhood of you noticing the difference for anything is tiny, meanwhile you could be doing something less stressful


----------



## OCmember

@Gre4ka You should not need 1.38vcore to hit 4.4GHz


----------



## xblue

before I buy this thing... https://starmicroinc.net/intel-xeon-x5660-2-80ghz-server-oem-cpu-slbv6-at80614005127aa/?gclid=CLGgp4bs4cgCFQOUaQodjBwKqA is the correct model for ocing and all of that right? dunno why it wouldn't be though. and if I want to OC on air, after searching through this thread, a hyper 212 seems ok for high 3ghz range, right?


----------



## 2010rig

@xblue yup you're good to go, is that site trustworthy is what I would be concerned with. This was more than likely pulled from a server that wasn't overclocked.


----------



## gofasterstripes

DX12 just got weird.

*Caution, "evil" website alert*


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah I'm definitely not going to that site. Also what's so weird? I'm hoping Vulcan takes off as well.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah I'm definitely not going to that site. Also what's so weird? I'm hoping Vulcan takes off as well.


The fact that you can use both NVIDIA & AMD cards together...
http://www.overclock.net/t/1578269/anandtech-geforce-radeon-previewing-directx-12-multi-adapter-with-ashes-of-the-singularity/0_50


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> The fact that you can use both NVIDIA & AMD cards together...


Yeah, seriously, this is EPIC!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Oh I see now. I remember hearing about the possibility of mixing GPU vendors last year and earlier this year. Well as much as I want to be excited, I'd rather be excited about Fury X + Fury setups. There is NO WAY greedy Nvidia will allow this to happen period. They will add some sort security check to disable this possibility. Just like when people started using AMD main GPUs with spare\cheaper PhysX cards. Nvidia quickly put an end to that. Hacking is the only way and causes more issues. If a AMD\ATI GPU is found in a system PhysX is automatically disabled now.

Mixing cards is interesting, but I just don't see Nvidia allowing this to happen.

Edit:

Just in case anyone [or someone] misunderstood what I was trying to say. I meant Nvidia wouldn't allow this to "continue". I hope that clears things up a bit.


----------



## 2010rig

Yet, it's already happening, did you not see the benches?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Yet, it's already happening, did you not see the benches?


FTFKana











The really mad thing is how changing which card is the lead card affects the score!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> Yet, it's already happening, did you not see the benches?


Yet, as I stated before, I do not believe Nvidia will allow this happen. Simply my opinion. I SAW the charts. We have one game using DX12 that allows mixing. Would be nice if this was a standard, but lets be real, it's a still a capitalist market and it's all about the money to some people\companies.

I saw the benchmarks and could careless unless it becomes a standard. That's great, but I'm not getting my feeling or hopes up until it becomes a standard and Nvidia won't intervene.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> FTFKana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The really mad thing is how changing which card is the lead card affects the score!


Yeah I saw how when the Fury X was the main GPU it performed better than the 980 Ti as main.

You would also expect the 980 Ti + Titan X to out do everything. Nope the Fury X + Fury [non X] appears to be a better pair.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> FTFKana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The really mad thing is how changing which card is the lead card affects the score!


Ikr, I found this hilarious...
Quote:


> In the GTX 680 + HD 7970 setup, either the GTX 680 is a bad leader or the HD 7970 is a bad follower, and this leads to this setup spinning its proverbial wheels.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> @xblue yup you're good to go, is that site trustworthy is what I would be concerned with. This was more than likely pulled from a server that wasn't overclocked.


i emailed them asking what it come from, used, refurbished etc..

"It is new cpu pulled from new machines.

Never used."

interesting, for $80.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> i emailed them asking what it come from, used, refurbished etc..
> 
> "It is new cpu pulled from new machines.
> 
> Never used."
> 
> interesting, for $80.


New CPU pulled from a new machine? That doesn't sound legit.

Have you checked eBay? I actually got my X5660 brand new for $85.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> New CPU pulled from a new machine? That doesn't sound legit.
> 
> Have you checked eBay? I actually got my X5650 brand new for $85.


pretty sure the website is legit as in they actually have product and ship it out, lol. but that claim is iffy af


----------



## oyabun

Hi everyone,

after a lot of studying in this forum and elsewhere, I took the plunge and am now a proud owner of a X5675!!!

Some history:
My PO was first assembled on 2008, with ASUS P6T Deluxe, [email protected], Noctua NH-D12 cooler, 3GB OCZ [email protected] ATI 4850. All inside a Thermaltake Spedo Advance Full Tower. Total cost 1500€ (with HDDs etc).

At 2012 the memory was increased to 9GB and the i7-920 was throttled to 3.8GHz because it wasn't that stable at 4.0GHz after 3-4 years. Then this summer the GPU got upgraded to R7-360 for Windows 10, it should be noted that I noticed a decrease in power consumption when idle of ~45W!

With Skylake released and with my work constantly requiring more power (I am a structural/civil engineer), the i7 was getting long in the tooth. I just got a Xeon X5675 from ebay for 110€ and after a lot of trial, error, BSODs and stability testing I settled at [email protected] The X5675 is fast as hell, blows away a Skylake 6700k and has decreased my idle power consuption by another ~40W! This was the best upgrade I ever did!!!

All in all if you have a good and tested 1366 mobo do buy a 6-core Xeon, it is a steal!

Any suggestions on how to improve my Cinebench scores are welcome ([email protected], [email protected]), I think that others are getting better results at this frequency.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ Congrats. I wouldn't worry about the Cinebench score much if I were you. Compared to the old i7's [as you see] the Xeons will give your 1366 much more performance. Especially when it comes to programs that takes advantage of HT. I'd be careful running the CPU @ 1.34v. Some people CPUs have stopped working after a couple of months while running near the maximum voltage. Unless you know what you are doing and following Intel guidelines you'll more than likely have issue with spiking in the future. It could lead to degrading performance or a dead CPU. However, you are under Intel recommendations, but that still has nothing to do with spiking.


----------



## SuspiciousGuy

Hello, I was wondering if a Cryorig H5 Universal would a sufficient cooler to overclock a x5660 to around 4.0-4.2ghz ? Thinking about upgrading my old x58 asus p6t deluxe v2 to a x5660 from a i7 920 to give to my brother. The H5 is a spare cooler that i have laying around.


----------



## MicroCat

The H5 should be fine. I use a Mugen 4 on my 5660 rig at 4.2ghz/1.32V - peaks about 65c in RealBench or IBT. Using 2 fans for push/pull. And decent case airflow. Cooler intake temp <5 degrees above ambient.

H5 seems to review a couple degrees better than the Mugen 4, so 4.0ghz will be easy. Unless you get volt crazy.


----------



## SuspiciousGuy

Thanks for the reply, will update when its all set up


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to get stable 24/7 overclock, but seems something wrong... I can't undestand where the problem is and how to solve it.
> I decided to stay at 4.4GHz max to keep VCore under or at 1.4v, also I decided to stay at max 2000 memory to avoid voltages over 1.65-1.66 on it.
> Regarding Unclock and looking how it impacts performance but keeping in mind to not go over 1.35 QPI/DRAM I decided to left it in range about 3600-3800.
> For mem on 2000 it will be lower than 2x multi, for mem like 1800 it will be 2x multi.
> 
> Last 3 days I thought I got my stable overclock but trying to start some tests again always resulted in errors/reboots.
> I tried to stablilize 4.4GHz 200x22 1.39 vcore, with 2000-9-10-9-27-1T mem 1.65v, 3800 uncore 1.35v
> CPU PLL I had tried was lowest possible 1.2v and default 1.81v
> 
> The problem is the following:
> I run LinX with 100 iterations with 34000 problem size, it took 10 (!!) hours to complete and shown no errors.
> Then I started Prime95 Tortute test with a custom settings (to allow more memory use in test, by default it starts with 2000mb of mem testing):
> FFTs range 8 - 4096, mem to use 9216mb, time to test each FFT size 10 min (instead of 3min by default)
> It run fine for several hours but then one of the worker threads stopped woth error (rounding 0.5 instead of 0.4)
> It's always stop different worker and usually on different FFT size. Today it was 720k.
> 
> Could you give me an advice, where I should bump the voltage or maybe down a little?
> When I give too low CPU Vcore with settings above, I may survive Linx as long as 5-20 iterations, but then it usually result in a blue screen or just reboots.
> in 90% of time of low CPU vcore I get this message in windows logs:
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Internal Timer Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck.  The bugcheck was: 0x00000124 (0x0000000000000000, 0xffffe00014214038, 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000). A dump was saved in: C:\Windows\Minidump\102515-6109-01.dmp. Report Id: 102515-6109-01.
> 
> It's always give me 0x124 stop code and in 90% of cases with too low vcore voltage the processor APIC ID is 4.
> 
> Prime usually stop it's working threads with rounding errors - the more the lower voltage is and very rarely stop with blue screen or reboots. But in case of low QPI/DRAM voltage or too tight timings/high memory freq/uncore it's usually reboots. In most cases it logs the same 0x124 stop error, or logs nothing. But when it logs, the processor APIC ID is unrealistic - it may be 16, 18 etc (while I have only 12 of "CPU" id's)
> 
> When I stabilize Linx to pass 100 iterations in about 10-12 hours I may crash in Prime95 after 6-8-12 hours of tests. When I survived in Prime95 for 12+ hours I may crush in LinX... This makes me insane.
> 
> How long guys you tested you rigs usually?
> 
> Here is my current BIOS template I work with (suggestions highly appreciated!!!):
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Target CPU Frequency          4400MHz
> Target DRAM Frequency           2005MHz
> 
> LN2 Mode:                       Disabled***
> QPI Loadline Calibration:       Enabled***
> 
> AI Overclock Tuner              [Manual]
> OC From CPU level Up            [Auto]
> 
> 2D Performance Booster          [Disabled]
> CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
> CPU Turbo Power Limit           [Disabled]
> 
> >CPU Configuration----------------------------
> CPU Ratio Setting               [22.0]
> C1E Support                     [Disabled]
> Hardware Prefetcher             [Enabled]
> Adjacent Cache Line Prefetcher  [Enabled]
> MPS and ACPI MADT ordering      [Modern]
> Intel(R) Virtualization Tech    [Enabled]
> CPU TM Function                 [Disabled]
> Execute Disable Bit             [Enabled]
> Intel(R) HT Technology          [Enabled]
> *Active Processor Cores         [All]
> A20M                            [Disabled]
> *Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) Tech    [Disabled]
> Intel(R) C-STATE Tech           [Disabled]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> BCLK Frequency                  [200]
> PCIE Frequency                  [100]
> DRAM Frequency                  [2005]
> UCLK Frequency                  [3609]
> QPI Link Data Rate              [7218]
> 
> Memory Recheck                  [Enabled]
> Memory Configuration Protect    [Disabled]
> 
> >DRAM Timing Control--------------------------
> CAS# Latency                  9 [9]
> RAS# to CAS# Delay           10 [10]
> RAS# PRE Time                 9 [9]
> RAS# ACT Time                27 [27]
> RAS# to RAS# Delay            7 [7]
> REF Cycle Time              160 [160]
> WRITE Recovery Time          14 [14]
> READ to PRE Time              8 [8]
> FOUR ACT WIN Time            28 [28]
> Back-To-BackCAS# Delay        0 [Auto]
> 
> Timing Mode                  1N [1N]
> Round Trip Latency on CHA    58 [58]
> Round Trip Latency on CHB    60 [60]
> Round Trip Latency on CHC    61 [61]
> 
> WRITE To READ Delay(DD)       6 [Auto]
> WRITE To READ Delay(DR)       6 [Auto]
> WRITE To READ Delay(SR)      19 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(DD)      10 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(DR)      10 [Auto]
> READ To WRITE Delay(SR)      10 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(DD)        7 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(DR)        6 [Auto]
> READ To READ Delay(SR)        4 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(DD)      7 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(DR)      7 [Auto]
> WRITE To WRITE Delay(SR)      4 [Auto]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> CPU Differential Amplitude      [Auto]
> CPU Clock Skew                  [Auto]
> IOH Clock Skew                  [Auto]
> ------------ Extreme Engine Digi+ ------------
> Digi+ PWR Mode                  [T-Balanced]
> PWR Volt. Control               [10V]
> Load-Line Calibration           [Full]
> CPU Voltage OCP                 [Enabled]
> CPU PWM Frequency               [500KHz]
> 
> Extreme OV                      [Disabled]
> Extreme OC                      [Auto]
> 
> CPU Voltage             1.382   [1.39375]
> CPU PLL Voltage         1.204   [1.20575]
> QPI/DRAM Core Voltage   1.336   [1.34375]
> DRAM Bus Voltage        1.640   [1.64300]
> 
> >DRAM REF Voltages----------------------------
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA    [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB    [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC    [Auto]
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> IOH Voltage             1.244   [1.24550]
> IOH PCIE Voltage        1.508   [1.51050]
> 
> ICH Voltage             1.138   [1.13950]
> ICH PCIE Voltage                [1.51050]
> 
> ---------- Spread Spectrum Control -----------
> CPU Spread Spectrum             [Disabled]
> DRAM Spread Spectrum            [Disabled]
> 
> My CPU-Z and CPU-Tweaker with settings above:


u have w3680?
isn't it an unlocked processor?
use odd number with multi like 21x or 23x.
it helps to stabilize oc .
like i would run prime95 28+ version @4ghz 19x multi @1.18vCORE
but with 20x multi could not at same 4ghz.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Machine Check Exception
> Error Type: Internal Timer Error
> Processor APIC ID: 4
> 
> The details view of this entry contains further information.
> 
> The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck.  The bugcheck was: 0x00000124 (0x0000000000000000, 0xffffe00014214038, 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000). A dump was saved in: C:\Windows\Minidump\102515-6109-01.dmp. Report Id: 102515-6109-01.
> 
> It's always give me 0x124 stop code and in 90% of cases with too low vcore voltage the processor APIC ID is 4.


Any help? (From i7-950 days)

BSOD codes for overclocking
0x101 = increase vcore
0x124 = increase/decrease vcore or QPI/VTT...have to test to see which one it is
0x0A = unstable RAM/IMC, increase QPI first, if that doesn't work increase vcore
0x1E = increase vcore
0x3B = increase vcore
0x3D = increase vcore
0xD1 = QPI/VTT, increase/decrease as necessary
0x9C = QPI/VTT most likely, but increasing vcore has helped in some instances
0x50 = RAM timings/Frequency or uncore multi unstable, increase RAM voltage or adjust QPI/VTT, or lower uncore if you're higher than 2x
0x109 = Not enough or too Much memory voltage
0x116 = Low IOH (NB) voltage, GPU issue (most common when running multi-GPU/overclocking GPU)
0x7E = Corrupted OS file, possibly from overclocking. Run sfc /scannow and chkdsk /r


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oyabun*
> 
> Hi everyone,
> All in all if you have a good and tested 1366 mobo do buy a 6-core Xeon, it is a steal!
> 
> Any suggestions on how to improve my Cinebench scores are welcome (R11[email protected], [email protected]), I think that others are getting better results at this frequency.


i did a lot test about the cinebench r15.
it is noticeably dependent on uncore speed.
at about 3.8-4ghz *UNCORE* speed it will be enough with 4.4ghz (core) to alleviate UNCORE bottleneck . it only stands for cinebenchr15 and 3dmark 11 physics test.
i get 1026 score with 4.4ghz [email protected] around. with ram @2000hz timing most probably 10-11-11-34


----------



## oyabun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> i did a lot test about the cinebench r15.
> it is noticeably dependent on uncore speed.
> at about 3.8-4ghz *UNCORE* speed it will be enough with 4.4ghz (core) to alleviate UNCORE bottleneck . it only stands for cinebenchr15 and 3dmark 11 physics test.
> i get 1026 score with 4.4ghz [email protected] around. with ram @2000hz timing most probably 10-11-11-34


Thanks for the reply mohiuddin. After my post I played around with uncore. My original post had an [email protected](2x8)x192=3072MHz. I went up to (2x8+1)x192=3264MHz and now I'm scoring 1001 at Cinebench R15 and 11.21 at Cinebench 11.5. I tried higher values of uncore freq but the PC was not stable and I don't want to raise Vtt any more.


----------



## oyabun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ^ Congrats. I wouldn't worry about the Cinebench score much if I were you. Compared to the old i7's [as you see] the Xeons will give your 1366 much more performance. Especially when it comes to programs that takes advantage of HT. I'd be careful running the CPU @ 1.34v. Some people CPUs have stopped working after a couple of months while running near the maximum voltage. Unless you know what you are doing and following Intel guidelines you'll more than likely have issue with spiking in the future. It could lead to degrading performance or a dead CPU. However, you are under Intel recommendations, but that still has nothing to do with spiking.


Thanks Kana-Maru! Basically I followed your guideline here as godspell







:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5170#post_24449567

I do have load line calibration enabled, otherwise the voltage would drop at load and the PC would BSOD. However through all my benchmarks I have never seen the voltage go above 1.344V at CPU-Z. Is spiking undetectable from the cpu voltometer?

I plan on keeping this chip for years. The PC is not on 24/7 but enters standby when given the chance. However if you believe, based on your experience, that it would be safer for me to go to e.g. 1.31-1.32V (which would also mean downclocking), then I'll probably do it.

IIRC my Vtt is at 1.32-1.33V. Do you believe that this is too high as well?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oyabun*
> 
> Thanks for the reply mohiuddin. After my post I played around with uncore. My original post had an [email protected](2x8)x192=3072MHz. I went up to (2x8+1)x192=3264MHz and now I'm scoring 1001 at Cinebench R15 and 11.21 at Cinebench 11.5. I tried higher values of uncore freq but the PC was not stable and I don't want to raise Vtt any more.


yeah right,. i did it for only short-performance-burst for bench- purpose..
for 3.2ghz uncore , vtt @1.32 is high. on my side, @1.2v vtt uncore 3.3-3.4ghz is stable. for 3.8 i need 1.30-1.32v vtt. it varies a bit with core speed and vcore i guess though.
i am running- 3.8ghz(multi22x) @1.17v vCORE , uncore 3.3ghz @vtt 1.2v, ram 1730mhz 8-9-9-21-1T @1.5v vDRAM gskill ripjaw-1600mhz


----------



## greywarden

(posted in both threads in case someone is subbed to one and not the other)

So I'm having an issue and I can't seem to figure out what is going on.

I finally got the rig running properly and decided it was time to overclock. Talked to one of the members that had the same mobo as me and he put out a video of his settings.

So I copy all of his settings that are "enable" and "disable" type things, and leave the stock 133MHz Base clock and 22 multiplier (turbo) with voltage on auto (1.184v - 1.2v) and it won't boot, C1 code. C1 is a DRAM code, maybe I need to run memtest, could I possibly have a kinda bad stick of ram that is keeping me from being able to OC? They all seem good and I'm reporting 12GB (3x4GB).

I've tried various things and I can't seem to pin down what the problem is.

I was playing some Skyrim (heavily modded) and the heavy CPU load was making the game all glitchy and slow at only 2.9GHz max.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greywarden*
> 
> (posted in both threads in case someone is subbed to one and not the other)
> 
> So I'm having an issue and I can't seem to figure out what is going on.
> 
> I finally got the rig running properly and decided it was time to overclock. Talked to one of the members that had the same mobo as me and he put out a video of his settings.
> 
> So I copy all of his settings that are "enable" and "disable" type things, and leave the stock 133MHz Base clock and 22 multiplier (turbo) with voltage on auto (1.184v - 1.2v) and it won't boot, C1 code. C1 is a DRAM code, maybe I need to run memtest, could I possibly have a kinda bad stick of ram that is keeping me from being able to OC? They all seem good and I'm reporting 12GB (3x4GB).
> 
> I've tried various things and I can't seem to pin down what the problem is.
> 
> I was playing some Skyrim (heavily modded) and the heavy CPU load was making the game all glitchy and slow at only 2.9GHz max.


By the amount of posts that you have I am pretty sure that you know that each system is different, what he has won´t necessarily work for you. I also play skyrim, but with only a few mods, as well as a ton of other games and have not had any issues at all, besides the extremely slow boot times my motherboard gives me, Does it happen with other games also or is it just that one in particular? My x5650 is at stock as well.

What I would try is setting everything back to default and leave it on auto, try playing the game then and see if it still gives you those issues. It should not give you any boot issues unless you have some other hardware problem/s.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oyabun*
> 
> Thanks Kana-Maru! Basically I followed your guideline here as godspell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5170#post_24449567


It's no problem man. I'm glad I was able to help you. I have LLC Disabled on my PC. The drop in vCore is NORMAL behavior. I've been trying to get people to realize this as well. However, when overclocking the "drop" [vDroop] occurs it doesn't give the CPU enough voltage. This is caused by several things. LLC was created for overclocking & enthusiast who didn't want to follow Intel Guidelines...or.....aka complainers who wanted constant voltage period. Which is great, but it does nothing to "protect" or help the CPU from random spikes over time. So when people CPUs die they wonder what happened? Well it could be one of several reasons, but I'm pretty sure it's spiking according to Intel Guidelines.
Quote:


> I do have load line calibration enabled, otherwise the voltage would drop at load and the PC would BSOD. However through all my benchmarks I have never seen the voltage go above 1.344V at CPU-Z. Is spiking undetectable from the cpu voltometer?


YES SIR! You'll never catch it in a monitor program and if you do it was more than likely an error. You'll need some heavy duty stuff tuned to Intel settings to catch the spiking. Someone posted a website that attempted to "test" or "catch" the spike on X58, but they couldn't see it so they claimed LLC [Enabled] prevented spiking. Which is dumb wrong! The site didn't tune their tools to match Intel standards. So even if you want to check for spiking you'll at the very least need an oscilloscope which can cost a decent amount of money. I also like to remind people that spiking can be negative as well. So when transitioning from a high load [>60%] to Idle can cause a negative spike. Both does nothing to help the CPU, but obviously the higher spikes are what most people are worried about. However, when you remove vDroop protection you are risking degrading anyways.

Another unknown fact is that other components on the MB [other than the CPU] can spike as well. I've never felt the need to tell people this info before, since CPU vCore, PCI, and CPU PLL seems to be the number 1 killer for CPU\MB\RAM\HDDs\SDDs etc.

Quote:


> I plan on keeping this chip for years. The PC is not on 24/7 but enters standby when given the chance. However if you believe, based on your experience, that it would be safer for me to go to e.g. 1.31-1.32V (which would also mean downclocking), then I'll probably do it.
> 
> IIRC my Vtt is at 1.32-1.33V. Do you believe that this is too high as well?


I don't run my PC 24/7 because I shut it down daily. My vCore that I use daily averages 0.992v for light use and never exceeds 1.20v if run heavy CPU loads. I run 4Ghz. I could use even less if I ran 3.8Ghz @ 1.18v max and a even lower Idle voltage. 4Ghz is fine for me given the speed and required voltage. I'm extremely close to the stock voltage @ 4Ghz. I also plan on keeping my CPU for years as well.

1.31v-1.32v would be better for you. Especially since you aren't using any protections with LLC enabled. I think you'd worry less with 1.31v - 1.32v. I only overclock highly when I need to speed for benchmarks CPU and GPUs. Vtt @ 1.32-1.33v is fine.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> i emailed them asking what it come from, used, refurbished etc..
> 
> "It is new cpu pulled from new machines.
> 
> Never used."
> 
> interesting, for $80.


did you get your x5660 yet?


----------



## webhito

Quick question!

Since I got this board, I only updated to f2 to get the xeon recognized and left it as is, all the other bios updates are beta´s, would anyone suggest updating to the latest or should I just leave it as is? I don´t like beta´s but I am not sure if updating will actually help with the post speed issues I am having. I can see that Bios F3a has 3tb+ support but my f2 recognizes my 4tb drive with no apparent issues, not sure what else updating could help with.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> did you get your x5660 yet?


I did, not from them. i spent $10 more to get one through ebay/paypal, came in perfect condition, not a single scratch on it.

anyways, i currently overclocked it, I changed the blck to 160 from whatever the default was and the multiplier to 23, its currently at 3.8ghz, and i was wondering if it should always idle at that? its used to idle at like 2ghz and max at 2.8 stock, now its just 3.8 always. should I change anything else? i didnt touch any voltages


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> I did, not from them. i spent $10 more to get one through ebay/paypal, came in perfect condition, not a single scratch on it.
> 
> anyways, i currently overclocked it, I changed the blck to 160 from whatever the default was and the multiplier to 23, its currently at 3.8ghz, and i was wondering if it should always idle at that? its used to idle at like 2ghz and max at 2.8 stock, now its just 3.8 always. should I change anything else? i didnt touch any voltages


Sounds like you need to turn speed step and c states on.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Sounds like you need to turn speed step and c states on.


gotcha

this is slightly offtopic, but in the game h1z1 after the overclock, my game i sped up 3-4x times, i run 4x faster and shoot 4x faster, and so does everyone else. the game in its entirety is faster. obviously not normal, maybe speed step will fix it :/


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Sounds like you need to turn speed step and c states on.


ok so speed step was on, c state was off, so i turned it on. still no go

upped my blck a little more, think i may turn it down a little bit

http://i.imgur.com/heg7zyk.png i have an asus p6t if that helps.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> ok so speed step was on, c state was off, so i turned it on. still no go
> 
> upped my blck a little more, think i may turn it down a little bit
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/heg7zyk.png i have an asus p6t if that helps.


Sorry, went out for icecream with the kids.

What about Eist? Is that turned on or is it also off? Take a screenshot of your Cstates if you can.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So I might possibly have a failing Samsung SSD drive. Magician says it's "Good" but upon the second Windows 7 install to upgrade to WinX the install rebooted and did a disk check. I don't ever remember that happening. So in the meantime I'm searching for a new drive for my main rig. How is the Intel 750 PCIe 3.0 NVM x4 Express drive? Or should I go with a traditional 2.5" ssd drive?


dunno if anyone said it yet but x58 don't support intel nvme.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Sorry, went out for icecream with the kids.
> 
> What about Eist? Is that turned on or is it also off? Take a screenshot of your Cstates if you can.


alright, well theres another issue that popped up. I was at about 4.3ghz and my computer froze up, I restarted and changed my blck down a bit, but not my multiplier, but when i got into windows I saw that my multiplier was back to 21 from 23. although when I go into my bios its still 23.

one moment on the picturess


----------



## xblue

http://imgur.com/Xdsjs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Sounds like you need to turn speed step and c states on.





http://imgur.com/Xdsjs

 best option i could find on google is to reflash to bios to get the multiplier to work again.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/Xdsjs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/Xdsjs
> 
> best option i could find on google is to reflash to bios to get the multiplier to work again.


Did you clear cmos after you flashed last time?


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Did you clear cmos after you flashed last time?


uh, I havent flashed my bios in years and the last time i updated it was like 3 years ago, which was the latest update lol


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> uh, I havent flashed my bios in years and the last time i updated it was like 3 years ago, which was the latest update lol


Nvm lol, figured you had done it recently, not sure a reflash will help more than just clearing cmos and starting over again, freezing is obviously an unstable overclock but it should still downclock as long as they are set to do so, try lowering your cpu ratio and see if it downclocks.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Nvm lol, figured you had done it recently, not sure a reflash will help more than just clearing cmos and starting over again, freezing is obviously an unstable overclock but it should still downclock as long as they are set to do so, try lowering your cpu ratio and see if it downclocks.


ok going to try and clear my CMOS, but im not sure why the multiplier wont work in windows at 23, no matter the blck.

im back at a x23 multiplierno particular reason for wanting it, other than that it worked then no longer worked

i disabled speed step to get it back, odd. while It would be nice for temps for it to downclock when not in use. are there any particular reasons to NOT have it clocked at 4ghz 24/7?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> ok going to try and clear my CMOS, but im not sure why the multiplier wont work in windows at 23, no matter the blck.


Not quite sure, I had windows once give me a usb port error reporting that it was faulty and my front usb 3.0 ports were not working, had to pull the battery out and reset to get it working. Might be worth a try!


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Not quite sure, I had windows once give me a usb port error reporting that it was faulty and my front usb 3.0 ports were not working, had to pull the battery out and reset to get it working. Might be worth a try!


see my edit, i was too lazy to pull my case out(haf 932, thing is like 60 pounds with everything in it) and in a crappy spot so its reallly annoying to get to. so i disabled speed step and cstate as one last ditch effort to get it to work, and tada.

on to my next questions

do I need to mess with my vcore, pcie timings or anything like that? everything else is on auto.

current settings are 168x23 @ 3.8ghz , vcore is sitting at about 1.245v , guess ill leave it here for a bit to see if any games crash.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> see my edit, i was too lazy to pull my case out(haf 932, thing is like 60 pounds with everything in it) and in a crappy spot so its reallly annoying to get to. so i disabled speed step and cstate as one last ditch effort to get it to work, and tada.
> 
> on to my next questions
> 
> do I need to mess with my vcore, pcie timings or anything like that? everything else is on auto.
> 
> current settings are 168x23 @ 3.8ghz , vcore is sitting at about 1.245v , guess ill leave it here for a bit to see if any games crash.


Vcore wise yes, you should, why? Because if you are overvolting that cpu then it will burn at some point, how soon? You never know lol, its a pita, but in the long run you will be running your system under your parameters and not what the bios thinks is a good idea. There is a lot of info on whats safe, I had pretty much everything set on auto but the vcore however you are going to need to test out your system to figure out what works for you, llc needs to be on also. All the other parameters can be set to auto as long as it works afaik.


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Vcore wise yes, you should, why? Because if you are overvolting that cpu then it will burn at some point, how soon? You never know lol, its a pita, but in the long run you will be running your system under your parameters and not what the bios thinks is a good idea. There is a lot of info on whats safe, I had pretty much everything set on auto but the vcore however you are going to need to test out your system to figure out what works for you, llc needs to be on also. All the other parameters can be set to auto as long as it works afaik.


noted

now if only I could figure out why h1z1 is running at 4x speed when overclocked.

:\


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> noted
> 
> now if only I could figure out why h1z1 is running at 4x speed when overclocked.
> 
> :\


Lol, can´t help you there, I remember having issues with skyrim and a 144hz monitor, almost bought a new system as I thought mine had crapped out, silly game couldn´t handle anything over 60fps as it messed with the game engine lol.

Weird, you kind of fixed yours and mine crapped out, for some reason now its shutting down instead of rebooting and I am randomly losing my bios settings... Gonna have to try a new battery and test the psu. Not sure what else to check, maybe time to move on to x99?


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Lol, can´t help you there, I remember having issues with skyrim and a 144hz monitor, almost bought a new system as I thought mine had crapped out, silly game couldn´t handle anything over 60fps as it messed with the game engine lol.
> 
> Weird, you kind of fixed yours and mine crapped out, for some reason now its shutting down instead of rebooting and I am randomly losing my bios settings... Gonna have to try a new battery and test the psu. Not sure what else to check, maybe time to move on to x99?


I just read on google for a long time and its basically two things: VERY ****ty programming on the games part, and issues with the FSB.

can you maybe help with these words?

"Alright, in that case it seems to be an overclocking issue indeed. Have you tried overclocking with a 'natural frequency' on the frontside bus?
Instead of 389MHz take something like 266 or 333 and make sure the multiplier for the RAM is still making it to 533, 667 or 800 (or 1066 or 1200) in that case. See what happens then. "

is from a fix i read. Is any of this applicable to my cpu? :/


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> I just read on google for a long time and its basically two things: VERY ****ty programming on the games part, and issues with the FSB.
> 
> can you maybe help with these words?
> 
> "Alright, in that case it seems to be an overclocking issue indeed. Have you tried overclocking with a 'natural frequency' on the frontside bus?
> Instead of 389MHz take something like 266 or 333 and make sure the multiplier for the RAM is still making it to 533, 667 or 800 (or 1066 or 1200) in that case. See what happens then. "
> 
> is from a fix i read. Is any of this applicable to my cpu? :/


er
I guess it means to keep it as natural as possible, in other words like memory is rated at, 800/1333/1600 etc and not something in between, multiplier wise I have read that they like uneven numbers, 19, 21, 23 etc. I would drop your multiplier to 21 just so turbo can kick in, I think that if you set it to the max turbo will not work.

What is your ram speed set to?


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> er
> I guess it means to keep it as natural as possible, in other words like memory is rated at, 800/1333/1600 etc and not something in between, multiplier wise I have read that they like uneven numbers, 19, 21, 23 etc. I would drop your multiplier to 21 just so turbo can kick in, I think that if you set it to the max turbo will not work.
> 
> What is your ram speed set to?


6 sticks of 2gb @ 1333

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231230


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> 6 sticks of 2gb @ 1333
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231230


that´s the speed its set at in your bios or is it the rated speed of the chips?


----------



## xblue

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> that´s the speed its set at in your bios or is it the rated speed of the chips?












it was set to auto

had a lot of problems just now with ram, I had my multiplier set to 23, with vcore at 1.4 just to test, only had 8gb of ram visible, ended up dropping to 21x192 to leave me right at 4ghz lol, at 1.33 vcore for now.

fudzilla.com/32335-windows-8-rtc-bug-isolated-and-fix

guess that was my issue with h1z1, what an obscure and bs bug with windows 8/10


----------



## meganerd

Quote:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> dunno if anyone said it yet but x58 don't support intel nvme.


PCIe works just fine in X58, the only problem is that you cannot boot from those devices. To the original question, the 750 works great, but you will still need a regular SATA drive to install your OS to and to boot from.


----------



## greywarden

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meganerd*
> 
> PCIe works just fine in X58, the only problem is that you cannot boot from those devices. To the original question, the 750 works great, but you will still need a regular SATA drive to install your OS to and to boot from.


X58 can boot from PCIe, or at least I could on both my X58 Sabertooth and my GA-X58A-OC with the Addonics Quad mSATA PCIe card. I have a pair of 500GB Samsung 850 EVOs on it, eventually I'll get another pair, I don't have any SATA drives plugged into my computer, not even an optical drive. I plan on having 4 hdds in RAID10 and 2TB backup drive for the mSATAs one day...


----------



## meganerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *greywarden*
> 
> X58 can boot from PCIe, or at least I could on both my X58 Sabertooth and my GA-X58A-OC with the Addonics Quad mSATA PCIe card. I have a pair of 500GB Samsung 850 EVOs on it, eventually I'll get another pair, I don't have any SATA drives plugged into my computer, not even an optical drive. I plan on having 4 hdds in RAID10 and 2TB backup drive for the mSATAs one day...


X58 cannot boot NVME based PCIe SSDs like the Intel 750. Your card is a sata/sas card that essentially has mSATA connectors instead of a regular SATA or SFF8087. The question was regarding the Intel 750 specifically.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xblue*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it was set to auto
> 
> had a lot of problems just now with ram, I had my multiplier set to 23, with vcore at 1.4 just to test, only had 8gb of ram visible, ended up dropping to 21x192 to leave me right at 4ghz lol, at 1.33 vcore for now.
> 
> fudzilla.com/32335-windows-8-rtc-bug-isolated-and-fix
> 
> guess that was my issue with h1z1, what an obscure and bs bug with windows 8/10


Yea, 1.33 is ok, Not sure how good it is to push a chip to its limit but I read the max is 1.35, Auto is not a good idea for ram speed unless its not affected by the multiplier and bclk you might have been pushing your ram speed much higher than its rated to go.

Sucks that your game has issues, I recently upgraded my laptop to windows 10 and am regretting it. My gaming pc will stick with windows 7, I would rather miss DX12 and have it work properly.


----------



## kckyle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meganerd*
> 
> PCIe works just fine in X58, the only problem is that you cannot boot from those devices. To the original question, the 750 works great, but you will still need a regular SATA drive to install your OS to and to boot from.


huh? i said NVMe doesn't work with x58, never said pcie doesn't work for x58. what are you on about.


----------



## Gre4ka

Hi all again.

Seems my memory stick died or/and CPU IMC degraded...

This night I made some tests with CPU at 4.66GHz, keeping uncore at 3300-3400 range with 1.33-1.34v max, with different bclk and memory freq. I noticed that something is bad when I tested 186x25 combo trying to determine which Vcore is required for stable 4.66 Core, I finished with 1.4375v on Vcore testing CPU in Prime95 Blend while it produced a "memory_management_error" blue screen in about 30min of test. I turned pc off and started later again, but from the "verified" 4.5GHz range. And Prime95 started to fail each time...
And not as before - when some of 1-2 working threads stopped after a significant time like several hours (if there were not enough VTT voltage/or vcore), now this happens after prime95 starts to test IMC/memory stress problem size FFT size - above 1024k, it usually happens in 20-30 mins, when 1120k / 1200k blocks starts in test pattern and all workers stopping in no time - not 1 or 2 of them. Looks like something happens with memory and data corrupts or it "losts" I loaded my "verified" prime95 29hours stable config and it also failed in the same time the same way. Linpack were stable for 1 hour showing no errors and correct results, but when I stopped it manually - BSOD with "memory management error".

I run Memtest with CPU freq default (200x17) with high vcore (1.4v) and memory at 2000 with minimum uncore at 3000 and QPI/DRAM at 1.35v:
 

Then I dropped the bclk to default 133 and multi to 25, set all mem timings to auto, decreased voltages at minimum level and set mem to 1333 with 2000 uncore:

much less amount of errors (x12 less), and only from 7 & 8 memtest test patterns, not 9

then I put CPU at 1.6GHz 12*133, with 800 mem and then 1066 mem (1.5v), all with minimum possible voltages and memtest haven't find any errors... even 1

I put memory up again to 1333 and 1.65v on it and run memtest again:


NO errors again.

I allowed test to pass several times, turned pc off. Get in BIOS and set the 17*200 1.3v, 2000 mem 1.65v, 3000 uncore 1.3v and run memtest again, waiting to see errors again:


http://imgur.com/oF6Z3Wn


nope! I feel myself an idiot. Like my PC play with me but not I play with my PC.

Had someone faced such problems? Can this be defective or dying memory stick? If I understand right and if memtest test memory in blocks according to errorous addresses it should be 3'rd stick (the latest), because it's all that above 8192Mb up to 12gb.
Can it be an IMC? glitch? or degradation? but I think in case of degradation it can't come back from dead state and handle mem and uncore again as nothing happend?

I think I should take some mem. Could somebody give an advice, what of modern mem kits are suitable and optimal for our old 1366 westmere's/gulftowns? Newer "overclocking grade" kits seems to have high mem freq like 2000+ but bad timings like 11-11-11. While we need something that are able to handle both lower freq at tighter timings and high enough freq with sweet timings like 9 (as my current kit for example, it may move from default 2000-9-10-9 to 1800-1866 8-9-8 and 1600-1666 7-8-7).
I have old mem kit (forgot about it) that were made for MAC upgrades and is ECC and rated at 1066 freq (but mem sticks marked as 1333), the mem kit is from OWC. 3 sticks 4gb each. But I don't think that mem with ECC will go even to 1600. There are Micron chips. Finding info for them tooks only to some SO-DIMM modules used in notebooks and they all are about 1600 with timings like 11 and rated for 1.35v/1.5v...

In case of CPU... to have enough room and flexibility in BCLK I looking for X5680-5690. But they become too expensive last 1-2 months. The ES (engineering sample) are much cheaper and have to be unlocked multi, right? But how good they are?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hello guys,

I'm fiddling with an X5650 bought on ebay about a year ago. When I first installed it, I encountered that well-known error where only 4 Gb out of 6 Gb would be accessible in Windows and in BIOS, while memtest86 would report no errors at all after an overnight run. I even bought an i7 3930k on ebay for 300 euros, now it's giving me a dilemma - what to sell given their identical performance xD The error disappeared after OC'ing the CPU so go figure what it disliked about my memory. (See below for details.)

Anyway the point is, I'm overclocking the X5650 on an eVGA X58 SLI3 E767 board, and this is the first time that I've overclocked a CPU. At first, I approached it without a plan, but later went the following route: find a QPI voltage for a given bclk first and then find the vcore for the desired core multiplier. The board seems to have a pretty basic BIOS, compared to what I see in the screenshots in this thread, in partiicular the P6T family of boards. This BIOS only has a predefined set of vcore voltages spaced at about .06125V or so. QPI can be adjusted with +0.025V offsets, the exact value is never shown in the BIOS UI. There also is a vdroop setting that adds a value in the [0, 0.05V] range to the vcore value specified in BIOS under load. Well, here are some results I've got so far, and the vcore seems a bit too high to me compared to what you guys are posting.

_(to be added later as right now the PC is in a chkdsk with a 2TB drivve, can't reboot to enter BIOS)_

The highest OC I'v got so far is listed below, and to be honest with you it makes me believe the CPU is either dead, or really bad, compared to the voltages posted in this thread for 4.4Ghz:

200x22 = *4.388*, vcore *1.435V* CPU-Z / *1.36875* BIOS (vdroop set to "red" - unsafe, QPI *+0.025V* (exact value with multimeter approaching 1.2V but still lower, don't have it in the copybook right now)
*974* CB 15 score (estimated as too low based on the 1021 rating for 4.4 in a screenshot around here)

One step lower vcore and cinebench 15 will BSOD or crash. Why is it so high? Is thre a variable I've missed somewhere? The bclk 200 at +0.025V is stable, i've tested it at 12x in cinebench, wprime and prime95 allong with bad company 2 and bf3, it's ok, no crashes. Yet you see the results.

Thank you!

'09 x5650 SLBV3 Costa Rica B/N 31223837 (for fun and record: '10 i7 3930k SROKY Costa Rica B/N 3206C003







)


----------



## meganerd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kckyle*
> 
> huh? i said NVMe doesn't work with x58, never said pcie doesn't work for x58. what are you on about.


I meant to say that NVMe works fine on x58, you just can't boot from those devices.


----------



## webhito

So, it seems that my board is starting to crap out on me, time to upgrade... I have 3 paths the way i see it z97 being the cheaper.
4790k + z97 $700 EVGA Classified
6700k + z170 $1000 Gaming G1 Board
5820K + X99 $750 EVGA FTW

Prices are just an idea, they are in Mexican pesos so things here are pretty expensive, mind you all builds are on top notch motherboards.

I don´t do rendering, or compressing I just have a huge list of steam games that I go back to every now and then and of course fallout 4 has already been preordered and I plan on playing the crap out of it. I will most likely stick with my 7970 until I can recover a bit from buying the rest. They will probably be left at stock also, I dont do the overclock much but I always purchase unlocked cpus for their resale value.

Buying another x58 board is out of the question, I just got this one 3 months ago brand new and its out of warranty due to it being discontinued lol.

What would be the smart move?

I have seen quite a few reviews on x99 motherboards and they seem to be plagued with issues, only a few of them seem to be ok.


----------



## Space Marine

while i would still being tempted by the 6 cores, why not a 6600k on z170?
Hyperthreading is useless in games


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> while i would still being tempted by the 6 cores, why not a 6600k on z170?
> Hyperthreading is useless in games


Direcxt 12 would be the reason, apparently hyperthreading helps quite a bit. 6 core wise yea, I have a 6 core xeon that does not break a sweat at all but the motherboard has been giving me issues lately, reason of the upgrade.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Direcxt 12 would be the reason, apparently hyperthreading helps quite a bit. 6 core wise yea, I have a 6 core xeon that does not break a sweat at all but the motherboard has been giving me issues lately, reason of the upgrade.


What issues are you having?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> Hi all again.
> 
> Seems my memory stick died or/and CPU IMC degraded...
> 
> This night I made some tests with CPU at 4.66GHz, keeping uncore at 3300-3400 range with 1.33-1.34v max, with different bclk and memory freq. I noticed that something is bad when I tested 186x25 combo trying to determine which Vcore is required for stable 4.66 Core, I finished with 1.4375v on Vcore testing CPU in Prime95 Blend while it produced a "memory_management_error" blue screen in about 30min of test. I turned pc off and started later again, but from the "verified" 4.5GHz range. And Prime95 started to fail each time...
> And not as before - when some of 1-2 working threads stopped after a significant time like several hours (if there were not enough VTT voltage/or vcore), now this happens after prime95 starts to test IMC/memory stress problem size FFT size - above 1024k, it usually happens in 20-30 mins, when 1120k / 1200k blocks starts in test pattern and all workers stopping in no time - not 1 or 2 of them. Looks like something happens with memory and data corrupts or it "losts" I loaded my "verified" prime95 29hours stable config and it also failed in the same time the same way. Linpack were stable for 1 hour showing no errors and correct results, but when I stopped it manually - BSOD with "memory management error".


4.66GHz and 1.43V @ prime95 I assume u had your cpu under a really good WC loop and monitoring CPU temps ?

Yes, your CPU can degrade, specially with that combination of high Vcore.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> What issues are you having?


Well, due to my own stupidity I decided to update my bios to f3a, lost all my oc profiles and could barely get it to work with default settings, decided to reflash it to f2 and pull the battery for a few mins, everything works on default but it no longer wants to post with any type of overclock, it just shuts down, reboots and gives me an oc error.

Besides this, it has always been somewhat finicky, I use a wireless keyboard and sometimes when I try to get into bios ( hitting the Delete key too many times ) It decides to power off completely and reboot. Sometimes instead of restarting it shuts down instead. It kind of has a mind of its own if you catch my drift lol.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Well, due to my own stupidity I decided to update my bios to f3a, lost all my oc profiles and could barely get it to work with default settings, decided to reflash it to f2 and pull the battery for a few mins, everything works on default but it no longer wants to post with any type of overclock, it just shuts down, reboots and gives me an oc error.
> 
> Besides this, it has always been somewhat finicky, I use a wireless keyboard and sometimes when I try to get into bios ( hitting the Delete key too many times ) It decides to power off completely and reboot. Sometimes instead of restarting it shuts down instead. It kind of has a mind of its own if you catch my drift lol.


Give the backup bios a try if you haven't already. Otherwise I'd try to flash it to f3a again but this time clear the cmos before flashing the bios and then clear it once again after it's updated.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Give the backup bios a try if you haven't already. Otherwise I'd try to flash it to f3a again but this time clear the cmos before flashing the bios and then clear it once again after it's updated.


Would you by chance know how to kick in the second bios module? Looked all over the place and was not able to figure out how to work this, If it contains the Bios it originally came with I am pretty sure its the 1st one as I needed to flash it to f2 before i was able to use the xeon chip.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Would you by chance know how to kick in the second bios module? Looked all over the place and was not able to figure out how to work this, If it contains the Bios it originally came with I am pretty sure its the 1st one as I needed to flash it to f2 before i was able to use the xeon chip.


Sorry, But I honestly have no idea on how to switch to the backup bios on the Guerrilla.







I thought you would know since you actually have the board and all.

Well, try flashing the F4D (Latest) version bios on it, it may do something.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Sorry, But I honestly have no idea on how to switch to the backup bios on the Guerrilla.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you would know since you actually have the board and all.
> 
> Well, try flashing the F4D (Latest) version bios on it, it may do something.


Lol nope, I don´t know, Yea, I will give it one last shot, if not it will end up in my kids room for them to use it. Thanks!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> Hi all again.
> 
> Seems my memory stick died or/and CPU IMC degraded...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> This night I made some tests with CPU at 4.66GHz, keeping uncore at 3300-3400 range with 1.33-1.34v max, with different bclk and memory freq. I noticed that something is bad when I tested 186x25 combo trying to determine which Vcore is required for stable 4.66 Core, I finished with 1.4375v on Vcore testing CPU in Prime95 Blend while it produced a "memory_management_error" blue screen in about 30min of test. I turned pc off and started later again, but from the "verified" 4.5GHz range. And Prime95 started to fail each time...
> And not as before - when some of 1-2 working threads stopped after a significant time like several hours (if there were not enough VTT voltage/or vcore), now this happens after prime95 starts to test IMC/memory stress problem size FFT size - above 1024k, it usually happens in 20-30 mins, when 1120k / 1200k blocks starts in test pattern and all workers stopping in no time - not 1 or 2 of them. Looks like something happens with memory and data corrupts or it "losts" I loaded my "verified" prime95 29hours stable config and it also failed in the same time the same way. Linpack were stable for 1 hour showing no errors and correct results, but when I stopped it manually - BSOD with "memory management error".
> 
> I run Memtest with CPU freq default (200x17) with high vcore (1.4v) and memory at 2000 with minimum uncore at 3000 and QPI/DRAM at 1.35v:
> 
> 
> Then I dropped the bclk to default 133 and multi to 25, set all mem timings to auto, decreased voltages at minimum level and set mem to 1333 with 2000 uncore:
> 
> much less amount of errors (x12 less), and only from 7 & 8 memtest test patterns, not 9
> 
> then I put CPU at 1.6GHz 12*133, with 800 mem and then 1066 mem (1.5v), all with minimum possible voltages and memtest haven't find any errors... even 1
> 
> I put memory up again to 1333 and 1.65v on it and run memtest again:
> 
> 
> NO errors again.
> 
> I allowed test to pass several times, turned pc off. Get in BIOS and set the 17*200 1.3v, 2000 mem 1.65v, 3000 uncore 1.3v and run memtest again, waiting to see errors again:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/oF6Z3Wn
> 
> 
> nope! I feel myself an idiot. Like my PC play with me but not I play with my PC.
> 
> 
> 
> Had someone faced such problems? Can this be defective or dying memory stick? If I understand right and if memtest test memory in blocks according to errorous addresses it should be 3'rd stick (the latest), because it's all that above 8192Mb up to 12gb.
> Can it be an IMC? glitch? or degradation? but I think in case of degradation it can't come back from dead state and handle mem and uncore again as nothing happend?
> 
> I think I should take some mem. Could somebody give an advice, what of modern mem kits are suitable and optimal for our old 1366 westmere's/gulftowns? Newer "overclocking grade" kits seems to have high mem freq like 2000+ but bad timings like 11-11-11. While we need something that are able to handle both lower freq at tighter timings and high enough freq with sweet timings like 9 (as my current kit for example, it may move from default 2000-9-10-9 to 1800-1866 8-9-8 and 1600-1666 7-8-7).
> I have old mem kit (forgot about it) that were made for MAC upgrades and is ECC and rated at 1066 freq (but mem sticks marked as 1333), the mem kit is from OWC. 3 sticks 4gb each. But I don't think that mem with ECC will go even to 1600. There are Micron chips. Finding info for them tooks only to some SO-DIMM modules used in notebooks and they all are about 1600 with timings like 11 and rated for 1.35v/1.5v...
> 
> In case of CPU... to have enough room and flexibility in BCLK I looking for X5680-5690. But they become too expensive last 1-2 months. The ES (engineering sample) are much cheaper and have to be unlocked multi, right? But how good they are?


Well Memtest is usually correct when it comes to stability and errors. It appears that your RAM isn't stable when running at high frequencies. You might need to change the timings or settle for a stable\lower frequency. Then again it "could" be the CPU IMC degrading. OR you need to push the Vtt to higher than 1.35v for 2000Mhz for stability. That will definitely increase the heat as well. You'll just have to do some more testing. There's plenty of RAM to choose from. The prices were lower a few months ago and I hope they are still cheaper. You just have to look around for kits that aren't sold out.

I have two RAM kits. One kit is rated at 12GBs 1600Mhz 7-9-8-24-1T @ 1.65v and it can reach 2000Mhz+ 8-10-8-24-1T @ 1.65v. It's my performance\benchmark kit.

I have another kit that low powered server ram that runs 24GBs 1333Mhz 9-9-9-24-1T @ 1.35v and it can reach 2000Mhz-2200Mhz 9-10-10-22-1T @ 1.65v. All timings are stable of course. I can actually see the temperature on these modules which is pretty cool. I'm running 1400Mhz with only 1.36v [AUTO setting in BIOS].

Overclocking RAM can be a headache. There are so many different settings for me to modify on my board. It's very time consuming so once I get a high overclock I stick with it. If it's unstable I have no problems runnning 1600Mhz - 1700Mhz. Based on my test the higher RAM frequency won't make a big difference especially during gaming. Of course you "might" see a higher score in "some" benchmarking programs, but that's don't worry that score will be beaten easily by newer tech.


----------



## Gre4ka

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> 4.66GHz and 1.43V @ prime95 I assume u had your cpu under a really good WC loop and monitoring CPU temps ?
> 
> Yes, your CPU can degrade, specially with that combination of high Vcore.


Yes, CPU is under custop WC loop. I never noticed temps over 80C under ANY load. Moderate maximum under linpack is about 75-77C with freq around 4.5 and voltages above 1.4v, Prime95 always cooler by 3-4C. Real apps etc rarely go under 65C. Tests under 4.66 were benchmarking like. I run sometimes 3Dmarks, other test and just have to look how it will handle linpack and prime to know which core voltage may be required for stable 4.66GHz. Then happend what happend and what I described. Before this tests I done a working profile with 4.5GHz overclock, 2000 mem and Uncore at 3500. It were 29h prime blend stable, linpack 10h stable and combined load - 3dmark fire strike extreme with max settings, prime95 + linpack + winrar benchmark at one time (prime95 and linpack were limited to use 6 and 4 threads accordingly, while 2 cores were free for 3dmark and winrar, both GPU's load were at 100%)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well Memtest is usually correct when it comes to stability and errors. It appears that your RAM isn't stable when running at high frequencies. You might need to change the timings or settle for a stable\lower frequency. Then again it "could" be the CPU IMC degrading. OR you need to push the Vtt to higher than 1.35v for 2000Mhz for stability. That will definitely increase the heat as well. You'll just have to do some more testing. There's plenty of RAM to choose from. The prices were lower a few months ago and I hope they are still cheaper. You just have to look around for kits that aren't sold out.
> 
> I have two RAM kits. One kit is rated at 12GBs 1600Mhz 7-9-8-24-1T @ 1.65v and it can reach 2000Mhz+ 8-10-8-24-1T @ 1.65v. It's my performance\benchmark kit.
> 
> I have another kit that low powered server ram that runs 24GBs 1333Mhz 9-9-9-24-1T @ 1.35v and it can reach 2000Mhz-2200Mhz 9-10-10-22-1T @ 1.65v. All timings are stable of course. I can actually see the temperature on these modules which is pretty cool. I'm running 1400Mhz with only 1.36v [AUTO setting in BIOS].
> 
> Overclocking RAM can be a headache. There are so many different settings for me to modify on my board. It's very time consuming so once I get a high overclock I stick with it. If it's unstable I have no problems runnning 1600Mhz - 1700Mhz. Based on my test the higher RAM frequency won't make a big difference especially during gaming. Of course you "might" see a higher score in "some" benchmarking programs, but that's don't worry that score will be beaten easily by newer tech.


Are there any 100% method to determine what is died? I have some difficulties to just swap out and exchange the memory sticks... My watercool loop is on hardline acrylic tubing and I can't just "move" memory waterblock (yep, I know new memory are cool even at 1.65v, but this WB improves loop design and makes tubing route much easily).

I still hope (and want to!) that it's a memory stick fail of my Corsair Dominator GT kit, but I really not happy to make a lot of useless work to take off waterblock. But I can reroute my loop with soft tubing, excluding memory WB just for tests. Of course if there are no methods to determine what died - imc or/and core or memory...

Just to understand each other better - I tested mem for stability from the first day use of my system. I leaved cpu at default freq arount 3.3-3.4GHz, and moved around all usable bclk values, setting memory to 1600-1800-2000 and even 2100 (for 2100 my kit want 1.7v and never go higher - even 2110 is not working - just "no mem" error and black screen). It worked perfectly at 2000-9-8-9-27, 1800-1866 8-9-8-24 and 1600-1666 7-8-7-21. At freq lower than 2000 only 1.55-1.6v were enough for stability.

Regarding IMC rule ant 1.35v on it and or 2x of uncore freq to mem... I only pushed it around 1.36-1.365 to test is it enough or "no go", it lasted only a few hours in such state. Other time I were hold it around 1.33-1.34 and sometimes at 1.35
Vcore loadline calibration and QPI loadline calibration were enabled, so when I set 1.41v for CPU it keeps 1.41 in idle and going to 1.42 under heavy/full load. QPI works in classic way. Set 1.34 in BIOS - it holding 1.35 in idle and lowers to set 1.34v under heavy/full load.
Also I keepen CPU PLL at 1.3v then moved to minimal possible 1.2V - it give me an ability to cut off about 0.002v from Vcore to be stable and applications that usually had to bsod or restart in such not enough vcore condition started to generate just errors - for example linpack and prime.
I never upped IOH core more than 1.24v and upped memory only for a shot period of time to 1.7v to test 2100 freq. But as we know it's safe while 0.45v max difference kept between VTT (QPI/DRAM) and memory voltage. It's always were about 0.25-0.35v, not less, not more.


----------



## platinum1105

So far this is what i have after running 3D Mark successfully.
Also my v-core is no were near 1.5 , intel says not to go passed 1.4 on a x5660 unless of course you move to watercooling... this is what brought me up to speed.
My voltage idle is 1.376-1.384, All 12 cores at 100% utilization it will jump to 1.392v

Im I winning???


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gre4ka*
> 
> Are there any 100% method to determine what is died? I have some difficulties to just swap out and exchange the memory sticks... My watercool loop is on hardline acrylic tubing and I can't just "move" memory waterblock (yep, I know new memory are cool even at 1.65v, but this WB improves loop design and makes tubing route much easily).
> 
> I still hope (and want to!) that it's a memory stick fail of my Corsair Dominator GT kit, but I really not happy to make a lot of useless work to take off waterblock. But I can reroute my loop with soft tubing, excluding memory WB just for tests. Of course if there are no methods to determine what died - imc or/and core or memory...
> 
> Just to understand each other better - I tested mem for stability from the first day use of my system. I leaved cpu at default freq arount 3.3-3.4GHz, and moved around all usable bclk values, setting memory to 1600-1800-2000 and even 2100 (for 2100 my kit want 1.7v and never go higher - even 2110 is not working - just "no mem" error and black screen). It worked perfectly at 2000-9-8-9-27, 1800-1866 8-9-8-24 and 1600-1666 7-8-7-21. At freq lower than 2000 only 1.55-1.6v were enough for stability.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding IMC rule ant 1.35v on it and or 2x of uncore freq to mem... I only pushed it around 1.36-1.365 to test is it enough or "no go", it lasted only a few hours in such state. Other time I were hold it around 1.33-1.34 and sometimes at 1.35
> Vcore loadline calibration and QPI loadline calibration were enabled, so when I set 1.41v for CPU it keeps 1.41 in idle and going to 1.42 under heavy/full load. QPI works in classic way. Set 1.34 in BIOS - it holding 1.35 in idle and lowers to set 1.34v under heavy/full load.
> Also I keepen CPU PLL at 1.3v then moved to minimal possible 1.2V - it give me an ability to cut off about 0.002v from Vcore to be stable and applications that usually had to bsod or restart in such not enough vcore condition started to generate just errors - for example linpack and prime.
> I never upped IOH core more than 1.24v and upped memory only for a shot period of time to 1.7v to test 2100 freq. But as we know it's safe while 0.45v max difference kept between VTT (QPI/DRAM) and memory voltage. It's always were about 0.25-0.35v, not less, not more.


The only thing you can do is test and duplicate. From there you'll' narrow down your issues and hopefully find the culprit. There so many different factors. So either you aren't using enough voltage or something is defective. Easy as that. The CPU IMC could be the problem while OC'd. The CPU IMC "could" require more unrealistic 27/7 voltage or it could damaged. I can't test it for you so you'll have to narrow it down. You can try keeping the CPU PLL around 1.8v as well for testing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far this is what i have after running 3D Mark successfully.
> Also my v-core is no were near 1.5 , intel says not to go passed 1.4 on a x5660 unless of course you move to watercooling... this is what brought me up to speed.
> My voltage idle is 1.376-1.384, All 12 cores at 100% utilization it will jump to 1.392v
> 
> Im I winning???


Congrats, bit you are incorrect. Intel states that you should've go above 1.35v with a X5660. I have one. Even 1.35v is the very end of the cliff. Nothing is protecting you from spikes I imagine.


----------



## platinum1105

Ah sorry, thank you for correcting me! 1.35 should be max under their regular heatsink before the CPU gets to hot, if you monitor your temps thought your overclocking you can push your cpu to higher voltage with more cooling so Intel doesn't want you going beond the cliff if you don't know what your doing, keeping an eye on your cpu temps are really what they are justifying. Watercooling keeps the cpu from burning it self because you don't run into a heat issue, this is a problem for people with stock heatsinks and don't really know about VID Voltage range effects on your cpu, the more voltage the more cooling, it's better to look up max temps rather than intels safe say, water cooling definelty changes the game on this, and understand you can achieve stable overclocks beyond their cap vid voltage, just like a lot of people are way passed 1.35 but understanding this and how the bios works it helps having a bachelors in computer science, let me know if u have any other concerns, I would recommend bringin down your heat with water cooling so u can up the voltage, I started with an L edition first then got my x5660 because it is a low wattage cpu and does well with overclocking 95watts is easier to cool than a Xeon that is 125watts or some i7s that are 140w now. I would also assume your not on these forms much and if you are, all u learned was max voltage on your x5660? Your selling your self short plus but something that makes sense. I think a lot of people would agree with me but I can agree to disagree. Maybe I'll post a pic if your interested, I'd like to see your cluncker?


----------



## spdaimon

Dude...you sound a bit arrogant. I guess I should get a refund on my BS in Comp Sci, because they didn't teach anything about overclocking...maybe if I took Computer Engineering I'd now more about temperature, electrical resistance and the like. Kanu-Maru is always on these forums, he started it after all. My X5650 died suddenly and I had it at 1.35v so I am going to have tend to agree with Kanu-Maru with the spikes. Was running it 24/7 around 70C or so with an AIO cooler. With my current X5660 set up, I've managed 4.14Ghz (23*180) with just 1.32v on air.


----------



## 2010rig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Dude...you sound a bit arrogant. I guess I should get a refund on my BS in Comp Sci, because they didn't teach anything about overclocking...maybe if I took Computer Engineering I'd now more about temperature, electrical resistance and the like. Kanu-Maru is always on these forums, he started it after all. My X5650 died suddenly and I had it at 1.35v so I am going to have tend to agree with Kanu-Maru with the spikes. Was running it 24/7 around 70C or so with an AIO cooler. With my current X5660 set up, I've managed 4.14Ghz (23*180) with just 1.32v on air.


If I were him, I would demand a refund on his Computer Science degree, for teaching him to refer to an X5660 as 12 core CPU.








Quote:


> My voltage idle is 1.376-1.384, *All 12 cores* at 100% utilization it will jump to 1.392v


If he wants to run his CPU at those volts LET HIM.


----------



## Firehawk

Ya, sticking to recommended guidelines is optional.....just like punctuation.


----------



## OCmember

@2010rig

Your avatar gif says it all, lol


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *2010rig*
> 
> If I were him, I would demand a refund on his Computer Science degree, for teaching him to refer to an X5660 as 12 core CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If he wants to run his CPU at those volts LET HIM.


Thanks, yes to be correct a six core, with hyper-threading or what would you call it? They can all be considered threads that process their calculations per sec and if that's what your aiming for a 100$ chip is really nothing.. So I'm not really sure if people are looking for trying to tweak as much as performance as they can or save the longevity of their cheap chips...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> Ah sorry, thank you for correcting me! 1.35 should be max under their regular heatsink before the CPU gets to hot, if you monitor your temps thought your overclocking you can push your cpu to higher voltage with more cooling so Intel doesn't want you going beond the cliff if you don't know what your doing, keeping an eye on your cpu temps are really what they are justifying. Watercooling keeps the cpu from burning it self because you don't run into a heat issue, this is a problem for people with stock heatsinks and don't really know about VID Voltage range effects on your cpu, the more voltage the more cooling, it's better to look up max temps rather than intels safe say, water cooling definelty changes the game on this, and understand you can achieve stable overclocks beyond their cap vid voltage, just like a lot of people are way passed 1.35 but understanding this and how the bios works it helps having a bachelors in computer science, let me know if u have any other concerns, I would recommend bringin down your heat with water cooling so u can up the voltage, I started with an L edition first then got my x5660 because it is a low wattage cpu and does well with overclocking 95watts is easier to cool than a Xeon that is 125watts or some i7s that are 140w now. I would also assume your not on these forms much and if you are, all u learned was max voltage on your x5660? Your selling your self short plus but something that makes sense. I think a lot of people would agree with me but I can agree to disagree. Maybe I'll post a pic if your interested, I'd like to see your cluncker?


I have no concerns, but I'm not sure where to start with your reply. I did not see the second half of your post coming, although it was one large wall of text. Just for the record I am a certified in the IT field [several certification at that, but I won't go into detail] and I've worked for and currently work closely with Intel, HP, Dell, Lenovo, Apple, Cisco, APC, Kyrocera and plenty of other big name vendors in the industry. I've worked with just about every piece of IT tech that you can think of. From cell phones to rack servers to UPS's to Cisco switches\routers to printers to punch down tools for RJ11-RJ45 etc. I'm familiar with just about everything in the IT field since my company requires me to be able to handle everything from break\fix to sensitive data. I can't explain every single thing I know and do, but just because you have a "degree" doesn't mean anything to me since I have certifications as well.









Now with that out of the way, I understand the BIOS very well. I'm not sure what they taught you during your schooling, but the fact that you think that the CPU get's hot @ 1.35v while using the standard heatsink is telling. There's much more to it than that. Also I wouldn't dare use the standard\cheap heat sink any higher than 3.6Ghz and no higher than 1.22+vCore. Just for the record I'm running a water cooled CPU and GPU. Lovely temps and although the voltage does play a part in the heat output, keeping heat "lower than X Celsius" will NOT save your CPU as time passes. My temps are great. Under the hood your CPU is slowly degrading if you don't stay within Intel recommendations. Yes, as enthusiast we take this risk, but everyone can't afford to upgrade to Intel more expensive newer platforms. In other words those people want their X58 build to last as long as possible. Even if you don't care you'll still face stability issues down the line if you don't listen to Intel.

It's NOT good practice to look up max temps INSTEAD of following what Intel says. It's BETTER to FOLLOW Intel voltage recommendations while staying below Intel temperature recommendation. It makes no sense to not follow the company that engineered the CPU. Unless you know more than an Intel Engineer, which I doubt? Also why would you assume I'm new to these forums when I started THIS very topic last year and I have over 1,000 post. You only have 2 post. ???? Also if you want to see pictures of my "cluncker" you can go to first page and click "Rig Pics" underneath "Click Here for Pictures of my Gaming Rig"

My GPU has been upgraded as well to this:
http://s26.postimg.org/xye91eap5/radeon_fury_x_video_card_hoses_1500x1000.jpg

My SSD Writes 600+MB/s and Reads 1400MB/s. I won't go on about my specs since that not the issue here.

Also it isn't 12 cores, it's 12 "logical" cores or processors. It's a Hexa-Core CPU + HT. I'm used to people taking "shots" at me because they think they are smarter than me or know something I don't know. At the end of the day I don't care and you can't make me think any differently unless you have definite proof. Usually proof from Intel. Also there are many factors and tons of different outcomes for different rigs. No build is 100% the same. No CPU is 100% the same. I'm not selling my self short. I can hit 4.6Ghz while following Intel guidelines. I've run 4.8Ghz for CPU and GPU benchmarking.
Quote:


> Your selling your self short plus but something that makes sense. I think a lot of people would agree with me but I can agree to disagree.


I don't think many would agree with you and I'm not missing out on anything. I choose to run my CPU at 4Ghz @ 1.20v [Average voltage 0.09v] because I like my fans to run silently. I also love the fact that I don't have to worry about my CPU going higher than 50c-55c [100% Load] with the fans running at low speeds. Not to mention it keeps my monthly bill low. For everyday use I'm missing out on nothing and everything runs fine. With all of that being said I'm done now, but I never go against Intel based merely on low "heat output" and "water cooling."


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far this is what i have after running 3D Mark successfully.
> Also my v-core is no were near 1.5 , intel says not to go passed 1.4 on a x5660 unless of course you move to watercooling... this is what brought me up to speed.
> My voltage idle is 1.376-1.384, All 12 cores at 100% utilization it will jump to 1.392v
> 
> Im I winning???


Where did intel say anything about water cooling?


----------



## platinum1105

It very well looks like we have what we studies in common. I'm not saying I'm better than anyone by having a degree but was just justifying some understanding I have in this field. Very well said on your end, although IOPS (input/output operations per sec.) which is used to measure and benchmark strorage devices like SSDs and HDDs should be looked at before read write speeds.

Overlocking with water cooling is really becoming the new advantage in PC gaming enthusiasts and I purely came to the community not to bash anyone but to maybe get some feedback or helpful tips. This turned into a long time hobby of mine to push limits to discover the unknown and all we are trained really to due is troubleshooting hardware or software issues and to narrow down and pin point an issue and bring a solution. I agree everyone has a different setup and you can get tons of different results, some lucky enough to push speeds other cant with a silicon lottery chip.

If there is no new information or if I affended people about saving their special x58 and not wanting to upgrade than that's is there decision, I sit on high expectations and know it's risking changing any voltages in the bios but when I reach stability on my "12-logical core processor" and still 12 thread processor I'm always looking to push the limits so this forum really becomes just ego and trash talking..

Maybe someone with 1000 posts has some kind of non-obvious information not just standard information, and while overclocking you can't assume Intel standards apply while your trying to test and surpass the chips original ability or BLK speed.

I defiantly agree temperatures have to always be monitored while performing overclocking because and I'm not recommending my voltages to anyone saying they are right but rather posting what my results are.

If you don't have any further or new info on a glorious processor then your preaching to the choir with intel recommendations which are purely standards for a stock processor. OVERCLOCK.net seemed like I would learn something but I have people nit picking at just how I'm counting threads or logical cores on the x5660 physical processor.



This is what I'm working with and I'm getting great performance, who knows how long a 1st gen setup will last..

As for me these forums seem like just a bunch of trolls spitting the obvious so goodluck but these responses and the feedback is worthless in my situation and this will be the last time I post here so cheer cause I'm glad to kiss these forums goodbye, and for future people looking for feedback, just expect to mr. Know it all to help you overclock with Intel standards. ?


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Where did intel say anything about water cooling?


jihe, they don't, I never quoted Intel on anything about water cooling, look up why one would upgrade to watercooling. These are ******ed questions ?


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> jihe, they don't, I never quoted Intel on anything about water cooling, look up why one would upgrade to watercooling. These are ******ed questions ?


Well there wouldn't have been any '******ed' questions if there weren't any '******ed' comments.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> intel says not to go passed 1.4 on a x5660 unless of course you move to watercooling...


Anyway those corsair AIO's are really not much better than high end air like a D14/15. Water cooling really means custom loop, those AIO's are pretty much gimmicks for people who thinks they know what they're doing.


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Well there wouldn't have been any '******ed' questions if there weren't any '******ed' comments.
> Anyway those corsair AIO's are really not much better than high end air like a D14/15. Water cooling really means custom loop, those AIO's are pretty much gimmicks for people who thinks they know what they're doing.


Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, on this build I didn't want to buy a $1000-$2000 dollar cooling kit but if you want to se my other build then feast your eyes!


When u have enough buy something from EK Water Blocks


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, on this build I didn't want to buy a $1000-$2000 dollar cooling kit but if you want to se my other build then feast your eyes!
> 
> 
> When u have enough buy something from EK Water Blocks


Intel totally called me and was like bro, you NEED to go water cooling, like omg! So I went with their recommendation. True story bro!!!!!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> If there is no new information or if I affended people about saving their special x58 and not wanting to upgrade than that's is there decision, I sit on high expectations and know it's risking changing any voltages in the bios but when I reach stability on my "12-logical core processor" and still 12 thread processor I'm always looking to push the limits so this forum really becomes just ego and trash talking..


You finally got it right







Also I simply stated that "some" people want their X58 builds to last longer and overclocking it to death isn't priority number 1. You did not offend anyone, you simply came off as a arrogant know it all. You still appear to be that way. I respect opinions, but facts are facts period. If you have your own way of doing things don't make it sound like it's "official" or anything like that. Intel is official as it gets.

Quote:


> Maybe someone with 1000 posts has some kind of non-obvious information not just standard information, and while overclocking you can't assume Intel standards apply while your trying to test and surpass the chips original ability or BLK speed.


You suggested that I was new to the forums which is why I even brought up the post count. This is my topic and I'm very familiar with Intel technology and platforms. I have plenty of non-obvious information and I've given plenty of info throughout this topic. It's only "non-obvious" if you understand what you are talking about in the first place, which I feel you do not. To correct you once again, I CAN assume that Intel's standards apply while surpassing the chips original ability or BCLK "frequency". Why[?], because I apply Intel standards while overclocking my CPU all the way up to 4.8Ghz. Even if I exceed Intel voltage recommendation for 15 - 30 minutes of benchmarking [4.8Ghz] I follow every other rule. 4.6Ghz is within Intel recommendations and I am protected from spikes. I learned the hard way to listen to Intel.

Quote:


> If you don't have any further or new info on a glorious processor then your preaching to the choir with intel recommendations which are purely standards for a stock processor. OVERCLOCK.net seemed like I would learn something but I have people nit picking at just how I'm counting threads or logical cores on the x5660 physical processor.


I simply corrected you because you were wrong. I wasn't trying to preach to anyone. You replied so I replied, simple as that. Also stop saying that "Intel recommendations are purely standards for a stock processor". If you truly understood the stock processor settings you'll *obviously* realize that the CPU doesn't top out at 1.35v. It doesn't even go above 1.20v. The reason Intel gives us this info is so that we don't kill the CPU. If you want to degrade and\or ultimately kill your CPU go for it. It's your money and your build. At the end of the day I'm hitting up to 4.6Ghz+ following Intel recommendations. Also don't get upset because people called you out on 12 "logical" cores. We were making sure you weren't confused about dual processors, single processors and how HT works. I mean you do claim to have a BS degree. Rookie mistake.

Quote:


> As for me these forums seem like just a bunch of trolls spitting the obvious so goodluck but these responses and the feedback is worthless in my situation and this will be the last time I post here so cheer cause I'm glad to kiss these forums goodbye, and for future people looking for feedback, just expect to mr. Know it all to help you overclock with Intel standards. ?


No we aren't of trolls spitting anything. Just because you were wrong a don't want to follow Intel recommendation doesn't mean you should start name calling. No one here needs luck since many have already reached the overclock frequencies that they desire and post their updates. Even if they don't reach the overclock that they desire, they get plenty of help in both of my topics. My entire goal was the keep the X58 alive and kicking and ensure users that an upgrade to X79\X99 wasn't necessary unless they wanted to upgrade. Time and time again I get a few people like you. Usually I just ignore them, but I had to fill you in. Just in case others users see your post and neglect Intel guidelines and recommendations. However, as I stated you are free to follow any bad advice that you choose to and follow any thing that you want to.

Edit:
Also about my SSD from what I can remember the 4K Read IOPS was roughly 160K and the Write was around 118K.


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You finally got it right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also I simply stated that "some" people want their X58 builds to last longer and overclocking it to death isn't priority number 1. You did not offend anyone, you simply came off as a arrogant know it all. You still appear to be that way. I respect opinions, but facts are facts period. If you have your own way of doing things don't make it sound like it's "official" or anything like that. Intel is official as it gets.
> You suggested that I was new to the forums which is why I even brought up the post count. This is my topic and I'm very familiar with Intel technology and platforms. I have plenty of non-obvious information and I've given plenty of info throughout this topic. It's only "non-obvious" if you understand what you are talking about in the first place, which I feel you do not. To correct you once again, I CAN assume that Intel's standards apply while surpassing the chips original ability or BCLK "frequency". Why[?], because I apply Intel standards while overclocking my CPU all the way up to 4.8Ghz. Even if I exceed Intel voltage recommendation for 15 - 30 minutes of benchmarking [4.8Ghz] I follow every other rule. 4.6Ghz is within Intel recommendations and I am protected from spikes. I learned the hard way to listen to Intel.
> I simply corrected you because you were wrong. I wasn't trying to preach to anyone. You replied so I replied, simple as that. Also stop saying that "Intel recommendations are purely standards for a stock processor". If you truly understood the stock processor settings you'll *obviously* realize that the CPU doesn't top out at 1.35v. It doesn't even go above 1.20v. The reason Intel gives us this info is so that we don't kill the CPU. If you want to degrade and\or ultimately kill your CPU go for it. It's your money and your build. At the end of the day I'm hitting up to 4.6Ghz+ following Intel recommendations. Also don't get upset because people called you out on 12 "logical" cores. We were making sure you weren't confused about dual processors, single processors and how HT works. I mean you do claim to have a BS degree. Rookie mistake.
> No we aren't of trolls spitting anything. Just because you were wrong a don't want to follow Intel recommendation doesn't mean you should start name calling. No one here needs luck since many have already reached the overclock frequencies that they desire and post their updates. Even if they don't reach the overclock that they desire, they get plenty of help in both of my topics. My entire goal was the keep the X58 alive and kicking and ensure users that an upgrade to X79\X99 wasn't necessary unless they wanted to upgrade. Time and time again I get a few people like you. Usually I just ignore them, but I had to fill you in. Just in case others users see your post and neglect Intel guidelines and recommendations. However, as I stated you are free to follow any bad advice that you choose to and follow any thing that you want to
> 
> Edit:
> Also about my SSD from what I can remember the 4K Read IOPS was roughly 160K and the Write was around 118K.


Well that's a cool story bro!
I'm forgive myself for doing neglect overclocking which you might call, but please show me some proof here, it it purely YOUR recommendation to follow Intel recommendations/guidelines while pushing your chip? U can to some degree but There's really only three critical things to know before your overclocking

1.) your chips max v-core (GUIDELINE from Intel)
2.) heat and our 95wattage process (which I would personally recommend)
3.) what your desired BLK level is. (CPU speed)
That will equal a favorable outcome,

now in all cases you would need different recommendations and guidelines for everyone, because you also said everyone's build is different and if you want this whole forum to yourself and give people information that purely DOES NOT exist when overclocking then go ahead and try to play safe and keep standing in the middle of the field. Your recommendation is purely your own guideline for your overclocking. I would rather hear from someone I'm actually looking for which is more of a overclock enthusiast for this chip because I would like to see more people pushing beyond the limits, these are the cool results we get when someone discovers something and maybe purely on accident but like u said everyones here to overlock and keep their chips alive? So then don't overlock at all it would u should be saying get the high wattage chip for 50$ more! really you can't preach Intel guidelines on an overlock forum that do not even make sense. Let's just say EVERYONE 4.0ghz is safe and u shouldnt go beyond that.. That is plain ignorance. Even if your not overclocking your processor is still deteriorating just on a slower level which I'm not sure why you think it only does when u overclock it or maybe you forgot to mention that also? Again, I'm not here to argue with someone on both sides with Intel guidelines and recommendations

One you change your BLK setting and other things in your BIOS, Intel CAN NOT recommend anything after that. If they do I would love to see a support post from them or you cause I would be there! But what I'm saying buddy is that Intel would never stand behind your "recommendation" while quoting them on their guidelines unless you made the chip. So you would need different GUIDELINES after pushing your chip, water cooled or not it's almost 2016 and all products are getting better, so u don't have to be stuck preaching Intel guidelines and recommendation because they are already known on an also discontinued processor. you will always be vulnerable for tons of issues since the game has changed Clu. You can't make a great chip last a lifetime anyways and there are no perfect configs even stock. If your not the type that like to push the limits than sorry this may not be for your eyes or ears, being on overlock.net this is what I least expected.. THANKS for your recommendation but I can not consider it with my expectation and setup may be a silicon lottery chip. Are Theres guildlines on how to push that kinda chip cause actually they are not all perfectly the same anyways.

So as I was saying sorry for offending any ONE.
I was leaving these forums but if you want to keep taking shots your merely making your self look ignorant or scared to fry a $100 chip? If I buy it I can fry it if I want. Other people buget don't even overlock cause you will probably never utilize 100% on your hexa-core (6-being logical) or 12 threads if u want unless your benchmarking. And by the way running a 27/4 stress tests is stupid , if u don't blue screen with in 30-min to an hour with 100% utilization, I would cut off the 23 other hours of torturing your processor in a way it will never really be used. So save the longevity and crash or enable blue screen hault while only using 25-50% utilization and just looking for clock speed before you blow your chip while you.

I don't don't what you have your followers heads wrapped around but it seems like these are very well made chips that are still comparable to high end and more expensive chips out now. These all very well just be a great all around chip Intel made. So accept the fact that in information technology sometimes you get the unexpected even if your sitting at a stock clock cause someone accidentally put there fans in the wrong direction. Or never air dusting their heat sink until the fan stops turning which I've seen with my own eyes lol.


----------



## OCmember

The 1.35v max voltage range for these chips is not a dynamic idea where it (the max) can change with overclocking.

I experienced chip degradation when I went over 1.35v to ~ 1.39v to push beyond 4.4GHz. Sad chip indeed. It was a X5660. Crapped out beyond 70*c no matter what. I have a i7 970 that will venture into 90*c and still push IBT so that to me defunks the tdp between the chips, for me. What started killing the chip was the voltage. Before I pushed the volts it was able to do 4.4Ghz around 1.34v although I can't say it was totally stable but the few runs I had seemed ok for me. After pushing the volts to ~ 1.39 for 4.6Ghz the chip wouldn't do 4.4GHz even at 1.35v It immediately crapped out or BSOD'd.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> Well that's a cool story bro!
> I'm forgive myself for doing neglect overclocking which you might call, but please show me some proof here, it it purely YOUR recommendation to follow Intel recommendations/guidelines while pushing your chip? U can to some degree but There's really only three critical things to know before your overclocking
> 
> 1.) your chips max v-core (GUIDELINE from Intel)
> 2.) heat and our 95wattage process (which I would personally recommend)
> 3.) what your desired BLK level is. (CPU speed)
> That will equal a favorable outcome,
> 
> now in all cases you would need different recommendations and guidelines for everyone, because you also said everyone's build is different and if you want this whole forum to yourself and give people information that purely DOES NOT exist when overclocking then go ahead and try to play safe and keep standing in the middle of the field. Your recommendation is purely your own guideline for your overclocking. I would rather hear from someone I'm actually looking for which is more of a overclock enthusiast for this chip because I would like to see more people pushing beyond the limits, these are the cool results we get when someone discovers something and maybe purely on accident but like u said everyones here to overlock and keep their chips alive? So then don't overlock at all it would u should be saying get the high wattage chip for 50$ more! really you can't preach Intel guidelines on an overlock forum that do not even make sense. Let's just say EVERYONE 4.0ghz is safe and u shouldnt go beyond that.. That is plain ignorance. Even if your not overclocking your processor is still deteriorating just on a slower level which I'm not sure why you think it only does when u overclock it or maybe you forgot to mention that also? Again, I'm not here to argue with someone on both sides with Intel guidelines and recommendations
> 
> One you change your BLK setting and other things in your BIOS, Intel CAN NOT recommend anything after that. If they do I would love to see a support post from them or you cause I would be there! But what I'm saying buddy is that Intel would never stand behind your "recommendation" while quoting them on their guidelines unless you made the chip. So you would need different GUIDELINES after pushing your chip, water cooled or not it's almost 2016 and all products are getting better, so u don't have to be stuck preaching Intel guidelines and recommendation because they are already known on an also discontinued processor. you will always be vulnerable for tons of issues since the game has changed Clu. You can't make a great chip last a lifetime anyways and there are no perfect configs even stock. If your not the type that like to push the limits than sorry this may not be for your eyes or ears, being on overlock.net this is what I least expected.. THANKS for your recommendation but I can not consider it with my expectation and setup may be a silicon lottery chip. Are Theres guildlines on how to push that kinda chip cause actually they are not all perfectly the same anyways.
> 
> So as I was saying sorry for offending any ONE.
> I was leaving these forums but if you want to keep taking shots your merely making your self look ignorant or scared to fry a $100 chip? If I buy it I can fry it if I want. Other people buget don't even overlock cause you will probably never utilize 100% on your hexa-core (6-being logical) or 12 threads if u want unless your benchmarking. And by the way running a 27/4 stress tests is stupid , if u don't blue screen with in 30-min to an hour with 100% utilization, I would cut off the 23 other hours of torturing your processor in a way it will never really be used. So save the longevity and crash or enable blue screen hault while only using 25-50% utilization and just looking for clock speed before you blow your chip while you.
> 
> I don't don't what you have your followers heads wrapped around but it seems like these are very well made chips that are still comparable to high end and more expensive chips out now. These all very well just be a great all around chip Intel made. So accept the fact that in information technology sometimes you get the unexpected even if your sitting at a stock clock cause someone accidentally put there fans in the wrong direction. Or never air dusting their heat sink until the fan stops turning which I've seen with my own eyes lol.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^LOL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *platinum1105*
> 
> Well that's a cool story bro!
> I'm forgive myself for doing neglect overclocking which you might call, but please show me some proof here, it it purely YOUR recommendation to follow Intel recommendations/guidelines while pushing your chip?


You obviously can't comprehend my replies or you are simply not reading my replies. This cool story is also a cool fact. As I said before unless you know more than a Intel Engineer I will continue to follow Intel. It's pretty foolish to not follow the very company that manufactured the CPU. My proof is my overclocks up to 4.6Ghz which follows Intel Guidelines. Even when I run 4.8Ghz [for benchmarking purposes] I still follow Intel recommendations although I'm outside of the voltage recommendation. I ensure my CPU is ready to deal with spikes regardless. Now I'm repeating myself smh.
Quote:


> because you also said everyone's build is different and if you want this whole forum to yourself and give people information that purely DOES NOT exist when overclocking


???????? I have to refer you to this post:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5470#post_24608810

Quote:


> Your recommendation is purely your own guideline for your overclocking. I would rather hear from someone I'm actually looking for which is more of a overclock enthusiast for this chip because I would like to see more people pushing beyond the limits, these are the cool results we get when someone discovers something and maybe purely on accident but like u said everyones here to overlock and keep their chips alive?


My recommendations are directly from Intel. Stop trying to say they are my opinions. They are official opinions from Intel Engineers. Your problem is with the engineers not me. Also I pushed my CPU to 5.4Ghz so don't talk to me about pushing beyond the limits. I hit 5.2Ghz and hit 5.4Ghz and the CPU crapped out and definitely degraded. Also I "never" said everyone here want to keep their CPU alive. I said not everyone can afford to upgrade to Intel more expensive platforms. If you would have read you would've seen the part were I said you are free to do whatever you want with your build. It's your money. Don't be upset or angry with me because I understand Intel recommendations and hit high OCs while follow it.

Quote:


> really you can't preach Intel guidelines on an overlock forum that do not even make sense. Let's just say EVERYONE 4.0ghz is safe and u shouldnt go beyond that.. That is plain ignorance.


Wow more name calling. Read what I posted above. I follow Intel guidelines with all of my overclocks. The only one who's said anything about staying at 4Ghz is you. I stated what I run on a daily basis. I never told anyone else that it was mandatory so stop trying to start crap with untrue statements.

Quote:


> Even if your not overclocking your processor is still deteriorating just on a slower level which I'm not sure why you think it only does when u overclock it or maybe you forgot to mention that also? Again, I'm not here to argue with someone on both sides with Intel guidelines and recommendations


Nah that's exactly why you are here. Since you did "some" research and found out that CPUs have a limited lifespan [how many years







] even without oveclocking [which I'm sure many people know], why don't you tell us how to calculate the actual lifespan of a CPU Mr. Bachelors Science Degree? Or did your professor not teach you that? Yeah I'm not expecting an answer for this one.









Quote:


> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> One you change your BLK setting and other things in your BIOS, Intel CAN NOT recommend anything after that. If they do I would love to see a support post from them or you cause I would be there! But what I'm saying buddy is that Intel would never stand behind your "recommendation" while quoting them on their guidelines unless you made the chip. So you would need different GUIDELINES after pushing your chip, water cooled or not it's almost 2016 and all products are getting better, so u don't have to be stuck preaching Intel guidelines and recommendation because they are already known on an also discontinued processor. you will always be vulnerable for tons of issues since the game has changed Clu. You can't make a great chip last a lifetime anyways and there are no perfect configs even stock. If your not the type that like to push the limits than sorry this may not be for your eyes or ears, being on overlock.net this is what I least expected.. THANKS for your recommendation but I can not consider it with my expectation and setup may be a silicon lottery chip. Are Theres guildlines on how to push that kinda chip cause actually they are not all perfectly the same anyways.


You clearly have NO idea what you are talking about LOL. Ok once again it's not my recommendation it's Intel recommendation. If you choose to violate those suggestion then go for it. Not my problem as I'm losing no sleep over it. You have clearly been avoiding the other post in this thread where users have either agreed with me or have spoken about how running their CPU higher than 1.35v caused issues. Upi sure love the word "preaching" don't you? As far as pushing my CPU read above, as far as my RAM goes I've pushed my current 24GBs Triple Channel DDR3-1333Mhz to DDR3-2000Mhz+. I think that's a nice push. I'm not your average overclocker. I actually understand the tech I'm working with and I like to inform others as well. It's completely up to them to follow Intel guidelines or not. You are welcome by the way and it's NOT MY recommendations, IT IS INTEL recommendations for the 100th time.

Quote:


> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> So as I was saying sorry for offending any ONE.
> I was leaving these forums but if you want to keep taking shots your merely making your self look ignorant or scared to fry a $100 chip? If I buy it I can fry it if I want. Other people buget don't even overlock cause you will probably never utilize 100% on your hexa-core (6-being logical) or 12 threads if u want unless your benchmarking. And by the way running a 27/4 stress tests is stupid , if u don't blue screen with in 30-min to an hour with 100% utilization, I would cut off the 23 other hours of torturing your processor in a way it will never really be used. So save the longevity and crash or enable blue screen hault while only using 25-50% utilization and just looking for clock speed before you blow your chip while you.


Whew you know you are losing or upset when you continue to name call. How childish. I'm not making myself look like anything and I'm not taking shots at you. I need you to understand and comprehend. You are wrong on so many levels that it is not funny. Also stop talking as if you know everything about me, my CPU or overclocking. It's not $100. My X5660 cost $225 IIRC and I could careless how much you paid for yours. I was one of the first enthusiast to jump on the X58 Xeon CPU purchases [L5639 & X5660] in 2013 before the steep price drop in around Spring-Summer 2014. I performed a ton of test and brought my results here. Now they reside on my blog. If 24/7 stress test are stupid in your opinion then simply avoid them. Good luck with stability and BSOD issues. Oh and I use some pretty high end programs on my PC. You have no idea if my CPU is near 50% or about 70% regularly. Stop acting like you know it all please. Thanks.


----------



## webhito

I see things have been getting heated up here lately lol, seems there is always the oddball in the group no matter where you go.

Anywho, my board has come back to life, after reflashing half a dozen times, back and forth to f3a and f2 it ended up settling down with the f2 bios, got my overclock working once again and just have that silly problem with the boot time, should not have flashed to f3a to start with, lesson learned.

The sad thing is that during all this issue I went and ordered a Gaming G1 z170 board with a 6700k, pricewise it was almost the same as a x99 with a 5820 chip but since x99 is not really that big of a platform here and there are very few boards I can get my hands on I decided to give skylake a try, I picked up a 970 also, but am having remorse as I could have picked up a 980ti... Now, I do not play anything over 1080p as I only use my 40" lcd to play games, would anyone suggest returning the card and buying a 980ti? I got one of those asus 970 turbo cards to match with my white and red build lol, sad thing is that its not completely white on the back, so it looks kind of weird, and performance wise its not the greatest either, however it only uses one 8 pin pci-e connector which is nice IMO.

At least I am happy to have my board back up and running, playing Fallout 4 at ultra with 40-60 fps most the time with some real crappy drops every now and then to 20fps but I do have a 7970 only so maybe putting the 970 in that machine and in my 6700k put in a 980ti lol... Sigh, decisions decisions.


----------



## Hexcorious

Long time reader first time poster.. I have a DO 920 @3.2 on a DX58SO I'd like to play around with. I haven't heard much about this MB and 1366 Xeon's. I'd like to drop a x5650 in to play around with. Any thoughts about how this will work?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hexcorious*
> 
> Long time reader first time poster.. I have a DO 920 @3.2 on a DX58SO I'd like to play around with. I haven't heard much about this MB and 1366 Xeon's. I'd like to drop a x5650 in to play around with. Any thoughts about how this will work?


A quick google search showed me that your motherboard indeed is compatible with x5650, however I am not too sure how well it will overclock as intel boards are known for being very stable yet not very good overclockers so I would not expect to get the same results as you would with the other available boards, but even if you are able to get it to 3.2 on all cores you will have 2 more cores to play, heck even at stock the xeon is a great cpu.

If you are looking on how to overclock it just do a search for Kana-Maru´s posts, should be easy to go from there.

Good luck!


----------



## Firehawk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> A quick google search showed me that your motherboard indeed is compatible with x5650, however I am not too sure how well it will overclock as intel boards are known for being very stable yet not very good overclockers so I would not expect to get the same results as you would with the other available boards, but even if you are able to get it to 3.2 on all cores you will have 2 more cores to play, heck even at stock the xeon is a great cpu.
> 
> If you are looking on how to overclock it just do a search for Kana-Maru´s posts, should be easy to go from there.
> 
> Good luck!


Ya the DX58SO wasn't a good overclocking board. You're almost better off getting a chip with a higher multiplier just so the clock speed is higher, because you're limited.

To be fair to platinum1105, he did state a couple things that were right to a point, despite being misrepresented. I'm not siding with him, so don't flame me, this is just for general knowledge and discourse.

First of which is chip degradation. Your chip during running time, regardless of voltage is degrading. As a result your chip has a set lifespan. Good luck figuring it out. Intel Engineers provide the white papers that you're taking your recommended voltages from for statistical analysis. Basically, from testing they figured out a MTBF (mean time before failure) for the chips under those conditions. As long as all of the conditions are met, the chip will fall under the bell curve. This allows Intel as a company to figure out a decent time period over which to offer a warranty for the product, among other things. If the recommendations are strayed from, the bell curve shifts. The higher the voltage, the faster degradation occurs. The higher the temperature, the faster degradation occurs. Despite what happened to OCmember's chip, these are not hard lines. Your chip will not up and die if you choose to run it at 1.38v.
Its much like a best before date on a carton of milk. If the date is Dec 1, and the first rolls around, the milk will not suddenly go from good to sour and curdling. Some cartons will last weeks longer and some will go bad early.
Is it safer to stay within guidelines? Sure. Can you exceed those guidelines? Well technically, none of the chips were ever meant to have been overclocked in the first place, so they're all exceeding specs here. Its just a matter of degree at this point. Overclocking is about risk and reward. Do you want to risk a little to gain a little? How about a little more? More again? Where do you stop?
The point here is that you could be running stock and have your chip die tomorrow, or you could be running at 5.0GHz and 1.45v and have it last for another 2 years like that. We have no way of knowing how much time is left for our chips. Intel has the statistical data, but they're not sharing.
In the end, enjoy your chip and let people overclock it however they want. We all know the Intel recommendations have been stated about 500 times in this and the club threads, so if he wants to push it further, let him, its his chip and his money.

I think the original question that started the flaming was whether watercooling would let you overclock further, safer. The only good answer to that is: only if temperature is limiting your overclock. If you're hitting 90* under load at 4.2GHz, it will help, if you're getting 4.8GHz and 50*, you have another problem.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> The sad thing is that during all this issue I went and ordered a Gaming G1 z170 board with a 6700k, pricewise it was almost the same as a x99 with a 5820 chip but since x99 is not really that big of a platform here and there are very few boards I can get my hands on I decided to give skylake a try, I picked up a 970 also, but am having remorse as I could have picked up a 980ti... Now, I do not play anything over 1080p as I only use my 40" lcd to play games, would anyone suggest returning the card and buying a 980ti?


Unless you want to play at resolutions higher than 1080p you might as well keep the 970. The 970 Ti is top-of-the-line-expensive, but it is also on the way out. DX12 is here with games right around the corner. If I were you I'd simply wait and see what AMD and Nvidia offers next year. At the moment Nvidia cares about the 980 Ti and it is getting all of the much needed driver updates. However, if it turns out anything like my 670s or other Kepler complaints you could be having headaces late next year or sometime in 2017. So i you want a 980 Ti for it, but remember newer cards are closer than ever. Plus AMD still has to release their dual GPU Fury X2. The 295X2 is still king among GPU cards in overall performance, even beating out dual 970s [which wasn't the case at first, AMD drivers saved the day].

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hexcorious*
> 
> Long time reader first time poster.. I have a DO 920 @3.2 on a DX58SO I'd like to play around with. I haven't heard much about this MB and 1366 Xeon's. I'd like to drop a x5650 in to play around with. Any thoughts about how this will work?


If it does indeed work as @webhito suggested. Let me know so I can add it to my list:
www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9

Quote:


> To be fair to platinum1105, he did state a couple things that were right to a point, despite being misrepresented. I'm not siding with him, so don't flame me, this is just for general knowledge and discourse.
> 
> First of which is chip degradation. Your chip during running time, regardless of voltage is degrading. As a result your chip has a set lifespan. Good luck figuring it out.


First of all I acknowledged this. I specifically stated "[which I'm sure many people know]" because that is 100% OBVIOUS INFORMATION. That's basic as it gets.......seriously. I'm sure many people knows and understands that nothing last forever and that CPUs slowly lose life overtime. Now these times might long periods of time [6+ years - 10+ years etc], but we all understand that they will eventually fail. It's greeat since Intel can count on new server sales more often that none as CPUs expire and big corporations won't\can't take the chance of a server bing down.

The guy simply added that because his back was against the wall and he didn't want to acknowledge Intel guidelines for overclock. "Oh uhhhh well it's gonna die anyways duh didn't you know that" = is NOT an excuse or reason to be reckless. As I said before you can be reckless if you choose to, but don't try to prove your point by saying Intel recommendations are pointless when you exceed their default BCLK or use H20 to exceed the max voltage [what in the world].

Quote:


> Despite what happened to OCmember's chip, these are not hard lines. Your chip will not up and die if you choose to run it at 1.38v.


I'm not sure were you've been in both topics or across the web. @OCmember isn't that only person that has experience problems while running 1.35v or going above 1.35v. He simply stated his story. I've read many others and received messages on Steam\Origin\Email etc about people killing their CPUs. I try to help as much as I can, but once you exceed Intel recommendations and remove their safety nets it's just a matter of time then.

Quote:


> The point here is that you could be running stock and have your chip die tomorrow, or you could be running at 5.0GHz and 1.45v and have it last for another 2 years like that.


LOL no. 1.45 @ 5.0Ghz is more than likely not happening unless you have the most holiest gold chip known to man. Secondly stating that stock will die quicker than a high overclock that is probably not getting enough voltage anyways is silly. Of course stock will last longer. That's why they lived in servers for many years under who knows conditions. I've been in server rooms were it was extremely hot and others with server room A\Cs. The CPU lived for years under harsh conditions @ stock. I would put your theory to test, but I already know the outcome having nearly killed and actually degrading my CPU myself.

Quote:


> In the end, enjoy your chip and let people overclock it however they want. We all know the Intel recommendations have been stated about 500 times in this and the club threads, so if he wants to push it further, let him, its his chip and his money.


I stated that as well, but I'm not going to let anyone pass bad information, especially here of all places were most newcomers go for help and information period. You are repeating pretty much what I said in my first post I believe. Read all of my replies were I have stated that if you want to destroy your CPU......GO FOR IT. However, don't come with the "no need to listen to Intel" non-sense or "heat is more important than anything." I'll tell you like I told him, unless you know more than a Intel Engineer. who manufactured these CPUs, why talk against what they know and what they can prove. I also stated that it's his chip and his money, but keep the false info out. Now do you understand me? If not re-read my post where I clearly stated this.

Quote:


> I think the original question that started the flaming was whether watercooling would let you overclock further, safer. The only good answer to that is: only if temperature is limiting your overclock. If you're hitting 90* under load at 4.2GHz, it will help, if you're getting 4.8GHz and 50*, you have another problem.


Well kinda. He stated that he was within Intel recommendation of 1.4v [which was wrong] and went on to say that overclocking with H20 will ensure you don't have to worry about voltage above 1.4v [which is wrong]. I simply stated that he was incorrect and the max recommendation was 1.35v which turned into him tell me that I'm new here and that his Bachelors Science Degree proves he's smarter or something.

Just start here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5450#post_24602723

Then read. I mean it's pretty obviously what happened and everything you've stated above was either already acknowledged or discussed.


----------



## Firehawk

Kana-Maru, no need to get all defensive. I wasn't attacking you, merely discussing the chips. I'll ask you though to please stop telling me to go back and read it all since I've been in both of these threads for years already, having read all the posts, despite the fact that I never joined the club. I happen to have a X5670, and have had it for 2 years already.

Unfortunately, you misunderstood my point. It wasn't to reiterate points that had already been made, it wasn't to tell people to exceed the recommendations set by Intel, and it wasn't to tell everyone that nothing matters except heat and dissipating it. The entire point was to illustrate that the recommendations are set based on statistics and bell curve results. I assume that since you work in the industry you're familiar with MTBF calculations. Essentially they look at the stats and say "if we set the limits to these values, 95% (or whatever percentage they think is safe) of the chips will last the warranty period." That's all they care about.

Please don't call it a safety net. There isn't some magic bubble that the engineers put in place that will protect your chip until you decide to push it above 1.35v where it will pop and destroy your chip along with it. I know there have been a few cases of people whose chips have died. The question though is under what conditions? What was the history of the chip before the user that had it fail? Was it in a hot or climate controlled server room? How long was it in service before it was retired? These are all things that you yourself have just said. Any number of variables could have contributed to their chips dying when they were pushing them.

As for the 5.0GHz chip at 1.45v, I wish. Yes of course its ridiculous, I pulled the numbers out of my ass. I thought that statement was obvious given what came before. I was saying that depending on the aforementioned variables that any given chip has been subjected to, and where it would have fallen on the MTBF graph to begin with, its entirely possible for the user (read second hand user, since that the point of this thread) to have chips last differing amounts of time regardless of overclock. Yes, of course if you push it too far and burn it out.....

Refresh my memory, what voltage were you pushing to get your chip to 5.4GHz?

I honestly don't remember everything that was in the first post. I read it once, however long ago this thread started, and haven't bothered with it since, other than noticing that you changed links to point people to your blog instead of these forums. What shameless self promotion.
If you're going to tear a strip out of someone for saying something that's already been discussed, you may as well contact a Mod and have them close the thread. Then go back and delete all but maybe 50 posts. While you're at it close the club thread too. Everything has been discussed ad nauseum. But, you only attack people who don't share your views. Everyone must preach from the book of the GREAT KANA-MARU.


----------



## virpz

You are overclocking, you're out of the intel recommendations, "safe zone" or whatever you wanna call it.
I don't see any intel engineers on this thread telling that you can't go past 1.35V because if you do your chip will explode in 3 months... there isn't any magic number concerning, vcore, pll and temp. Of course the common sense tell us that it not not safe to have 80ºC, vcore 1.4V and 2.0V PLL with westmere Xeons. My experience is that I had all my Xeons 24/7 1.35-1.38v, pll 1.73v 7 and I never had any troubles. Of course I also had excellent ventilation + stellar wc loop.

The most comprehensive overclocking guides for X58 incluiding westmeres ?

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/
http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/

All the info is from 2008 to 2011, people have been replicating and spreading that information since then.

Op made a great contribution to the community but lately this thread has been looking like the "Invention of X58 overclocking".


----------



## meganerd

What is with all the hate? I had an X58 + i7 920, found this guide and bought an X5650 which is happily running at 4Ghz stable with low voltages. This is important since my work loads can run north of 48 hours so actual stability is important. I found and used most of those guides from before to get as much out of the 920 as I could, but they did not talk about the Xeons. This thread was a nice twist that has saved me time and money, so kudos to the OP.


----------



## gofasterstripes

In other news, I like the site redesign


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> In other news, I like the site redesign


Agreed lol


----------



## cb750rob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> In other news, I like the site redesign


Good one Sam!

"Blessed are the cheese makers"


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Firehawk*
> 
> Kana-Maru, no need to get all defensive. I wasn't attacking you, merely discussing the chips. I'll ask you though to please stop telling me to go back and read it all since I've been in both of these threads for years already, having read all the posts, despite the fact that I never joined the club. I happen to have a X5670, and have had it for 2 years already.


I'm not defensive at all so please don't think that. Just because I reply doesn't mean I am defensive. If you did indeed read my post then you would've already understood that I've already addressed some of the basic things you were saying.

Quote:


> Please don't call it a safety net. There isn't some magic bubble that the engineers put in place that will protect your chip until you decide to push it above 1.35v where it will pop and destroy your chip along with it.


Yeah there really is a safety net that Intel put in place. You don't have to believe me or believe in the safety net. Anyone that understands how to overclock while following Intel guidelines will understand this. It's old information as well, nothing new. As a overclocker when you decide to violate those "rules" Intel had in place then you are free to do whatever is you want. Pushing volts into your chip towards 1.35v and above is clearly your choice, I'm not disputing that at all.

Quote:


> I honestly don't remember everything that was in the first post. I read it once, however long ago this thread started, and haven't bothered with it since, other than noticing that you changed links to point people to your blog instead of these forums. What shameless self promotion.


Shameless promotion. HAHA. Funny since it is in fact MY review that spent plenty of time and months typing up until it's completion. Also the fact that I rarely even have time to update my blog as much as I should makes me laugh even harder at your statement. You feel that I am simply here to promote myself and my website.....if that was the case then I WOULDN'T BE HERE ON OCN NOW! Think before you speak. I'm here on OCN and other websites. If you don't like me posting my work on my blog then don't read it. I'm not done with my review either. I still have another update coming. I simply don't have a ton of time to run benchmarks back to back as I did in the past. I'm sorry if that offends you. Remember earlier when you told me not to be so defensive, well you don't have to be so offensive because I chose to put my review on my blog many months after it was posted on OCN. If anything I've brought more traffic and sign-ups to OCN than my little blog site that many people knows nothing about.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> In other news, I like the site redesign


Same here. Caught me by surprise at first. I like it overall.


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> In other news, I like the site redesign


http://www.overclock.net/t/1580688/a-new-face-for-overclock-net


----------



## jihe

So anyone tried registered ECC with the xeons yet? I ran into this problem, I know the xeons support registered ECC and the borad (X58A-UD5) will too if the ram is x8 and not x4 (unfortunately most higher capacity rdimms are x4). In fact my board runs 6x4G PC3L-12800R 2rx8 fine with a lowly E5506, however every time I tried them with my X5650 I just get C1 flashing a few times at boot and eventually stuck at C1, which I believe is a ram error. Has anyone encountered this?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> So anyone tried registered ECC with the xeons yet? I ran into this problem, I know the xeons support registered ECC and the borad (X58A-UD5) will too if the ram is x8 and not x4 (unfortunately most higher capacity rdimms are x4). In fact my board runs 6x4G PC3L-12800R 2rx8 fine with a lowly E5506, however every time I tried them with my X5650 I just get C1 flashing a few times at boot and eventually stuck at C1, which I believe is a ram error. Has anyone encountered this?


I have no issues. I'm running Registered ECC 1.35v memory with my X5660+Sabertooth X58. So far so good.


----------



## OCmember

I would love to run ECC ram in my system. Last time I ran ECC was with an early Northwood system with Rambus RDR

gotta say i find the new forums kinda counter productive... i've got to switch to the mobile mode to log in then back desktop mode


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I have no issues. I'm running Registered ECC 1.35v memory with my X5660+Sabertooth X58. So far so good.


I have no issues with the exact same ram and a 5506, drop in a 5650 and can't get it to boot? The only explanation I can think of is the 5506 only supports 800mhz so ram is forced to run at that frequency whereas the 5650 is trying to run them at some strange settings.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I see things have been getting heated up here lately lol, seems there is always the oddball in the group no matter where you go.
> 
> Anywho, my board has come back to life, after reflashing half a dozen times, back and forth to f3a and f2 it ended up settling down with the f2 bios, got my overclock working once again and just have that silly problem with the boot time, should not have flashed to f3a to start with, lesson learned.
> 
> The sad thing is that during all this issue I went and ordered a Gaming G1 z170 board with a 6700k, pricewise it was almost the same as a x99 with a 5820 chip but since x99 is not really that big of a platform here and there are very few boards I can get my hands on I decided to give skylake a try, I picked up a 970 also, but am having remorse as I could have picked up a 980ti... Now, I do not play anything over 1080p as I only use my 40" lcd to play games, would anyone suggest returning the card and buying a 980ti? I got one of those asus 970 turbo cards to match with my white and red build lol, sad thing is that its not completely white on the back, so it looks kind of weird, and performance wise its not the greatest either, however it only uses one 8 pin pci-e connector which is nice IMO.
> 
> At least I am happy to have my board back up and running, playing Fallout 4 at ultra with 40-60 fps most the time with some real crappy drops every now and then to 20fps but I do have a 7970 only so maybe putting the 970 in that machine and in my 6700k put in a 980ti lol... Sigh, decisions decisions.


I think it would be better to buy x99 systems, as broadwell-E would be x99 compatible.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Good evening gentlemen,

What should be my course of action if my question seems to have got lost a few pages ago? Basically it's about too high voltage required to reach 4.4 GHz, it looks suspicious to me, as it may indicate a faulty or dying chip.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Good evening gentlemen,
> 
> What should be my course of action if my question seems to have got lost a few pages ago? Basically it's about too high voltage required to reach 4.4 GHz, it looks suspicious to me, as it may indicate a faulty or dying chip.


How much voltage are we talking here?
The voltages required vary greatly on these chips, my X5650 needs 1.45V for 4.4GHz but my X5670 can do it with 1.35V.


----------



## webhito

Hey fellas, got another question for you.

Anyone here have windows 10 installed on their x58? how has it been working so far?


----------



## meganerd

I have several systems with x58 chipsets paired with a 6 core Xeon running a variety of OSs (Linux, Windows Server 2012r2, and Windows10, and yes I really do have three X58s with Xeons in them now). One common problem I have had is with SATA chipsets not playing nice with SSDs (and not recognizing them at all in one instance), though this appears to be independent of the OS (that is I have the same problems under Linux as I do Windows). You may need to pick up an add in card to solve this (as I have done on two of my systems, the exception being my P6X58-E PRO which has been a rockstar board).

Sometimes drivers for the devices included on the motherboard can be a little harder to find if Windows 10 does not automatically detect them.

My best experiences so far have come from Ubuntu and CentOS 7 because there was no driver hunt (and they also work out of the box with the SAS controllers I buy for their pass through feature).

So while the install can be a little annoying, I have not had any insurmountable issues yet once I am up and running. Having 6 cores at 3.6- 4 Ghz (I have very conservative overclocks because stability is more important to me than raw performance) at this price point is pretty awesome.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meganerd*
> 
> I have several systems with x58 chipsets paired with a 6 core Xeon running a variety of OSs (Linux, Windows Server 2012r2, and Windows10, and yes I really do have three X58s with Xeons in them now). One common problem I have had is with SATA chipsets not playing nice with SSDs (and not recognizing them at all in one instance), though this appears to be independent of the OS (that is I have the same problems under Linux as I do Windows). You may need to pick up an add in card to solve this (as I have done on two of my systems, the exception being my P6X58-E PRO which has been a rockstar board).
> 
> Sometimes drivers for the devices included on the motherboard can be a little harder to find if Windows 10 does not automatically detect them.
> 
> My best experiences so far have come from Ubuntu and CentOS 7 because there was no driver hunt (and they also work out of the box with the SAS controllers I buy for their pass through feature).
> 
> So while the install can be a little annoying, I have not had any insurmountable issues yet once I am up and running. Having 6 cores at 3.6- 4 Ghz (I have very conservative overclocks because stability is more important to me than raw performance) at this price point is pretty awesome.


i had no problem running two samsung 850 evo 120gn in raid 0 on my asus rampage 2 x58 board, too bad you had this problem.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Hey fellas, got another question for you.
> 
> Anyone here have windows 10 installed on their x58? how has it been working so far?


Works fine.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meganerd*
> 
> I have several systems with x58 chipsets paired with a 6 core Xeon running a variety of OSs (Linux, Windows Server 2012r2, and Windows10, and yes I really do have three X58s with Xeons in them now). One common problem I have had is with SATA chipsets not playing nice with SSDs (and not recognizing them at all in one instance), though this appears to be independent of the OS (that is I have the same problems under Linux as I do Windows). You may need to pick up an add in card to solve this (as I have done on two of my systems, the exception being my P6X58-E PRO which has been a rockstar board).
> 
> Sometimes drivers for the devices included on the motherboard can be a little harder to find if Windows 10 does not automatically detect them.
> 
> My best experiences so far have come from Ubuntu and CentOS 7 because there was no driver hunt (and they also work out of the box with the SAS controllers I buy for their pass through feature).
> 
> So while the install can be a little annoying, I have not had any insurmountable issues yet once I am up and running. Having 6 cores at 3.6- 4 Ghz (I have very conservative overclocks because stability is more important to me than raw performance) at this price point is pretty awesome.


No problem with the intel sata2 ports. Though the so called sata3 ports are known to have problems.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Hey fellas, got another question for you.
> 
> Anyone here have windows 10 installed on their x58? how has it been working so far?


So far it's been lovely. No crashes or random BS. All of my programs and games [older games from pre 2005] still works. Constantly checking and disabling the spy crap isn't that fun. I've been using Windows 10 for several months now and it has given me no issues.

I've had no issues with SATA 2 or SATA 3 ports with my Sabertooth X58 with the Xeons I've used.


----------



## webhito

Thanks fellas!

For some reason I had Issues with my sata 3 and ssd but, also after installing windows 10 my usb started connecting and disconnecting every few seconds even after installing drivers for them, Maybe I will try a clean install instead of just the upgrade.

@Kana-Maru, Not too sure why you would need to turn it off constantly, seems Microsoft is desperate to know what everyone does just like facebook lol, makes me wonder how much the nsa is paying for info these days.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> How much voltage are we talking here?
> The voltages required vary greatly on these chips, my X5650 needs 1.45V for 4.4GHz but my X5670 can do it with 1.35V.


Wow that's basically the same as mine, which is 1.4325 IIRC. Is there any pattern in that the chips with a higher multiplier require less voltage?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Wow that's basically the same as mine, which is 1.4325 IIRC. Is there any pattern in that the chips with a higher multiplier require less voltage?


IMO, the higher models are better binned, so yes. Not sure if having 4Ghz at 20*200 rather than 25*160 requires more or less voltage though. To me, it would seem running the lower multiplier would require less vCore, but maybe more VTT on the board. I've had two X5675s. One would run too hot at 4Ghz, and I could get to 4.2Ghz on the other with same settings. Probably just restating the obvious.


----------



## platinum1105

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm not defensive at all so please don't think that. Just because I reply doesn't mean I am defensive. If you did indeed read my post then you would've already understood that I've already addressed some of the basic things you were saying.
> Yeah there really is a safety net that Intel put in place. You don't have to believe me or believe in the safety net. Anyone that understands how to overclock while following Intel guidelines will understand this. It's old information as well, nothing new. As a overclocker when you decide to violate those "rules" Intel had in place then you are free to do whatever is you want. Pushing volts into your chip towards 1.35v and above is clearly your choice, I'm not disputing that at all.
> Shameless promotion. HAHA. Funny since it is in fact MY review that spent plenty of time and months typing up until it's completion. Also the fact that I rarely even have time to update my blog as much as I should makes me laugh even harder at your statement. You feel that I am simply here to promote myself and my website.....if that was the case then I WOULDN'T BE HERE ON OCN NOW! Think before you speak. I'm here on OCN and other websites. If you don't like me posting my work on my blog then don't read it. I'm not done with my review either. I still have another update coming. I simply don't have a ton of time to run benchmarks back to back as I did in the past. I'm sorry if that offends you. Remember earlier when you told me not to be so defensive, well you don't have to be so offensive because I chose to put my review on my blog many months after it was posted on OCN. If anything I've brought more traffic and sign-ups to OCN than my little blog site that many people knows nothing about.
> Same here. Caught me by surprise at first. I like it overall.


Like I said

Seriously stop saying the same thing, can u just point someone on the right direction while not acting affended at first then at the end, there you go with your ignorance mix, I can agree to disagree. There is no safety net. Do you know what DOA is? I guess you learned a new paradox then.

When people ask questions or come for support, you don't answer like this "nope I don't have any issues" great info, you sound like a broken record on this form, how do u think you have master these dicontinued xeons with no more support from Intel about them. Sorry you bought your chip at the wrong time considering upgrading back then from the 920 or higher was just a waste of money. Buy you chips now for $100-150. Stop looking ignorant. If u don't want to understand anyone else your hurting your self in knowledge and others in trying to grasp new knowledge. Your no Intel rep. Your not your processor and for sure u think your helping people here with obvious points then nit pick not at anything else but to argue about threads and logical cores lol, by the way it's "12 logical cores" 1 physical processor. I saw you mention it has processors lol. It's a CPU central processor unit. You can be right at times but if your wrong that while statement is wrong. Stop blasting people or you will just be another troll that thinks he is the best at what he knows, I also saw someone set u stright like firehawk and you had no response, you simply said next! Lol at least incorrect myself.
I'm realizing these forum is one sided with anyone that brings a different point of view than you. Typical ignorant IT guy with *certifications* please.


----------



## platinum1105

Also the fact that I rarely even have time to update my blog as much as I should makes me laugh even harder at your statement.

Dude foot in mouth you only have time to try and blast people u don't help other than sucking intels dick about there proposed guidelines and this should apply to everyone. Again like firehawk said my money my processor, I care less what u say now since you but yourself on blast. It's time for you with all your "great knowledge" to step up and say something if it's gonna help them not comments from the peanut gallery u live at. At least I'm not LOLing everyone that has good points. Your just suck living in 2010. Processor status "end of life" there's a good quote from your best friend. (Intel)

http://ark.intel.com/m/products/47921/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5660-(12M-Cache-2_80-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI)#@product/specifications

This is a great spec sheet from Intel. No need to repeat it since it been posted for over 5 years.

If u want to respond you can but at least try not to repeat yourself.


----------



## webhito

↑ Rage much?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> @Kana-Maru, Not too sure why you would need to turn it off constantly, seems Microsoft is desperate to know what everyone does just like facebook lol, makes me wonder how much the nsa is paying for info these days.


Haha true. Well I don't think the NSA is paying anyone anything. I'm pretty sure it's "give us data or get sued and fined". Then again a judge can force certain things as well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> ↑ Rage much?


Yup I'm pretty sure it's rage.. I'm not even reading what he has to say anymore. I'm ignoring the negativity from people as much as I can.


----------



## cobovo

Hi guys,
I have a seriously problem. I can't get any overclock on my new mobo. In this time it be Gigabyte GA_X58A_OC. I updated bios to late (F5d). But not result at all. My X5650 work on 2,9 (22x133) and any change of settings give me not stable work of system.
Any suggestion? Maybe some one get stable work on this desk with Xeon X56xx (6-core).
Thx.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Hi guys,
> I have a seriously problem. I can't get any overclock on my new mobo. In this time it be Gigabyte GA_X58A_OC. I updated bios to late (F5d). But not result at all. My X5650 work on 2,9 (22x133) and any change of settings give me not stable work of system.
> Any suggestion? Maybe some one get stable work on this desk with Xeon X56xx (6-core).
> Thx.


Had a similar issue with my G1 Guerilla not long ago, try turning eist to automatic and try again, not sure why but my board would not even post if it was set to on.


----------



## cobovo

Thank you for quick response.
Hmm.. maybe i not tried to do it yet.
Also i find beta bios for GA-X58A-OC F5c. If your decision not help, will be update bios and trying again.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Thank you for quick response.
> Hmm.. maybe i not tried to do it yet.
> Also i find beta bios for GA-X58A-OC F5c. If your decision not help, will be update bios and trying again.


One other thing I forgot to mention is that only f2 bios worked for me, I spent several hours flashing\clearing cmos to get a stable overclock but only f2 seemed to work for me. If you can get a newer version to work do it by all means but if it doesn't you might wanna try an older one.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> One other thing I forgot to mention is that only f2 bios worked for me, I spent several hours flashing\clearing cmos to get a stable overclock but only f2 seemed to work for me. If you can get a newer version to work do it by all means but if it doesn't you might wanna try an older one.


Okay keep in mind. My desk has two bios and second bios was F3.


----------



## Dotachin

This user needs your wisdom guys.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Hi guys,
> I have a seriously problem. I can't get any overclock on my new mobo. In this time it be Gigabyte GA_X58A_OC. I updated bios to late (F5d). But not result at all. My X5650 work on 2,9 (22x133) and any change of settings give me not stable work of system.
> Any suggestion? Maybe some one get stable work on this desk with Xeon X56xx (6-core).
> Thx.


Does it just throw the Overclock Failed error at POST?

Mine used to do that all the time, I can't remember how I stopped it exactly but try this:

1. Turn off the system and switch the PSU off.
2. Hold the power button to get rid of any residual power.
3. Turn the PSU back on (but not the system) and hold the Clear CMOS button down for 10 sec.
4. Turn the system on and go into the BIOS.
5. Load optimized defaults when in the main BIOS screen.
6. Increase the BCLK to 140 and then Save & exit the BIOS.

See what it does then.


----------



## ldrancer

WHICH DDR3 IS BEST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

does anyone have 1 opinion?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> WHICH DDR3 IS BEST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> does anyone have 1 opinion?


Lots of brands and speeds are available, I love Kingston memory as they never give me problems, G.skill seems to be doing good also.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> WHICH DDR3 IS BEST???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> 
> does anyone have 1 opinion?


I use Samsung HCH9 IC sticks, if your lucky they could OC up to the 2600MHz CL9 or 10 range @ 1.65V with Ivy bridge or Haswell cpu's. On X58 I topped out @ 2200MHz CL9 1.6V with 12GB's on my E762 because of the BCLK. They are the same IC's used in some of Corsairs & G. Skills high frequency kits.

Hynix MFR is the best of the best though, it can hit 3000MHz CL12 @ 1.65V, but it's very expensive compared to HCH9's. I paid $20 per 4GB stick for my HCH9's.


----------



## ldrancer

heres my big question, then. how about overclocking the ram and the speed, the cpu will need for an overclock? what speed ram should i get? what should i start on? i picked up a good board, know you gotta have a good motherboard. looking for the most, gaming performance. plan to pick up a new cpu heatsink. and have a good decent airflow case. cm 690. so i was always wanting to aircool and, wanted to get good performance. and overclock and know im hitting the processors limit, and not mine that i dont kow how to overclock or am missing some component in this to do it. i dont know some technical part of this or what.

i found a decent evga e768 board used for sale for this. figure a x5675 processor. its, one thing newer. and decent speed, and when you hit that turbo button on the front of the computer, it says it gets adecent faster speed. wonder which would be better? the 130watt tdp versions, or the 95 watt tdp versions, like the x5670 I mean if they had to bin them, test them, just make chips to see which would run the best, which, would I get the faster overclock out of?

Like for example, on this page here, it shows. x5675 compared to the x5690. should i get 300mhz less speed processor with 35watts less tdp? or is the heat gonna blow the other one? before i could clock it to the same speeds? is a question.

so anyway, i dont want to overclock ram, just the processor. if the board can support and i can get, a higher speed ram, that means it can run those speeds without dying quicker. it can actually, run those speeds. if its, you know just like this why dont i find ddr 100 speed ram and overclock it to 3098908220 ghz, because well you just can. thats the only question i got.

ive overclocked ram, just because the computer done it, didnt find out until i got the ram to start messing up, that it was overclcoked. but i knew i overclocked the computer. so how will i know on 1366 ram when im overclocking the ram. i dont know


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> heres my big question, then. how about overclocking the ram and the speed, the cpu will need for an overclock? what speed ram should i get? what should i start on? i picked up a good board, know you gotta have a good motherboard. looking for the most, gaming performance. plan to pick up a new cpu heatsink. and have a good decent airflow case. cm 690. so i was always wanting to aircool and, wanted to get good performance. and overclock and know im hitting the processors limit, and not mine that i dont kow how to overclock or am missing some component in this to do it. i dont know some technical part of this or what.
> 
> i found a decent evga e768 board used for sale for this. figure a x5675 processor. its, one thing newer. and decent speed, and when you hit that turbo button on the front of the computer, it says it gets adecent faster speed. wonder which would be better? the 130watt tdp versions, or the 95 watt tdp versions, like the x5670 I mean if they had to bin them, test them, just make chips to see which would run the best, which, would I get the faster overclock out of?
> 
> Like for example, on this page here, it shows. x5675 compared to the x5690. should i get 300mhz less speed processor with 35watts less tdp? or is the heat gonna blow the other one? before i could clock it to the same speeds? is a question.
> 
> so anyway, i dont want to overclock ram, just the processor. if the board can support and i can get, a higher speed ram, that means it can run those speeds without dying quicker. it can actually, run those speeds. if its, you know just like this why dont i find ddr 100 speed ram and overclock it to 3098908220 ghz, because well you just can. thats the only question i got.
> 
> ive overclocked ram, just because the computer done it, didnt find out until i got the ram to start messing up, that it was overclcoked. but i knew i overclocked the computer. so how will i know on 1366 ram when im overclocking the ram. i dont know


That's one mighty big question and a wall of text. You almost always have to overclock the memory when overclocking the CPU, most of the time. Some boards you can unlink the memory from the BCLK, so it can run at 1333Mhz or whatever. I'm using Gskill Snipers DDR3-1600 12GB kits in my rigs. One of my cases is a CM 690 as well. I am using a Zalman CPNS 10X Performa in push-pull, does ok. The highest I get is about 65C with an ambient temp of 21C. I've got 4 fans in the case as well. I'm using a X5660 at 4.14Ghz, a fairly simple overclock by bumping the BCLK to 180, changing the multi to 23. Memory is running slightly lower than 1600Mhz, 1553 Mhz, I believe. A X5675 will support a multiplier up to 25. Using a BCLK of 160 or 200 and adjusting the memory divider accordingly you could get 4Ghz out of your chip and 1600Mhz on the RAM easy, and be pretty close to stock in volts. There are many examples of this in this thread.
As for the 95W TDP vs 130W TDP I'll let someone else answer this. I am not 100% certain. 95W chips run cooler, as far as I know, this more power effient, but as far as overclock headroom? no idea, its always seems to be the luck of draw. I have 2 95W chips and one 130W chip. Only using the X5660 at the moment, so I can't give real world examples right now. I might dig out the 130W one tonight.


----------



## ldrancer

this is all im talkign about ok? i dont get it. ? ok is this a hard question or not?

thats a computer ddrram divider. in that 775 bios picture up there. an x5660 i looked it up, is 1333fsb. matching that speed, from what ive heard is 1333mhz ddr3 ram. if thecpus fsb was 1066, 1066ddr3 would be what to get. same with 775 socket. 1066mhz fsb core2duo's, where the same as.. well.. ddr2 533 ram.

heres the deal with busses from both computers. a 1066fsb c2d was running at 267mhz bus speed. times(X) the mutliplier to make your cpu frequency. you kjnow that GHZ.

at 1066mhz fsb on 1366 socket, its not very hard, get ddr3 1066. in comparison 1066mhz fsb on 775 was ddr2 533. so.. yea. so whats the deal here. i do not understand anything abuot blclk. i didnt have a motherboard with mchbar unlocked here, i dotn have one now with 775. unless my bios is hacked. and someone knows what their looking at. or have added an isa option rom.. hehhe. anyway these fsb, divider, bus speed, ram frequencies. how does all that go? i dont know. ive never heard 1 thing thats lead me to understand it.

what? did intel throw a turbo button on the computer to screw over overclocking on a computer to turn the stupid comptuer into a console and sell fps in games to people and have game makers manufacture straight to them, to make top amount on everything they do, like as if though thtey deserve some imaginary amount of money they think they deserve? what about this divider? it was the go to thing i 775 for overclocking. i got adescent overclock with no fuss with my abit board with that setting. i used ddr2 1066 ram so i could handle 2133mhz fsb without any overclocking on the ram and have good latency timings by default in the bios. .. is this x2 thing really confusing people that much? so much they dont get this? ive never heard anything that has got me figure out how to overclock a 1366 to interest me that any technology improved between the 775 and anything beyond it. the biggest technology jump i seen was pentium to c2d.


----------



## ldrancer

alright, an updated color coded picture to my question. heres 775.


can someone relate me to 1366 with it for it? is this divider thing, now a thing of the past while overclocking, hs been turned into a destroyed concept by intel for profits by them and game makers conspiring to relate fps to $$????? just so they can sell fps in games for money?? just asking. oh you want 30fps in games? well hand me 1000$$ oh you want 60fps?? well hand me 1500.. 100fps? 2500$$... ...... whatever anyway.
Just for some information: remember, i have ddr2 1066 ram. the item help> to the right, knows that and is making that information set up to that making it, relevant to it. it is helping me on that ram speed and its settings.
what is hidden, hehe what is the options that are in that 1:1 divider option i can pick? i dont remember cause i was always, i always heard to run it 1:1. for best performance. doing that also let you run tighter timings. going to a higher speed, say 1066 ram speed, and the fsb of the comptuer at what its at, on that picture its at 1720fsb. its a 333bus 1333mhz fsb computer. the processor is that.

is there anything left anyone else is confused upon? has anyone figured this out? all i want to do is overclock, a 1366 without overclocking the ram, like for example on my 1066 ddr2 ram, id have to hit fsb 2133 to begin to overclock the ram. id have a 533bus speed on the processor and the processors clock would be, 533mhz x (x8) multilplier, pretty high.. 4530 ghz. so. help me get there and kow what 1366 is. id be happy with 775 and 4.5ghz. definately. and same with the 1366 type cpu. if i wanted to go beyond on the 775 4.5ghz cmputer speed, does people know what im trying to overclock?? id have to overclock the ram.

at 2133fsb the ram is 1:1 running and I hoped i expolained that thouroughly, with this 775 screen im showing in the picture up there, to get past 4.5 ghz lets say i wanted, 5ghz. i would need the COMPLICATED ALGERBRA PROBLEM why does nobody understnad that, i learned it in like 7th grade. or 6.. 5.. dont remember. 4 or 3 becuase i was in GT.

If youve caught up and understand math, skip this paragraph its detailed and descriptive, and long. all the maths below it in a paragraph under it.

5ghz = 5000/8.5= x. x= the bus speed. that one in that picture up there thats at 430mhz. answers 588mhz. 588x2= what ram speed youd need to run the ram without overclocking it. my ram in my computer is 1066 right? 1160 ram would let me hit, 5 ghz on this computer without even starting to overclock the ram. but the ddr2 1066 ram would need .. the ddr2 1176 ram speed(run 1:1 with the cpu:dram thingy means.. without overclocking the ram=mygoalmainly to do or learn here) - 1066, which is 106. anyway id get it but, its confusing i think it would be at half that overclocked, so the 106/2 53mhz overclock on 1066ram. Which might be alright. but seeing that it goes from almost 1066 ram to ddr2 1200 almost, within not much, and if i got the right frequency i would need to add right to overclock it, it seems more than i think. they dont give out free 1200 ddr2 right?! right? peter griffin right? get it?

5000mhz/8.5=x solve 5000mhz/8.5=588

533mhz=ddr2 1066 ram frequency
588=ddr2 1176 speed

1176-1066=110
588-533=55
checking math 55x2= 110 correct

soooooo, 1200 ddr2 ram would run with that 1:1 up there at 1176 and 5ghz, without even overclocking the ram. and you NEEDED 1:1 on 775, for the ram to not be supplying the cpu with enough data to happen. you knmow if its wasnt 1:1 ratio.

thats the goal to run faster or close to it, speed ram. ddr2 1176 is close to ddr2 1200 and if i wanted to do 775 socket .. with this cpu, i have id want to bettter chance without my ram giving up first or failing on me later, costing me more to upgrade ddr3 when it goes up if it becomes rarer or whatever it is. that makes it price go up, noone needs it anymore or whatever. my better bet would be, if i want 5ghz which will also make the processor die quicker, faster for longer i would want to do the ddr2 1200 ram. or let the cpu plus ram die at the same time at 1066ddr2.

so, how does htis work for ddr3 and x58 1366 socket.

edit: forgot one part, 1176mhz ram speed x 2 = 2352fsb computer. or processor, or motherboard. im not sure what the FRONT SIDE BUS relates to. the front.


----------



## spdaimon

I think I know what you are asking, you want to relate overclocking a socket 775 chip to a socket 1366 chip. Its basically the same. FSB is called BCLK (Base Clock) now in the X58s and above. As for your RAM, as I said earlier, you would set the memory divider, same as in the 775 bios. Some boards, like my R3E, have the memory unlinked i.e. independent of the BCLK. So to try to answer you, on my P6T I have a X5660 installed. I have DDR3-1600 installed. Memory bus speed is still 1/2 the rated speed, so it would say 800Mhz if your board displays that. Mine does not, it just says Memory Target speed: 1600 (or whatever, depends on the BCLK and memory divider set). For example, I set my BCLK to 160. The multiplier on the chip to 23. Memory speed I set to 1604Mhz from the list. This is equivalent of a 2:10 multiplier (or 1:5 if you prefer). You need to set the UCLK (uncore clock) as well, something that is not present in 775 socket chips. This is the uncore. People recommend either 1.5x or 2x the memory speed, so 3200Mhz for 2x, or 2400Mhz for 1.5x. Your clock speed is BCLK * multiplier, so 160 * 23 = 3680Mhz. Not sure how they list DDR2 in the BIOS, or where. Its been a long time. I only recently was helping my buddy with his system with DDR2, but again don't recall. I only remember picking a speed from a drop down type menu in the BIOS. Most my boards have been ASUS, so yours might be different. It may just list DDR2-1066 as 533 like you say. Hope this helps.

P.S. So for the magical 1:1 ratio on the 775 chips, Not sure if that applies here. I remember hearing about it, and best i could do is 5:8 or something like that... like a Q6600 with DDR2-800. 266 FSB, and 400Mhz memory bus. Going beyond 1600Mhz on the memory nets very little it has been said. Your max memory voltage is 1.65v. My Snipers are suppose to run 1600Mhz at 1.35, but I typically set them to 1.5v.


----------



## cobovo

So, guys after 5 days of battle with darkside of overclocking. Looking ahead to say that suffered a heavy defeat ... I can't get any overclock on GA-X58A-OC with X5650 (aka Westmere*32nm). All what i can it's overclocking with OC panel on desk (aka buttons Gear and "+","-") but it work only during this session and after next start of system all settings will be changed to default. Tried with any combination of setting as i can do. But result no overclock. Main problem this changing value of BCLK. Any change of this value give message with follow : overclocking failed. I can't understand how it work when i change with button on desk?
Maybe some one can get and placed here screenshots with bios settings.
Thx.
Also any suggestion and think will be welcome.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> So, guys after 5 days of battle with darkside of overclocking. Looking ahead to say that suffered a heavy defeat ... I can't get any overclock on GA-X58A-OC with X5650 (aka Westmere*32nm). All what i can it's overclocking with OC panel on desk (aka buttons Gear and "+","-") but it work only during this session and after next start of system all settings will be changed to default. Tried with any combination of setting as i can do. But result no overclock. Main problem this changing value of BCLK. Any change of this value give message with follow : overclocking failed. I can't understand how it work when i change with button on desk?
> Maybe some one can get and placed here screenshots with bios settings.
> Thx.
> Also any suggestion and think will be welcome.


Does it reset after shutting it down? Do you get some sort of warning?

I would change the battery if you haven´t already, those boards are old. Update to latest non beta bios and see if that helps, if you did update it, make sure to pull the battery and clear cmos before you dial in your overclock, I had issues with my g1 guerilla not recognizing all 6 cores and by doing that it was smooth sailing afterwards.


----------



## DR4G00N

Just keep resetting the CMOS and cycling power to the board, change the battery, try re-flashing the bios to F5D (After clearing the CMOS) and try the backup bios (little dip switch at the bottom right corner of the board).


----------



## cobovo

So guys battery is be okay,

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Does it reset after shutting it down? Do you get some sort of warning?


Yes,it reset setting after shutdown. After sleep mode system keeps overclock.
I get always this message


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> So guys battery is be okay,
> Yes,it reset setting after shutdown. After sleep mode system keeps overclock.
> I get always this message


I was getting the same errors on my board, oc was not stable at times, once it booted it was fine, but every now and then after a cold boot or restart it would crash, I am not sure if its voltage related ( vccio, vccsa, llc ) or the fact that my ram was not a true ddr3 triple channel kit but it would do the same thing. That screen is telling you that your overclock is simply not stable, and resets to default, it will keep doing that until you find the culprit.

I just purchased a triple channel kit of Corsair Dominator GT 2000 3x2 kit just to test this out and see if indeed my memory has been playing with me. When you boot, does your computer boot, then shut down and then restart again just to show you that screen?


----------



## nzsi7

For what its worth, im not really a big believer in there being much of a benefit to getting a "tripple channel" kit.

Im running 6 sticks in my setup. 3 x 4gb sticks (that are the same but were purchased individually), and 3 x 2gb sticks that I purchased when i build the computer (I got a twin kit and an extra single because im cheap). Everything works fine.

To add to this - I thought there was an issue with one of my RAM sticks as windows showed 18gb installed and 16gb usable (turned out it was my version of windows), but anyway, I tried swapped each of the 2gb sticks out with some random RAM sticks that my friend gave me a couple of years ago before i figured out it was my version of windows. (was still the same type of RAM). Still worked...

Iv seen that "failed to overclock" screen hundreds of times, lol.

Start small, add maby 10 to the baseclock and see if you can boot. If you cant, then add a couple of points of vcore above the "normal" setting and try again. Keep adding voltage untill you get to windows. Lower the uncore multiplier, and the RAM multiplier to get it closer to "normal" speeds.
Add a couple of points of voltage to the CPU PLL and the QPI PLL. Maybe increase RAM voltage to 1,54v.


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nzsi7*
> 
> For what its worth, im not really a big believer in there being much of a benefit to getting a "tripple channel" kit.
> 
> Im running 6 sticks in my setup. 3 x 4gb sticks (that are the same but were purchased individually), and 3 x 2gb sticks that I purchased when i build the computer (I got a twin kit and an extra single because im cheap). Everything works fine.
> 
> To add to this - I thought there was an issue with one of my RAM sticks as windows showed 18gb installed and 16gb usable (turned out it was my version of windows), but anyway, I tried swapped each of the 2gb sticks out with some random RAM sticks that my friend gave me a couple of years ago before i figured out it was my version of windows. (was still the same type of RAM). Still worked...
> 
> Iv seen that "failed to overclock" screen hundreds of times, lol.
> 
> Start small, add maby 10 to the baseclock and see if you can boot. If you cant, then add a couple of points of vcore above the "normal" setting and try again. Keep adding voltage untill you get to windows. Lower the uncore multiplier, and the RAM multiplier to get it closer to "normal" speeds.
> Add a couple of points of voltage to the CPU PLL and the QPI PLL. Maybe increase RAM voltage to 1,54v.


Hi,
Thank you for suggestion.
I use kit of 32Gb kingston KHX16C9K4/32X (kit of 4) but i use only 3 of them. Problem not in RAM. Why? This kit was tested many time on many rigs of LGA1366 and always work fine. In this time i think is no exception. I tried use only one stick in slot A1. Situation not changed.
About small start. Any change in bios of value BCLK gives me not boot system after save with F10. I wrote about this before.
This rig has this configuration.
-X5650
-GA-X58A-OC
-His IceQ 5750 1Gb DDR5
-Kingston KHX16C9K4/32X use only 3 of them
-Seasonic X1250 (new)
-some hdd Hitachi of 120Gb
Maybe this help. Today i trying to use older versions of BIOS.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nzsi7*
> 
> For what its worth, im not really a big believer in there being much of a benefit to getting a "tripple channel" kit.
> 
> Im running 6 sticks in my setup. 3 x 4gb sticks (that are the same but were purchased individually), and 3 x 2gb sticks that I purchased when i build the computer (I got a twin kit and an extra single because im cheap). Everything works fine.
> 
> To add to this - I thought there was an issue with one of my RAM sticks as windows showed 18gb installed and 16gb usable (turned out it was my version of windows), but anyway, I tried swapped each of the 2gb sticks out with some random RAM sticks that my friend gave me a couple of years ago before i figured out it was my version of windows. (was still the same type of RAM). Still worked...
> 
> Iv seen that "failed to overclock" screen hundreds of times, lol.
> 
> Start small, add maby 10 to the baseclock and see if you can boot. If you cant, then add a couple of points of vcore above the "normal" setting and try again. Keep adding voltage untill you get to windows. Lower the uncore multiplier, and the RAM multiplier to get it closer to "normal" speeds.
> Add a couple of points of voltage to the CPU PLL and the QPI PLL. Maybe increase RAM voltage to 1,54v.


I really don´t mind either if its triple, dual or single channel, if it doesn´t work its useless anyways. Both my gigabyte motherboards are extremely finicky ( x58 g1 guerilla and z170 g1 gaming ). They both do the same thing due to the memory I used in them, funny thing is that the memory I purchased for the z170 is on the compatibility list, so just because its on the list doesn´t mean it will actually work.
My point is, if you are having trouble with memory compatibility, no matter how much you crank up the volts its not gonna work.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cobovo*
> 
> Hi,
> Thank you for suggestion.
> I use kit of 32Gb kingston KHX16C9K4/32X (kit of 4) but i use only 3 of them. Problem not in RAM. Why? This kit was tested many time on many rigs of LGA1366 and always work fine. In this time i think is no exception. I tried use only one stick in slot A1. Situation not changed.
> About small start. Any change in bios of value BCLK gives me not boot system after save with F10. I wrote about this before.
> This rig has this configuration.
> -X5650
> -GA-X58A-OC
> -His IceQ 5750 1Gb DDR5
> -Kingston KHX16C9K4/32X use only 3 of them
> -Seasonic X1250 (new)
> -some hdd Hitachi of 120Gb
> Maybe this help. Today i trying to use older versions of BIOS.


Just because the ram works on another system does not mean it works in every system you put them in, gigabyte boards are picky, I have 3 pieces of Hyperx Fury ddr3 1600 running at 1333 and it gives me the same issue, runs perfectly fine on my z87 pc.

If you leave everything at stock, do you still get the same error?


----------



## cobovo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> If you leave everything at stock, do you still get the same error?


If i use all settings at stock all work fine without warning message.


----------



## ldrancer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Going beyond 1600Mhz on the memory nets very little it has been said. .


NOo can someone make any statement that applies to me. this makes no sense. thats like say overclocking nets no benefit.

Still?, confused on this dd3 stuff? well, i been looking for 6 years. heres a picture to clear up any other confusion. 

see that one that says ddr2 900? Im speaking thats at the highest overclock i could get it to run at, at one time. it was 450 cpu bus speed. my ram which is ddr2 1066 ram, i ran with a 1:1 divider in the bios on CPURAM like my other screenshot of the bios says ratio. so as everest shows it is running at ddr2 900 speed. it IS ddr2 1066. My timings on both these tests, CL are THE SAME. too. aAAANd looky there. it does improve. THATS THE QUESTION.

MY concern on ddr3 with x58 is, in my scenario, here is that if i was to go beyond 533 bus speed, my ram would be getting overclocked. that doesnt always end up successful, and ram failing really sucks. it can cause you to reformat from corrupted files it writes to your hardrive. even make the OS unstable from some messed up file. I know. it really sucks. so i want to try to stay away from overclocking ram unless i can. but also i see higher ram speed, shows in this test taht it gives me more performance. yea yo8u see that one above it highlighted, there too? its a nforce chipset, I can beat it on some of them tests that old result i had. Never been able to get close to it. I forgot about setting the ram to match its actual speed better in bios and testing it. Free performance for me. SOmtimes and ive heard, a higher ram speed with the right ratio unlocked from the CPU, gives better performance. how high that can go, i dontknow thats the whole thing. but some, right? as i show here. its only ddr2 900 to ddr2 1066, well not even since im lower clocked on the computer. 3.65ghz to 3.83ghz

So which ram will give the best performance with a x58. i think maybe try to get a x5675 type processor. or maybe a little lower. but with that setup, which ram speed will be the best?

see i dont even know what nothing past 1600mhz does no better, means. you mean ddr 1600? your meaning 1600fsb. that gets hit at a cpu bus speed of 400 with a 775 socket. thats all i know. im past that. 1600mhz fsb you need ddr2 800 ram to match it. but past the cpu clock does do better at least some a little bit. ive heard TOO high and it kills out. by lookingn up tests.

so anyones opinion, whats best? which speed ram to get ddr3 x58 xeon x5675 cpu? i got a e768 rev.1.1 evga ftw3 board. thank you.


----------



## alancsalt

Generally speaking, only overclockers chasing benchmark points will see a benefit to faster ram. I have also seen claims that overclocking ram can shorten batch processing or large file processing times, but outside of those situations a regular user would not be able to detect the benefit. I think the greater number of users settle for 1600MHz. Ultimately it is a personal choice as to whether any extra speed is worth it to you.

http://valid.canardpc.com/1923728

775 is mainly fsb overclocking

1336 is mainly multiplier overclocking. - so having faster ram is not as important.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Im going to be the one to lay it out for you, Idrancer: your posts make next to no sense. Probably no one understands what you are asking.

DDR3 is very well understood and the X58 platform is too.

1600MHz RAM is effectively as fast as 2100 in anything other than memory streaming benchmarks. This is old news. In real world use you wont see the difference unless youre doing some science calculation program etc that takes a week to run and is really sensitive to RAM speed. Then, in theory you might actually save a few hours.

Photoshop, gaming etc? Nope.

What else do you actually need to know? Please just write the question and no waffle. Thanks....


----------



## gofasterstripes

The suggestion for RAM to match x58/Xeon56xx:

1600MHz CL 8/8/8/24 @1T.

Nothing else with a higher clockspeed is going to be of use outside of benchmarking or e-penis measuring. Yes you can run higher clockspeeds or lower CL's, but its likely to take so long to set up youre actually wasting/losing time overall.

200*8 will give you 1600, then get your IMC to 3200 or maybe even 3600 (probably also not worth the hassle).

THAT is a well proven setup that will get you 99% of the real world performance in little time.

If all you want to do is benchmark the system, then i dont think you should be asking us what we reccomend. Overclock the hell out of it, feel free. Just stay <1.35v core (Vcc) and uncore (Vtt).

Personally i suggest 1.32v max and LLC off, for safety.

Now, what was it you wanted again...?


----------



## Dale-C

I have recently got 12gb (3x4GB) of Mushkin Silverline 1333Mhz 9-9-9-24 1T(?) and a X5650. The new RAM doesn't OC or want to change timings at all, but it is Silverline.

I installed both and left bios on default settings (didn't touch anything) and ran a program called MaxxMEM2. Here are the results:

Copy 10584MB/s, Read 11231, Write 7145, Latency 150ns (bug I think, couldn't get anything but 150) Memory Score: 9.28GB/s

(Current) X5650 at 4GHz 1.3v Bios, 1.28-9 real no LLC, RAM 1200Mhz 8-8-8-20 1T 1.49v, NB Uncore 3800Mhz 1.35625v (Haven't tested lower):

Copy 18074MB/s, Read 15960, Write 13568, Latency 54.2ns Memory Score: 14.56GB/s

950 at 4GHz 1.225v Bios, 1.205-1.215 real no LLC, RAM 1600Mhz 6-7-6-18 1T 1.643v, NB Uncore 3800Mhz 1.35625v (Haven't tested lower)

Copy 20520MB/s, Read 19769, Write 19332, Latency 45ns Memory Score: 19.55GB/s

950 at 4GHz 1.225v Bios, 1.205-1.215 real no LLC, RAM 2000Mhz 8-9-8-24 2T Not sure volts probably 1.65-6v, NB Uncore 4000Mhz not sure volts 1.38v maybe

Copy 21665MB/s, Read 19953, Write 20301, Latency 43ns Memory Score: 20.13GB/s

This should provide ldrancer with some more insight. For the rest of you: With these tests, NB/Uncore speed does make a difference. I also tested my current setup at 2400Mhz NB and got very similar results to complete stock. As for real world difference, I'm not sure. I don't think I have noticed any difference from running 1600-1200 with higher timings. Also if anyone is interested in this Silverline RAM, I am happy to get rid of it haha. Or may if someone knows where I can get another kit of Mushkin 998691. I need piece of mind for my bench marks even if there if I don't notice any real world performance increase/decrease haha.


----------



## spdaimon

I can understand where he is coming from. Recently there was another guy in the main thread, I believe that was asking the same thing and was equally upset with us. I didn't have the tools to test the memory. Not saying as excuse, just fact. I could have probably done what Dale-C did, though he's more through.

I found the most gains are with BCLK/FSB increase. For example, my P6T motherboard with a X5660 and Gskill Sniper (9-9-9-24) DDR3-1600 RAM, and R9 280X. With my processor set at 21*200 (4.2Ghz) and 1600Mhz on the RAM, with 2x uncore, I got 7647 on Firestrike. Current settings is 23*180 (4.14Ghz) and 1443Mz(?) I believe on the RAM, 1.5x uncore. Firestrike is 6795. Overall, there was a 4% increase on physics score at 4.2Ghz. Gfx drivers changed from 14.5, to 15.2, so not sure what affect that might have had with gfx scores, not worried about that. http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/4633310/fs/6470236

So it seemed like he was asking would there be a significant increase if I change the Gskill Sniper CL9 DDR3-1600 out for Gskill Ares CL9 DDR3-1866 (I got some spares sitting around now, blue of the heat spreaders and the gold of the Z97 chipset coolers clash, lol)? Looking at Dale-C's numbers, guess not really. I don't notice any difference really between web surfing, downloading files, playing D3. Still fast and responsive, and probably the SSD has something to do with that.


----------



## gofasterstripes

*bump*


----------



## cobovo

And after two weeks of battle guys i get result 


In bios setting, the clock of uncore must set by hand not avto. And this help me. On screens first stable result.
Version of bios F5d


----------



## nzsi7

The 1366 platform uses triple channel RAM, so has much higher bandwidth even with the slower RAM.

Some people (like myself) run the RAM slower because it makes it much easier to get the system stable, and according to benchmarks, on the X58 / 1366 platform anyway, there is not much real life performance to be gained from overclocking the RAM.

Really Its a bit of a trade off between ultimate performance and ease/reliability of overclocking. (and the parts you have)

Personally, I have cheap crappy RAM. (1333mhz kingston value RAM). So I make a trade off to take a slight performance hit by running the RAM slower, which leaves me with a stable system.

Slow RAM speeds do not bottleneck an X58 / 1366 system much at all due to the bandwidth of tripple channel RAM. Benchmarks prove the performance difference to literally be a couple of % at best, and in benchmarks only (so you will probably never notice it doing normal computer tasks)

But yes, we can adjust the base clock and the RAM speed multiplier separately


----------



## ieldra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nzsi7*
> 
> The 1366 platform uses triple channel RAM, so has much higher bandwidth even with the slower RAM.
> 
> Some people (like myself) run the RAM slower because it makes it much easier to get the system stable, and according to benchmarks, on the X58 / 1366 platform anyway, there is not much real life performance to be gained from overclocking the RAM.
> 
> Really Its a bit of a trade off between ultimate performance and ease/reliability of overclocking. (and the parts you have)
> 
> Personally, I have cheap crappy RAM. (1333mhz kingston value RAM). So I make a trade off to take a slight performance hit by running the RAM slower, which leaves me with a stable system.
> 
> Slow RAM speeds do not bottleneck an X58 / 1366 system much at all due to the bandwidth of tripple channel RAM. Benchmarks prove the performance difference to literally be a couple of % at best, and in benchmarks only (so you will probably never notice it doing normal computer tasks)
> 
> But yes, we can adjust the base clock and the RAM speed multiplier separately


Hey. I've had an i7 920 on an a P6T deluxe since 2008 - the triple channel memory implemented on these chips is not very efficient, I distinctly remember the i7/i5 2X00K besting the memory performance on nehalem on a dual channel setup. I believe the issue persists in the xeon parts, so if you're looking for memory bandwidth an upgrade to quad-channel ddr4 is definitely worth it


----------



## nzsi7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ieldra*
> 
> Hey. I've had an i7 920 on an a P6T deluxe since 2008 - the triple channel memory implemented on these chips is not very efficient, I distinctly remember the i7/i5 2X00K besting the memory performance on nehalem on a dual channel setup. I believe the issue persists in the xeon parts, so if you're looking for memory bandwidth an upgrade to quad-channel ddr4 is definitely worth it


Iv had the X58 setup since way back as well







Upgraded to a xeon a few weeks ago though.









Everything I ever saw showed it as an upgrade from dual channel. Mostly a bunch of extra bandwidth that makes no real difference though, lol.

I would not be at all surprised if something (newer) outperformed its memory performance with dual channel ram of the same speed though.

I really dont care about my RAM performance or speed..I cant say I have ever thought to "myself man I need some _faster_ RAM.."


----------



## ldrancer

im moving from 775 to 1366, not goign backwards. with amd, from what i remember memory bandwidth was higher than intel and its what made amd good, back when amd was better than intel. so better memory just makes me think its better to fill the video card and the rest of the periphials with the information they need.

I wondered if anyone understood the same thing as running 533 ddr2 on a 1333fsb 775 as compared to the 1366. My objective is to not end up with a motherboard that doesnt give you that option but to not run into that problem, that would be what you'd see on 775 in whatever way it applies to ddr3 and 1366, and you cant tell me it doesnt exist. say you took 1333 ram and overclocked a 2.63ghz 1366 computer, to almost near 5ghz. there has to be a memory bottleneck i would think there, or especially if you used instead ddr3 1066 ram. youd have to run into a memory bottleneck and i wondered if anyone and now that someone has shown they relate i can ask without people confusing what i say either with me having to backtrack it to explain or intentionally to derail my question, and try to attack me. looking for someone who knows about that limitation and where it is or how its added up, explained, like i did with 775, on a 1366socket.

memory bandwidth is what is used to feed your fat video card and the hardrive and the processor with the information it needs to work. and your soundcard, and ethernet. it doesnt just go lets go to the comptuer, I dont believe, from the sata.. memory is used to hold like the entire program or game in it. and it sends as in a multiplayer game the events so it can calculate the outcomes and send them to the other hardware parts, but first back tomemory so it can keep the actual game that is staying in there in the random access memory place in its place holder. with small bandwidth, then if a lot needs fed to the video card, and back to the processor, you lag


----------



## gofasterstripes

Can somebody Rep cobovo for me? It won't do it on my phone.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Idrancer, the question has been well and truly answered, here by us and elsewhere online.

1200-1400MHz RAM and/or 2400-3000mhz 'uncore' (cache/memory controller) is ok. Not optimal but ok.

1400-1600MHz RAM is best performance/effort (and 200x8 is 1600 giving you an easy setup using 1600MHZ ram and 200 x */for your CPU overclock (eg 200*20 for 4GHz). 3000-3600MHz uncore is also roughly in this category.

>1600MHz can be benchmarked faster, but is not noticable IRL. >3600MHz uncore is in this category.

The only other thing you need to know is that some programs report DDR3 clockspeed differently, so in CPU-Z the memory speed is given as the memory bus clock, which is HALF the transfer rate (ie '16000MHz' ram is reported as '800MHz' because it's actually a 800MHz timing signal used with two transfers per cycle).


----------



## ldrancer

im asking you to relate this to my understanding of 775 socket. the same thing too what your talking about on 775. they call a computer 1333fsb but it uses ddr2 667 ram. and the computers actual bus rate is 333mhz though. if it was 1066mhz fsb using ddr2 533ram, it would have a cpu bus at 267mhz. and 1600fsb would be ddr2 800 ram and 400 cpu bus. where does this computer bus speed relate to 1366, i cant figure that out. i would think the for example x5670 which requires 1333 ddr3 which i would think is just another fancy kind of ddr2 667, would be a computer bus of 333mhz. how does that relate? that is not answered at all and is not clear. what happened to this 333mhz? see id like i said a billion times would increase the cpu bus up to 400mhz from 333mhz for a 67mhz x the multiplier of the processor = + mhz overclock to my computer.

im not seeing it with these random numbers wrote down. i couldsee that that 1333 ram is really only half of its speed just doulbe that for doulbe the transfer. 775 it was called fsb. because that was the bus and the ram ran at doulbe but was called ddr2 667, not a 3. when actualy the cpu bus is 333. so you got 333.. times 2, 667 .. times 2 1333. just seems the names changed a little. im not getting the cpu bus part.


----------



## gofasterstripes

You can change the multiplier.

Bclk is just a varible you use to generate the frequency you want. To chose the speed of the RAM or uncore etc you set a bclk and then the multiplier. As you have limited rage of multipliers for each device (RAM, CPU, uncore) you need to plan in advance for the frequencies you want.

Eg if u want 4ghz and your CPU has a multiplier of 20x without turbo, you can set 200MHz bclck, then 20x CPU multi for 4GHz, this would then force you to use x6 or x8 RAM multi for 1200 or 1600MHz RAM.

Seriously, just search for an overclocking guide for 1366, preferably one that compares it to 775. The system architecture is different, so when 1366 was introduced articles were written comparing the two and explaining the method you need to learn.

Try reading this for example:

http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh, you also need to take into account that raising the bclk raises the QPI speed, and that is often your limit for bclk adjustment as the minimum QPI multiplier is x36.

IIRC max within spec QPI is 133x48 (6400MHz), but 200x36 will usually work for 7200. Another reason why 200MHz bclk is a good bet if you can set it up.

Right, Ive been more than fair and i need to do some actual work today so thats your lot.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Hey so got my Xeon up and running. Running at 3.33 at 1.05v right now

On core temp it gets to about 33c max load when running prime 95 for a little while. Any better software to monitor some dont even recognize xeon. Ambient temp is about 14c (house thermometer)
Somehow core #5 (6th core) is 41c lol...

anyways, suggestions? Planning on running 4.50ghz one it. I'm on liquid loop with cpu/nb/sb/mosfet blocks, and 480 rad and 240 rad.

Thanks









http://i.imgur.com/ild2JrO.jpg


----------



## gofasterstripes

RealtempGT.

For 4.5, no, not me sorry. Model of Xeon?


----------



## AlienPrime173

okay thanks will try that.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> im asking you to relate this to my understanding of 775 socket. the same thing too what your talking about on 775. they call a computer 1333fsb but it uses ddr2 667 ram. and the computers actual bus rate is 333mhz though. if it was 1066mhz fsb using ddr2 533ram, it would have a cpu bus at 267mhz. and 1600fsb would be ddr2 800 ram and 400 cpu bus. where does this computer bus speed relate to 1366, i cant figure that out. i would think the for example x5670 which requires 1333 ddr3 which i would think is just another fancy kind of ddr2 667, would be a computer bus of 333mhz. how does that relate? that is not answered at all and is not clear. what happened to this 333mhz? see id like i said a billion times would increase the cpu bus up to 400mhz from 333mhz for a 67mhz x the multiplier of the processor = + mhz overclock to my computer.
> 
> im not seeing it with these random numbers wrote down. i couldsee that that 1333 ram is really only half of its speed just doulbe that for doulbe the transfer. 775 it was called fsb. because that was the bus and the ram ran at doulbe but was called ddr2 667, not a 3. when actualy the cpu bus is 333. so you got 333.. times 2, 667 .. times 2 1333. just seems the names changed a little. im not getting the cpu bus part.


RTFM


----------



## gofasterstripes

heh.


----------



## ericeod

Just an FYI for those I've seen ask before; My eVGA X58 FTW3 fully supports high density dimms. I picked up a set of Team 2x8Gb 1600 CAS 9 for cheap and have no problem running it on this older platform. YMMV depending on the manufacturer though (might be some bios support issues). But there isn't a limitation with the Intel chipset.


----------



## wanderjahr

Question for you guys. I have a 4.0 i7-930. I was having some people sanity check my oc and somebody mentioned the x5650. I use my rig pretty much exclusively for gaming with the occasional Plex transcoding. My question is what kind of benefit (if any) would I see by replacing my 930 with a 5650. My monitor is 1920x1200/60hz. Games I'm playing right now are Fallout 4, Witcher 3, and soon Dark Souls III.

Is it worth the effort replacing the 930?


----------



## dude guy bro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wanderjahr*
> 
> Question for you guys. I have a 4.0 i7-930. I was having some people sanity check my oc and somebody mentioned the x5650. I use my rig pretty much exclusively for gaming with the occasional Plex transcoding. My question is what kind of benefit (if any) would I see by replacing my 930 with a 5650. My monitor is 1920x1200/60hz. Games I'm playing right now are Fallout 4, Witcher 3, and soon Dark Souls III.
> 
> Is it worth the effort replacing the 930?


How much you gonna pay for it? How much do you just enjoy the hardware aspect of enthusiast PC building? Regardless, in geek terms 930 @ 4ghz isn't nearly as seksi as a 5650 @ same, cos not only is the 5650 32nm, it's also 95w TDP which is pure seks even tho in games you won't see a noticeable improvement...


----------



## wanderjahr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dude guy bro*
> 
> How much you gonna pay for it? How much do you just enjoy the hardware aspect of enthusiast PC building? Regardless, in geek terms 930 @ 4ghz isn't nearly as seksi as a 5650 @ same, cos not only is the 5650 32nm, it's also 95w TDP which is pure seks even tho in games you won't see a noticeable improvement...


I'd probably pay between 80 and 90 usd. I like the idea of tinkering with the oc and landing on optimum numbers for the hardware. I have my cpu and gpu overclocked but my cpu overclocking knowledge is admittedly not that strong. There is a small part of me that wants to get it for the enthusiast in me, but the larger reason is for sure the possible gains in gaming. Sounds like what you are saying though, they wouldn't me much. Hmmmm....


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wanderjahr*
> 
> I'd probably pay between 80 and 90 usd. I like the idea of tinkering with the oc and landing on optimum numbers for the hardware. I have my cpu and gpu overclocked but my cpu overclocking knowledge is admittedly not that strong. There is a small part of me that wants to get it for the enthusiast in me, but the larger reason is for sure the possible gains in gaming. Sounds like what you are saying though, they wouldn't me much. Hmmmm....


Gaming wise I don´t think you will get much gain at all, its a 6 core that will most definitely hit 4.0 ghz and has an extra 2 cores, but will those 2 cores help with games? I think not. It will be beneficial for multitasking, thats for sure, and benchmark wise my 3.6- 3.8 ghz xeon gives me almost the same benchmark results with physics that my 6700k does ( around 13k ).

The Xeon is a great cpu, the only reason I got the skylake is because I always have upgrade itches and did not want to bottleneck the 980ti I got as well.

All in all its a great cpu, and can handle anything you throw at it while doing it at much cooler temperatures. For $90, its a win win imo.


----------



## OCmember

I agree with above, you won't see much improvement with the chip except for the added MHz headroom. But people are saying the low end chips will benefit most from DX12 games on a Windows 10 system


----------



## wanderjahr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I agree with above, you won't see much improvement with the chip except for the added MHz headroom. But people are saying the low end chips will benefit most from DX12 games on a Windows 10 system


I considered that. However, it might be a while before the fully fleshed out dx12 game is in the wild (that I would want to play at least). I should be realistic and go with people's opinion that an upgrade might be wasted on my needs.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Actually, I say do it. It won't hurt, and its about the most processing power for the £ anywhere in the geeksphere.

Also, I suspect DX 12 SLI will improve


----------



## nzsi7

I feel much better about life now that im running a 6core x5675 at an _easy_ 4275Mhz, as opposed to my old i7 930. Im sure you will to















That's enough for me lol.


----------



## wanderjahr

Hmmm, worth considering. My temps are not the coolest. High 40's and low 50's for idle and internet browsing. Easily 60's and 70's for gaming.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wanderjahr*
> 
> Hmmm, worth considering. My temps are not the coolest. High 40's and low 50's for idle and internet browsing. Easily 60's and 70's for gaming.


I idle at 27*c @ 4.4GHz in 70*F ambient


----------



## webhito

My 5650 was not going over 60c while gaming, I believe it was in the mid 50s, idle was around 29c, pretty good chip tbh, too bad my motherboard was crapping out on me or I would have kept it for a few years longer.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wanderjahr*
> 
> Hmmm, worth considering. My temps are not the coolest. High 40's and low 50's for idle and internet browsing. Easily 60's and 70's for gaming.


Use adaptive vcore, turn on cpu energy saving features. Honestly the extra 100mhz OC you get for fix voltage and speedstep off is not worthy it.


----------



## 5ricevic

Hi people! I seem to have killed 2 X5660 cpu's in 3 hours.

I bought a used motherboard - MSI X58 Pro-E. I also bought new ram - Patriot PSD34G160081.

The Pc booted in Windows. I downloaded the latest bios, restarted the pc, and updated the bios. After that I set the switch on the motherboard from 133 to 166. Tried to boot but the motherboard clicked then turned off a few times.

Clear CMOS, set the switch back to 133, the motherboard starts, all the led's turn on, but no beep or post.

I thought that the Cpu was faulty, So I took another one. Booted into windows, did some Cinebench test, turned off the pc, and set the switch to 166. Same thing happend. Both CPU's are dead. Is it a faulty mobo or I am completely ******ed?









Sorry for the long post!


----------



## webhito

Did you manually set the voltage after setting it to 166 or did you leave it on auto?


----------



## 5ricevic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Did you manually set the voltage after setting it to 166 or did you leave it on auto?


Auto. I also thought that it might be the voltage that killed it, but I don't believe that auto would set it that high?

I forgot to mention, the mobo is now working with a E5606


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *5ricevic*
> 
> Auto. I also thought that it might be the voltage that killed it, but I don't believe that auto would set it that high?
> 
> I forgot to mention, the mobo is now working with a E5606


Two chips dead from doing the same thing leads me to believe otherwise, leaving on auto and not checking voltage/temps is a big no no, just by changing your multiplier it is already pushing the voltage higher than normal and the board could have already been pushing the chip to the limit.


----------



## nitrobg

Guys, why did nearly all Xeons become extinct on eBay and AliExpress? Did Intel force the sellers to remove them or the supplies of these chips are nearly gone?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Guys, why did nearly all Xeons become extinct on eBay and AliExpress? Did Intel force the sellers to remove them or the supplies of these chips are nearly gone?


Probably demand, people have been figuring out its cheaper to buy a 6 core than rather upgrade to something newer, here in Mexico I was able to get my hands on a x5650 and I have yet to see another one hit the market after more than 6 months.


----------



## Space Marine

About time, maybe this will scale down back to normal the board's prices. Used boards are going for 200 euros here, at least. It's crazy.


----------



## 5ricevic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Two chips dead from doing the same thing leads me to believe otherwise, leaving on auto and not checking voltage/temps is a big no no, just by changing your multiplier it is already pushing the voltage higher than normal and the board could have already been pushing the chip to the limit.


The strange thing is, that there is a guy that did the same thing and it worked without problems? Link: https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=259006.0

Here also: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040665737&postcount=564

Thanks!


----------



## webhito

I paid around $150 for a brand new guerilla g1 down here in Mexico, but sadly the board was faulty, can´t return it, cant have it repaired from gigabyte for being discontinued. But yes, boards are very overpriced, same goes for triple channel ram.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nitrobg*
> 
> Guys, why did nearly all Xeons become extinct on eBay and AliExpress? Did Intel force the sellers to remove them or the supplies of these chips are nearly gone?


I still see Xeons on Ebay, but the prices are definitely much higher and their doesn't seem to be as many available as it used to be. I don't believe Intel can stop anyone from reselling unless it's Intels ES\Engineer Sample.

@webhito is probably right. It is cheaper to get a 1st generation 6 core opposed to a 2nd gen and up Quad core. The performance is great as well. Just about all of the Xeons have no issues hitting 4.0Ghz - 4.2Ghz. It has been nearly 3 years and the information is still spreading across the web rapidly. Then you have to remember those who purchase more than one CPU for several X58 builds. Also you can't forget those who kill several CPUs while trying to overclock. So I'm not surprised that there aren't as many CPUs as their were once were.

The prices have definitely increased for sure.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *5ricevic*
> 
> The strange thing is, that there is a guy that did the same thing and it worked without problems? Link: https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=259006.0
> 
> Here also: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1040665737&postcount=564
> 
> Thanks!


Not enough info IMO, one of them does not specify if he had voltages set to auto, and the other one was having his cpu downclock with autovoltage, plus he had an engineering sample.

Just because it worked for them does not necessarily mean it will for everyone else. If you already cleared your cmos, pulled the battery and the chips are nonresponsive then they are probably dead, and died rather fast.

I believe 1.35 is the max voltage these chips should reach, if for some reason when you benched them they went over that, then its possible they died, and rather quickly. A spike in voltage will do that.


----------



## ruggercb

Yesterday I ran into some trouble with my ram. I've had this system overclocked mildy at stock voltages for well over a year with no issues, ram at 1666mhz(ram [email protected]). So, BCLK 166, Multiplier normal, [email protected] voltage which goes between .944 and 1.2 volts,QPI/VTT at 1.235V, all other voltages on auto, including ram which is @1.632V. I added another 12 GB ram a couple of months ago and I'm pretty sure that's the culprit, but it worked fine till yesterday on a Handbrake encode, and it bluescreened and wouldn't boot any more. Had to set the ram multi down to 8 so the ram is around 1300 mhz and left everything else as-is, and it's working fine now. I upped the QPI/VTT, the IOH, tried LLC and none of that affected it.

So, any ideas why it failed, and does anyone have an idea what voltage is probably the culprit?


----------



## nitrobg

I'd say the timings or DRAM voltage, that's usually the reason. The rest would give you a BSOD or freeze.
Try setting them to 11-11-11-31 1.65V to see if it'll boot. If it does - work your way down.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *5ricevic*
> 
> Hi people! I seem to have killed 2 X5660 cpu's in 3 hours.
> 
> I bought a used motherboard - MSI X58 Pro-E. I also bought new ram - Patriot PSD34G160081.
> 
> The Pc booted in Windows. I downloaded the latest bios, restarted the pc, and updated the bios. After that I set the switch on the motherboard from 133 to 166. Tried to boot but the motherboard clicked then turned off a few times.
> 
> Clear CMOS, set the switch back to 133, the motherboard starts, all the led's turn on, but no beep or post.
> 
> I thought that the Cpu was faulty, So I took another one. Booted into windows, did some Cinebench test, turned off the pc, and set the switch to 166. Same thing happend. Both CPU's are dead. Is it a faulty mobo or I am completely ******ed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the long post!


i had the exact same motherboard with a x5650, and its a piece of [email protected], it has no load line calibration, and no fixed voltage, you cant even set a fixed voltage in the bios, and the 5 phases are not enough for an overclocked xeon, in that board i couldnt get more than 3.7ghz stable, with my rampage 2 gene i can set the multiplier to 22 and the bclk to 191 with stock vcore, that gives me a 4.2ghz stable oc with stock vcore


----------



## 5ricevic

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> i had the exact same motherboard with a x5650, and its a piece of [email protected], it has no load line calibration, and no fixed voltage, you cant even set a fixed voltage in the bios, and the 5 phases are not enough for an overclocked xeon, in that board i couldnt get more than 3.7ghz stable, with my rampage 2 gene i can set the multiplier to 22 and the bclk to 191 with stock vcore, that gives me a 4.2ghz stable oc with stock vcore


Somehow I new that the board is crappy. I see people all over the net having problems with this board. I already sold it, but my two beautiful xeons will remain dead forever


----------



## AlienPrime173

Thanks everyone for all the help. Finally got my cpu overclock stable.

Problem was i was starving the memory. Increase vtt by about 350mV and it's running smoother than ever now! for the ram, 1350mhz with 5-6-5-16-1T now and it's running smooth. couldnt get it higher. CPU OC is running well and i kept all 6 core with 12 ht on as well, works great! Also, temps are great! 23~c idle and 39c load on all cores







Was under 35c load temps at 4.0ghz but i had core 05 (6th) running oddly (10c higher than others) 42c load while others were 32c load. It's funny because mobo socket temp never rises above ambient hahaha


----------



## AlienPrime173

will post cpu-z validate after work


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Thanks everyone for all the help. Finally got my cpu overclock stable.
> 
> Problem was i was starving the memory. Increase vtt by about 350mV and it's running smoother than ever now! for the ram, 1350mhz with 5-6-5-16-1T now and it's running smooth. couldnt get it higher. CPU OC is running well and i kept all 6 core with 12 ht on as well, works great! Also, temps are great! 23~c idle and 39c load on all cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was under 35c load temps at 4.0ghz but i had core 05 (6th) running oddly (10c higher than others) 42c load while others were 32c load. It's funny because mobo socket temp never rises above ambient hahaha


You may want to look into this.
Just putting this out there.

I do remember reading that you want to keep the VTT voltage at or below 1.35. for the Xeon CPUs
On EVGA older x58 boards the base VTT volt is 1.1 and the newer like classified3, FTW3 the base volts is 1.2.
So on my FTW3 if I add 150mv my voltage is 1.35 on the older it would be 1.25.
If you added 350mv that would be 1.45 I do believe and it maybe a bit high. On the FTW3 350mv would be 1.55v
You maybe can see the voltage in the bios hardware monitor section.

You may want to double check.

EDIT:..
I also found this at EVGA the voltage maybe even more on older boards with the nevest BIOS flashed.
*The base VTT for later BIOS versions is 1.2v.*


----------



## gofasterstripes

That'll do it :/

Good sleuthin', bill


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *5ricevic*
> 
> false
> Somehow I new that the board is crappy. I see people all over the net having problems with this board. I already sold it, but my two beautiful xeons will remain dead forever


give them a try with another x58 board, maybe they still work


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *5ricevic*
> 
> false
> Somehow I new that the board is crappy. I see people all over the net having problems with this board. I already sold it, but my two beautiful xeons will remain dead forever


Should have considered that before pushing it, if you have no control over voltage the board will do whatever it wants and obviously fry it. Gonna have to light a candle for those poor soldiers.


----------



## 45nm

Does anyone know whether the X5690 or the W3690 Hexacore Xeon's are supported on the Rampage II Extreme. I am in the process of drafting and researching an overhaul to my secondary LGA1366 build and I would like to know the compatibility of it. Also is it worth an upgrade to the Rampage III extreme for a more refined and newer motherboard and USB3/Sata 6Gbps?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> Does anyone know whether the X5690 or the W3690 Hexacore Xeon's are supported on the Rampage II Extreme. I am in the process of drafting and researching an overhaul to my secondary LGA1366 build and I would like to know the compatibility of it. Also is it worth an upgrade to the Rampage III extreme for a more refined and newer motherboard and USB3/Sata 6Gbps?


I wish I knew, but if I were you I'd go with the W3690


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I wish I knew, but if I were you I'd go with the W3690


Is there any actual differences between the X5690 and the W3690 besides the dual-socket support and the two-QPI links on the X5690? The reason I ask is because the price difference between either CPU is small but it seems that the X5690 can also support a much higher memory capacity and has a better memory bandwidth. It would need to be for a workstation so there is a possibility that down the road I may use a dual socket motherboard (but not a certainty).

It's quite exciting even discussing this again as I remember back in 2010 and 2011 when I almost made the decision to go with the 980X or the 990X but held off for Sandy Bridge.


----------



## bill1024

If I am not mistaken the multiplier is unlocked on the W3690 CPU where it is not on the X56xx


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> If I am not mistaken the multiplier is unlocked on the W3690 CPU where it is not on the X56xx


I would like it if someone can confirm this as I need to do the overhaul soon preferably and aside from the dual-QPI link and the memory bandwidth it seems a W3690 is not that different from a X5690 and even a 990X. Compatibility is a big concern as I may just end up having to get the Rampage III Extreme (which is not that much cheaper than when it was originally released) to ensure compatibility.

Edit: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/RAMPAGE_II_EXTREME/

It mentions it is 32nm 6-core processor ready but the CPU support list doesn't mention Xeons.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> I would like it if someone can confirm this as I need to do the overhaul soon preferably and aside from the dual-QPI link and the memory bandwidth it seems a W3690 is not that different from a X5690 and even a 990X. Compatibility is a big concern as I may just end up having to get the Rampage III Extreme (which is not that much cheaper than when it was originally released) to ensure compatibility.
> 
> Edit: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/RAMPAGE_II_EXTREME/
> 
> It mentions it is 32nm 6-core processor ready but the CPU support list doesn't mention Xeons.


Pretty sure the w3680 is unlocked too, but not the w3670 so I was told.
Maybe not unlocked on workstation type boards, may have to be an high end gaming type board.
Some one will chime in soon to confirm.

EDIT:..

Most all Asus boards will support xeons of all flavors (E,X W and L, many EVGA will also FTW3 SLI3 classified3 and other boards with a revision of 1.2, the info is out there.

My Asus P6T V2 D and Rampage3 Gene and my EVGA FTW3 are all running Xeons. now X5660, before E5620


----------



## nzsi7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> I would like it if someone can confirm this as I need to do the overhaul soon preferably and aside from the dual-QPI link and the memory bandwidth it seems a W3690 is not that different from a X5690 and even a 990X. Compatibility is a big concern as I may just end up having to get the Rampage III Extreme (which is not that much cheaper than when it was originally released) to ensure compatibility.
> 
> Edit: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/RAMPAGE_II_EXTREME/
> 
> It mentions it is 32nm 6-core processor ready but the CPU support list doesn't mention Xeons.


x5670 and x5675 have unlocked multipliers.


----------



## OCmember

My 3690 would not work above the 26 multi. It is an unlocked chip though. The issue was with the motherboard, and I hear it has something to do with the X58 chip revision, or some chip revision. I do have another board for backup but I haven't tested it and the W3690 yet.


----------



## webhito

Yes, both w3680 and w3690 as well as the 980x and 990x have unlocked multipliers, even the w3670 is unlocked afaik.

Support wise I am pretty sure it will work with the x5690, but not so sure about the w3690, you will be paying a pretty big premium for getting the top tier chip though, if cash isn´t an issue then by al means but if you would rather save a few bucks get a x5670, those oc like champs.


----------



## 45nm

On the subject of the W3690 and the X5690 what kind of temperature differences can I expect from them compared to the equivalent of an i7 990X? I have seen some claims that mention that the Xeons run cooler but considering they are the same 130W parts for the i7 and the Xeon I can't see how that would be

These will be for a workstation to prolong it's life so I won't be looking to overclock it heavily (probably a mild overclock at best). In this case price is not an issue between the W3690 and the X5690 but compatibility is a concern with the RIIE and possibly with the RIIIE.


----------



## OCmember

The heat is the same in terms of cooling. The Xeon doesn't run cooler than a 32nm counter part. With stress testing, my X5660 crapped out beyond 70*c where my i7 970 I still have would stress test almost up to 95*c


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The heat is the same in terms of cooling. The Xeon doesn't run cooler than a 32nm counter part. With stress testing, my X5660 crapped out beyond 70*c where my i7 970 I still have would stress test almost up to 95*c


Ok that would make sense considering that they are both 130W TDP parts. How are you finding the X5690 versus W3690 and any differences or improvements in performance from your previous components (I assume were quad-core Bloomfields?)


----------



## OCmember

What I meant was my X5660 didn't run cooler than my i7 970.

Yeah, if one comes from 45nm, it is a big improvement in terms of efficiency, cooling, OC headroom, vcore requirements for overclocking..

EDIT: I have never overclocked the X5690, but I have with a W3690, I7 970, X5660. So far my i7 970 has been the best


----------



## AlienPrime173

wow those temps are out of this world lol.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> You may want to look into this.
> Just putting this out there.
> 
> I do remember reading that you want to keep the VTT voltage at or below 1.35. for the Xeon CPUs
> On EVGA older x58 boards the base VTT volt is 1.1 and the newer like classified3, FTW3 the base volts is 1.2.
> So on my FTW3 if I add 150mv my voltage is 1.35 on the older it would be 1.25.
> If you added 350mv that would be 1.45 I do believe and it maybe a bit high. On the FTW3 350mv would be 1.55v
> You maybe can see the voltage in the bios hardware monitor section.
> 
> You may want to double check.
> 
> EDIT:..
> I also found this at EVGA the voltage maybe even more on older boards with the nevest BIOS flashed.
> *The base VTT for later BIOS versions is 1.2v.*


Thanks for all the info. I tested it on prime95 with 1.25v vtt and its still stable so maybe i was a little over on voltage. at 1.20v vtt it bsods. So 1.25v vtt it is.

Thanks for that though









Here is my validation









http://i.imgur.com/nKK8QWV.png

Original: http://i.imgur.com/nKK8QWV.png


----------



## AlienPrime173

Really wish i could solve the oddball core 5 temps though


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nzsi7*
> 
> x5670 and x5675 have unlocked multipliers.


Those CPUs are not unlocked.

The BCLK is unlocked and you can lower the multiplier, but it is not unlocked in the sense you can make it go higher than Intels max setting to the speed of the chip.
The x5670 would be 22x with a turbo of 24x max, you cant raise the multiplier to 30x.

If you have one that can go higher than Intels max, I would love to see a screen shot of it.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Really wish i could solve the oddball core 5 temps though


Every socket 1366 xeon I have (running 10 right now) has a couple cores that go 8-10c higher than the rest.
If you go to the teal temp web site they have instructions on how to calibrate the software, I would not worry about it


----------



## bill1024

Even my Intel xeon E5-2670 8 core 16 thread is running 100% load 24/7 and real temp sees only 6 cores of the 8 the temps range from 46-54c
That is on an Asus x79 Sabertooth

Not sure what program would see and read all eight cores. But that is a good spread of temps 8c.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> On the subject of the W3690 and the X5690 what kind of temperature differences can I expect from them compared to the equivalent of an i7 990X? I have seen some claims that mention that the Xeons run cooler but considering they are the same 130W parts for the i7 and the Xeon I can't see how that would be
> 
> These will be for a workstation to prolong it's life so I won't be looking to overclock it heavily (probably a mild overclock at best). In this case price is not an issue between the W3690 and the X5690 but compatibility is a concern with the RIIE and possibly with the RIIIE.


I have a W3690 on a RIIIE. I'm able to run pretty smoothly with 27*160 Blck @ 1.34 vCore in the BIOS (I've seen it go as high as 1.352 in HWMonitor, but the max on the W3690 is 1.37 so still safe) I looked over at the main Xeon-X58 thread for combos with the RIIE and the highest model I see is an X5675. I have a feeling that the W3690 would run on a RIIE, but that's an expensive feeling if it doesn't work. I believe I paid around $180-190 for it earlier this year. I suppose you could always resell it. I have a NH-D14 sitting on top of my W3690 and at full load I get about 50-55C, ambient temp is 70F, so that's what ... 21-22C if I did my math right. The multiplier is unlocked, the highest you can go is 66, unlike the others, such as the X5675 you can only go between 12 and 25 with the multiplier, depending on the model of course. Not quite as locked as say a old C2Q with only 1 multiplier, but locked none the less. Most likely this is because they introduced "Turbo" and "SpeedStep". Don't remember if the old C2Q had SpeedStep...I think they did, but thats like Turbo in reverse.









EDIT: Kind of remember my old Q6600 going between 6 and 9. Kind of irrelevant, but I think this is where the confusion comes from.


----------



## OCmember

@spdaimon were you able to use any multi you wanted with that board?


----------



## AlienPrime173

core temp reads everything i've found


----------



## AlienPrime173

okay, so nothing to worry about. Just sucks cuz my idle temps are like 22c and load temps are 33c, while the 6th core is idle at 28c and load at 42 @ 3.68GHz (Which is what i run 24/7)


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> The BCLK is unlocked and you can lower the multiplier, but it is not unlocked in the sense you can make it go higher than Intels max setting to the speed of the chip.
> The x5670 would be 22x with a turbo of 24x max, you cant raise the multiplier to 30x.


my x5680 and x5690 go to 26x


----------



## saaanx

Could anyone owning a X5675 (and hopefully a X58 Sabertooth as well) download _CoreTemp_ and tell me if the program reads a X5680 instead of a X5675? It's happening to me and it's bugging me out. I'm afraid I have applied too much pressure to the CPU with the cooler or something.

Also, stockwise, the turbo on the CPU won't go past 3,33GHz from the 3,46GHz advertised. Is this normal? I had a X5650 previously and it did the 3,06GHz that are advertised with the Turbo.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *saaanx*
> 
> Could anyone owning a X5675 (and hopefully a X58 Sabertooth as well) download _CoreTemp_ and tell me if the program reads a X5680 instead of a X5675? It's happening to me and it's bugging me out. I'm afraid I have applied too much pressure to the CPU with the cooler or something.
> 
> *Also, stockwise, the turbo on the CPU won't go past 3,33GHz from the 3,46GHz advertised. Is this normal?* I had a X5650 previously and it did the 3,06GHz that are advertised with the Turbo.


That's normal with locked CPU because when all cores on x5675 are loaded, all cores (3 to 6 cores loaded) will only run up to 3.33GHz. Did x5650 have unlocked multiplier? I thought it doesn't. If it's locked, depending on the workload which only one to two cores loaded, you can see it running up to 3.06GHz.


----------



## saaanx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> That's normal with locked CPU because when all cores on x5675 are loaded, all cores (3 to 6 cores loaded) will only run up to 3.33GHz. Did x5650 have unlocked multiplier? I thought it doesn't. If it's locked, depending on the workload which only one to two cores loaded, you can see it running up to 3.06GHz.


Thank you for your input.

I honestly have no idea as to wether the X5650 was locked or not. Are there even different versions for it? (Aside from an Engineering Sample and whatnot, of course).

All I can tell you -for sure- is that my X5650 reached the 3,06GHz fully stock (all cores on, HT on, Turbo on... etc) which is why I felt something was wrong with the new X5675 not reaching its max turbo state by default.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Question, x5690 vs w3690 i guess x series xeons are better because they support more ram? Probably different architecture/build type of IMC?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Question, x5690 vs w3690 i guess x series xeons are better because they support more ram? Probably different architecture/build type of IMC?


Is it twice the amount? The X can run with another chip in a dual socket system. I don't think the W can, hence the RAM amount support.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is it twice the amount? The X can run with another chip in a dual socket system. I don't think the W can, hence the RAM amount support.


even more than double. and you're right i see the qpi link on the x series now, my bad


----------



## OCmember

Anyone running a GTX 980Ti on their X58 6 core?


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Question, x5690 vs w3690 i guess x series xeons are better because they support more ram? Probably different architecture/build type of IMC?


Well the X series also has dual QPI links versus the single QPI link of the W series. The X series compatibility is more limited as well due to the nature of the dual QPI links. The dual QPI link is only for dual socket motherboards and so the X series can be used on a dual socket motherboard versus that of the W which is single socket only.


----------



## bill1024

The E, L and X series of LGA 1366 Xeons can be used on dual socket systems as well as single socket.
And as said W is only for single socket boards.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> The E, L and X series of LGA 1366 Xeons can be used on dual socket systems as well as single socket.
> And as said W is only for single socket boards.


The X and L will not run on an EVGA 760 A1 Rev. 1.0 board.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The X and L will not run on an EVGA 760 A1 Rev. 1.0 board.


Nor an E, I think it has to be a rev 1.1 or have a hard mod done to it. RX boards If I am not mistaken have the hard mod done when they are sent in for repair.
There is a good list in this thread of what EVGA boards will support those Xeon.

I know EVGA FTW3 SKI3 and classified3 will support the xeons.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Nor an E, I think it has to be a rev 1.1 or have a hard mod done to it. RX boards If I am not mistaken have the hard mod done when they are sent in for repair.
> There is a good list in this thread of what EVGA boards will support those Xeon.
> 
> I know EVGA FTW3 SKI3 and classified3 will support the xeons.


Yup. I was unfortunate to end up with a Rev. 1.0, ended up having EVGA mod it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yo!

Anyone got any experience with using the clock skew functions? Results?

Happy Xmas


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yo!
> 
> Anyone got any experience with using the clock skew functions? Results?
> 
> Happy Xmas


Never touched it on mine, sorry.

Merry Xmas to you too!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yo!
> 
> Anyone got any experience with using the clock skew functions? Results?
> 
> Happy Xmas


They help a bit when pushing 5GHz+, but aren't really useful for anything else.
Merry Xmas.


----------



## 8ax

I hope lowly L-series CPUs are allowed here as well








I just got my L5639/P6T SE system, flashed the mbo to a P6T WS Pro and I'm running 224/x18 (4.03GHz) which I think is pretty good considering I only played with it for an hour or two.

Atm I'm running 1.344vcore and 1.66vdimm, increasing the PCIe clock to 106 pushed the FSB wall from 222 to 224, any idea how to take it further?
I think I managed to post once at 225, maybe it was pure luck...


----------



## OCmember

So I've been trying to stabilize 4.6Ghz with my W3690 but I am having no such luck.

201 FSB/CPU Host Frequency
3.6GHz Uncore (18x)
3.6GHz QPI
1600MHz CL8

Bios Settings:
CPU VCore - 1.368v
CPU VTT - 1.29v
CPU PLL - 1.830v
QPI PLL - 1.150v
DIMM - 1.50v
IOH VCore - 1.20v
ICH VCore - 1.20
VTT PWM Freq - 370KHz
CPU PWN Freq - 940KHz
CPU Impedance - Less
QPI Signal Compensation - Less

Passes IBT Very High
Does the latest P95 and passes. *EDIT: Does not pass P95 - I guess I'm upping the VCore to 1.3750*

Games have issues. When I lower the overclock the issues disappear.


----------



## gofasterstripes

How are you lowering the overclock? Bclk or multiplier?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> How are you lowering the overclock? Bclk or multiplier?


Multi. It's at 22 atm, would like 23 and 4.6Ghz Just not sure if I have to go over Intel safe specs with this chip. It doesn't seem like I have to, hmm

Edited above post. It fails P95 so I'm upping the VCore to 1.3750v

EDIT2: Passed an hour at 1.375v Prime v27.9 builld 1 @ Custom/Blend - shortened the minutes to 3, upped the ram amount to 12288, and changed the max FTT size to 8192. VCore is up to 1.3875v right now at idle. Debating whether to run a stability test. Idles at 1.379 - P95 load @ 1.389 - testing with P95 v28.5 build 2 same settings as before.

EDIT3: Failed P95 @ 1.389v That's enough for me, back down to 4.4Ghz :T


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Multi. It's at 22 atm, would like 23 and 4.6Ghz Just not sure if I have to go over Intel safe specs with this chip. It doesn't seem like I have to, hmm
> 
> Edited above post. It fails P95 so I'm upping the VCore to 1.3750v
> 
> EDIT2: Passed an hour at 1.375v Prime v27.9 builld 1 @ Custom/Blend - shortened the minutes to 3, upped the ram amount to 12288, and changed the max FTT size to 8192. VCore is up to 1.3875v right now at idle. Debating whether to run a stability test. Idles at 1.379 - P95 load @ 1.389 - testing with P95 v28.5 build 2 same settings as before.
> 
> EDIT3: Failed P95 @ 1.389v That's enough for me, back down to 4.4Ghz :T


Why not lower bclk? Much lower stress on the mb. Running at 22x seems a waste of the unlocked multiplier.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Why not lower bclk? Much lower stress on the mb. Running at 22x seems a waste of the unlocked multiplier.


Cause I've tried it before, and so I said why not 200 BLCK


----------



## 45nm

Can anyone tell me if there is any specific differences between the X5690 and the W3690. I just got a W3690 locally and I am also looking for the X5690. From what I can find there seems to be dual socket support but the memory bandwidth is the same and most of the other specifications are the same. Same clock speeds (even with turbo), etc... Perhaps instruction set? TDP and other parameters are the same as well.


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is any specific differences between the X5690 and the W3690. I just got a W3690 locally and I am also looking for the X5690. From what I can find there seems to be dual socket support but the memory bandwidth is the same and most of the other specifications are the same. Same clock speeds (even with turbo), etc... Perhaps instruction set? TDP and other parameters are the same as well.


The Xeon W3600 is for single CPU workstations. The CPU has a single QPI link and supports (officially) 24Gb of ram. The Xeon X5600 is for dual CPU workstactions and has two QPI links. They officially support up to 288 of sever ram.

That all being said, in a single CPU configurarion, they should perform the same. There have been many more X5600 CPUs at a reasonable price, which is why I bought an X5680, even though my system is a single CPU config.


----------



## OCmember

Most boards will not accept the unlocked multi in general. I've heard it has to do with the X58 chip revision. My EVGA doesn't allow multipliers to be unlocked or go above 26. It won't even turbo to 27. But I have a Gigabyte UD7 that might.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Most boards will not accept the unlocked multi in general. I've heard it has to do with the X58 chip revision. My EVGA doesn't allow multipliers to be unlocked or go above 26. It won't even turbo to 27. But I have a Gigabyte UD7 that might.


So it won't support the i7-980X or i7-990X? I've only saw someone mention the RIIIE so I got one, at first to run a X5650, but after that bit the dust, I got a W3690. Again, curiousity. Two years ago, I was messing around with X54xxs. They don't compare to these X56xxs for some reason, only managed a 10% OC to the nearly 50% OC with these.
Anyhoo... I've only got it at 4.3Ghz (27*180? I think) . Temp isn't the issue, the voltage is. I managed at 1.34 currently. Might be able to squeeze a few more Mhz out of it. BCLK seems to do the most good, for obvious reasons...faster the highway, the more data will move. I'll tinker with it a bit more. My X5660 scores higher in Firestrike with the BCLK at 200 rather than 160.
I don't suppose there is a list some where. Well, I did come across this site:

http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/CPUs/Intel/Xeon/W3690_motherboards.html

As I thought, the Asus WS type boards would support it... no mention of the RIIIE, I suppose because its "unofficial". Your UD7 may be on there too. There are a few Gigabyte UD7s at the bottom of the list.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> So it won't support the i7-980X or i7-990X? I've only saw someone mention the RIIIE so I got one, at first to run a X5650, but after that bit the dust, I got a W3690. Again, curiousity. Two years ago, I was messing around with X54xxs. They don't compare to these X56xxs for some reason, only managed a 10% OC to the nearly 50% OC with these.
> Anyhoo... I've only got it at 4.3Ghz (27*180? I think) . Temp isn't the issue, the voltage is. I managed at 1.34 currently. Might be able to squeeze a few more Mhz out of it. BCLK seems to do the most good, for obvious reasons...faster the highway, the more data will move. I'll tinker with it a bit more. My X5660 scores higher in Firestrike with the BCLK at 200 rather than 160.
> I don't suppose there is a list some where. Well, I did come across this site:
> 
> http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/CPUs/Intel/Xeon/W3690_motherboards.html
> 
> As I thought, the Asus WS type boards would support it... no mention of the RIIIE, I suppose because its "unofficial". Your UD7 may be on there too. There are a few Gigabyte UD7s at the bottom of the list.


Maybe Rev 1.1 for the EVGA board did but I can't get the W3690 to work on my Rev 1.0 board beyond 26. The bios will allow up to 66 er something but it just won't reflect that on the desktop, only 26

Looks like it will work with the UD7 board. I have (Rev 2.0) Nice site you posted there.

*
Anyone know if 3878MHz Uncore @ 1.33v will burn it's self out?* Thanks


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I just moved back to win 7 and apparently my OC is not stable anymore. I've been running win 10 since it came out and the OC was rock solid. I had to bump the voltage from 1.28 to 1.32 just so I can get a couple passes of IBT.(x5670, 85C max IBT load lol) The cpuz bench score is also slightly lower.
> 
> What OS trickery is this?


It is the Windows 7 trickery. Stick with Windows 10, no?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I just moved back to win 7 and apparently my OC is not stable anymore. I've been running win 10 since it came out and the OC was rock solid. I had to bump the voltage from 1.28 to 1.32 just so I can get a couple passes of IBT.(x5670, 85C max IBT load lol) The cpuz bench score is also slightly lower.
> 
> What OS trickery is this?


Windows 7 is no where near as efficiently coded as Windows 10 is. Windows 7 was coded for eye candy and heavy animations. Windows 10's coding has been greatly geared towards efficiency, in order to get it to run on as many devices as possible including mobile devices. Thus it stands to reason Windows 7 would need more power in order to keep its stability.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I just moved back to win 7 and apparently my OC is not stable anymore. I've been running win 10 since it came out and the OC was rock solid. I had to bump the voltage from 1.28 to 1.32 just so I can get a couple passes of IBT.(x5670, 85C max IBT load lol) The cpuz bench score is also slightly lower.
> 
> What OS trickery is this?


Also, did you roll back or was it a clean install? I upgraded through 7. It was a Clean install. As soon as I hit the 7 desktop for the first time I verified the COA and then upgraded with the medial tool. My point is that I still ended up up with registry issues and they may be effecting your overclock if you rolled back to 7 from Windows 10.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Good point.

What I did was install Windows 7 fresh, skipping any driver installs etc (just not needed). Then I just upgraded 7 to 10 and once done and it registers itself with my MS account, then I formatted the SSD and installed 10 cleanly. Today however, Windows 10 will use your Windows 7 serial key which is a big plus. That wasn't the case back earlier in the year.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I just moved back to win 7 and apparently my OC is not stable anymore. I've been running win 10 since it came out and the OC was rock solid. I had to bump the voltage from 1.28 to 1.32 just so I can get a couple passes of IBT.(x5670, 85C max IBT load lol) The cpuz bench score is also slightly lower.
> 
> What OS trickery is this?


I ran Win 10 on my Xeon 5675 rig for a few months and rolled back to 7 (clean install) and did not have to change any BIOS settings or push more volts. So we're at the 50/50 anecdotal evidence point. Since I'm on the no-change side, going to say that your hardware has lost a little 'electron freshness' since the 1.28V days.









Those temps tho!!! So hot! What cooler are you using? I'm running a D15 inside a modded HAF XB and max temps barely hit 60c at 4.4/1.30V in IBT. I'm not comfortable hitting over 72c with 56xx Xeons.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So I've been trying to stabilize 4.6Ghz with my W3690 but I am having no such luck.
> 
> 201 FSB/CPU Host Frequency
> 3.6GHz Uncore (18x)
> 3.6GHz QPI
> 1600MHz CL8
> 
> Bios Settings:
> CPU VCore - 1.368v
> CPU VTT - 1.29v
> CPU PLL - 1.830v
> QPI PLL - 1.150v
> DIMM - 1.50v
> IOH VCore - 1.20v
> ICH VCore - 1.20
> VTT PWM Freq - 370KHz
> CPU PWN Freq - 940KHz
> CPU Impedance - Less
> QPI Signal Compensation - Less
> 
> Passes IBT Very High
> Does the latest P95 and passes. *EDIT: Does not pass P95 - I guess I'm upping the VCore to 1.3750*
> 
> Games have issues. When I lower the overclock the issues disappear.


why is your imc voltage so high? are you trying to run higher than 1333mhz ram?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> why is your imc voltage so high? are you trying to run higher than 1333mhz ram?


At that time my Uncore speed was high. I think 3.9GHz, my RAM was probably 1600MHz. Using only 2 DIMM slots though. Presently I'm only running 3.4GHz Uncore at 1.277v according to my digital multi-meter on the terminals from the board. And at 1600MHz. With only 2 slots populated it's much easier on the IMC


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I just moved back to win 7 and apparently my OC is not stable anymore. I've been running win 10 since it came out and the OC was rock solid. I had to bump the voltage from 1.28 to 1.32 just so I can get a couple passes of IBT.(x5670, 85C max IBT load lol) The cpuz bench score is also slightly lower.
> 
> What OS trickery is this?


There is no trickery. It just means your oc wasn't stable.


----------



## SuspiciousGuy

Hello, I finally got around to overclocking my x5660 on my old asus p6td deluxe and was wondering how much head room I have left.

BCLK Frequency: 200
CPU Multiplier: 21
CPU Voltage: 1.272
CPU PLL: 1.8
QPI/DRAM Core Voltage: 1.272
DRAM Bus Voltages: 1.5

Highest temperatures I have seen during realbench is 63c and the average of the highest temperatures of each core is 67.5c according realtemp. The rest of the settings are set to auto and I was wondering if that would be ok. I had to enable LLC due to constant crashes during stress test. Ram is set to 1600mhz and timings set manually to 9-9-9-24. Also I was wondering if it would safe to set DRAM Bus Voltage to 1.65 to overclock the ram due to the ram being rated for 1.5v according to the specifications. The ram I have is two sets of gkill ripjaws 12gb ram


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuspiciousGuy*
> 
> Hello, I finally got around to overclocking my x5660 and *was wondering how much head room I have left.*
> 
> BCLK Frequency: 200
> CPU Multiplier: 21
> CPU Voltage: 1.272
> CPU PLL: 1.8
> QPI/DRAM Core Voltage: 1.272
> DRAM Bus Voltages: 1.5
> 
> Highest temperatures I have seen during realbench is 63c and the average of the highest temperatures of each core is 67.5c according realtemp. The rest of the settings are set to auto and I was wondering if that would be ok. I had to enable LLC due to constant crashes during stress test. Ram is set to 1600mhz and timings set manually to 9-9-9-24. *Also I was wondering if it would safe to set DRAM Bus Voltage to 1.65 to overclock the ram due to the ram being rated for 1.5v* according to the specifications. The ram I have is two sets of gkill ripjaws 12gb ram


4.2GHz is a good overclock. You might be able to stabilize 4.4 close to Intel recommended safe operating voltages of 1.35v I thought I was at 1.329v but apparently I wasn't so I'm sticking with 4.2GHz and working with the Uncore. I was fooling around with it and was running 3.9GHz but I lowered it to 3.5Ghz for now.

Just stick with 1600MHz and try lowering the timings. Unless you are running a RAM disc you won't see significant performance gains > 1600


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> At that time my Uncore speed was high. I think 3.9GHz, my RAM was probably 1600MHz. Using only 2 DIMM slots though. Presently I'm only running 3.4GHz Uncore at 1.277v according to my digital multi-meter on the terminals from the board. And at 1600MHz. With only 2 slots populated it's much easier on the IMC


i was told x series xeons arent recommended even OC to go over 1.20v vtt. I dont think it's a heat thing, just what the memory controller can handle :/


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> i was told x series xeons arent recommended even OC to go over 1.20v vtt. I dont think it's a heat thing, just what the memory controller can handle :/


From what I've heard and read the max is 1.35v for the VTT/QPI Voltage.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> i was told x series xeons arent recommended even OC to go over 1.20v vtt. I dont think it's a heat thing, just what the memory controller can handle :/


Up to 1.35V VTT is fine for 24/7. Heck for benching I've run my X5650 at 1.66V VCore for 5.1GHz and 1.42V VTT for 4.2GHz Uncore w/ 12GB's of 2220MHz CL9 ram and it still clocks just as good as on day one.
These things are a lot tougher than people make them out to be.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Up to 1.35V VTT is fine for 24/7. Heck for benching I've run my X5650 at 1.66V VCore for 5.1GHz and 1.42V VTT for 4.2GHz Uncore w/ 12GB's of 2220MHz CL9 ram and it still clocks just as good as on day one.
> These things are a lot tougher than people make them out to be.


Wow! Would be awesome! Maybe i will bump my imc vtt to 1.40v because at 1.4 i can run 2100mhz at 6-7-6-20-1T but was worried about burning out the memory controller. Then i can keep 4.7GHz all the time. Would probably be nice

Think ill see any additional socket/core temp increased? I'm on a liquid loop


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> Wow! Would be awesome! Maybe i will bump my imc vtt to 1.40v because at 1.4 i can run 2100mhz at 6-7-6-20-1T but was worried about burning out the memory controller. Then i can keep 4.7GHz all the time. Would probably be nice
> 
> Think ill see any additional socket/core temp increased? I'm on a liquid loop


Keep it below 1.35v for 24/7. I was just giving an example that for short periods of time 1.42V VTT won't damage the IMC but it should not be used for the long run.


----------



## AlienPrime173

oh gosh okay i understand

Well thanks for the tip!


----------



## 5ricevic

After killing 2 X5660, with an MSI board, I am now rocking with a Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R (rev. 1.6) like a boss









The only thing is that I cannot manage to get it stable at 4.4Ghz. Everything works in Windows, but Cinebench r15 doesn't manage to complete the rendering.

Mobo - Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R
CPU - X5660
RAM - Patriot PSD34G160081 1600 MHz
Heatsink - CM 412s

The CPU Voltage is 1.41250V in BIOS, AIDA shows somewhat lower.
QPI/VTT 1.335
CPU PLL 1.8
IOH CORE 1.3

21*210
Uncore x16
Uncore freq 3360
Memory freq 1680MHz
PCI freq 101

What do you guys think?


----------



## OCmember

@5ricevic why don't you try turning off HT and the CPU features like CPU Halt, etc but leave speed step on.

EDIT: does the board have voltage terminals to cross check the bios and the software readings?


----------



## 5ricevic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @5ricevic why don't you try turning off HT and the CPU features like CPU Halt, etc but leave speed step on.
> 
> EDIT: does the board have voltage terminals to cross check the bios and the software readings?


I wold like to keep HT on if possible as I will be using The PC for architectural rendering in 3ds max. Sory for the noob question, but where do I find the CPU halt and speed step?







Thanks!

The board is without the terminals


----------



## RX7-2nr

Glad to see this thread still kicking around.


----------



## AlienPrime173

are you running phoenix bios? If so, it's under "CPU Feature" Guessing award is separate from phoenix?

and yeah turn off speed step, keep on HT

Maybe try reducing pci freq to 100 (stock) I havent had much luck increasing frequency or skew.

If you aren't running ecc ram, maybe try lower clocks and loosen thee timings so the imc doesnt have to work so hard?


----------



## AlienPrime173

So for $80CAD i have the option of buying some 1333MHz samsung RAM ECC and registered memory. They are 6, 4GB modules (my mobo max) (24GB)

I am currently running my mushkin set at 942MHz (471DDR) with 7-7-7-20-1T @ 1.5v

I can run it 1100MHz 5-6-5-16-1T @ 1.5v but it stresses IMC and i have to up vtt voltage on imc

What do you guys think? Worth it?


----------



## mrstef

Hey all, new to the x5650 and many years since I've played with OC (got my old i920 stable years ago and left it alone)

I'm struggling a little bit right now, because I can't seem to get anything stable at all, and I'm wondering if I got a busted used x5650...

Here's what I'm running:

Mobo - Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R
Bios: FJ
CPU - X5650
RAM - G.Skill Ripjaws F3-10666CL-9GBXL (2x8gb)
Heatsink - Noctua NH-D14

Loading optimized defaults posts OK, goes to Windows.

However, as soon as I simply ENABLE the BLCK control (see 5ricevic 's pics above, same menu) I receive a POST error saying boot failure, previous BIOS settings applied. I haven't changed anything (multiplier, blck, voltages...)

Kind of at a loss here. Thoughts? Suggestions? Anything is appreciated.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrstef*
> 
> Hey all, new to the x5650 and many years since I've played with OC (got my old i920 stable years ago and left it alone)
> 
> I'm struggling a little bit right now, because I can't seem to get anything stable at all, and I'm wondering if I got a busted used x5650...
> 
> Here's what I'm running:
> 
> Mobo - Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R
> Bios: FJ
> CPU - X5650
> RAM - G.Skill Ripjaws F3-10666CL-9GBXL (2x8gb)
> Heatsink - Noctua NH-D14
> 
> Loading optimized defaults posts OK, goes to Windows.
> 
> However, as soon as I simply ENABLE the BLCK control (see 5ricevic 's pics above, same menu) I receive a POST error saying boot failure, previous BIOS settings applied. I haven't changed anything (multiplier, blck, voltages...)
> 
> Kind of at a loss here. Thoughts? Suggestions? Anything is appreciated.


That seems to happen with every gigabyte board. From my experience with my GA-X58A-OC, increasing the BCLK past stock would stop the error from happening.


----------



## George 100

Hello guys, im from greece and i own the system that i write down. I wan to change my 920 to x5670 that i found 130€. I think thats a good upgrade and i dont know if my mobo supports the xeon cpu. Has anybody test this config? Also i had a pm from a friend in greece for a i7 980x at 150€. I really want to put xeon on my system but i dont kwow if my mobo supports it.

SYSTEM:

MB: ASUS P6T SE X85 1366
CPU: I7 920 OC TO 4.2GHZ WITH 1.4V
RAM: 1 DIMM HYPERX 8GB 1866 OC TO 2000
PSU: XIGMATEK MAVERICK 600W BRONZE
GPU: RADEON HD6950 FLASHED TO 6970 MSI REFERENCE


----------



## ericeod

Just upgraded from X5679 to an X5680 (picked it up for $90!). So I also picked up an AIW 240mm H2O cooler and will be trying to push the CPU to the 4.4GHz range. I hit the limit of the X5679 at 4.2GHz with 1.365v vcore, and I was also limited with the 1066 only ram divider with the CPU.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Just upgraded from X5679 to an X5680 (picked it up for $90!). So I also picked up an AIW 240mm H2O cooler and will be trying to push the CPU to the 4.4GHz range. I hit the limit of the X5679 at 4.2GHz with 1.365v vcore, and I was also limited with the 1066 only ram divider with the CPU.


Awesome, let us know how it goes!


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> So for $80CAD i have the option of buying some 1333MHz samsung RAM ECC and registered memory. They are 6, 4GB modules (my mobo max) (24GB)
> 
> I am currently running my mushkin set at 942MHz (471DDR) with 7-7-7-20-1T @ 1.5v
> 
> I can run it 1100MHz 5-6-5-16-1T @ 1.5v but it stresses IMC and i have to up vtt voltage on imc
> 
> What do you guys think? Worth it?


Why run such tight timings but very slow speed? Have you done any kind of memory benchmarking to test whether the tight timings are worth it? I run mine at 1600 mhz but only 8-8-8-24 2t. I briefly tweaked it to get 1t but it isn't very stable. I'm using 6 2gb DIMMS and my system doesn't really like it. I was able to get better memory clocks and timings with only 3x2gb. Tradeoff I suppose.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *George 100*
> 
> Hello guys, im from greece and i own the system that i write down. I wan to change my 920 to x5670 that i found 130€. I think thats a good upgrade and i dont know if my mobo supports the xeon cpu. Has anybody test this config? Also i had a pm from a friend in greece for a i7 980x at 150€. I really want to put xeon on my system but i dont kwow if my mobo supports it.
> 
> SYSTEM:
> 
> MB: ASUS P6T SE X85 1366
> CPU: I7 920 OC TO 4.2GHZ WITH 1.4V
> RAM: 1 DIMM HYPERX 8GB 1866 OC TO 2000
> PSU: XIGMATEK MAVERICK 600W BRONZE
> GPU: RADEON HD6950 FLASHED TO 6970 MSI REFERENCE


Your MB supports it. I used to have a 920 in this board before getting the Xeon.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> Why run such tight timings but very slow speed? Have you done any kind of memory benchmarking to test whether the tight timings are worth it? .


Yes i have, it's about 30% better at 2133MHz 9-10-8-27-1T but its running 1.65v on dimms plus, i need to bump imc vtt well over recomended voltage








(Tested in MaxMemm 1.95)

Thats why i always try and keep it low :/

Was told to try lower multi, and higher fsb and higher ram :/


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## George 100

Thanks for your answers. I am preparing a 4690k build as a second gaming pc. The only parts that i dont bought yet are the motherboard and cpu. At Thursday 14/1/16 i will get my xeon. I think thats a very good choice and it will help me for my job! (Photoshop and premiere pro)


----------



## mrstef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> That seems to happen with every gigabyte board. From my experience with my GA-X58A-OC, increasing the BCLK past stock would stop the error from happening.


And that was it. Running smooth at 3.6GHz now... thanks!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mrstef*
> 
> And that was it. Running smooth at 3.6GHz now... thanks!


Your welcome.

Now crank that sucker up to 4GHz+!


----------



## OCmember

Anyone have a DDR3 2000 CL8.8.8.21 kit?


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> So for $80CAD i have the option of buying some 1333MHz samsung RAM ECC and registered memory. They are 6, 4GB modules (my mobo max) (24GB)
> 
> I am currently running my mushkin set at 942MHz (471DDR) with 7-7-7-20-1T @ 1.5v
> 
> I can run it 1100MHz 5-6-5-16-1T @ 1.5v but it stresses IMC and i have to up vtt voltage on imc
> 
> What do you guys think? Worth it?


Won't work if 2rx4 sticks, even if 2rx8 there is a chance of incompatibility.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Symix

Of course, there comes a point when even these chips will not make X58 the best value choice for a build. Value really requires a consideration of performance too.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Anyone tried any VR on this platform yet?, like Oculus or summit'?.


----------



## George 100

Maybe its a annoying question, but xeon x5760 on asus p6t se mobo supports non ecc ram?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *George 100*
> 
> Maybe its a annoying question, but xeon x5760 on asus p6t se mobo supports non ecc ram?


Yes, it is perfectly capable of using Non-ECC ram. That's what most of us are using.


----------



## George 100

Thanks a lot! At thursday ill buy a x5670 for 120€. I have 8gb of hyperx 1866mhz memory non ecc and i am going to use it!


----------



## DR4G00N

Well, I just pulled the trigger on an Alphacool Eisberg 240 to replace my H110. It was on sale for $110 cad (75 usd) at dazmode. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the H110 for my X5670 which currently peaks @ 70c for 4.188GHz 1.325V.

The H110 will go on my test bench because the Hyper T4 I'm using now is quite inadequate for the task.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Well, I just pulled the trigger on an Alphacool Eisberg 240 to replace my H110. It was on sale for $110 cad (75 usd) at dazmode. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the H110 for my X5670 which currently peaks @ 70c for 4.188GHz 1.325V.
> 
> The H110 will go on my test bench because the Hyper T4 I'm using now is quite inadequate for the task.


My custom loop has the same fundamentals except the pump and res are on the Radiator. It's a real simple solution. Plus it looks 10x cleaner than run of the mill AIO cooling solutions. The other great part about it is choosing your CPU block. Why not piece together a simple Custom Loop? Honestly the hardest part was designing the angles and lengths for the tubing with 1/2ID / 5/8OD compression fittings. I probably spent twice the amount being prepared in parts than what I actually used


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> My custom loop has the same fundamentals except the pump and res are on the Radiator. It's a real simple solution. Plus it looks 10x cleaner than run of the mill AIO cooling solutions. The other great part about it is choosing your CPU block. Why not piece together a simple Custom Loop? Honestly the hardest part was designing the angles and lengths for the tubing with 1/2ID / 5/8OD compression fittings. I probably spent twice the amount being prepared in parts than what I actually used


Eisberg = $110 Cad

Simple custom loop = $300ish Cad

BTW the Eisberg is expandable so I can add my GPU's and Mobo alongside a 360 rad, though I'd probably need a better pump for that.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Eisberg = $110 Cad
> 
> Simple custom loop = $300ish Cad
> 
> BTW the Eisberg is expandable so I can add my GPU's and Mobo alongside a 360 rad, though I'd probably need a better pump for that.


Indeed it will be interesting to see how the other AIO cooler performs, keep us posted!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Indeed it will be interesting to see how the other AIO cooler performs, keep us posted!


Will do, should be here this monday.


----------



## arnavvr

@DR4G00N Have you noticed if deliding X58 chips as a benefit in terms of temps? Most people just do it for upgrading 2009 Mac Pros.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> @DR4G00N Have you noticed if deliding X58 chips as a benefit in terms of temps? Most people just do it for upgrading 2009 Mac Pros.


If I were to compare it to my X5650 I'd say the temps are pretty much equal after the delid. The only reason I delidded my X5670 was because it had a horrendously bad solder application and core 0 & 1 were 20-25c hotter than the other cores.
So unless you got a chip like mine or are upgrading your mac than a delid is completely pointless.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Anyone tried any VR on this platform yet?, like Oculus or summit'?.


Nope, I refuse spending $600 on a helmet, way too much money. In theory it should work fine, my 6700k at 4.0 gives me the same results physics wise as my x5650 did at 3.6, at 4.0 it will obviously be even better. 1366 is far from being dead. I kind of regret buying a new platform but since I upgraded to a 1440p monitor and a 980ti I was worried I was going to get a performance hit.


----------



## tbob22

I fiddled around with my newly crossflashed bios (bios for the P6T WS Pro) and optimized some things a bit.

Now running the following and stressed tested for about 12 hours with Memtest86 and 7 hours with Prime95.
CPU: [email protected], 185x24 _(from [email protected], 200x22)_
VTT: 1.20v, 2959mhz _(from 1.25v ~3200mhz)_
Ram: 1853mhz 9-10-9-27 1t, 1.20v _(from, 2000mhz 10-11-10-30, 1.5v)_

Speed is pretty much exactly the same as before in Cinebench, etc, but with lower temps. P95 sits at about 62c vs 68c or so before.
Cinebench:

CPU is actually at 4.44 of course, but Cinebench doesn't read the turbo multi's for whatever reason. The other benches are a bit higher because I was running ~3600mhz UCLK or so.

Also just picked up an ASUS Z8NA-D6C to pair with some x5670's I got a good deal on last year, not x58 I know, but it should make a nice little workstation.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I fiddled around with my newly crossflashed bios (bios for the P6T WS Pro) and optimized some things a bit.
> 
> Now running the following and stressed tested for about 12 hours with Memtest86 and 7 hours with Prime95.
> CPU: [email protected], 185x24 _(from [email protected], 200x22)_
> VTT: 1.20v, 2959mhz _(from 1.25v ~3200mhz)_
> Ram: 1853mhz 9-10-9-27 1t, 1.20v _(from, 2000mhz 10-11-10-30, 1.5v)_
> 
> Speed is pretty much exactly the same as before in Cinebench, etc, but with lower temps. P95 sits at about 62c vs 68c or so before.
> Cinebench:
> 
> CPU is actually at 4.44 of course, but Cinebench doesn't read the turbo multi's for whatever reason. The other benches are a bit higher because I was running ~3600mhz UCLK or so.
> 
> Also just picked up an ASUS Z8NA-D6C to pair with some x5670's I got a good deal on last year, not x58 I know, but it should make a nice little workstation.


i've experianced what you displayed here. Sometimes different OC (usually lower multi) even at lower OC get better results... (4.43Ghz gets better cinebench than 4.78GHz)

Anyone willing to explain why?


----------



## DR4G00N

Got my new cooler today, gotta love having a watercooling store only a couple provinces over.









So far so good got it unboxed and there are no leaks to be seen, that's always a good sign.







The pump is fairly noisy @ 12V but it does come with a 7V and a 9V adapter < (which most reviewers mistake for an extension







).

Well anyway, I'm going to do some extensive test's with my H110 first before I install the Eisberg.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Got my new cooler today, gotta love having a watercooling store only a couple provinces over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far so good got it unboxed and there are no leaks to be seen, that's always a good sign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pump is fairly noisy @ 12V but it does come with a 7V and a 9V adapter < (which most reviewers mistake for an extension
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).
> 
> Well anyway, I'm going to do some extensive test's with my H110 first before I install the Eisberg.


Scary, if there is one thing I will never again put in a build is water. Hopefully you get the results you are looking for.


----------



## DR4G00N

Well, I got it installed now. It performs only a few degrees better which was to be expected since it has less surface area, and the pump is only at 7V plus the fans aren't the best (I may swap them for my YL D12SM-12's). I mainly just wanted it for the expandability later on.


De-lid X5670 @ 4.188GHz 1.325V, 1.25V VTT

H110:
Idle: 26c, 25, 21, 26, 22, 19
Prime 95 Small FFT's Load: 64c, 65, 59, 60, 63, 61

Eisberg:
Idle: 23c, 24, 20, 24, 21, 18
Prime 95 Small FFT's Load: 61c, 62, 57, 57, 60, 58

~3c average drop under load.


----------



## OCmember

Looks like the temps of a newly seated Heat Sink. Could it be just that?

Nice hardware, btw


----------



## OCmember

What version of P95? How long for? Ambient room temps?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What version of P95? How long for? Ambient room temps?


P95 V28.7, build 1 for about half an hour or so and the ambient was 16c.

It could possibly be due to a new mount, the spread didn't look great when I removed the H110.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> P95 V28.7, build 1 for about half an hour or so and the ambient was 16c.
> 
> It could possibly be due to a new mount, the spread didn't look great when I removed the H110.


You keep your room with your computer at 60*F, or is it uncontrollable? wow that's cool for a living type room..


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I fiddled around with my newly crossflashed bios (bios for the P6T WS Pro) and optimized some things a bit.
> 
> Now running the following and stressed tested for about 12 hours with Memtest86 and 7 hours with Prime95.
> CPU: [email protected], 185x24 _(from [email protected], 200x22)_
> VTT: 1.20v, 2959mhz _(from 1.25v ~3200mhz)_
> Ram: 1853mhz 9-10-9-27 1t, 1.20v _(from, 2000mhz 10-11-10-30, 1.5v)_


What are your other settings and voltages? pll, ioh/ich, llc on?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> You keep your room with your computer at 60*F, or is it uncontrollable? wow that's cool for a living type room..


It's somewhat controllable, so it normally sit's in the 15-17c range during winter.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> What are your other settings and voltages? pll, ioh/ich, llc on?


LLC on, all other voltages are manually set to stock.

CPU Voltage: 1.325v
CPU PLL: 1.8v
QPI/DRAM Core Voltage: 1.20
IOH Voltage: 1.10
IOH PCIE Voltage: 1.50
ICH Voltage: 1.10
ICH PCIE Voltage: 1.50
DRAM Voltage: 1.50 _(now running 9-9-9, but 9-10-9 did work fine at 1.2v)_

I also jammed a fan between my usb3 card and cooler and connected it to a fan controller. Chipset is now much cooler.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> i've experianced what you displayed here. Sometimes different OC (usually lower multi) even at lower OC get better results... (4.43Ghz gets better cinebench than 4.78GHz)
> 
> Anyone willing to explain why?


Your overclock probably isn't stable.

Plus you want to have your QPI PLL voltage match the IOH voltage , looks like you have the QPI @ 1.2v and the IOH at 1.1v


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> It's somewhat controllable, so it normally sit's in the 15-17c range during winter.


What do you do with that rig?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> i've experianced what you displayed here. Sometimes different OC (usually lower multi) even at lower OC get better results... (4.43Ghz gets better cinebench than 4.78GHz)
> 
> Anyone willing to explain why?


Cinebench loves fast ram, tight timings, and high QPI speeds. My highest is 1038, but I haven't went past 1.35v yet.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Your overclock probably isn't stable.
> 
> Plus you want to have your QPI PLL voltage match the IOH voltage , looks like you have the QPI @ 1.2v and the IOH at 1.1v


How do you know what AlienPrime173's voltages are? If you are talking about what I posted, I can assure you this is rock solid. I've been running my IOH at 1.1v for as long as I can remember and my QPI/VTT has always been from 1.2v to 1.3v.

QPI PLL and QPI/VTT aren't the same thing. Some boards have both settings, my board only has QPI/VTT or as Asus says QPI/DRAM.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What do you do with that rig?


BOINC crunching mostly though I play games on it every now and then.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> BOINC crunching mostly though I play games on it every now and then.


I was gonna say that's gotta be pretty cold there in the winter time for leisure type stuff


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> How do you know what AlienPrime173's voltages are? If you are talking about what I posted, I can assure you this is rock solid. I've been running my IOH at 1.1v for as long as I can remember and my QPI/VTT has always been from 1.2v to 1.3v.
> 
> QPI PLL and QPI/VTT aren't the same thing. Some boards have both settings, my board only has QPI/VTT or as Asus says QPI/DRAM.


Ah hell, I quoted the wrong person and got something else mixed up, sorry. Thanks for correcting things. I'll be over in the corner eat'n cookies.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Ah hell, I quoted the wrong person and got something else mixed up, sorry. Thanks for correcting things. I'll be over in the corner eat'n cookies.


Haha, no worries.


----------



## 5ricevic

I was thinking that my Gigabyte mb was the limiting factor, so I got myself a Sabertooth x58











Unfortunately, I can't even boot now on 4.4Ghz







Could somebody share theri bios settings for Sabertooth + X5660?


----------



## AlienPrime173

i can probably get better score at 4.78ghz if i can just increase ram to 2133mhz?

ill try that tonight


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Cinebench loves fast ram, tight timings, and high QPI speeds. My highest is 1038, but I haven't went past 1.35v yet.
> How do you know what AlienPrime173's voltages are? If you are talking about what I posted, I can assure you this is rock solid. I've been running my IOH at 1.1v for as long as I can remember and my QPI/VTT has always been from 1.2v to 1.3v.
> 
> QPI PLL and QPI/VTT aren't the same thing. Some boards have both settings, my board only has QPI/VTT or as Asus says QPI/DRAM.


Thank you for the info


----------



## Kana-Maru

I don't post here as much as I used to, but it looks like you guys are still overclocking pretty well.

As far voltages goes, I feel as if Windows 7 were better with [Idle] voltages for high overclocks [4.6Ghz -4.8Ghz]. Windows 10 doesn't seem to control the voltage that well. 4Ghz is fine, but high OCs aren't as low and stable as they were on Win 7. Win 10 has been getting updates so I guess I'll have to check out the voltages again.

My AMD R9 Fury X is still performing very well. Even with no OC. MGSV: TPP never runs above 43c. The GPU is simply amazing. I don't think I'll be getting the Fury X2 since this one will probably last awhile @ 1440p, 1600p and 4K. The rendering times for 3D modelling programs are great as well.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't post here as much as I used to, but it looks like you guys are still overclocking pretty well.
> 
> As far voltages goes, I feel as if Windows 7 were better with [Idle] voltages for high overclocks [4.6Ghz -4.8Ghz]. Windows 10 doesn't seem to control the voltage that well. 4Ghz is fine, but high OCs aren't as low and stable as they were on Win 7. Win 10 has been getting updates so I guess I'll have to check out the voltages again.
> 
> My AMD R9 Fury X is still performing very well. Even with no OC. MGSV: TPP never runs above 43c. The GPU is simply amazing. I don't think I'll be getting the Fury X2 since this one will probably last awhile @ 1440p, 1600p and 4K. The rendering times for 3D modelling programs are great as well.


Why'd you buy a Fury X? Doesn't the 980Ti perform better?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Have a look at the review Kana has written on his blog.


----------



## 45nm

How cool in terms of temperatures are these Xeon 32nm parts when compared to their i7 or Xeon 45nm counterparts? I have seen some say that because of the smaller process that they run cooler but even D0 stepping parts run cooler to their C0 stepping counterparts.

I will likely be using either my W3690 or X5690 with a Freezer 13 CO or a Delta DBX-A so I don't really forsee any issues there as they are all 130W parts even at 32nm.

Edit: Specifically inquiring about the 130W 32nm Xeons and not the 95W 32nm Xeons.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> How cool in terms of temperatures are these Xeon 32nm parts when compared to their i7 or Xeon 45nm counterparts? I have seen some say that because of the smaller process that they run cooler but even D0 stepping parts run cooler to their C0 stepping counterparts.
> 
> I will likely be using either my W3690 or X5690 with a Freezer 13 CO or a Delta DBX-A so I don't really forsee any issues there as they are all 130W parts even at 32nm.
> 
> Edit: Specifically inquiring about the 130W 32nm Xeons and not the 95W 32nm Xeons.


They run cool. Very cool. My X5690's coolest cores are 20*c in 72*F ambients - which is kinda odd but so says HW monitor.


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> They run cool. Very cool. My X5690's coolest cores are 20*c in 72*F ambients - which is kinda odd but so says HW monitor.


Same results for coretemp and realtemp?


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> They run cool. Very cool. My X5690's coolest cores are 20*c in 72*F ambients - which is kinda odd but so says HW monitor.


I have to agree. I notice much lower temps with my X5680 then when I ran a W3520 (i7 920 equiv). My X5680 also seems to run cooler than my i7 980X. I am able to hit 4.4Ghz with my X5680 vs 4.1Ghz with 980x... I understand I could have just had a dud 980x though, or the lower temps helps.


----------



## AlienPrime173

I am in same boat witu my 5680. Coldest core (4) is about 1 or 2 degreees above ambient with my lcs setup.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> Same results for coretemp and realtemp?


Coretemp reads the same thing. Haven't used Realtemp in a while.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> Why'd you buy a Fury X? Doesn't the 980Ti perform better?


Not since AMD has been doing what they normally do....kick @ss overtime with their graphics. Except this time it isn't taking 6 months to get more performance or driver updates. I don't even look at 1090p resukts when comparing the cards since I only game at 1440p and higher. You aren't spending $400+ on a card for 1080p. After I saw my GTX 670 performance degrade after the 970 4GB [*cough 3.5GB] released I was done with Nvidia. I still considered the 980 Ti, but I only read and heard great things about AMD drivers over time from friends who own and tested the performance.

Also the Fury X pulled ahead of the 980 Ti. The 980 Ti simply had crazy overclocks to give it those 5%-8% leads against a stock Fury X, That itself tells a story.

http://techfrag.com/2015/11/02/fury-x-performance-increases-match-even-surpass-980ti-thanks-latest-drivers/
or
http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-fury-x-performance-ahead-nvidia-980-ti-latest-drivers/

I also wrote my own review on the Fury X on my blog. The card is nothing short of amazing especially at stock. The noise is low, the temps are the lowest I've ever experienced in the summer time and performance is high.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> How cool in terms of temperatures are these Xeon 32nm parts when compared to their i7 or Xeon 45nm counterparts? I have seen some say that because of the smaller process that they run cooler but even D0 stepping parts run cooler to their C0 stepping counterparts.
> 
> I will likely be using either my W3690 or X5690 with a Freezer 13 CO or a Delta DBX-A so I don't really forsee any issues there as they are all 130W parts even at 32nm.
> 
> Edit: Specifically inquiring about the 130W 32nm Xeons and not the 95W 32nm Xeons.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> They run cool. Very cool. My X5690's coolest cores are 20*c in 72*F ambients - which is kinda odd but so says HW monitor.


^ Same here. It is true. I never got around to writing up more info about the Hexa-cores on my blog, but maybe I will someday. The Westmere's can cut power to the uncore when needed. Same for the cores. That's why some inactive cores readings are much lower than others during idle states or states when they are not being utilized. There's a lot of nice things about these Westmere's.


----------



## AlienPrime173

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Coretemp reads the same thing. Haven't used Realtemp in a while.


realtemp reads 3 cores only need realtemp gt to get all acurate readouts


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlienPrime173*
> 
> realtemp reads 3 cores only need realtemp gt to get all acurate readouts


Yup


----------



## bill1024

Is there one that reads 10, 12 or 24 cores?


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Is there one that reads 10, 12 or 24 cores?


Open Hardware Monitor claims to support up to 32 cores.

HWiNFO64 supports the big Xeons.

I use them on my little 6 core Xeons. Recommend both even for puny quad cores.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Open Hardware Monitor claims to support up to 32 cores.
> 
> HWiNFO64 supports the big Xeons.
> 
> I use them on my little 6 core Xeons. Recommend both even for puny quad cores.


Thank you.


----------



## serko70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> Why'd you buy a Fury X? Doesn't the 980Ti perform better?


I have the cheapest 980ti in the market (MSI Armour 2x) and it hits 20590 Graphics score on FireStrike 1.1 on its own air cooling and stayed below 60C during the benchmark test. Can someone tell me what a Fury X scores? I have not seen a single AMD card in the top 100 list.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serko70*
> 
> I have the cheapest 980ti in the market (MSI Armour 2x) and it hits 20590 Graphics score on FireStrike 1.1 on its own air cooling and stayed below 60C during the benchmark test. Can someone tell me what a Fury X scores? I have not seen a single AMD card in the top 100 list.


and you probably won't. Performance and fake e-peen from one benchmark doesn't tell the story.

http://techfrag.com/2015/11/02/fury-x-performance-increases-match-even-surpass-980ti-thanks-latest-drivers/
or
http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-fury-x-performance-ahead-nvidia-980-ti-latest-drivers/

Thanks to the watercooler I've never hit 60c even during the hot summer temps. Also what is your ambient temp? You'll have re-do it to be accurate. I run stock [Core = 1050Mhz], but I have OC'd up to 1170Mhz. I haven't benched with my the latest drivers at stock or OC on FireStrike. Why?....because it's FIRESTRIKE. It takes more than one DX11 benchmarking program to determine the overall performance. The scores can fluctuate from many factors and it's DX11. Although AMD has caught up tremendously, we all know Nvidia has had more mature DX11 drivers much longer than AMD. If anything I pay more attention to the "Graphics Score". The "Combined Score" usually favors Fury X at Extreme settings for DX11. I have also been spending more times playing games than benchmarking.

Since I'm still talking about this Fury X......another reason I purchased the Fury X was because it "is" DX12 ready. In other words AMD Mantle\DX12\Vulcan all complements the asynchronous functions. A 290X can perform more work than a 980 Ti. Once DX12\Vulcan drops I don't have to worry about the issues that Maxwell [980 Ti\900 series] has.


----------



## serko70

Thanks for the information. Actually I've all my life used AMD GPUs. I was planning for a R9 295x2 in my dream rig or a Fury Nano for mini ATX micro gaming rig but I happened to find a very cheap 980ti and replaced my 7970 with it. I know the memory in AMD is much faster than nvdia gddr5 and nvdia will only be catching up with Pascal on that front but i was a bit shocked to see that most enthusiasts are on nvdia. I recently read in an article that 80% of all steam users are on gtx 970!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Let's not forget that that there are tons of people who choose not participate in the Steam survey\data collection. The 970 was great for the price per performance and I almost purchased one. A few things preventing me from purchasing a 970 or 980 Ti. First, my GTX 670 2-way SLI performance dropped when Maxwell released [yes drivers killed performance and stable overclocks....tested and proven by myself]. Secondly, the GTX 970 cpi;d pm;y access 3.5GBs before slowing to snails crawl for the remaining 500MBs, if you got to use all it. I game at 1440p, 1600p, and 4K so this definitely wasn't going to work for me. I was eyeballing the watercooled 980 Ti, but the price was more than $100 more than the Fury X. Plus all of the issues I explained earlier in my previous post I decided to go with new technology over the old.

As far as I know Nvidia will still be behind since AMD has access to HBM2 and Nvidia can only use HBM1 [max 4GBs] I believe. Unless something has changed. Once again AMD is innovating, but Nvidia fanboys never seem to care about actual innovation. AMD has been doing a lot of big things lately. I hope they eventually get the credit they deserve. Intel and Nvidia has been following suit for sometime now.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> As far as I know Nvidia will still be behind since AMD has access to HBM2 and Nvidia can only use HBM1 [max 4GBs] I believe. Unless something has changed. Once again AMD is innovating, but Nvidia fanboys never seem to care about actual innovation. AMD has been doing a lot of big things lately. I hope they eventually get the credit they deserve. Intel and Nvidia has been following suit for sometime now.


They will probably make big money in the mobile market with HBM2. I just read the latest article about HBM2 on Anand and it's the way of the future. Although I wonder if 3D Xpoint will make it's way onto GPUs


----------



## AlienPrime173

i've heard mobility hw will benefit greatly as well


----------



## Adhmuz

Ordered one of these x5660s to do a multi box tower build on an old x58 board I had lying around. Can't wait to get overclocking on this bad boy!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serko70*
> 
> Thanks for the information. Actually I've all my life used AMD GPUs. I was planning for a R9 295x2 in my dream rig or a Fury Nano for mini ATX micro gaming rig but I happened to find a very cheap 980ti and replaced my 7970 with it.!


Oh yeah I forgot to add that the Fury Nano is as low as $459.99 now. I'm not sure how cheap you purchased your 980 Ti, but the Fury Nano is a steal at that price.


----------



## meganerd

I tend to buy what I think is good for the near and short term since historically I have been on a 18-24 month GPU upgrade cycle. Right now is an interesting time since I would not count out nVidia, though in theory AMD is better positioned for DX12. Also the price of AMD is attractive. I am planning on a wait and see approach with DX12.

I currently own a big kepler that works great at 1440p. I have had it for nearly 3 years now which is easily the longest I have used a single GPU though for what it cost it better have









Having said that I am definitely a mercenary. I had AMD GPUs previously (7950 and 6950), then nVidia before that (9800 gtx or something like that) and this has always been my pattern since discreet GPUs became a thing (3dfx was my first 3d discreet card waaaay back in the day).

The point is not to get to tied up in one side or the other. Look at the data, particularly for the games you play. Then based on your budget get the best performance for your dollar at that price point. I personally think that DX 12 is not going to be important enough for the card I would buy today, fortunately I don't have to.


----------



## serko70

Dx12 will also bring cpu core count into play, high end gaming will require a 10+ core chip as well as a top gpu within 2 years time. I'm fine with all that but having to upgrade to windows 10 from 7 is all that upsets me


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Oh yeah I forgot to add that the Fury Nano is as low as $459.99 now. I'm not sure how cheap you purchased your 980 Ti, but the Fury Nano is a steal at that price.


The Fury Nano performs about the same as GTX 980 because it thermal throttles on the stock cooler.


----------



## OCmember

UT4 will bring Mantle DX12/Vulcan to this up and coming Alpha release with engine 4.11 It's due out in the next week or sooner


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meganerd*
> 
> I tend to buy what I think is good for the near and short term since historically I have been on a 18-24 month GPU upgrade cycle. Right now is an interesting time since I would not count out nVidia, though in theory AMD is better positioned for DX12. Also the price of AMD is attractive. I am planning on a wait and see approach with DX12.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I currently own a big kepler that works great at 1440p. I have had it for nearly 3 years now which is easily the longest I have used a single GPU though for what it cost it better have
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having said that I am definitely a mercenary. I had AMD GPUs previously (7950 and 6950), then nVidia before that (9800 gtx or something like that) and this has always been my pattern since discreet GPUs became a thing (3dfx was my first 3d discreet card waaaay back in the day).
> 
> The point is not to get to tied up in one side or the other. Look at the data, particularly for the games you play. Then based on your budget get the best performance for your dollar at that price point. I personally think that DX 12 is not going to be important enough for the card I would buy today, fortunately I don't have to.


My last cards lasted nearly 3 years [Nvidia GTX 670 2-way SLI]. I tend to buy and get the max out of my cards. I don't believe in buying a new card every 12 months which is why I normally don't cheap out when it comes to my GPUs. I might have to pick up a Nano since AMD allows you to Crossfire different brands [Fury X + Fury Nano CFX]. All of my decisions have been based on research and I'm no fanboy for either company. I call it how I see it. If AMD messes up....call em out.....if Nvidia screws up big time.....call em out. They pay me a dang thing.

AMD is the smartest choice since they are actually INNOVATING and they CREATED the low level APIs we will be using shortly. Just in case some didn't know DX12 and Vulcan is largely based on AMDs Mantle API. AMD is better equipped and have been sometimes. Even their older GPUs will be ready. Nvidia documentation is still trying to lead devs towards a serial way programming. Big companies are getting behind Vulcan and I hoping Vulcan will become much more popular than DX12. I feel that DX12 was enough to help justify my purchase. AMD has been stepping up their DX11 game as well. That's really an understatement since The Fury X is now faster than the 980 Ti with mere driver updates. Competition is great for everyone.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> The Fury Nano performs about the same as GTX 980 because it thermal throttles on the stock cooler.


From what I've seen for years is that if an Nvidia GPU beats an AMD GPU by 0.2fps it's becomes...."OMG Amd sux...why buy that card, plus it's hot". In this case the Fury Nano actually beats the Nvidia GTX 980 period. The Fury Nano runs cooler and has better performance. Forget 1080p since that's what most sites used as a comparison with the 980 Ti vs whatever. No one with a Fury X, Fury Nano, 980, 980 Ti or Titan is gaming at 1080p. If they are then they are reckless with their money. At 1440p+ and especially at 4K the Nano shows it's strength. The Nano is so tiny, but so powerful. The Fury X isn't a large card either.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> UT4 will bring Mantle DX12/Vulcan to this up and coming Alpha release with engine 4.11 It's due out in the next week or sooner


Keep me posted. I will be downloading and benchmarking that for sure.


----------



## OCmember

@Kana-Maru Will do


----------



## tbob22

My dual x5670 build so far.


Did some testing.. Surprisingly, this board pushes these x5670's to 24x at full load giving 3.2ghz. Did some preliminary testing with 2x2gb, getting around 1430 in Cinebench. Waiting on my 48gb kit to arrive for triple channel.
Getting around 57c with prime smallffts and the bios set to whisper mode (very quiet). The chipset gets insanely hot so I'll have to mount a fan on there.

Using setfsb I'm able to get around 137x24 for 3.26ghz, but that seems to be about the limit. If I set QPI to Slow mode I can get the bclk up to 140 giving 3.36ghz, but it's much, much slower this way so it's not worth it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> My dual x5670 build so far.
> 
> 
> Did some testing.. Surprisingly, this board pushes these x5670's to 24x at full load giving 3.2ghz. Did some preliminary testing with 2x2gb, getting around 1430 in Cinebench. Waiting on my 48gb kit to arrive for triple channel.
> Getting around 57c with prime smallffts and the bios set to whisper mode (very quiet). The chipset gets insanely hot so I'll have to mount a fan on there.
> 
> Using setfsb I'm able to get around 137x24 for 3.26ghz, but that seems to be about the limit. If I set QPI to Slow mode I can get the bclk up to 140 giving 3.36ghz, but it's much, much slower this way so it's not worth it.


Very nice. There's no way I'm going dual proc on X58. Especially with the ridiculous prices. I'd rather just use newer tech.
Nice scores. What's the main reason for all of that power?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Very nice. There's no way I'm going dual proc on X58. Especially with the ridiculous prices. I'd rather just use newer tech.
> Nice scores. What's the main reason for all of that power?


I wouldn't have either, but I picked up a matched set of x5670's for $80 last year. So I decided to put them to use, the board was $100, the 48gb of 1333 was $70, Toughpower 750w Gold was $55, coolers were $40, haven't picked up a case yet. The entire build will be less than a 5820k not including some parts I already have (hdd/ssd/gpu).

I probably would have went with dual e5-2670's _(~$90 now)_ if I didn't already have these CPU's.

I run a lot of VM's for testing apps and web stuff on different platforms, so this will help a bit to just leave them open and be able to use them as needed. Also a lot of Photoshop use with very large images, this should perform a bit better. Also wanting to get into rendering, so this will help me try that out.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Those are great prices. The prices I've seen have been horrible the past year or so. I was thinking about either going mATX or building a dual Hexa core [not X58, but X79 and up]. My Xeon X5660 is just doing everything I need it to do at the moment so I don't really want to spend the money unless I have to.

I'm guessing you can't OC the CPUs or the RAM. Well I guess you wouldn't need to with dual processors. I'm still eyeballing Broadwell-E and Skylake-E. Looks like Cannonlake might be the leap for me [who knows.]. Intel and MS are being garbage right now. If they are going to limit the OS I can use based on the CPU I might skip them altogether.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Those are great prices. The prices I've seen have been horrible the past year or so. I was thinking about either going mATX or building a dual Hexa core [not X58, but X79 and up]. My Xeon X5660 is just doing everything I need it to do at the moment so I don't really want to spend the money unless I have to.
> 
> I'm guessing you can't OC the CPUs or the RAM. Well I guess you wouldn't need to with dual processors. I'm still eyeballing Broadwell-E and Skylake-E. Looks like Cannonlake might be the leap for me [who knows.]. Intel and MS are being garbage right now. If they are going to limit the OS I can use based on the CPU I might skip them altogether.


Yeah, I don't really need to OC for what I'm using it for. I would if I could, but SR2's are crazy expensive and just not worth it to me.

For gaming I still feel like these processors are just fine at 4ghz+, and will probably only get better with DX12. They may even catch up to some of the newer quad core's in games that can take full advantage of the extra cores. A x56xx at 4.2ghz gets approximately the same Cinebench score as a 6700k at 4.2ghz _(depending on the memory speed, QPI clocks, etc of course)._


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, I don't really need to OC for what I'm using it for. I would if I could, but SR2's are crazy expensive and just not worth it to me.
> 
> For gaming I still feel like these processors are just fine at 4ghz+, and will probably only get better with DX12. They may even catch up to some of the newer quad core's in games that can take full advantage of the extra cores. A x56xx at 4.2ghz gets approximately the same Cinebench score as a 6700k at 4.2ghz _(depending on the memory speed, QPI clocks, etc of course)._


I actually had a chance to get a SR-2 board at a good price back in late 2013, early 2014. Afterwards the prices [SR-2] went insane with the drop in Xeon prices throughout 2014. The main reason I didn't buy the SR-2 was because I heard about some issues while running dual processors. Some games wouldn't work properly or at all and CPU overclocking & long term stability was shaky. I also thought about how I would need to purchase another chassis for the huge SR-2 board. It would've been around $250-$300+ for the PC case I wanted at the time. I'd also need another water cooler for the extra CPU. Plus the higher end Xeon prices were still well about $300 at the time with the cheaper Xeons hovering around $150-$200. Of course the prices are much lower for many of the Xeons now.

I was also eyeballing a AMD R9 7990 to replace my GTX 670 SLI setup. Well I dodged that bullet and stuck with the 670s After looking at all of the possibilities and how much money it would cost me, in the end I decided not to do it. I had a lot going on in life at the time and bills come first before anything. Now in 2016, yes the SR-2 MBs are higher than ever. I bet some of the sellers purchased the boards at a high price [$500+] and is hoping to sell them for $800-$1,000.00+. That's going to be a tough pill to swallow if people really did scalp the boards solely for profit.

I game at 4Ghz with my Fury X and I get great frame rates and frame times. I benchmark @ 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz though. I haven't really looked at Intel latest CPU benchmarks. It looks like the single core gains are getting much better though if the 6700k Quad is matching the Xeon X56xx Hexa. We are talking multi- core benchmarks correct?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I actually had a chance to get a SR-2 board at a good price back in late 2013, early 2014. Afterwards the prices [SR-2] went insane with the drop in Xeon prices throughout 2014. The main reason I didn't buy the SR-2 was because I heard about some issues while running dual processors. Some games wouldn't work properly or at all and CPU overclocking & long term stability was shaky. I also thought about how I would need to purchase another chassis for the huge SR-2 board. It would've been around $250-$300+ for the PC case I wanted at the time. I'd also need another water cooler for the extra CPU. Plus the higher end Xeon prices were still well about $300 at the time with the cheaper Xeons hovering around $150-$200. Of course the prices are much lower for many of the Xeons now.
> 
> I was also eyeballing a AMD R9 7990 to replace my GTX 670 SLI setup. Well I dodged that bullet and stuck with the 670s After looking at all of the possibilities and how much money it would cost me, in the end I decided not to do it. I had a lot going on in life at the time and bills come first before anything. Now in 2016, yes the SR-2 MBs are higher than ever. I bet some of the sellers purchased the boards at a high price [$500+] and is hoping to sell them for $800-$1,000.00+. That's going to be a tough pill to swallow if people really did scalp the boards solely for profit.
> 
> I game at 4Ghz with my Fury X and I get great frame rates and frame times. I benchmark @ 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz though. I haven't really looked at Intel latest CPU benchmarks. It looks like the single core gains are getting much better though if the 6700k Quad is matching the Xeon X56xx Hexa. We are talking multi- core benchmarks correct?


Yeah, I've also read that the SR-2 has some stability issues. I'd still give it a try if it was half the price of what it currently goes for.









It really depends on the ram speed I guess, the 6700k can match a x56xx at the same clocks but it needs faster ram. With 2133mhz or so it is not much faster than a 4790k. And of course once the x56xx is overclocked past 4.4ghz or so the 6700k can't keep up. To match what I get at 4.5ghz (~1040cb) the 6700k would need to be at 4.8ghz or so. Of course I'm just going by the results I'm seeing online, would really need to do a side by side comparison to really compare properly.

On average it seems like the 6700k is about 35% faster per core than a x5xx at the same clocks.


----------



## marcchep

Great news!

I finally got a X58 system back up and running.All the trouble started in the middle of last year, I tried to lay my hands on a X58 mainboard, but I got scammed an it took me 5 months to get my money back, so that delayed the whole process quite a bit. Then finally in Sptember, I grabbed myself a AsRock X58 Extreme, with 12Gb of memory and a i7 920 for 130 bucks. But very soon I realized that this board is not really ideal for overclocking the 6-core Xeons. So I got myself a X58 Sabertooth for 120 bucks. But after about 2 months, the Raijintek Triton CPU block cracked and spilled water all over my dearly loved X5670 and the Sabertooth. At that time, I did not use that system at all, so I realized that something was wrong with this system a whole month after the block started spilling water. I dried the board and the CPU up, but they did not want to cooperate at all. So I bought a X5650 and a P6T6 WS Revolution with the fitting waterblocks, because I had to somehow replace the dead system. I still helt onto the dead Sabertooth and the X5670, because I still had hope. I let the board and the CPU dry again for more then a week, and what can I say, the Sabertooth board is indestructible, it still works like a charm, and the X5670 can take a beating too, because it still works as well.

The X5650 and the X5670 are not bad overclockers, I managed to boot @5140Mhz with the X5650 and I managed to hit 5170Mhz with the X5670. So all in all, everything worked out all right.

I am happy to be a part of the X58 club once again.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> I let the board and the CPU dry again for more then a week, and what can I say, the Sabertooth board is indestructible


Great story. The Sabertooth board does make it through some crazy situations. It's literally military tested and certified. Those test are rigorous. 5 year warranty is simply win.
--

I finally got around to running a few test on my AMD Fury X using the latest Crimson drivers. All I can say is that AMD continues to impress me with their drivers and quick hot fixes. 16.1 has a lot of hot fixes and is in the beta stage. The increases at stock and overclocks are pretty good for a simple driver install. Here are my percentage increases.

*AMD Fury X STOCK Settings*
*3DMark FireStrike Performance % Increase:*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
-Overall Score: *+3%*
-Graphics Score: *+2.19%*
-Combined Score: *+5.89%*

*3DMark FireStrike Extreme % Increase:*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
-Overall Score: *+2.24%*
-Graphics Score: *+2.20%*
-Combined Score: *+2.84%*

*Crysis 3 4K 100% Maxed - No MSAA- Performance % Increase:*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
FPS: *+13.33%*
Frame Rate: *+4.48%*

My Firestrike overclock scores have increased as well. I haven't ran any MGSV: TPP benchmarks, but I have noticed that my 1440p\1600p FPS are higher than they used to be. . I just can't say for sure without benchmarking everything.

*Edit:*

*AMD Fury X STOCK Settings*
*3DMark Feature Test [DX12] Performance % Increase:*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
DirectX 12 Increase: *+5.85%*


----------



## webhito

I was extremely tempted of getting a fury x, but it was the same price as my evga 980ti sc was and due to the crappy reviews it was really hard to take the risk, plus they only had the water cooled version and water for me is a no no.

Good to see they are picking up, I used to love amd, hopefully they can pull a rabbit out of the hat with zen.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I was extremely tempted of getting a fury x, but it was the same price as my evga 980ti sc was and due to the crappy reviews it was really hard to take the risk, plus they only had the water cooled version and water for me is a no no.
> 
> Good to see they are picking up, I used to love amd, hopefully they can pull a rabbit out of the hat with zen.


"Good to see they are picking up"....picking it up?????? The Fury X has been great since day 1. I was very impressed when I reviewed my Fury X when I was able to get my hands on one after release. Most of the reviewers were clearly biased towards Nvidia. They focused heavily on the 1080p scores as well [lol 1080p with a Fury X or 980 Ti]. That's why I couldn't wait to run my own test @ 1400p\1600p\4K To my surprise the Fury X surprised much better when I benchmarked it. It wasn't really surprising since I know some sites can be biased. The drivers and fixes for newer games are only making things better. Especially when newer games release. So hopefully all of those complaints from the green side about AMD drivers will cease. 2015 and so far 2016 has been great for AMD drivers. AMD is fixing problems much quicker now.

I had my eye on a specific 980 Ti. The price was pretty high as well. I went with AMD this time around for several reasons. So far I feel that I've made a great decision. I'm still running all of my games at stock, but I'm hearing extremely minor overclocks are giving users approx. 10FPS or more increases. I'll have to get around to testing this myself whenever I get time.

*Edit*

*AMD Fury X STOCK Settings*
*3DMark Feature Test [DX12] Performance % Increase:*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
DirectX 12 Increase: *+5.85%*

Mantle performed better than DX12 though. Mantle was 1.57% better than DX12. Mantle had 16,374,768 Draw Calls at stock settings. DX12 Draw Calls was 16.1M.


----------



## ldrancer

did anybody ever figure out or, have that problem where your sata2 write speeds with the sata 6g marvell x58 boards had 240mb writes on the intel sata2 ports, which is worse than my 775 board did on p35.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> "Good to see they are picking up"....picking it up?????? The Fury X has been great since day 1. I was very impressed when I reviewed my Fury X when I was able to get my hands on one after release. Most of the reviewers were clearly biased towards Nvidia. They focused heavily on the 1080p scores as well [lol 1080p with a Fury X or 980 Ti]. That's why I couldn't wait to run my own test @ 1400p\1600p\4K To my surprise the Fury X surprised much better when I benchmarked it. It wasn't really surprising since I know some sites can be biased. The drivers and fixes for newer games are only making things better. Especially when newer games release. So hopefully all of those complaints from the green side about AMD drivers will cease. 2015 and so far 2016 has been great for AMD drivers. AMD is fixing problems much quicker now.
> 
> I had my eye on a specific 980 Ti. The price was pretty high as well. I went with AMD this time around for several reasons. So far I feel that I've made a great decision. I'm still running all of my games at stock, but I'm hearing extremely minor overclocks are giving users approx. 10FPS or more increases. I'll have to get around to testing this myself whenever I get time.


If they were biased at all, must mean I ran into every single one of them. Every review said the same thing and lead me to choose the 980ti as the fury x was just not on par with it.

Would love to see your results though.


----------



## marcchep

Kana-Maru, I have to thank you for your great review of the X5660. You are the reason I spent all this money for two beast X58 systems









They even beat my i7 4790k! And I love overclocking with the X58 chipset, it reminds me of the time I had a LGA775 system as my main rig, and pushed a Q6600 to 3.8Ghz with a vCore of 1.6V xD


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> did anybody ever figure out or, have that problem where your sata2 write speeds with the sata 6g marvell x58 boards had 240mb writes on the intel sata2 ports, which is worse than my 775 board did on p35.


???? I've ran non-Raid and Raid 0 setups. The speeds were decent for everyday use. I wouldn't expect much out of SATA II performance when SSDs are so fast nowadays. You shouldn't bank on more than 300/MBs for a single drive anyways.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> If they were biased at all, must mean I ran into every single one of them. Every review said the same thing and lead me to choose the 980ti as the fury x was just not on par with it.
> 
> Would love to see your results though.


No every review did not. The obvious review sites did though. Fury X was definitely on par. and the Fury X is actually beating the 980 Ti on a few sites. Honestly I don't base my opinions solely around company reviews anyways and if that was the case I would've settled for the 980 Ti I was eyeballing. Well I could go back and find all of the results, but many have been updated and I'm not sure how long that would take. The obvious websites were usually biased while I read sites outside of the nation [USA] who told a different story. For instance 1080p was laughable to begin with especially for comparison because no one is spending $350+ [especially $650+] on a GPU of all things for 1080p performance. When I checked the 1400p\1600p\4K scores the Fury X and 980 Ti were pretty much even. Depending on the games they both had their strengths and weaknesses, but the weaknesses weren't "massive" loses in performance. However, they were painting the 980 Ti the king and winner, but forgetting Fury X strengths and wins at higher resolutions.

I seen a website that showed the Fury X performing much better than the obvious sites where.....the obvious being AnAnd[ugh], Guru3D etc. I guess it would be pointless to try and find the sites from last year since the Fury X is faster than the 980 Ti now from driver updates. Another issue that was left out was that the Reference 980 Ti had boost [Core=1000Mhz - Boost=1076Mhz ] while the Fury X ran solely at Core = 1050Mhz. However, when a lot of people like those guys on Youtube were sent a Fury X for reviews they were doing dumb stuff like comparing it to a highly overclocked aftermarket GTX 980 Ti cards [OCs upwards towards Core=1500Mhz] that costed much more than the Fury X at the time.

They failed to realized that those higher clocked GTX 980 Ti increases [sometimes 35% and more] over the stock Fury X weren't significant enough to justify the high price point after viewing the performance gains [oh wait 3DMark FireStrike Performance Test e=peen makes it worth it >_>....no]. AND yeah 980 Ti's aftermarket cards were going for $700-$1,050. Ridiculous prices for sure since they went about the Titan X. Those higher aftermarket overclocks also didn't result in a demanding lead during actual gameplay benchmarks. Fury X held it's ground *AT STOCK* core clock. For me it was sickening since I support both companies equally, but there was a lot of one sided conclusions going on. So of course I couldn't wait to retire my GTX 670s SLI and get my hands on a Fury X.

Now if you want to read my Fury X review you can check it out here:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/40-amd-fury-x-review

It was uploaded last year using the Catalyst 15.7.1 Drivers dated 7/29/2015. Earlier I posted my performance increases in Crysis 3 and FireStrike. I'll probably get around to running more in-game benchmarks and updating the article. I focus more on actual gameplay benchmarks than synthetic anyways since that's what ultimately matters at the end of the day.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Kana-Maru, I have to thank you for your great review of the X5660. You are the reason I spent all this money for two beast X58 systems
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They even beat my i7 4790k! And I love overclocking with the X58 chipset, it reminds me of the time I had a LGA775 system as my main rig, and pushed a Q6600 to 3.8Ghz with a vCore of 1.6V xD


No problem man







I'm glad that you checked out my review and I'm glad that I was able to help you make a great decision. Overclocking these bad boy Xeons are nice, just be careful because they can't take a long beating like older processors. However, if the temperature is right and you know what you are doing you reach some fairly impressive clocks.

*Edit:*

I would like to point out something in my Fury X review. Please remember that I'm running a *1st generation* X58 + Hexa core + PCIe 2.0 vs an extreme *4th generation* OCTO CORE Haswell-E + X99 + PCIe 3.0.

So the results will be more in favor of the the 980 Ti with the more up to date setup [DDR3-2133Mhz etc]. Still I think the Fury X and X58 does well.


----------



## ldrancer

problem is is that it wont reach the same speeds as a ich9r chipset does. no matter what drivers or even different bioses with different option roms and any combination of drivers or the newest for that release, newer, older or anyting wont do it. heres what it looks like, 
Before so you get an idea of what it does do, but it doesnt do. see it. thats before and im talking about the one on the right. or either but, this is 2 ssds on sata2 intel ich9r. now the write side on this board wont go past 244~MB speeds now. pretty significat and im sure youd be here night and day if it didnt work posting..

anyway, the IDE doesnt work either which is controlled by the marvell controllers. sort of makes me think their related since intel and microsoft neither one can code anything but write out pay me money for my sign of a driver ooh like microsoft is some big security people that i give a crap about. maybe they can learn to code, or just plain code. nah forget all that. right.

anyway, dont care what you think go back to your overclocking threads. 245mb is way under what it should be able to do, and its slower getting there. i dont have a screenshot but where looking at 15-20%.. performance loss. with a case of maybe trim who knows if it works does intel or microsoft even describe what it is or are they too busy spying on people. and my ssds maybe taking damage. but dont worry about a 10-20% perfomance loss. please make some more overclock threads for me if you think 240mb is ok for sata2. 133mb was a speed for pata ata 133 drives. we arent even doubling that and tell me again why i should care about a ssd, a newer comptuer than socket 775 or any crappy games trying to make you use more computer power. code to me.

ok made a quick bench pic. 
reads are average 5% slower and writes between 5-12% slower. 271-245, i cant count. 26. thats over 10% loss in performance in writing speed for the same thing. its broke. and the IDE controlled by marvell who controlls, sata speed in the sata controller is also limited and ive not seen any driver or firmware that lets the marvells sata3 plugins go over 245mb speed on write. Seems like they are related.


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> problem is is that it wont reach the same speeds as a ich9r chipset does. no matter what drivers or even different bioses with different option roms and any combination of drivers or the newest for that release, newer, older or anyting wont do it. heres what it looks like,
> Before so you get an idea of what it does do, but it doesnt do. see it. thats before and im talking about the one on the right. or either but, this is 2 ssds on sata2 intel ich9r. now the write side on this board wont go past 244~MB speeds now. pretty significat and im sure youd be here night and day if it didnt work posting..
> 
> anyway, the IDE doesnt work either which is controlled by the marvell controllers. sort of makes me think their related since intel and microsoft neither one can code anything but write out pay me money for my sign of a driver ooh like microsoft is some big security people that i give a crap about. maybe they can learn to code, or just plain code. nah forget all that. right.
> 
> anyway, dont care what you think go back to your overclocking threads. 245mb is way under what it should be able to do, and its slower getting there. i dont have a screenshot but where looking at 15-20%.. performance loss. with a case of maybe trim who knows if it works does intel or microsoft even describe what it is or are they too busy spying on people. and my ssds maybe taking damage. but dont worry about a 10-20% perfomance loss. please make some more overclock threads for me if you think 240mb is ok for sata2. 133mb was a speed for pata ata 133 drives. we arent even doubling that and tell me again why i should care about a ssd, a newer comptuer than socket 775 or any crappy games trying to make you use more computer power. code to me.


I'm sorry if this sounds elitest but I'm going to state facts for you.

No matter what you do, onboard Intel SATA-II / 3 Gpbs (What ever you want to cal it) can only do 240 - 255 MB/s write, maybe 270 - 280 reads if you're lucky. MAXIMUM, forever, that is all.

It doesn't matter if you put 2 modern SSD's in raid-0 on either ICH9R, or ICH10R, or 4, or 6 SSD's on it. It will not go above that.

That is fundamentally the maximum performance you can get out of onboard raid on the motherboard on x58 and 775 motherboards.

Even if -ANY- motherboard for x58, or 775, or any of that series have "Sata 6 Gbps" onboard, this is always (for this era of system) a secondary, add-on controller chipset on the motherboard, running over PCI-Express 1x.

There is no Intel motherboard older than Sandy Bridge that has Sata-III / 6 Gbps onboard, native, through the chipset. Which is the only thing that can get above the 255 MB/s barrier in storage performance.

I've owned multiple x58 (and 775) motherboards, P45, P35, x38, x48, 780i, 790i, etc, and tried them with a pair of Samsung Pro 128 GB SSD's and could not get performance higher than 240 - 255 MB/s until I went with a P67 socket 1155 motherboard that has 2 x 6 Gbps ports native through the chipset.

The Only thing I've ever been able to do to get faster was use a Dell PERC 6/i raid controller on a x58 motherboard and 8 x scsi 15k-rpm hard drives and got 560 - 630 MB/s.


----------



## ldrancer

maybe you should try looking at the picture, and some math. i cant go over 245 right? and noone else can too. well boy oh boy my 775 is the best. board is for sale for 1000$ if anyones intersted. man can abit code. bye


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> maybe you should try looking at the picture, and some math. i cant go over 245 right? and noone else can too. well boy oh boy my 775 is the best. board is for sale for 1000$ if anyones intersted. man can abit code. bye


So you have one screenshot showing what, 280 MB/s ? That's.. still Sata-II limitation. I'm not sure what you're expecting but you're not going to get 500+ on those systems, has to be something newer. Sandy bridge era can get 1000+ MB/s on the onboard chipset.


----------



## ldrancer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> So you have one screenshot showing what, 280 MB/s ? That's.. still Sata-II limitation. I'm not sure what you're expecting but you're not going to get 500+ on those systems, has to be something newer. Sandy bridge era can get 1000+ MB/s on the onboard chipset.


look i just posted here to see if anybody could help me not argue with you over wether 10% is better on an overclocking forum or that its not worthwhile. its broke. unless you think its bad then buy my crap and stop arguing at me over yoru new crap that i dont care about. you still get beat in any game by me. or anything else.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> problem is is that it wont reach the same speeds as a ich9r chipset does. no matter what drivers or even different bioses with different option roms and any combination of drivers or the newest for that release, newer, older or anyting wont do it. heres what it looks like, [IMG
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ALT=""]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2695295/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
> Before so you get an idea of what it does do, but it doesnt do. see it. thats before and im talking about the one on the right. or either but, this is 2 ssds on sata2 intel ich9r. now the write side on this board wont go past 244~MB speeds now. pretty significat and im sure youd be here night and day if it didnt work posting..
> 
> anyway, the IDE doesnt work either which is controlled by the marvell controllers. sort of makes me think their related since intel and microsoft neither one can code anything but write out pay me money for my sign of a driver ooh like microsoft is some big security people that i give a crap about. maybe they can learn to code, or just plain code. nah forget all that. right.
> 
> anyway, dont care what you think go back to your overclocking threads. 245mb is way under what it should be able to do, and its slower getting there. i dont have a screenshot but where looking at 15-20%.. performance loss. with a case of maybe trim who knows if it works does intel or microsoft even describe what it is or are they too busy spying on people. and my ssds maybe taking damage. but dont worry about a 10-20% perfomance loss. please make some more overclock threads for me if you think 240mb is ok for sata2. 133mb was a speed for pata ata 133 drives. we arent even doubling that and tell me again why i should care about a ssd, a newer comptuer than socket 775 or any crappy games trying to make you use more computer power. code to me.
> 
> ok made a quick bench pic.
> reads are average 5% slower and writes between 5-12% slower. 271-245, i cant count. 26. thats over 10% loss in performance in writing speed for the same thing. its broke. and the IDE controlled by marvell who controlls, sata speed in the sata controller is also limited and ive not seen any driver or firmware that lets the marvells sata3 plugins go over 245mb speed on write. Seems like they are related
> 
> 
> .


As I said above you are using a Single SSD and you'll be lucky if you get near 300MB/s, That's pretty much it for you on the SATA II ports. Remember that these are OLD platforms. I had to remind a few people about that. The SSDs were nowhere close as powerful and fast as they are today.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> It doesn't matter if you put 2 modern SSD's in raid-0 on either ICH9R, or ICH10R, or 4, or 6 SSD's on it. It will not go above that.


Ok now that's not necessarily true. I've ran RAID 0 and got 530+MB/s on SATA II.


----------



## ldrancer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> As I said above you are using a Single SSD and you'll be lucky if you get near 300MB/s, That's pretty much it for you on the SATA II ports. Remember that these are OLD platforms. I had to remind a few people about that. The SSDs were nowhere close as powerful and fast as they are today.
> Ok now that's not necessarily true. I've ran RAID 0 and got 530+MB/s on SATA II.


just buy me that new board you talk about then. since im sure it will run sata3 at sata3 but im running this on sata2. snice my board is broke and you care so much to tell me about new boards not being broke buy me that board. thanks.
still, doesnt answer my question though


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> just buy me that new board you talk about then. since im sure it will run sata3 at sata3 but im running this on sata2. snice my board is broke and you care so much to tell me about new boards not being broke buy me that board. thanks.
> still, doesnt answer my question though


The thing though is, a 10% drop in performance can be any number of a hundred variables that effect it. Differences in manufacturing processes between different motherboard families (ICH9R vs ICH10R is a big leap in tech), may be the difference. That and if you're using cheaper SSD's in raid-0 on those chipsets, you don't get trim support any more. And perhaps (And all this I'm just guessing here) maybe your SSD's do rather bad internal garbage collection without TRIM support and degrade faster than you think.

I have a pair of Patriot Blaze series 64GB SSD's in raid-0 on my x58 system and they used to do 225 MB/s when I first bought them last year in that system but now about 8 months later they only do 165 MB/s over there. Probably because no TRIM and they were $33 SSD's.

There's a lot of different factors.. and you have to remember SSD's in general do degrade over time. They will never be as fast as the day you bought them.

Now, Samsung Pro series SSD's are one of several that "lead the field" in garbage-collecting performance, TRIM or not, and hold up high speeds longer over time before degrading vs others. Part of why they're expensive.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> just buy me that new board you talk about then. since im sure it will run sata3 at sata3 but im running this on sata2. snice my board is broke and you care so much to tell me about new boards not being broke buy me that board. thanks.
> still, doesnt answer my question though


I said absolutely NOTHING about "new board" in my last post. I spoke solely about the old X58 platform.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> As I said above you are using a Single SSD and you'll be lucky if you get near 300MB/s, That's pretty much it for you on the SATA II ports. Remember that these are OLD platforms. I had to remind a few people about that. The SSDs were nowhere close as powerful and fast as they are today.


If you cannot understand the limitations of SATA II then there's nothing I can do for you. Once again if you use SATA II ports expect less than 300MB\s for a single drive. You'll usually be below than 275MB/s in most cases.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ldrancer*
> 
> is my computer also is it normal for it to catch on fire?
> i never mentioned 300mb and your blind and i cant help you. look. see. see that? buy me an ssd.


No I can't help you. I am done with you kid.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I actually had a chance to get a SR-2 board at a good price back in late 2013, early 2014. Afterwards the prices [SR-2] went insane with the drop in Xeon prices throughout 2014. The main reason I didn't buy the SR-2 was because I heard about some issues while running dual processors. Some games wouldn't work properly or at all and CPU overclocking & long term stability was shaky. I also thought about how I would need to purchase another chassis for the huge SR-2 board. It would've been around $250-$300+ for the PC case I wanted at the time. I'd also need another water cooler for the extra CPU. Plus the higher end Xeon prices were still well about $300 at the time with the cheaper Xeons hovering around $150-$200. Of course the prices are much lower for many of the Xeons now.
> 
> I was also eyeballing a AMD R9 7990 to replace my GTX 670 SLI setup. Well I dodged that bullet and stuck with the 670s After looking at all of the possibilities and how much money it would cost me, in the end I decided not to do it. I had a lot going on in life at the time and bills come first before anything. Now in 2016, yes the SR-2 MBs are higher than ever. I bet some of the sellers purchased the boards at a high price [$500+] and is hoping to sell them for $800-$1,000.00+. That's going to be a tough pill to swallow if people really did scalp the boards solely for profit.
> 
> I game at 4Ghz with my Fury X and I get great frame rates and frame times. I benchmark @ 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz though. I haven't really looked at Intel latest CPU benchmarks. It looks like the single core gains are getting much better though if the 6700k Quad is matching the Xeon X56xx Hexa. We are talking multi- core benchmarks correct?


Those SR-2 boards are way better investment than stocks lol.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> I'm sorry if this sounds elitest but I'm going to state facts for you.
> 
> No matter what you do, onboard Intel SATA-II / 3 Gpbs (What ever you want to cal it) can only do 240 - 255 MB/s write, maybe 270 - 280 reads if you're lucky. MAXIMUM, forever, that is all.
> 
> It doesn't matter if you put 2 modern SSD's in raid-0 on either ICH9R, or ICH10R, or 4, or 6 SSD's on it. It will not go above that.
> 
> That is fundamentally the maximum performance you can get out of onboard raid on the motherboard on x58 and 775 motherboards.
> 
> Even if -ANY- motherboard for x58, or 775, or any of that series have "Sata 6 Gbps" onboard, this is always (for this era of system) a secondary, add-on controller chipset on the motherboard, running over PCI-Express 1x.
> 
> There is no Intel motherboard older than Sandy Bridge that has Sata-III / 6 Gbps onboard, native, through the chipset. Which is the only thing that can get above the 255 MB/s barrier in storage performance.
> 
> I've owned multiple x58 (and 775) motherboards, P45, P35, x38, x48, 780i, 790i, etc, and tried them with a pair of Samsung Pro 128 GB SSD's and could not get performance higher than 240 - 255 MB/s until I went with a P67 socket 1155 motherboard that has 2 x 6 Gbps ports native through the chipset.
> 
> The Only thing I've ever been able to do to get faster was use a Dell PERC 6/i raid controller on a x58 motherboard and 8 x scsi 15k-rpm hard drives and got 560 - 630 MB/s.


I get 370MB/s seq read on P35 with ICH9R and two intel 313 20G ssd raid 0.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> Those SR-2 boards are way better investment than stocks lol.


LOL I know. People are literally sitting on a old platform with a updated chipset that's nearly 7 years old [X58 will be 8 this year]. They can sit on it as long as they want.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> I get 370MB/s seq read on P35 with ICH9R and two intel 313 20G ssd raid 0.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5750#post_24840448

Already addressed. RAID 0 is "ok" for daily usage. Unless you have some programs that need the speed or you are moving a lot of files you'll probably never notice the difference between one SSD and RAID-0 speeds.


----------



## Disturbed117

Okay, Keep it clean and civil. No trolling etc.


----------



## Kana-Maru

It was clean and civil. I think I got trolled by a kid. I'm not sure. That's why I said I was done helping him.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> As I said above you are using a Single SSD and you'll be lucky if you get near 300MB/s, That's pretty much it for you on the SATA II ports. Remember that these are OLD platforms. I had to remind a few people about that. The SSDs were nowhere close as powerful and fast as they are today.
> Ok now that's not necessarily true. I've ran RAID 0 and got 530+MB/s on SATA II.


Yep, a machine I built around the ASRock x58 Extreme is running 3x250gb bx100's in Raid 0 and gets around 700-750MB/s or so, but that was built primarily for Final Cut.

During normal use I notice absolutely no difference compared to my single 840 EVO on my P6T Deluxe v2 (~250-270MB/s). The biggest gains come from the latency of SSD's (~0.1ms) versus mechanical drives (~10ms), which I think most of us know already. The extra throughput will help for copying large files between multiple fast drives or arrays _(or video work)._


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> LOL I know. People are literally sitting on a old platform with a updated chipset that's nearly 7 years old [X58 will be 8 this year]. They can sit on it as long as they want.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/5750#post_24840448
> 
> Already addressed. RAID 0 is "ok" for daily usage. Unless you have some programs that need the speed or you are moving a lot of files you'll probably never notice the difference between one SSD and RAID-0 speeds.


Or in my case a 20G drive is too small for OS and raiding two of them works perfect.


----------



## marcchep

Kana-Maru, yeah I know that I have to be careful with the LGA1366 Xeons, for benching, I never gave them more than 1.45V Vcore. What temps and Vcore do you consider safe for 24/7 use under water?

The Q6600 I overclocked, I actually gave it 1.7V on air! I knew it would be crazy to do that, but I really wanted to hit 4Ghz but it was never ment to happen. Now I cannot achieve anything higher than 3.5Ghz


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Kana-Maru, yeah I know that I have to be careful with the LGA1366 Xeons, for benching, I never gave them more than 1.45V Vcore. What temps and Vcore do you consider safe for 24/7 use under water?
> 
> The Q6600 I overclocked, I actually gave it 1.7V on air! I knew it would be crazy to do that, but I really wanted to hit 4Ghz but it was never ment to happen. Now I cannot achieve anything higher than 3.5Ghz


I have a 1366 Xeon W3520 (Essentially just the i7-920 in xeon form) that I've had as my gaming machine for a long while now. I run it under custom water loop, 4398 mhz @ 1.5v and it's been doing this just fine daily with turbo off and speedstep off and running at max clock constantly, almost 3 years now and I'm typing on it right now.

At one point back when I had a Corsair H110 (the big 13.5-inch radiator that takes 2 x 140mm fans (4 total)), It used to run around 90c - 95c load when I used it daily for video editing, and it would just.. hang out and run there for hours on end and didn't care. And now under custom water loop it runs about 70c max, idle 30's C, and I still use it daily.. mostly for light video editing and chatting and web browsing and heavy multi-tasking.

So far it's taken all of this "Abuse" all these years and keeps on truckin, no issues yet, no BSOD's in years now.

So the maximum with these 1366 xeons is 100c, as long as you stay below that (even if it's just -5c below) you're probably fine. Older intel xeons are like.. mack trucks, take a lickin' and keep on tickin'


----------



## OCmember

45nm chips were tanks. All that would be unusual with a 32nm Xeon. Not sayin it's not possible but unusual


----------



## cloudbyday

Hello,

I'm looking to use this CPU for a Freenas system, the motherboard I am thinking of using is a dual socket motherboard. Two questions, does anyone who uses this CPU would think that Freenas would have any issues with this CPU?

Beyond NAS, I will also be running Plex in a jail, and possibly Sabnzbd. Should be no issue with dual socket CPU's and plenty of RAM?

Motherboard
CPU

Looking at RAM, does anyone have experience with memory4less.com?

For the Freenas itself, I will be on the Freenas forums for those questions.

However, I am looking for the best bang for a good price...and seems like this CPU is a good one. Also one that is highly compatible.

edit: I just realized that this thread is about the x5660, not the x5560 that I linked. But still the x5660 seems like the better option....so maybe help me sort out something that will be compatible with that.


----------



## DR4G00N

From my experience the 32nm chips are quite durable as well. I've been using 1.66V VCore & 1.51V VTT with my X5650 in my benching rig for a little while now and it's still rock solid at the 4.2GHz oc I used when it was my daliy driver. My new X5687 also handles that amount of voltage just fine.


----------



## OCmember

Yeah my experience was just more of the middle of the road except for this one X5660. I may have been a little less experienced at the time but it just seemed to be a stubborn over-clocker, oh well


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> During normal use I notice absolutely no difference compared to my single 840 EVO on my P6T Deluxe v2 (~250-270MB/s). The biggest gains come from the latency of SSD's (~0.1ms) versus mechanical drives (~10ms), which I think most of us know already. The extra throughput will help for copying large files between multiple fast drives or arrays _(or video work)._


Yeah that low latency really makes a difference for sure when switching from a HDD to a SSD. So yeah daily use = no difference, but if you have programs that can really benefit from the lower latency the you'll see a big difference. Some of my programs benefit from SSDs while some others simply perform worse on a SSD than a HDD. It all depends on the program.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marcchep*
> 
> Kana-Maru, yeah I know that I have to be careful with the LGA1366 Xeons, for benching, I never gave them more than 1.45V Vcore. What temps and Vcore do you consider safe for 24/7 use under water?
> 
> The Q6600 I overclocked, I actually gave it 1.7V on air! I knew it would be crazy to do that, but I really wanted to hit 4Ghz but it was never ment to happen. Now I cannot achieve anything higher than 3.5Ghz


Ah dang 1.7v.....







whew. I pushed my X5660 to the point to where it wouldn't POST for approx. 45 mins and it had loud coil whine for about a week. My low 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz requires more voltage for stability now. I wish I would've never pushed so many volts into my CPU while hitting 5.2Ghz and 5.4Ghz. Simply wasn't worth it. Thankfully I didn't run my CPU for a long time and turned off the PC before extreme damage occurred.

Well no matter if you are under water or using air I suggest no more than 1.35v for the X5650 and the X5670. That's the recommended voltage before potential damage occurs or uncertain death. The 32nm can take a beating, but not the kind of beating a 45nm could take.

As far as temps goes you don't want anything above 80c period. Yes the CPU can take it, but that's a ton of heat that will only lead to problems over time. You'll definitely want to be below 74c for starters, but anything under 70c is great at 100% heavy work loads. In most cases you'll never be running 100% constantly, well for most people, so it shouldn't be a big problem.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cloudbyday*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm looking to use this CPU for a Freenas system, the motherboard I am thinking of using is a dual socket motherboard. Two questions, does anyone who uses this CPU would think that Freenas would have any issues with this CPU?
> 
> Beyond NAS, I will also be running Plex in a jail, and possibly Sabnzbd. Should be no issue with dual socket CPU's and plenty of RAM?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Motherboard
> CPU
> 
> Looking at RAM, does anyone have experience with memory4less.com?
> 
> For the Freenas itself, I will be on the Freenas forums for those questions.
> 
> However, I am looking for the best bang for a good price...and seems like this CPU is a good one. Also one that is highly compatible.
> 
> edit: I just realized that this thread is about the x5660, not the x5560 that I linked. But still the x5660 seems like the better option....so maybe help me sort out something that will be compatible with that.


There's no issue with speaking about other Westmere's in topic. There's nothing wrong with your setup. You can go X5660 if you want. I don't normally pay attention to dual motherboards for the X58 nowadays. As far as FreeNAS, I don't know if it will work or not or how well it will work. I'm sure those guys on that forum will help you.

Oh yeah about "memory4less.com"......never used the site. They have the BBB accredited icon and a few others. You can check them out on the BBB website I guess.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cloudbyday*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm looking to use this CPU for a Freenas system, the motherboard I am thinking of using is a dual socket motherboard. Two questions, does anyone who uses this CPU would think that Freenas would have any issues with this CPU?
> 
> Beyond NAS, I will also be running Plex in a jail, and possibly Sabnzbd. Should be no issue with dual socket CPU's and plenty of RAM?
> 
> Motherboard
> CPU
> 
> Looking at RAM, does anyone have experience with memory4less.com?
> 
> For the Freenas itself, I will be on the Freenas forums for those questions.
> 
> However, I am looking for the best bang for a good price...and seems like this CPU is a good one. Also one that is highly compatible.
> 
> edit: I just realized that this thread is about the x5660, not the x5560 that I linked. But still the x5660 seems like the better option....so maybe help me sort out something that will be compatible with that.


I'd avoid going the retail memory route for a large amount of ECC, you can probably find supported ram for whatever board you get for much less on ebay. I recently picked up a 48gb kit for my Z8NA-D6C of officially supported 1333mhz for about $70, and just let it run memtest86 for ~5 days to make sure it was reliable

I don't see why FreeNAS wouldn't work well, but you may want to do some research on that. But keep in mind that these chipsets and CPU's use quite a bit more power than more modern stuff.

As far as CPU selection goes, more CPU power is going to be better for something like Plex if you are planning to transcode media on the fly for mobile, tv's or whatever.


----------



## Myski

Any opinions what would be _the_ x58 Xeon to buy now if looking for best price-performance ratio?

I haven't followed the prices since last summer and just noticed the X5650 is selling for over 100 dollars now (it was 60 dollars when I bought mine year ago), it does not look so hot deal to me anymore.

Also would you consider buying used Asus Rampage 3 Extreme for 120 dollars/euros a good deal (only the board, nothing else).


----------



## burntheskies

i miss my old p6t deluxe ( psu blowout)

do you think a p6t (the regular model) could handle that or should i consider a sabertooth or older rive?


----------



## Myski

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *burntheskies*
> 
> do you think a p6t (the regular model) could handle that or should i consider a sabertooth or older rive?


I dont think there are major hw differences between the two, and you should be able to crossflash bioses (if they are faultless boards, unlike mine which still has the weird frozen bios problem) between deluxe and regular version if some overclocking options are missing from the regular version.

If you just want some stable ~4Ghz and nothing too extreme that is.


----------



## burntheskies

thanks Myski-

I am debating cycling some machines -
putting a p6t in operation again
and selling my 3930k with rive setup- so ill probably need a rig until i sort everything out.


----------



## OCmember

The X5650 is right around the best price for performance. Trouble is everyone buys them, abuses them, and then resells the ones they don't want.


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The X5650 is right around the best price for performance. Trouble is everyone buys them, abuses them, and then resells the ones they don't want.


Except according to cpu-world, those are dual-socket 1366 xeons. Which... don't work in but a extremely tiny list of normal single-socket 1366 motherboards.

The cheapest good performance 6-core designed for single-socket motherboards is the W3670, which can be had for about $100 - $120 used on ebay (buy it now, I just looked) and comes with default 3.4 ghz.


----------



## burntheskies

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> Except according to cpu-world, those are dual-socket 1366 xeons. Which... don't work in but a extremely tiny list of normal single-socket 1366 motherboards.
> 
> The cheapest good performance 6-core designed for single-socket motherboards is the W3670, which can be had for about $100 - $120 used on ebay (buy it now, I just looked) and comes with default 3.4 ghz.


that 5660 stock on 1333 ram runs pretty stale


----------



## kithylin

*DISCLAIMER* not my listing! I found this at random in ebay last night, forgot to post it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/321994260390

Someone's posting a sexy 1366 listing on ebay.

EVGA CLASSIFIED x58 3-way-sli motherboard. I own this one myself and it will take every possible 1366 cpu, desktop or xeon past 4ghz with overclocking.

Comes with 6 core xeon, 3.2 ghz version.

And, apparently it's the dual-socket version, which.. I know these boards don't take by default and have to be modified to do it, so already been modified some how, either by factory or by themselves.

Big point and why I'm mentioning it: Comes with full-board waterblock, and cpu waterblock. Board block covers vrm's, northbridge and southbridge.

Even includes ram too, I have no idea what speed though and seller doesn't say.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> Except according to cpu-world, those are dual-socket 1366 xeons. Which... don't work in but a extremely tiny list of normal single-socket 1366 motherboards.
> .


lol those X5650s work in a lot of single socket motherboards.


----------



## Myski

What do you think about the rampage 3 extreme mobo? Would it be worth buying for 120 bucks if it is used but in fully working condition or should I try to find something better in that price range?


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> lol those X5650s work in a lot of single socket motherboards.


^^^^^ Some. The thing is they're not -guaranteed- to work in -all- single socket boards, only some, and then you never know if it will or not until you try.

Since it's not my money being spent, I would rather educate folks about the possible incompatibility that may arise, and warn folks that there is a chance those chips may not work in everything.

Most boards yes, but not always all of them.

Where as the 1-way, single-socket xeons are typically guaranteed to work in 99.99% of 1366 single-socket boards.


----------



## OCmember

You overstated "Tiny list".


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> You overstated "Tiny list".


I've worked with and built a lot of 1366 motherboard based systems over the years (a couple hundred) I've seen.. about three or four that would take dual-socket chips normally, in a single socket board. A gigabyte one, one asrock x58 thing, and a dell alienware I forget the model, and one hp "work station" motherboard. The vast majority won't even show POST with these other chips installed.

So yes a "tiny list" I can probably count on one hand the amount I've seen it work in.

So.. "Your Milage May Vary", if you figure out one that works, yay you're lucky. But most of them don't.

My "EVGA classified x58 3-way-sli" motherboard does not, by default. When it was still in warranty there was an option to ship it to EVGA and they would modify it for us and send it back. Unfortunately I didn't learn about this "option" until way after warranty period expired. Some other folks published how to do it ourselves by soldering some pads on the motherboard together to "close" one of the two QPI Links. I tried on mine and almost ruined the board and still couldn't get it done right and gave up and just deal with single-socket chips. It means if I want to go back to 6-core I have to wait for the prices to come down a lot farther to what I consider affordable.


----------



## OCmember

The list that doesn't accept the dual QPI Xeon is a tiny list, I would say


----------



## kithylin

The only point I was trying to make is if you are going to suggest those processors to people as "A good buy", then you should at least include the disclaimer that there is some possibility it may not work in their system is all.

Else they might go shell out $100 for something, have it not even show POST in their computer and then they'll be all sad and confused.


----------



## OCmember

The question wasn't "will this work in my board?" The question I answered was "Any opinions what would be the x58 Xeon to buy now if looking for best price-performance ratio?"

ffs


----------



## bill1024

The x56 xeons will work in all Asus x58 boards with the latest bios,Not seen an Asus board not support them. They work in Gygabyte boards and Asrock boards. And Foxcon bloodrage
EVGA FTW3, Classified3 and SLI3, will work, the other EVGA boards that are REV 1.2 or better and most all RX boards. I do believe the rev 1.1 will work. Google is your friend.

In this thread here under member list, is a list of people and what boards they are using.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club/0_20


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> Any opinions what would be _the_ x58 Xeon to buy now if looking for best price-performance ratio?
> 
> I haven't followed the prices since last summer and just noticed the X5650 is selling for over 100 dollars now (it was 60 dollars when I bought mine year ago), it does not look so hot deal to me anymore.
> 
> Also would you consider buying used Asus Rampage 3 Extreme for 120 dollars/euros a good deal (only the board, nothing else).


I think the x5670 is the best price/performance right now, they regularly go for $100, you don't need to run high BCLK to get decent clocks. The x5675 is good as well if you get a good deal on it ($110), that extra multi can help quite a bit depending on your cooling.

Yep, I'd say $120 for that board is quite good. I think boards with more power phases may be better suited to the hexa cores though. The Black and Extreme versions regularly go for $200+ on ebay, of course I'd never buy a 1366 board for over $150 _(excluding the SR2







)_.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *burntheskies*
> 
> i miss my old p6t deluxe ( psu blowout)
> 
> do you think a p6t (the regular model) could handle that or should i consider a sabertooth or older rive?


The P6T will reach 4ghz+ depending on your chip, and shouldn't stress anything too much, but a Sabertooth has heftier phases and will overclock better.

I'm not sure how the Sabertooth compares to the P6T Deluxe/v2/WS PRO/P6X58D _(all similar for overclocking from what I understand)_ but I did a comparison recently with my P6T Deluxe v2 and a P6T using a x5670 and the same Cooler/HDD.

At 1.3v it maxed at 4.2ghz on my Deluxe v2, on the P6T it maxed at 4ghz.
These were approx 2 hours prime smallfft stable, so probably not 100% stable but fairly close.

Edit: some edits


----------



## gofasterstripes

@kithylin
Check Kana's list of compatible motherboards (page 1).

There are a large number of compatible boards. Probably most of the desirable models for overclocking or (and this really has to be a consideration at this point in time) for buying when this old will accept a Dual-QPI Xeon if flashed with an appropriate BIOS (usually the latest one)

But, you're right to remind possible n00bs that yes, not all boards support these dual QPI chips.


----------



## arnavvr

Looks like this 980X is POS. It can't post properly at 4Ghz


----------



## gofasterstripes

How are you so sure its not the setup?


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> How are you so sure its not the setup?


Please explain further what might be wrong with the setup.


----------



## OCmember

Is it a good idea to match the Uncore speed with the QPI speed? For the longest I've always had a mix match


----------



## ericeod

Decisions, decisions, decisions... I've been running an eVGA x58 FTW3 for a few months now, but recently dusted off an old ASUS X58 Sabertooth. So I'm trying to decide if i should switch motherboards. After all, I only have this platform so I can tinker with it. Is it worth switching or am I wasting my time? This is still my favorite platform to overclock; there is something about the x58 that always draws me back!

After all, I had a perfectly good 3930K I got rid of in 2014, followed by a complete 2600k build OCed to 4.8GHz that now sits in my closet because it is boreing to OC... That's how much I love to tinker!

Advice?


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Decisions, decisions, decisions... I've been running an eVGA x58 FTW3 for a few months now, but recently dusted off an old ASUS X58 Sabertooth. So I'm trying to decide if i should switch motherboards. After all, I only have this platform so I can tinker with it. Is it worth switching or am I wasting my time? This is still my favorite platform to overclock; there is something about the x58 that always draws me back!
> 
> After all, I had a perfectly good 3930K I got rid of in 2014, followed by a complete 2600k build OCed to 4.8GHz that now sits in my closet because it is boreing to OC... That's how much I love to tinker!
> 
> Advice?


Swap it out! No doubt. EVGA is great, but the Sabertooth is a beast. The stuff I've put mine through and it just hums along. Altho I did change out the tim/thermal pads on the NB and vrm sinks. Gotta swap out the thermal pads every 6 years whether it needs it or not.

Or...you could perform a retro X58 board comparo. For science.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Decisions, decisions, decisions... I've been running an eVGA x58 FTW3 for a few months now, but recently dusted off an old ASUS X58 Sabertooth. So I'm trying to decide if i should switch motherboards. After all, I only have this platform so I can tinker with it. Is it worth switching or am I wasting my time? This is still my favorite platform to overclock; there is something about the x58 that always draws me back!
> 
> After all, I had a perfectly good 3930K I got rid of in 2014, followed by a complete 2600k build OCed to 4.8GHz that now sits in my closet because it is boreing to OC... That's how much I love to tinker!
> 
> Advice?


I think they are both great boards, the only way to know for sure is to compare them side by side







. See what your max Prime stable OC is at 1.3v or 1.35v on each _(or a max temp of say 75c instead of going by voltage)_, that's how I'd decide which is better







.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Decisions, decisions, decisions... I've been running an eVGA x58 FTW3 for a few months now, but recently dusted off an old ASUS X58 Sabertooth. So I'm trying to decide if i should switch motherboards. After all, I only have this platform so I can tinker with it. Is it worth switching or am I wasting my time? This is still my favorite platform to overclock; there is something about the x58 that always draws me back!
> 
> After all, I had a perfectly good 3930K I got rid of in 2014, followed by a complete 2600k build OCed to 4.8GHz that now sits in my closet because it is boreing to OC... That's how much I love to tinker!
> 
> Advice?


If it were me I would buy another CPU and build another computer.
But that is why I have too many computers. Including 2 EVGA FTW3 boards.
They work great, have plenty of slots and overclock well.

Sell the Sabertooth while it is still in strong demand and worth a few bucks.
Take the money and run! Save the money for a better video card, Take the family out to dinner.


----------



## ericeod

The board I'm not keeping is getting donated!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by gofasterstripes View Post
> 
> How are you so sure its not the setup?
> 
> Please explain further what might be wrong with the setup.


Ummm. From where I am standing, it's more likely that the all the other parts of the machine contain a fault/setup error than just that one component [the CPU].

Put it this way - why are you sure it's the chip? Have you swapped it into a MoBo that was humming along at 4GHz and now it won't run but you're also sure it's not just that you need to tune the board to this chip [Vtt/Vcc etc etc]?


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Ummm. From where I am standing, it's more likely that the all the other parts of the machine contain a fault/setup error than just that one component [the CPU].
> 
> Put it this way - why are you sure it's the chip? Have you swapped it into a MoBo that was humming along at 4GHz and now it won't run but you're also sure it's not just that you need to tune the board to this chip [Vtt/Vcc etc etc]?


It was running a i7 930 fine. But I swapped in a E5630 which is 32nm and that won't work either. So maybe this board (X58A-OC) is only good for 45nm.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> It was running a i7 930 fine. But I swapped in a E5630 which is 32nm and that won't work either. So maybe this board (X58A-OC) is only good for 45nm.


?? didn't follow your questions but I'm almost sure the X58 OC will work with 32nm


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> It was running a i7 930 fine. But I swapped in a E5630 which is 32nm and that won't work either. So maybe this board (X58A-OC) is only good for 45nm.


32nm CPUs are listed on the rev 1.0 board's CPU support list:
Socket 1366 - Intel X58 - GA-X58A-OC (rev. 1.0)


----------



## OCmember

Anyone selling X58 shirts?


----------



## alancsalt

Only http://shirts.meetees.com/Evga-X58.html ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Only http://shirts.meetees.com/Evga-X58.html ?


lol, that's great... might buy one


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> It was running a i7 930 fine. But I swapped in a E5630 which is 32nm and that won't work either. So maybe this board (X58A-OC) is only good for 45nm.


Uhh.... BIOS Version?

Did you fully reset the BIOS [Battery out, 30minutes and reset button/switch] before inserting the chips?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> It was running a i7 930 fine. But I swapped in a E5630 which is 32nm and that won't work either. So maybe this board (X58A-OC) is only good for 45nm.


My X58A-OC with the F5e bios works perfect with 32nm chips. Make sure to clear the cmos before installing the new cpu.


----------



## arnavvr

Sorry, didn't mean to say doesn't work. It won't OC 32nm cpus very well. I tried OC'ing my E5630 from 2.53 to 2.54 and it wouldn't post


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I think they are both great boards, the only way to know for sure is to compare them side by side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . See what your max Prime stable OC is at 1.3v or 1.35v on each _(or a max temp of say 75c instead of going by voltage)_, that's how I'd decide which is better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


x58 chips (desktop and xeon) can easily handle 100c @ 1.5v without damage 24-7-daily. Been running mine there @ 4.4 ghz for a little over 3 years now daily, no issues yet.

Granted now it's under a custom water loop and never gets above 70c, but the rest of it remains. I used to run it "hard and hot" around 100c for the first year I owned it. 2nd year H110 AIO cooler, down around 80's C, now custom water loop, average mid-60's under load, max 68c-70c now.


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> x58 chips (desktop and xeon) can easily handle 100c @ 1.5v without damage 24-7-daily. Been running mine there @ 4.4 ghz for a little over 3 years now daily, no issues yet.


One sample does not mean that these chips are rated for those kind of voltages. There is a reason why higher cpu voltage leads to higher heat and why Intel's own requirements and specifications say no more than a certain voltage for example for vCore, QPI, etc... Intel wouldn't specify such ranges and limits.

I would trust Intel's own specifications and data on this subject over one sample and anecdotal evidence presented by one user. I have been around LGA1366 ever since it was first released and there are plenty of accounts of the LGA1366/X58 graveyard even dating back to the 45nm Xeon's and Bloomfield cpus.


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> One sample does not mean that these chips are rated for those kind of voltages. There is a reason why higher cpu voltage leads to higher heat and why Intel's own requirements and specifications say no more than a certain voltage for example for vCore, QPI, etc... Intel wouldn't specify such ranges and limits.
> 
> I would trust Intel's own specifications and data on this subject over one sample and anecdotal evidence presented by one user. I have been around LGA1366 ever since it was first released and there are plenty of accounts of the LGA1366/X58 graveyard even dating back to the 45nm Xeon's and Bloomfield cpus.


I should of mentioned others... I've had 4 different W3520's in here, all take this voltage and heat before. I've had a 980x that ran 95c constantly under H110 for hours on end with video editing at one point (@ 4.8 ghz, 1.55v), I've had an i7-920 run 100c all the time no issue in here, I've had a i7-940 at one point, same. They all take it just don't care, even my newest i7-3770k chip I got 3 months ago, runs 90c - 92c under air cooling @ 4.7 ghz constantly full load video editing and it doesn't care.

So yes, all i7 chips can handle 100c max.

In fact Intel's newer i7 chip the 4790K that runs 4 ghz out of the box, if you use the stock intel cooler it'll just slam against 100c and throttle it's self. People have complained on the intel developer forums and Intel comes back basically "working as intended".

That's pretty much (I think anyway) why Intel charges so much for their chips: They're built like tanks and can take almost anything.

In my personal experience it's the AMD chips that die when they go past 70c. I've had a few croak on me at just 75c under air cooling and just die suddenly. But then again I've only tried overclocking the AMD quad cores.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> x58 chips (desktop and xeon) can easily handle 100c @ 1.5v without damage 24-7-daily. Been running mine there @ 4.4 ghz for a little over 3 years now daily, no issues yet.
> 
> Granted now it's under a custom water loop and never gets above 70c, but the rest of it remains. I used to run it "hard and hot" around 100c for the first year I owned it. 2nd year H110 AIO cooler, down around 80's C, now custom water loop, average mid-60's under load, max 68c-70c now.


I was mentioning the temperature to compare each board to see which one produces better results at similar clocks/voltages.

You can run your hardware however you like, but I'll keep my voltage under 1.35 and max temps under 80c for 24/7. I'd rather have a moderately stable machine than something that is more likely to fail prematurely. My current OC only maxes out at 68c under load.


----------



## OCmember

Weird. These chips don't need 1.5v for 4.4GHz


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Weird. These chips don't need 1.5v for 4.4GHz


Some of these chips don't OC well. It's called the Silicon Lottery


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> Some of these chips don't OC well. It's called the Silicon Lottery


1.5v for 4.4GHz is an indicator of an abused or dying chip. 1.5v for 4.4GHz is beyond bad luck for the silicone lottery


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 1.5v for 4.4GHz is an indicator of an abused or dying chip. 1.5v for 4.4GHz is beyond bad luck for the silicone lottery


It's just what happens with some chips.. never know. My 980x would do 4.4 ghz at 1.35v, 4.6 ghz at 1.45v and 4.8 at 1.5v, where as I have a drawer full of 3 spare W3520's that all of them won't even POST at less than 1.500v for vcore for 4.4 ghz, but 1.500v and they just run rock solid stable forever. I don't know if it's my board or what.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> It's just what happens with some chips.. never know. My 980x would do 4.4 ghz at 1.35v, 4.6 ghz at 1.45v and 4.8 at 1.5v, where as I have a drawer full of 3 spare W3520's that all of them won't even POST at less than 1.500v for vcore for 4.4 ghz, but 1.500v and they just run rock solid stable forever. I don't know if it's my board or what.


How accurate is your bios voltage settings with the terminals? My VTT reads a full 1v, in the Operating system, over what it reads at the motherboard terminal. The VTT bios setting is spot on with the terminal while others are not exact but within tolerance. Yeah you may have some burnt up capacitors or something wrong with the board. What board are you running those on?


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> How accurate is your bios voltage settings with the terminals? My VTT reads a full 1v, in the Operating system, over what it reads at the motherboard terminal. The VTT bios setting is spot on with the terminal while others are not exact but within tolerance. Yeah you may have some burnt up capacitors or something wrong with the board. What board are you running those on?


EVGA classified x58 3-way-sli, E760.

I originally sold my 980x because I came to the realization that 6 core i7's are completely and utterly useless in all respects for gaming. Went with a high clocked quad core chip instead and been happy for years.

I've never measured this motherboard "at the points" and don't really care at this point. It's not used for daily-driving for gaming anymore, and is just happy set to what it is for years and doesn't run hot under custom water, so I don't care anymore. I just leave it alone and use it for chatting and web browsing and it's happy and everything's fine.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Take a look at Kana's benchmarks on the 6-cores.


----------



## C853

I'm running an Intel X5660 in a Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 (rev 1.0), with 6 x 2GB Gskill 2000Mhz (F3-16000CL9-2GBRH) with an total of 12GB and at the moment I have 2 sweet spots:

*1) BCLK 180*
*Ratio:* 180x23=4.14Ghz with Turbo Boost working and stable (small peaks of 180x24= 4.32 Ghz)
*QPI Clock:* 6.48
*Ram speed:* 1800mhz (10x Multiplier)
*CPU Vcore:* 1.30625
*QPI/VTT:* 1.335
*CPU PLL:* 1.920
*Linkpack score:* 63GFlops

*2) BLCK 200*
*Ratio:* 200x21 = 4.2Ghz (I cannot estabilize with Turbo Boost, which for my MB means no x22, x23, x24 and it's limited to x21. With x24 would have 4.8Ghz)
*QPI Clock:* 7.2Ghz
*Ram Speed:* 1600Mhz (8x Multiplier)
*CPU Vcore:* 1.30625
*QPI/VTT:* 1.335
*CPU PLL:* 1.880
*Linpack score:* 52Gflops

Reading this thread over and over it looks like is a lot harder to push high ram with 12GB, 16GB, etc..

So:
1) Why is the score of linpack 20% higher with ram speed of 1800mhz instead of 1600mhz. Is it normal such a difference?
2) Which sweet spot is preferable? The BCLK 180 or BCLK 200 to run 24/7?


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Take a look at Kana's benchmarks on the 6-cores.


I did look, his benchmark results only show results on the 6 core chip. They do not show results on it compared to 4 core chips.

I sat there and owned one of the 6 core chips myself and watched task manager while gaming, I tried many many many modern AAA games at the time and none of them used more than 10% - 20% of a 6 core chip.

It's an established fact that everyone knows by now, games do not use more than 4 cpu cores for gaming. Above that is wasted. Games respond to high clock speed, not amount of cores, anything past 4 is useless. Even with a quad core i7 the hyper-threaded cores rarely ever get used for anything when playing games.

And my big computer is just for that: 90% gaming. Sometimes I may occasionally do video editing, but that's rare.. and now I do that on my x58 system and devote my 3770k only to games.

The only people that benefit from 6 core chips are those doing "work" type programs. Adobe animation rendering, 3ds max, flash player maker, maya, photoshop, etc. They're largely a useless waste for games.

Especially when we can get a 2.66 ghz, hyper-threaded quad core LGA-1366 xeon i7 (W3520) for < $10 used today, (I just looked, there's 13 of em on ebay from $7.50 - $9.99), clock it to 4+ ghz and then enjoy gaming on it. Single-socket xeons too, guaranteed to work 100% on all 1366 motherboards, oem or after-market. Compared to a 6 core i7 that costs $100 for a good one and only like 5% of games actually use the extra cores.

Quad cores for 1366 are just a lot more "bang for your buck" in general.

EDIT: Here's some data too: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2960/12

They don't overclock the 920 chips.. so most of the gains are to clock speeds, at 4.4 ghz these chips can handle nearly anything.

The only reason I updated to ivy bridge was reduced frame-time latency due to no more northbridge, personally. I only got about +20% gaming performance increase compared to x58.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> It's an established fact that everyone knows by now, games do not use more than 4 cpu cores for gaming


Could it be that that is, perchance, a little out of date?




Studios have had a lot of time to get the hang of multicore scaling now 

EDIT:

"05/03/2015 at 21:53 Jeroen D Stout says:

As a developer working on a CPU-heavy game, I have to say that 4 cores are only arguably enough as a consumer-anno-2015 because most developers are not trying to use more than 4, because that is what consumers-anno-2015 are expected to have.

Yes, it is right to say often rendering is a huge bottleneck. However, when it comes to high-quality AI, high-quality physics with super-high frame-frames (some significant resonances need hundreds of steps per second), volumetric effects or large areas, things like enormous amounts of agents with non-flock behaviour (like citizens as opposed to pedestrian concepts), arbitrary crunch calculations or even just high-duty ray-tracing&#8230; then the actual argument of 4 cores is a bottleneck to future games.

Just to underline - yes, in a world where game development is mostly elaborately scripted things which need to run on outdated hardware with more GPU load than CPU, upgrading your PC to > 4 cores is probably a waste of money. I agree with this purely in the limited and depressing space of what the market is now. However, in my personal world in which games strive for interesting scenes high computational complexity, this mindset is holding back the sort of games in which which mass parallel computation could change the very boundaries of what we can do."
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/03/05/quadcore-gaming/ - [An article, rather lacking in actual substance, that]

EDIT:



Here's some terrible coding [Top work, AMD :/ ]
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-pc-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,9.html

"I think we found a root core of the performance issues, they seem to be related to the number of CPU cores. It is mind boggling to see that with the Radeon the 1 core setup remains to be the fastest. Here you will also notice that with a 2 core processor setup we have micro-stuttering going on whereas the 1, 4 and 8 core setup are fine. After seeing this it is without doubt that AMD will need to do a thing or two with driver optimizations. "

But better from NVIDIA:


Leading to a conclusion:
"Another metric we can look at is actual CPU usage as reported by the OS, as shown above. In this case CPU usage more or less perfectly matches our earlier expectations: with DirectX 11 both the GTX 980 and R9 290X show very uneven usage with 1-2 cores doing the bulk of the work, whereas with DirectX 12 CPU usage is spread out evenly over all 4 CPU cores.

At the risk of speaking to the point that it's redundant, what we're seeing here is exactly why Mantle, DirectX 12, OpenGL Next, and other low-level APIs have been created. With single-threaded performance struggling to increase while GPUs continue to improve by leaps and bounds with each generation, something must be done to allow games to better spread out their rendering & submission workloads over multiple cores. The solution to that problem is to eliminate the abstraction and let the developers do it themselves through APIs like DirectX 12."

.......

And this is why I am hopeful


----------



## OCmember

To anyone: What is your Max QPI speed?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> To anyone: What is your Max QPI speed?


My highest was 8.172GT/s (4086.27MHz) on my X5650 & X58A-OC.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> What is your Max QPI speed?


7560 on UD7
7200 runs all day on UD7 or UD3
1.255Vtt


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> My highest was 8.172GT/s (4086.27MHz) on my X5650 & X58A-OC.


Do you run that daily 24/7 or was it just a over clock adventure? What kind of volts were you using, also?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 7560 on UD7
> 7200 runs all day on UD7 or UD3
> 1.255Vtt


What is that in MHz, GHz ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

GT/s, it's down to the width of the bus and the Clk signal

It's set to BClk x 36*, which was either 200 or 210. I think many boards can go to 210BClk. 220+ is quite rare.

Spec is 4.8 or 6.4GT/s [133 BClk x36 or x48] IIRC, so 7.2GT/s isn't much of a stretch.

Why are you asking?

*200MHz BClk = lowest multiplier to get back to near spec.

"QPI operates at a clock rate of 2.4 GHz, 2.93 GHz, 3.2 GHz, 4.0 GHz or 4.8 GHz (4.0 GHz frequency is introduced with the Sandy Bridge-E/EP platform and 4.8 GHz with the Haswell-E/EP platform). The clock rate for a particular link depends on the capabilities of the components at each end of the link and the signal characteristics of the signal path on the printed circuit board. The non-extreme Core i7 9xx processors are restricted to a 2.4 GHz frequency at stock reference clocks. Bit transfers occur on both the rising and the falling edges of the clock, so the transfer rate is double the clock rate." - wiki

EDIT - My system right now - 200 x 36 = 3600MHz = 7.2GT/s


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Do you run that daily 24/7 or was it just a over clock adventure? What kind of volts were you using, also?


Just quick oc to find the max cpu freq.
I was using;
1.66V VCore
1.45V VTT
1.1V QPI PLL
1.1V IOH Core


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'm really pondering some "Magic numbers" on these systems. I wonder if setups with frequencies that are whole multiples of the other frequencies gain a little extra "edge", due no signals never having "just missed the bus" in terms of data transfer and then being held back another whole clock of the outgoing bus

ie - 1600MHz RAM with 3200MHz uncore. If you have 1500MHz RAM, would you get a data transfer that was drifting out of sync, leading to inefficiency?

QPI a multiple of RAM Speed too etc etc

Hmmm


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> 1.66V VCore
> 1.45V VTT


It's still on fire.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Just quick oc to find the max cpu freq.
> I was using;
> 1.66V VCore
> 1.45V VTT
> 1.1V QPI PLL
> 1.1V IOH Core


Thanks, DR4G00N


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> It's still on fire.


That was with only 2 cores with an H110 so the temps never got very high. Regardless, that's not the highest I've had the VTT either which was 1.51V for 4.2GHz Uncore & 12GB's of ram at 2220MHz 8-10-10-24 1T 1.9V. Living in the danger zone!


----------



## OCmember

@gofasterstripes
I recently matched my QPI speed to my uncore speed @ 3555MHz My QPI for the longest was ~ 2900MHz until I realized that upping the QPI PLL & IOH allowed it to run faster. I have no idea why it Auto'd to 2.9GHz But for some reason alot of issues running UT4 went away


----------



## kithylin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Could it be that that is, perchance, a little out of date?
> 
> Studios have had a lot of time to get the hang of multicore scaling now
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> "05/03/2015 at 21:53 Jeroen D Stout says:
> 
> As a developer working on a CPU-heavy game, I have to say that 4 cores are only arguably enough as a consumer-anno-2015 because most developers are not trying to use more than 4, because that is what consumers-anno-2015 are expected to have.
> 
> Yes, it is right to say often rendering is a huge bottleneck. However, when it comes to high-quality AI, high-quality physics with super-high frame-frames (some significant resonances need hundreds of steps per second), volumetric effects or large areas, things like enormous amounts of agents with non-flock behaviour (like citizens as opposed to pedestrian concepts), arbitrary crunch calculations or even just high-duty ray-tracing&#8230; then the actual argument of 4 cores is a bottleneck to future games.
> 
> Just to underline - yes, in a world where game development is mostly elaborately scripted things which need to run on outdated hardware with more GPU load than CPU, upgrading your PC to > 4 cores is probably a waste of money. I agree with this purely in the limited and depressing space of what the market is now. However, in my personal world in which games strive for interesting scenes high computational complexity, this mindset is holding back the sort of games in which which mass parallel computation could change the very boundaries of what we can do."
> https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/03/05/quadcore-gaming/ - [An article, rather lacking in actual substance, that]
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Here's some terrible coding [Top work, AMD :/ ]
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-pc-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,9.html
> 
> "I think we found a root core of the performance issues, they seem to be related to the number of CPU cores. It is mind boggling to see that with the Radeon the 1 core setup remains to be the fastest. Here you will also notice that with a 2 core processor setup we have micro-stuttering going on whereas the 1, 4 and 8 core setup are fine. After seeing this it is without doubt that AMD will need to do a thing or two with driver optimizations. "
> 
> But better from NVIDIA:
> 
> Leading to a conclusion:
> "Another metric we can look at is actual CPU usage as reported by the OS, as shown above. In this case CPU usage more or less perfectly matches our earlier expectations: with DirectX 11 both the GTX 980 and R9 290X show very uneven usage with 1-2 cores doing the bulk of the work, whereas with DirectX 12 CPU usage is spread out evenly over all 4 CPU cores.
> 
> At the risk of speaking to the point that it's redundant, what we're seeing here is exactly why Mantle, DirectX 12, OpenGL Next, and other low-level APIs have been created. With single-threaded performance struggling to increase while GPUs continue to improve by leaps and bounds with each generation, something must be done to allow games to better spread out their rendering & submission workloads over multiple cores. The solution to that problem is to eliminate the abstraction and let the developers do it themselves through APIs like DirectX 12."
> 
> .......
> 
> And this is why I am hopeful


Okay fine, it seems you just -HAVE- to argue and go to great lengths to try and disprove everyone and everything I ever say. Since you're obviously always correct in life, and you know anything and everything about every little aspect of computers.

By the way, if you search long enough and hard enough, you can find any website anywhere on the internet that will state things to your way of thinking. That doesn't make it any more correct than before you started.

But anyway, there's just no winning with "1-uppers" like you so I'll just have to leave this thread, have fun with your life.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> By the way, if you search long enough and hard enough


Dude, I just googled "cpu multicore game scaling".

It doesn't disprove anything, I posted some interesting things I found. I'm just saying that things have got some better, that's all.

C'mon...


----------



## DR4G00N

Oops, looks like I borked my win xp install on my bench while trying for maximum BCLK.







Oh well, I managed to pull the validation from the drive by hooking up my other hdd. The install was starting to get a bit bloated anyhow.

5.313GHz / 230.99MHz*23X Multiplier (OS corrupted @ 232 BCLK)
VCore: 1.66V
VTT: 1.3V
QPI PLL: 1.1V
IOH Core: 1.1V
PCIE Freq: 120MHz
Slow mode enabled.

http://valid.x86.fr/9kt6b9
(Sensors are off which is why it shows 0V & XOC mode was enabled too so it shows as "Unchecked").


Probably could've gotten it higher by bumping the IOH Core to 1.4-1.5V and using 130MHz PCIE Freq.


----------



## OCmember

I was able to squeeze a little more out of the QPI & Uncore speed. 3.7GHz respectively. 1.33v QPI PLL, 1.32 IOH, with the QPI compensation at "Less" and the CPU VTT @ 1.325

The RAM I bumped it up to 2022MHz cl 8.8.8.21 2T 1.66v vdroop to 1.65v

I broke my 1.25v QPI & IOH max limits,,, I think it will be ok, hopefully

We'll see how long this last,


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I was able to squeeze a little more out of the QPI & Uncore speed. 3.7GHz respectively. 1.33v QPI PLL, 1.32 IOH, with the QPI compensation at "Less" and the CPU VTT @ 1.325
> 
> The RAM I bumped it up to 2022MHz cl 8.8.8.21 2T 1.66v vdroop to 1.65v
> 
> I broke my 1.25v QPI & IOH max limits,,, I think it will be ok, hopefully
> 
> We'll see how long this last,


The IOH is good up till 1.6V with good enough cooling btw.
I don't know of anyone who actually needed any higher than 1.45V though.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The IOH is good up till 1.65V with good enough cooling btw.


"Cool"









I think where I'm at in terms of QPI Speed will be sufficient for a little while now


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kithylin*
> 
> I did look, his benchmark results only show results on the 6 core chip. They do not show results on it compared to 4 core chips.
> 
> I sat there and owned one of the 6 core chips myself and watched task manager while gaming, I tried many many many modern AAA games at the time and none of them used more than 10% - 20% of a 6 core chip.
> 
> It's an established fact that everyone knows by now, games do not use more than 4 cpu cores for gaming. Above that is wasted. Games respond to high clock speed, not amount of cores, anything past 4 is useless. Even with a quad core i7 the hyper-threaded cores rarely ever get used for anything when playing games.


I'd like to add that I actually did compare my overclocked Quad Core vs stock Hexa Core a long time ago. The performance gains were breath taking since I could never match my scores\frame rate\frame time with other benchmarks I saw online. With a STOCK Hexa core all of that changed. Of course the overclocked Hexa core performed great as well.

Long story short my i7-960 @ 4.1Ghz could not handle Crysis 3 100% maxed @ 1080p with dual GTX 670s. All I wanted was 1080p for crying out loud. The game was literally unplayable and I had to lower settings. The micro-stutter was horrendous and frustrating. Not only did the Xeon 6 core outperform the overclocked i7-960, I went from a stutter 25fps-35fps to a great average of 50fps. The frame time was also improved dramatically to 20ms average. My scores started to match the benchmarking sites at the time. In Battlefield 3 I saw the same improvements. The stock CPU Hexa Core settings were actually as good as some of the overclocked Hexa Core settings. The Hexa core improved my gaming performance for several titles such as Tomb Raider 2013, Metro: LL, Hitman, Battlefield etc.


----------



## gofasterstripes

A huge amount of info on the UD5 and UD7 Rev 2.0 [they're basically the same board]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?262904-GA-X58A-UD5-Revision-2-0-the-MOST-in-Depth-Review-Analysis

Shame about the pics


----------



## Space Marine

I just did a Cinebench R15 today and on a x5670 @4.2 with HT off (I optimized it for games, HT doesn't make any difference there), and I scored 740 on the multicore test (6 cores 6 threads) and 127 on the singlecore test.

Which frequency should I aim at for scoring a singlecore score of 140ish?
I'm running at 1.35v with LLC off, so I'm stretched already, but i was wondering if x58 would still stand the test of time and being able to run the upcoming VR games fine.
The minimum cpu required for VR (in the official min specs of the Oculus Rift CV1 ) are i5 6400 or 4590, and they both score 140 single core on Cinebench R15.

While on the multicore side I would still be covered, the coincidence of these cpu scoring the same in the singlecore test makes me think that the minimum specs were focused on minimum single core performance while using a 4 core CPU, and that game optimization is gonna be focused on 4 cores usage (not suprisingly).

I still hope that's not the case, but if 140 is in range of a 4.3 - 4.4ghz overclock, I might push the OC harder and see how it goes.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Which frequency should I aim at for scoring a singlecore score of 140ish


I made it (4200/127)*140 = 4630Mhz

What are your other frequencies [QPI/Uncore/BClk/RAM/Multis etc]?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> A huge amount of info on the UD5 and UD7 Rev 2.0 [they're basically the same board]
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?262904-GA-X58A-UD5-Revision-2-0-the-MOST-in-Depth-Review-Analysis
> 
> Shame about the pics


Yeah, that kinda sucks about the pics. Interesting about the X58 Chipset revisions. I heard/read there were different chip sets but this is a little more in-depth about it. I think my EVGA E760 A1 Rev 1.0 has the rev12/B2 chipset thus it can't use any multiplier above 26 with my W3690. I just wish the/my UD7 had voltage terminals on it to get a better reading from the volts. I couldn't trust reading my voltages through the OS. Some of them are WAY off.

EDIT: AARGH, the reviewer talks about voltage read points, and there are no pictures! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Yeah, that kinda sucks about the pics.


Kerrr-ching!

EDIT :
Quote:


> EDIT: AARGH, the reviewer talks about voltage read points, and there are no pictures! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! lol


indeed..... only some pics on WBW









You can copy the image address, see if you can dig it up somewhere? It was there a year back...


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I made it (4200/127)*140 = 4630Mhz
> 
> What are your other frequencies [QPI/Uncore/BClk/RAM/Multis etc]?


oh yeah, was wondering if a proportion would make the math valid








Ram 1600 8 8 8 27 (6x4gb) @ 1,5v
bclk 200
multi x21
Uncore 3000 @1.32v
QPI should be 3600/7200

Everything running on a Phanteks PH-TC14PE
Cpu at 4200 at 1,35v LLC off (as suggested by intel specs), all turbo off, all power saving off.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Uncore 3000 @1.32v


Can't you run 3200 at that voltage?


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Can't you run 3200 at that voltage?


Nope, tried so many times, no way to make it stable with 6 sticks of ram without a crazy amount of voltage.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Fairry-nuff









Yeah, so you are going to have to shoot for 4.6GHz, though I remain unconvinced that 4.2 will make any noticeable difference.

Your burn, baby. Mix it how you like.


----------



## Space Marine

That's what i have always thought about CPU speed







, but with VR any minor hiccup or slow down can make you feel sick, so a bit more headroom might be needed. I guess the only way to know is to test it.

Anyway, on a completely different topic, lately i noticed some strange behavior of my onboard secondary sata controller (from Jmicron, on a P6T vanilla).
Under torrent load for a pair of hours it makes the only connected drive disappear from the OS, and the only way to fix it is to completely shut off and power on the machine again. No problems detected on the intel one instead.
Might be some lack of voltage? I had to overvolt a bit some of the secondary voltages for making my USB3 card run properly. I wonder if anything can be done for the onboard Jmicron as well


----------



## gofasterstripes

I've been messing with my machine again.

CALLING ALL GIGABYTE OWNERS - What's stopping me having full manual control over the multipliers? Even at "stock settings" I can't seem to get Turbo to kick in on this 5650. I'm 12-20x and that's it.

EIST, C1, C3- etc etc all can be on or off and all I succeed in doing is locking out the downclocking, getting 20-20x heh

I'm after 4.2 or 4.4, for benching really, but it's not possible?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I've been messing with my machine again.
> 
> CALLING ALL GIGABYTE OWNERS - What's stopping me having full manual control over the multipliers? Even at "stock settings" I can't seem to get Turbo to kick in on this 5650. I'm 12-20x and that's it.
> 
> EIST, C1, C3- etc etc all can be on or off and all I succeed in doing is locking out the downclocking, getting 20-20x heh
> 
> I'm after 4.2 or 4.4, for benching really, but it's not possible?


I had this happen to me as well. Clearing the CMOS a bunch of times fixed it I think. Removing the CMOS battery may be worth a try also.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Kerrr-ching!
> 
> EDIT :
> indeed..... only some pics on WBW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can copy the image address, see if you can dig it up somewhere? It was there a year back...


I tried and got nothing. Dang! lol

EDIT: WAIT!!! I tried it earlier and it didn't work, I got it now:
Look in the"*Threaded View*" box at the top, scroll down and it will link you to the voltage points.

My luck I'd f'ckn slip and complete the circuit and blow the board. This might of been a bad idea searching for this, lmao

Does anyone bench with SuperPI??? Is there a bench thread with it? I'm testing out my game rig to compare how it is.. with 1M I got 9.811s How is that? Good? No Good? Get a different job?


----------



## OCmember

CREDIT GOES TO: sin0822 from xtremesystems

GA-X58A-UD5 Revision 2.0 the MOST in Depth Review/ Analysis

*Voltage Read Points for UD5 rev 2.0 ONLY:*

The following voltage read points can be used to physically monitor the voltage of Cpu Vcore, CPU PLL, QPI/VTT, QPI PLL, IOH Core, ICH Core, Dram Voltage, and Dram VTT, I confirmed they are working, and that they are really not needed. I say this because all voltages are within 2-3% or almost exactly what is shown in the Easy Tune program. The iTE IT8720F is one of the best voltage monitoring chips I have seen, and its accuracy is dead on, this is just phenomenal.

Cpu Vcore Voltage read point(Back of CPU, back of board):


Cpu PLL Voltage read point( to the right of Northbridge Heat Sink):


QPI/VTT Voltage Read Point(back of CPU, back of board):


QPI PLL Voltage Read Point(bottom of first White ram slot):


IOH Core Voltage Read Point(between CPU socket and Northbridge Heat sink, very hard to reach, in front of capacitors next to Heat sink):


ICH Core Voltage Read Point(right on top of Southbrdige Heat Sink, between two sets of capacitors on each side of the ram controller):


Dram Voltage Read Point(back of CPU socket,back of board, below where my qpi/vtt and vcore read points are, below from that angle only):


Dram VTT Voltage Read Point(top right of the last white ram slot):

NOTE!!!!!!!: Please do not go poking around unless you know exactly what you are doing, by shorting anything especially near the CPU socket will damage or destroy the components, please if you poke be precise.


----------



## Iching

I just got my x5675 since I wanted to hit 4.4Ghz. 20 x 200BCLK wasn't super stable unless higher volts, 25 x 176 works so much better. Core voltage is 1.344/1.352. It is borderline Intel specs.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Ok... Turbo unlocked (BIOS reset did it)
Now the question is whether i can hit 4.4 (22x200) with safe volts..?


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK - I can post this while Small FFTing on one core.

1.4VPLL 1.35Vcc[?] in BIOS


----------



## gofasterstripes

Fixing the Turbo glitch has unlocked 30watts of CPU Power:





EDIT: I really want to stick the spare 5650 in there now....


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Does anyone bench with SuperPI??? Is there a bench thread with it? I'm testing out my game rig to compare how it is.. with 1M I got 9.811s How is that? Good? No Good? Get a different job?


What's the setup? Super Pi version? OS?

On my X5670 I got a time of 9.866s @ 4.18GHz (Win 8.1 X64 & SPi 1.5 XS) and my X5650 in my bench rig @ 5.175GHz got 7.937s (Stripped Win XP X86 & SPi 1.5 XS).


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> What's the setup? Super Pi version? OS?
> 
> On my X5670 I got a time of 9.866s @ 4.18GHz (Win 8.1 X64 & SPi 1.5 XS) and my X5650 in my bench rig @ 5.175GHz got 7.937s (Stripped Win XP X86 & SPi 1.5 XS).


For some reason 1.9 won't read the hardware. Could that be a sign of instability? When Real Bench can't gather my system info I know the system is unstable.

W3690 @ 4214MHz (Win 10 64b 1151 Version, OS Build 10586.71 SuperPI 1.5)
Uncore 3.7GHz
QPI 3.7GHz
DDR3 2022 cl8.8.8.21 2T

SuperPI 1M - 9.811s


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> For some reason 1.9 won't read the hardware. Could that be a sign of instability? When Real Bench can't gather my system info I know the system is unstable.
> 
> W3690 @ 4214MHz (Win 10 64b 1151 Version, OS Build 10586.71 SuperPI 1.5)
> Uncore 3.7GHz
> QPI 3.7GHz
> DDR3 2022 cl8.8.8.21 2T
> 
> SuperPI 1M - 9.811s


Probably not, 1.9 is usually slower anyway which is why 1.5 is preferred.

///

Looks like I broke the HDD in that BCLK oc'ing escapade. It boots alright at stock but as soon as I try oc'ing the os doesn't get detected.









Okay, nvm. It was just a QPI PLL & IOH voltage issue, dropped them down to 1.1V (stock) and it works fine again @ 5.1GHz


----------



## gofasterstripes

Ok so it seems not a trick in (my) book will get this one to 4.3GHz with 1.35 Vcc.

*reaches for box of stuff*


----------



## gofasterstripes

*the box contains both whoop-ass and the spare CPU*

Yeah, there's some real brutality going on here...


Yes it passed - check out the wattage!

Beast mode: engage


Posting from her now at 4.3-4.5[turbo]. I think I can smell the VRMs...

EDIT - yes - even managed a little gaming with GPU and VRAM all overclocked too. 72C max then.


----------



## Space Marine

Why testing IBT at standard? I never felt IBT testing seriously till it is set at max (or custom 7300mb+)


----------



## gofasterstripes

Sure, but no point waiting 20minutes for 2 passes of max if its going to fail standard in 1 minute.

Its not done being tested, but it is at 95c, so I hope I can drop the volts, LOL.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Here you go @Space Marine That's 4290 to 4485MHz Core and 3315MHz Uncore as a data point for you









_

All Turbo/Power Saving = Enabled._


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Here you go @Space Marine That's 4290 to 4485MHz Core and 3315MHz Uncore as a data point for you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> All Turbo/Power Saving = Enabled._


Thanks! Nice result


----------



## gofasterstripes

Anyone got any tips? I am testing it with 3600MHz Uncore at 1.295Vtt now as well


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone got any tips? I am testing it with 3600MHz Uncore at 1.295Vcc now as well


Why is your vCore so high? Are you just stress testing and gradually increasing the different frequencies? If everything is working just keep going. If you hit a brick wall I'll try to give you some tips.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey @Kana-Maru! I'm curious how far I can take this sucker. I have a spare chip that I know is fine for 200x20, so the question is : Can we set this up any faster in a way where it'll have a chance of living a useful (if shorter) life?

All the settings in the BIOS were for the Cinebench Run, and results in Turbo of between 22 and 23x. Lowering any of Vcc, Vtt or Clock Drive will reduce stability, and the Skew seems to help a tiny bit too. Other settings are from the 4GHz that i have been running for the last year.

Going from 4-4.45 GHz is requiring a huge slab of Core voltage and LLC on too. Temps are 90+ in IBT, as CPU power consumption jumps 50+ W, from 1.27-1.375v. I dont actually want to damage this chip, so I've called it quits here.

I've not tried higher BClk, and I won't change the PCIE. RAM is 1600MHz rated as in the picture.

The other 5650 was a little cooler and had a lower AutoVolts Vcc, but i dont want to **** it up.

Oh, the Uncore didn't pass IBT at 3600 with 1.295v (with otherwise stable settings).

So yeah I'm stuck now, any tips?


----------



## OCmember

@gofastserstripe EDIT: I forgot, is that chip under water?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nope, under this Zalman CNPS10X Extreme, with exhaust fans above and to the side.


----------



## DR4G00N

Holy crap, I just fluked out.

I was watching a youtube video when I suddenly got a BOSD. I first thought it was just an unstable oc, that is until I took my headphones off and all I could hear was *splash* *splash* *splash*, my Eisberg 240 sprung a leak







. I quickly shut it down and ripped the side panel off... everything was soaked with water.

I have most of it cleaned up now, the mobo took the brunt of it but believe it or not it's perfectly fine.

I had originally intended to use this mobo for sub zero so the top half of the board has dielectic grease on it (in the socket too) and I think that is what saved it.

It seems the cause was that the threads in the resovoir for the fitting were stripped and that caused the fitting to come loose and spray water everywhere.

Still need to test my 780 ti's and the x5670 to see if they still work.

This sucks. :/


----------



## OCmember

That totally sucks @DR4G00N


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> That totally sucks @DR4G00N


It definitely does but surprisingly the cpu & both gpu's still work too. I'm some glad I put a backplate on my top gpu otherwise it would probably be dead right now.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yikes. That made me do a Wild Eep.

Hope it is all good when dried out.

Quick questions RE Delidding: how much temp did you drop, and how do I fit the HSF when the top surface is so much lower?


----------



## gofasterstripes

That little jaunt might have taken a toll, I think I need 1.3Vcc for 4GHz now


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey @Kana-Maru! I'm curious how far I can take this sucker. I have a spare chip that I know is fine for 200x20, so the question is : Can we set this up any faster in a way where it'll have a chance of living a useful (if shorter) life?
> 
> All the settings in the BIOS were for the Cinebench Run, and results in Turbo of between 22 and 23x. Lowering any of Vcc, Vtt or Clock Drive will reduce stability, and the Skew seems to help a tiny bit too. Other settings are from the 4GHz that i have been running for the last year.
> 
> Going from 4-4.45 GHz is requiring a huge slab of Core voltage and LLC on too. Temps are 90+ in IBT, as CPU power consumption jumps 50+ W, from 1.27-1.375v. I dont actually want to damage this chip, so I've called it quits here.
> 
> I've not tried higher BClk, and I won't change the PCIE. RAM is 1600MHz rated as in the picture.
> 
> The other 5650 was a little cooler and had a lower AutoVolts Vcc, but i dont want to **** it up.
> 
> Oh, the Uncore didn't pass IBT at 3600 with 1.295v (with otherwise stable settings).
> 
> So yeah I'm stuck now, any tips?


Dude more than 90c in IBT? You need to definitely down clock. Your current cooler can't handle the heat, bad airflow or you need to lower your ambient temps tremendously. At least you've called it quits.

4Ghz shouldn't require high voltage. Your vCore is 1.3875. That's way to high 4Ghz and reasonable temps.
Try increasing the CPU PLL to 1.8v and increasing your QPI\Vtt voltage a little [1.31-1.32v for testing purposes].
You are pushing the Uncore well above the stability recommendation of 1.8x or 2x of the DRAM Frequency. So your Uncore should really be around 2808 or 3120. Anything higher isn't necessarily guaranteed to work, but maybe you can get it working.
You can also also try setting the QPI PLL and IOH Core to "AUTO" as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That little jaunt might have taken a toll, I think I need 1.3Vcc for 4GHz now


1.3v is way to much for 4Ghz. 1.3v is usually around 4.2Ghz-4.4Ghz. It's possible that you may have damaged the CPU. No one will know, but you so you can keep testing it to make sure.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Holy crap, I just fluked out.
> 
> I was watching a youtube video when I suddenly got a BOSD. I first thought it was just an unstable oc, that is until I took my headphones off and all I could hear was *splash* *splash* *splash*, my Eisberg 240 sprung a leak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I quickly shut it down and ripped the side panel off... everything was soaked with water. I have most of it cleaned up now, the mobo took the brunt of it but believe it or not it's perfectly fine.
> I had originally intended to use this mobo for sub zero so the top half of the board has dielectic grease on it (in the socket too) and I think that is what saved it. It seems the cause was that the threads in the resovoir for the fitting were stripped and that caused the fitting to come loose and spray water everywhere.
> Still need to test my 780 ti's and the x5670 to see if they still work.
> This sucks. :/


That does suck. Man I hope everything still works.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks for the answer, Kana. I will see if your suggestions allow me to get there. I will assume the chip is OK, and continue testing with a view to reducing Vcc. I plugged some mesh at the front of my case and i think thats pressurised my case, so the cpu gets cooled a few degrees better. With the other chip i dropped a couple of degrees by wiping it across fine sandpaper.

This chip defaults to 1.2v, so 1.3 for 4GHz isn't too crazy*. I'll avoid 90c and get back to you









EDIT: The VCore measurement in Windows should be very accurate [pretty sure if Intel can fit 1.17 billion transistors in here, they can measure the voltage accurately







]
Every time I have compared BIOS to Multimeter it's been closer to the Windows reported voltage.

*hey, maybe it's just a really bad chip


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Thanks for the answer, Kana. I will see if your suggestions allow me to get there. I will assume the chip is OK, and continue testing with a view to reducing Vcc. I plugged some mesh at the front of my case and i think thats pressurised my case, so the cpu gets cooled a few degrees better. With the other chip i dropped a couple of degrees by wiping it across fine sandpaper.
> 
> This chip defaults to 1.2v, so 1.3 for 4GHz isn't too crazy*. I'll avoid 90c and get back to you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: The VCore measurement in Windows should be very accurate [pretty sure if Intel can fit 1.17 billion transistors in here, they can measure the voltage accurately
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> Every time I have compared BIOS to Multimeter it's been closer to the Windows reported voltage.
> 
> *hey, maybe it's just a really bad chip


Sorry I keep forgetting my chip is a special case and different than most. I thought you could hit 4Ghz between 1.22v-1.27v. Some people can run those volts and some can't I guess. 1.3v is fine if that's what your rig requires.


----------



## gofasterstripes

My other chip does 4 at 1.27 and 3.2 uncore at 1.25 v.

They're all different. This one has a 17C core temp spread


----------



## DR4G00N

Well thankfully everything still works well after that disaster







. Except maybe a stick of ram but I have some spares so it's not a problem.

Right now I have it running Realbench to help get rid of any small spots of moisture by getting everything nice and hot.

Considering the amount of water that poured onto the board while it was running I'm flabbergasted that it still works perfectly.


----------



## gofasterstripes

And just this morning I was thinking about watercooling...


----------



## arnavvr

I think I'm going to replace the CMOS battery in this Gigabyte X58A-OC. I think that's what's causing it to not save my CPU OC's.


----------



## webhito

@DR4G00N So sorry for the scare you had, believe me, been there, mine was far from what you had but ever since I had a few drops spring from a leak in my custom watercooled pc I never looked at it again, for a few degrees I stick to air cooling, I am even afraid of buying cases with top air vents in case one of my kids spills a soda on top lol.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sorry I keep forgetting my chip is a special case and different than most. I thought you could hit 4Ghz between 1.22v-1.27v. Some people can run those volts and some can't I guess. 1.3v is fine if that's what your rig requires.


The board also plays a big part. For example if I throw my chip in my P6T or Asrock Extreme it needs a lot more voltage.

On my Deluxe v2 4ghz is stable at ~1.2v, 4.2 is stable at around 1.25, and 4.4 needs 1.325v.

On the P6T and Asrock it needs nearly .05v more all around, the P6T needs slightly less voltage than the Asrock. I couldn't even get 4.4ghz stable at under 80c on those boards, it needed more than 1.35v and temps were already too high for my taste.


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK, we managed 7hours of BOINC with 3600MHz Uncore at 1.315v /4Ghz Core.

Now testing 4.4 with c/e/eist off at that Uncore.


----------



## gofasterstripes

It's not digging it. Trying 1.54v RAM.

EDIT: Nope, its MOAR Vcc thats needed, eerk!

EDIT EDIT: OK - so 1.4V in BIOS is needed giving a loaded of 1.392-1.376* for 4.4GHz [200x22 only] and this is with 3600 Uncore @1.315v. Stable enough to Run Cinebench several times, but at a guess a last Vcc bump would stabilise it in Prime/IBT, however that's only going to send it over 95C so I think I'll save that until I have given the chip a quick smoothing with 1200grit.

Scores vs My 4GHz/3200UCores: [NB this is also with antivirus and explorer and other processes killed]

Single thread: from 120 to 134 [+11.2%]
Multi Thread : from 906 to 1021 [+12.7%]
Open GL : 87 to 122 [this can't be right*]



So, uhh, unless I find my framerate in gaming is up 40% _Certainly didn't seem-to!_ Framerate is going to be <12% higher, maybe, more like 5%, then the >4GHz argument is looking weak for practicality, UNLESS you have a chip so golden it's good for 4.4 at safe volts etc (I read that is possible on Wikipedia, so it must be true







)

Hmmm, should I just leave it set-up like this and see how long it lasts??

* Maybe I should DMM this. Afraid-to, heh. DMM is 1.42-1.45 Loaded. This is behind the CPU socket, as shown above. There's still no way to measure the voltage on the cores, which will also be lower than outside the CPU package because of the effective network of resistors that the wiring within the chip makes. Still, it's brutal and @Kana-Maru is more righter than me on the voltages







Don't try this at home, kids.


----------



## DR4G00N

Hmm, it seems I'm having a problem with my system. It boots to windows but the display signal gets cut after 10sec to 10mins if I have my zotac 780 ti installed, the gigabyte card works fine by itself though.
The odd thing is, I put my zotac card in my test bench and it's been running unigine haven for a half hour now with out a problem.









Maybe there's something wrong with the mobo.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@DR4G00N All 12V PSU rails still up?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @DR4G00N All 12V PSU rails still up?


Yeah, the PSU doesn't seem to be the problem as my gigabyte card works perfectly.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Hmm, it seems I'm having a problem with my system. It boots to windows but the display signal gets cut after 10sec to 10mins if I have my zotac 780 ti installed, the gigabyte card works fine by itself though.
> The odd thing is, I put my zotac card in my test bench and it's been running unigine haven for a half hour now with out a problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe there's something wrong with the mobo.


How long did you leave your hardware to dry before you test them?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Sorry, I thought you had two different GPUs, not just the variants.

Crapping out after minutes sounds like heat, not a fault with the electronics. How is the fan?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> How long did you leave your hardware to dry before you test them?


About 12hrs but I disassembled everything and soaked up pretty much all the water with paper towels before letting them sit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Sorry, I thought you had two different GPUs, not just the variants.
> 
> Crapping out after minutes sounds like heat, not a fault with the electronics. How is the fan?


I have an H75 attached to it and it topped out @ 34c when running unigine haven on my test bench after an hour. So I don't believe it is a temp issue.


----------



## DR4G00N

Alright, I found that Evga Precision must have been the cause of the problem, I uninstalled it and the zotac card has been running unigine valley for about 10mins now, nice.


----------



## ruggercb

I don't know if anyone else has tried this, but on my Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 I popped another 4GB in slot #2, so slots #1,#2,#3,#5 with 4GB in each of the same ram (Crucial Ballistix 1600 MHZ ) and voila, my system is now running 16 GB ram. I had no idea if it would work, but I had some extra ram after 6x4GB failed. The ram is ever so slightly over-overclocked at 1667 MHZ(166 BCLK x 10x Memory multi).


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> The board also plays a big part. For example if I throw my chip in my P6T or Asrock Extreme it needs a lot more voltage.
> 
> On my Deluxe v2 4ghz is stable at ~1.2v, 4.2 is stable at around 1.25, and 4.4 needs 1.325v.
> 
> On the P6T and Asrock it needs nearly .05v more all around, the P6T needs slightly less voltage than the Asrock. I couldn't even get 4.4ghz stable at under 80c on those boards, it needed more than 1.35v and temps were already too high for my taste.


So i guess my limiting part is not the x5670, but my p6t vanilla.
I can report the same feedback. 4.4 is not reachable here at any safe voltage, 4.2 is working fine but really on the limit of the safe voltage.

Did you have problems with the Jmicron onboard controller when overclocking?
Mine recently is disconnecting the HD randomly when used for about 1 hour. The intel one works fine instead.
I'm still wondering if there is any way to make the Jmicron stable (what should I overvolt?)


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> So i guess my limiting part is not the x5670, but my p6t vanilla.
> I can report the same feedback. 4.4 is not reachable here at any safe voltage, 4.2 is working fine but really on the limit of the safe voltage.
> 
> Did you have problems with the Jmicron onboard controller when overclocking?
> Mine recently is disconnecting the HD randomly when used for about 1 hour. The intel one works fine instead.
> I'm still wondering if there is any way to make the Jmicron stable (what should I overvolt?)


Hmm, not sure. I've disabled that controller in the bios as I don't use it.

Just swapped my Deluxe v2 with a P6T6 Revolution as it was at a price I couldn't pass up, working well so far... other than Win10 deactivating on me. They threw in a ES 965 that wasn't in the listing as well.


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> I don't know if anyone else has tried this, but on my Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 I popped another 4GB in slot #2, so slots #1,#2,#3,#5 with 4GB in each of the same ram (Crucial Ballistix 1600 MHZ ) and voila, my system is now running 16 GB ram. I had no idea if it would work, but I had some extra ram after 6x4GB failed. The ram is ever so slightly over-overclocked at 1667 MHZ(166 BCLK x 10x Memory multi).


The x58 can run dual channel just fine. When running 4 modules, just run the modules in their respective dimm slots. You can run 2x8gb as dual channel too.

The Truth about i7 (1366) memory, both dual channel vs tri channel


----------



## gofasterstripes

Heads-up:

"Exciting news: Gravitational Waves detected!
We want to share our excitement about the first-ever direct detection of gravitational waves! The event happened right before the beginning of the first observing run of the advanced LIGO detectors, on 14 September 2015. The waves were generated as two black holes merged into a single black hole about 1.3 billion light years from Earth. In astronomy units this is 410 Mpc, approximately 10% of the way across the visible Universe!

Just as exciting: this is also the first-ever observation of binary black holes. In fact, since black holes are black, and emit no light or electromagnetic radiation, this is the only way we can see them.

Did [email protected] play any role in this? No, it didn't. The signal in the instrument lasted only about 1/4 of a second. It's not a continuous-wave signal like the type that [email protected] has been searching for. But since the observing run ended in mid January, we have been preparing the data to start a new low-frequency all-sky search for continuous gravitational waves. *We are now starting to run this on [email protected], so please sign up your computers and disable their sleep mode! In the next months we will extend the frequency range of the continuous waves all-sky searches, target interesting point sources and we are also gearing up to perform broader surveys for binary black hole mergers.*

Bruce Allen
Director, [email protected] "

I've actually dialled the OC back to 3.3 for now, and downclocked my GPUs too - I can now run BOINC with the fans on minimum 24/7









We have all this computing power - let's use it!


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> The x58 can run dual channel just fine. When running 4 modules, just run the modules in their respective dimm slots. You can run 2x8gb as dual channel too.
> 
> The Truth about i7 (1366) memory, both dual channel vs tri channel


See, I'm running 4 modules, but in triple channel mode, as per this quote from the Gigabyte Manual:

When enabling 3 Channel mode with three, four or six modules, it is recommended that memory of the same capacity, brand, speed, and chips be used. When enabling 3 Channel mode with three memory modules, be sure to install them in the DDR3_1, DDR3_3 and DDR3_5 sockets. When enabling 3 Channel mode with four memory modules, be sure to install them in the DDR3_1, DDR3_2, DDR3_3 and DDR3_5 sockets.


----------



## gofasterstripes

As you say, this is allowed. I think its called Flex mode. IIRC its more like dual channel - you may wish to check its not affected performance


----------



## ericeod

Yes, intel dis some interesting stuff with how the ram is configured depending on how it is installed. I can only assume it is operating in tri-channel with the 3 modules (slots A1-B1-C1), then switching asynchronously to the 4th dimm in slot A2. So the system should operate at tri-channel up to 12gb utilization. But as soon as the system needs to utilize that 4th dimm capacity, like 12.1Gb to 16Gb, it will not be accessing the remaining capacity in tri-channel mode.

I think the way flex mode works is for different capacity modules installed. So lets say you have 3 modules installed in x58 for tri-channel, and 2 modules are 4gb while the 3rd is 8gb, tri-channel should work spanned across 3 modules, but only at 12gb because the 3rd module will have 4Gb of its 8gb working in tri-channel, and thw other 4Gb is used asynchronous when needed.

I will add that Ive never run x58 in the above configs. So I've never seen it in action. So feel free to chime with more info, or to make corrections on what I stated. I will get some sources too.

update: found the source I was looking for:

Read this from Intel's site: Desktop Boards - "Single and Multi-Channel Memory Modes"

I snipped Tri-channel and flex mode info:


----------



## ruggercb

So, this 4GB stick is starting to sound like the last .5 GB in my GTX 970s.









How would I go about testing the speed? My CPU benches are the same, as is 3Dmark, but I expected that. I'd think I would need to get past 12.1GB RAM usage, and I'd need it to be apples to apples.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Dude, if you bench the same and it feels the same, then you're good to go









(But yeah, it's very much the same as the with the 970 cards)


----------



## ericeod

It all depends on how you look at it. Do you want 3 modules at 12gb accessed at the same time, then jump to a single module for the last 4gb when it is needed? Or do you want 2 modules at 8gb to be accessed at the same time, then jump to the second 2 modules of 8gb to be accessed (typical dual channel)?

I think your config is great if you are typically accessing 12gb or less on a regular basis. But if you are running memory intensive applications that maxes out your ram, you might need want to reconsider. I just run dual channel on this platform to keep a balance. But then again, I have way more ram than I need. I currently run 2x8Gb at 1866.


----------



## MadjinnSayan

No VS against any 2500k+ (oc too pls) processors in games ?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MadjinnSayan*
> 
> No VS against any 2500k+ (oc too pls) processors in games ?


In games that use 4 or less cores the 2500K will do better clock vs. clock but in games that can use more than that the 6-core may do better.


----------



## gofasterstripes

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_9.html

990x is a reasonable stand in.


----------



## MadjinnSayan

Ok thanks for data, better than nothing i guess


----------



## gofasterstripes

@ericeod @ruggercb I keep hearing how ECC RAM is really cheap on ebay.... huge quantities at low prices.

Whether it works with your board is another matter...


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MadjinnSayan*
> 
> Ok thanks for data, better than nothing i guess


It should be a very close approximation. It's a good article all around.


----------



## Iching




----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Myski*
> 
> Any opinions what would be _the_ x58 Xeon to buy now if looking for best price-performance ratio?
> 
> I haven't followed the prices since last summer and just noticed the X5650 is selling for over 100 dollars now (it was 60 dollars when I bought mine year ago), it does not look so hot deal to me anymore.
> 
> Also would you consider buying used Asus Rampage 3 Extreme for 120 dollars/euros a good deal (only the board, nothing else).


$60 X5650 used to be best bang for buck. But right now the best cpu is the $65 E5-2670.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I just want to say "Congratulations" and "Thanks" to @Kana-Maru for creating, participating and maintaining this thread [and to the Mods, of course] which has had 300,000+ views since he made it!

Long live X58!

gfs


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> $60 X5650 used to be best bang for buck. But right now the best cpu is the $65 E5-2670.


Is there any way to overclock the E5?
Also i'm looking at x79 motherboard prices and they are higher then x58. Any cheap suggestion?


----------



## gofasterstripes

PS This 2nd 5650 seems fine after the 1.45v Vcc abuse*







Now running 3.4GHz at 1.15v

*you'll note I didn't go high on the Uncore Voltage


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 
> I just want to say "Congratulations" and "Thanks" to @Kana-Maru for creating, participating and maintaining this thread [and to the Mods, of course] which has had 300,000+ views since he made it!
> 
> Long live X58!
> 
> gfs


Thanks man. I didn't think that it would last this long since it's a old platform. Now we see how viable and popular the X58 platform is. This topic is a little over 2 years and counting. No one is going to forget about the X58 at this pace, even new enthusiast. I'm glad I chose this place as the main base for my reviews, test and benches.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> PS This 2nd 5650 seems fine after the 1.45v Vcc abuse*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now running 3.4GHz at 1.15v
> 
> *you'll note I didn't go high on the Uncore Voltage


How long did you abuse it? I wanted to see how long it would go at 1.45v.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Is there any way to overclock the E5?
> Also i'm looking at x79 motherboard prices and they are higher then x58. Any cheap suggestion?


Yeah, the price of X79 boards are just as high as x58, or more.
I have an E5-2670 in an Asus x79 Sabertooth no can't over clock at all.
Also have a dual Asrock 2011 with two E5-2670. still no overclocking.
Unless you need AVX or the two extra cores, or come upon a cheap X79 board.....

For BOINC primegrid my X5660 @ 4ghz takes roughly 50% longer to do a work unit because of the AVX.
The E5-5670 is a Sandy bridge CPU.
Running primegrid my CPU throttles down to 2.8-2.9 ghz.Should be 3.2ghz Must be the CPU wattage limit, even though I raised it.
My temps are in the 50s so it is not temp limit.

The E5-V2 series CPUs are starting to fall in price 10 core 400$,- 500$ again if in need of AVX....

The E5-1600 xeons can be overclocked. I have heard the top tier like 1650 hexcore are and the E5-1620 are not.
But the I have heard of 1620 being unlocked but no info if they are ES or what board they were on.
It maybe hit or miss


----------



## OCmember

Gonna reach for 4.4GHz

previously was running 4.2Ghz @ 1.29v ~ 1.33v under load.

4.4Ghz needs 1.343v with CPU Impedance set to "Less" on my setup. It hits 1.348v under IBT load

QPI is working at 3.73GHz with 1.28v IOH, and 1.269v for the QPI PLL, QPI Signal Compensation set to "Less"

I left the Uncore at 3GHz with 1.28v - I might be able to go less volts

Memory is pumping out a little over 2GHz cl8.8.8. 21, 2T tRFC 60 - it droops to 1.64v

Passed Asus Real Bench 15minutes.

Passed IBT 3072mb, 10 iterations, producing 93.3243 max GFlops

seems stable


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Yeah, the price of X79 boards are just as high as x58, or more.
> I have an E5-2670 in an Asus x79 Sabertooth no can't over clock at all.
> Also have a dual Asrock 2011 with two E5-2670. still no overclocking.
> Unless you need AVX or the two extra cores, or come upon a cheap X79 board.....
> 
> For BOINC primegrid my X5660 @ 4ghz takes roughly 50% longer to do a work unit because of the AVX.
> The E5-5670 is a Sandy bridge CPU.
> Running primegrid my CPU throttles down to 2.8-2.9 ghz.Should be 3.2ghz Must be the CPU wattage limit, even though I raised it.
> My temps are in the 50s so it is not temp limit.
> 
> The E5-V2 series CPUs are starting to fall in price 10 core 400$,- 500$ again if in need of AVX....
> 
> The E5-1600 xeons can be overclocked. I have heard the top tier like 1650 hexcore are and the E5-1620 are not.
> But the I have heard of 1620 being unlocked but no info if they are ES or what board they were on.
> It maybe hit or miss


All of the X79 E5-1600 Series can be OC'd. Even the 8-core E5-1680V2


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice work, OCmember







mind the burn


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Yeah, the price of X79 boards are just as high as x58, or more.
> I have an E5-2670 in an Asus x79 Sabertooth no can't over clock at all.
> Also have a dual Asrock 2011 with two E5-2670. still no overclocking.
> Unless you need AVX or the two extra cores, or come upon a cheap X79 board.....
> 
> For BOINC primegrid my X5660 @ 4ghz takes roughly 50% longer to do a work unit because of the AVX.
> The E5-5670 is a Sandy bridge CPU.
> Running primegrid my CPU throttles down to 2.8-2.9 ghz.Should be 3.2ghz Must be the CPU wattage limit, even though I raised it.
> My temps are in the 50s so it is not temp limit.
> 
> The E5-V2 series CPUs are starting to fall in price 10 core 400$,- 500$ again if in need of AVX....
> 
> The E5-1600 xeons can be overclocked. I have heard the top tier like 1650 hexcore are and the E5-1620 are not.
> But the I have heard of 1620 being unlocked but no info if they are ES or what board they were on.
> It maybe hit or miss


Thanks, great infos








I read around that it is still possible to overclock a bit the 2670 through bclk and turbo multiplier. Is that true?

Mostly because, if it's true, it should be possible to make the e5 run at around 3.4ghz, maybe even 3.5, and that frequency should give better scores than a x56xx at 4.8, while giving better power consumption and 2 more cores. Considering that the e5 on ebay runs at around 90 euros included shipping, and a x79 motherboard can be found at around 200, it would be an upgrade for nearly zero cost, since i believe i can sell my x5670 and my p6t for about 300 here, or maybe just a little bit less.
Does my reasoning make sense?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Whats this about X79 and overclocking 2011 Xeons?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice work, OCmember
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mind the burn


Thanks, chief!

I'm thinking of upping the Uncore to 3.4GHz I just hate going over 1.3v for daily use with it. I'm not too keen on high QPI speeds either but for now I'm just having fun









Cheers!


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Whats this about X79 and overclocking 2011 Xeons?


Look at my post above.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh right, if that's all that is worth mentioning in passing.

I guess I mean, what sort of clocks and performance are people getting?

Oh, and, I don't know anything about this platform, IIRC there's two chipsets, so you seemed to be saying that one of them didn't correctly lock the CPU down? Could this be the next Westmere EP?


----------



## bill1024

I can not over clock the xeon E5-2670 at all. When I bump the FSB even a tiny bit it wont boot.
The turbo clocks are as follows
Turbo frequency 3300 MHz (1 or 2 cores)
3200 MHz (3 or 4 cores)
3100 MHz (5 or 6 cores)
3000 MHz (7 or 8 cores)

I have seen e5-1620 quad core overclocked, and I have had a couple people who owned them say theirs will not overclock.
Every hexcore 16xx I have heard of from the owner said the 6 core do overclock

The E5-16xx hexcores are not any cheaper than the i7 hexcores from what I see on ebay.

I'll do some Non-AVX work units on a BOINC project and post some results


----------



## bill1024

BOINC benchmarks the system at the install and every now and then afterward.

Measured floating point speed and interger speed. Just to give an idea of power the CPUs have
This is a few of the type of systems I have here I use for BOINC

Here are some results.

X5650 stock 2.9ghz all cores The numbers are "Million opps per second"

Floating point 3440
Interger 8399

X5660 @ 4ghz overclocked
Floating point 4868
Interger 11829

E5-2670 @ 3ghz all cores Sandy bridge
Floating point 3600
Interger 19356

i5-3570s 3.4ghz all cores Ivy Bridge
Floating point 3833
Interger 22501

i5-4570 3.4ghz all cores Haswell
Floating point 3554
Interger 20964

AMD Opteron 6172 2.1ghz
Floating point 1065
Interger 4643


----------



## bill1024

I see a problem I will have reporting times per workunit.
I am running windows and Linux, Linux is almost always faster than Windows per WU so it will not be 100% correct
Can make another Linux drive and swap Win7 over to linux. It will be a day or two before I can do it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Why not dude. It's interesting for sure.

How fast are GPU's?


----------



## bill1024

Picture of my dual xeon e5-2670 and a quad socket AMD socket F Opteron hexcores 8425
On the lower shelf is a dual socket Opteron 6172 12 core each CPU
Other servers are down stairs


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Picture of my dual xeon e5-2670 and a quad socket AMD socket F Opteron hexcores 8425
> On the lower shelf is a dual socket Opteron 6172 12 core each CPU
> Other servers are down stairs


Just picked up a pair of E5-2670s myself off of ebay. Got the pair for $140 and they are legit chips even (not ES) The 2670's seem to be the best bang for the buck right now


----------



## bill1024

There are tons of1366 hexcores on ebay for 50$ or so that can be overclocked, L5640 if I remember right.
I do a lot of BOINC so AVX instruction set help me a lot, plus the extra cores.
If all someone does is game and surf the web x56xx ot L56xx hexcores I think is still the way to go for now.
But the darn LGA 2011 boards are not cheap at all.
In time when the E5-V2 Ivy Bridge 10-12 core fall in price, then that will be a great bang for the buck.
Priced are slowly falling on those chips.


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> There are tons of1366 hexcores on ebay for 50$ or so that can be overclocked, L5640 if I remember right.
> I do a lot of BOINC so AVX instruction set help me a lot, plus the extra cores.
> If all someone does is game and surf the web x56xx ot L56xx hexcores I think is still the way to go for now.
> But the darn LGA 2011 boards are not cheap at all.
> In time when the E5-V2 Ivy Bridge 10-12 core fall in price, then that will be a great bang for the buck.
> Priced are slowly falling on those chips.


something like the X5650 goes for more than what I spent on my 2670 lol.

If anything I would say any of the good X58 boards are overpriced. Look at something like a Rampage III Extreme lol.

I got my Z9PE-D8 WS for $350 like a year ago

My machine is a hybrid server/gaming machine so the extra cores come in handy (especially for Plex)


----------



## Space Marine

The thing is that apparently Facebook has been upgrading their servers since november, and that's why there is an influx on e5-2670 chips on ebay. By the time the motherboards will get cheaper these cheap chips might not be on the market anymore. Or their presence may just trigger an increase in the price of x79 motherboards (the way it happened with x58 ones).


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> The thing is that apparently Facebook has been upgrading their servers since november, and that's why there is an influx on e5-2670 chips on ebay. By the time the motherboards will get cheaper these cheap chips might not be on the market anymore. Or their presence may just trigger an increase in the price of x79 motherboards (the way it happened with x58 ones).


Yeah its crazy how much the prices dropped. I paid $700 for my pair of 2660's like a year ago and they were ES chips lol. Now I paid $140 for my 2670s


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> something like the X5650 goes for more than what I spent on my 2670 lol.
> 
> If anything I would say any of the good X58 boards are overpriced. Look at something like a Rampage III Extreme lol.
> 
> I got my Z9PE-D8 WS for $350 like a year ago
> 
> My machine is a hybrid server/gaming machine so the extra cores come in handy (especially for Plex)


Good X79 motherboards are also overpriced. Have you seen the prices of the Rampage IV Extreme/Black Edition or similar motherboards from Gigabyte? Even LGA2011-0 only offers on average the equivalent of a small double digit percentage increase at the most versus LGA1366 components. Once they are overclocked the difference and margin begins to narrow down and the only benefit that the LGA2011-0 platform with X79 has is IVB-E and SB-E support and PCI-E 3/Quad channel. Otherwise this comparison comes to mind:








(Kana Maru's comparison)


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> something like the X5650 goes for more than what I spent on my 2670 lol.
> 
> If anything I would say any of the good X58 boards are overpriced. Look at something like a Rampage III Extreme lol.
> 
> I got my Z9PE-D8 WS for $350 like a year ago
> 
> My machine is a hybrid server/gaming machine so the extra cores come in handy (especially for Plex)


They have gotten more expensive. In June of 2015, I got a i7 930 and a Gigabyte X58A-OC for $175.


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> Good X79 motherboards are also overpriced. Have you seen the prices of the Rampage IV Extreme/Black Edition or similar motherboards from Gigabyte? Even LGA2011-0 only offers on average the equivalent of a small double digit percentage increase at the most versus LGA1366 components. Once they are overclocked the difference and margin begins to narrow down and the only benefit that the LGA2011-0 platform with X79 has is IVB-E and SB-E support and PCI-E 3/Quad channel. Otherwise this comparison comes to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Kana Maru's comparison)


Well if they are both overpriced id rather get something that's newer.

Also with my E5-2670's I can always drop in a pair of E5 V2's down the road when they are cheap (up to 12 cores). On X58 there is no where to go.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arnavvr*
> 
> They have gotten more expensive. In June of 2015, I got a i7 930 and a Gigabyte X58A-OC for $175.


Yep, I picked up my P6T Deluxe v2 + 920 last Jan for $150, they are a bit more expensive now.

But there are still deals to be had, they are just a bit harder to find. I just picked up a P6T6 + 965 + 2gb 2000mhz for $120, solid so far.


----------



## arnavvr

@Blindsay @45nm I was going to go for a Rampage IV Black Edition + E5-2670, but the X79 motherboards are really expensive, so I bought an SR-2 which ended up being the same price, and the X58 Xeons are overclockable.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> something like the X5650 goes for more than what I spent on my 2670 lol.
> 
> If anything I would say any of the good X58 boards are overpriced. Look at something like a Rampage III Extreme lol.
> 
> I got my Z9PE-D8 WS for $350 like a year ago
> 
> My machine is a hybrid server/gaming machine so the extra cores come in handy (especially for Plex)


I can get for less than what you paid for those two chips a dual socket G34 mother board with two 12 core Opteron 6172 CPUs for 24 cores and two heat sinks. 75$ shipped lower 48 USA
Throw in 8 sticks of 4gb Samsung memory for around another 70$ and you have a heck of a work horse.
140$ there add in 15$ for two 80mm fans and off you go. The PSUs 750W are B-stock PSUs I picked up to 30$ each
That's bang for the buck. I can go to the Opteron 63xx CPUs when those prices drop.

Either way you go today, there is so much great used parts to choose from.


----------



## bill1024

I picked up my EVGA FTW3 one for 60$ local Craigs list, and one brand new FTW3 for 110 EVGA for sale section, , My Rampage3 Gene I got for 110 shipped e-bay.
There are good deals out there you have to keep an eye out for them. I do think the x58 prices are dropping some. I seen a bunch sell for 125$ range.
The Asus X79 Sabertooth was 160$ and the dual Asrock LGA 2011 was 270$

Thing is, my 4 core i5-4570 Haswell spits our as many WUs for prime grid as my x5660 and I paid 130 for the chip and 70$ for the board.


----------



## Blindsay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I can get for less than what you paid for those two chips a dual socket G34 mother board with two 12 core Opteron 6172 CPUs for 24 cores and two heat sinks. 75$ shipped lower 48 USA
> Throw in 8 sticks of 4gb Samsung memory for around another 70$ and you have a heck of a work horse.
> 140$ there add in 15$ for two 80mm fans and off you go. The PSUs 750W are B-stock PSUs I picked up to 30$ each
> That's bang for the buck. I can go to the Opteron 63xx CPUs when those prices drop.
> 
> Either way you go today, there is so much great used parts to choose from.


Not sure that's really a better bang for the buck, cheaper yes, better bang for the buck probably not.

I know passmark isn't the best comparison but those 6172's look quite a ways off from the 2670

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/multi_cpu_pt7.html

Not to mention I am going to go out on a limb and guess those are a bit more power hungry


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blindsay*
> 
> Not sure that's really a better bang for the buck, cheaper yes, better bang for the buck probably not.
> 
> I know passmark isn't the best comparison but those 6172's look quite a ways off from the 2670
> 
> https://www.cpubenchmark.net/multi_cpu_pt7.html
> 
> Not to mention I am going to go out on a limb and guess those are a bit more power hungry


Rated 115 watt each, but pull 85 watts. Well until you overclock them, but with any CPU once overclocked wattage goes up

Did I mention they can be overclocked? Oh yeah!!!

Also the fact there are 24 cores, It all depends of what you're doing with the hardware.
Folding at home 24 cores working on 1 work unit or BOINC 24 cores each with its own WU, they spit out some work.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Right now I can grab a 2670 for 40-100 Euro??!?!? Pretty tempting! No ancillaries, but whack it in a draw for a couple of months maybe, till I find a 2011 MoBo and understand it.... Pretty sure with IPC and clockspeed bumps, that it would be a worthwhile change if so cheap.... If only I could unlock it somehow, sure to hit 4+GHz with a reasonable voltage!

So is there NO way to oveclock this chip then? I am behind the curve, obviously, but that seems odd








Quote:


> How long did you abuse it? I wanted to see how long it would go at 1.45v.


Just a couple of hours. It's just so damn HOT! Quite tempted to try a delid, though I CBA taking the PC apart again right now, I need to figure if it's going to fit back in the socket and whether the HSF will make contact with the die :/ Meh.
Quote:


> CPU Impedance set to "Less"


This is why we can't quite get a handle on the voltages! This system of power delivery exhibits really complex behaviour, so I see now why the voltages differ. I really would expect the CPU integrated voltage control to be able to READ the (internal, applied) core voltage correctly, though I note from the values it delivers that it's got a fairly coarse DAC. TL;DR - I'd think the CPU-Z voltages are accurate measured Core voltages. The BIOS is the voltage external to the chip, then with the usual allowances for droop and spikes, and then also with consideration of CPU Impedance setting and how the voltage deviates from the BIOS settings [LLC/voltage compensations]. Phew.
Quote:


> I can get for less than what you paid for those two chips a dual socket G34 mother board with two 12 core Opteron 6172 CPUs for 24 cores and two heat sinks. 75$ shipped lower 48 USA


The problem with this shizzle, is I have no need for it, but at that $ I want it.
Quote:


> E5-V2 Ivy Bridge 10-12 core fall in price, then that will be a great bang for the buck.
> Priced are slowly falling on those chips.


See the above, lol.

I think I just want to catch these dudes (friends) up.


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> Good X79 motherboards are also overpriced. Have you seen the prices of the Rampage IV Extreme/Black Edition or similar motherboards from Gigabyte? Even LGA2011-0 only offers on average the equivalent of a small double digit percentage increase at the most versus LGA1366 components. Once they are overclocked the difference and margin begins to narrow down and the only benefit that the LGA2011-0 platform with X79 has is IVB-E and SB-E support and PCI-E 3/Quad channel. Otherwise this comparison comes to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Kana Maru's comparison)


X79 and X58 boards are similarly overpriced, however on X79 platform you get native sata3 and nvme (after injecting efi rom), plus you also get an upgrade path. So with the price of 2670's now there is zero reason to buy an X58 rig if you don't already have a board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> So with the price of 2670's now there is zero reason to buy an X58


Unless you want to overclock?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> This is why we can't quite get a handle on the voltages! This system of power delivery exhibits really complex behaviour, so I see now why the voltages differ. I really would expect the CPU integrated voltage control to be able to READ the (internal, applied) core voltage correctly, though I note from the values it delivers that it's got a fairly coarse DAC. TL;DR - I'd think the CPU-Z voltages are accurate measured Core voltages. The BIOS is the voltage external to the chip, then with the usual allowances for droop and spikes, and then also with consideration of CPU Impedance setting and how the voltage deviates from the BIOS settings [LLC/voltage compensations]. Phew.


It looks like to me that EVGA had some good electrical engineers. It makes me excited to see what Gigabyte put into the UD7 board.

Yeah that setting straightened things out. The funny thing is CPU Impedance is suppose to have something to do with the QPI speed or something. Anand "In Depth" review - lol Before I set it to "Less" the QPI speed was under 3.2GHz so I think the Core frequency had some affliction on the QPI volts or stability to the bus er something.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I can get for less than what you paid for those two chips a dual socket G34 mother board with two 12 core Opteron 6172 CPUs for 24 cores and two heat sinks. 75$ shipped lower 48 USA
> Throw in 8 sticks of 4gb Samsung memory for around another 70$ and you have a heck of a work horse.
> 140$ there add in 15$ for two 80mm fans and off you go. The PSUs 750W are B-stock PSUs I picked up to 30$ each
> That's bang for the buck. I can go to the Opteron 63xx CPUs when those prices drop.
> 
> Either way you go today, there is so much great used parts to choose from.


I cant find any dual g34 board atm on ebay that costs less then 200 euros. Yeah, the cpu costs like 10 euros, but the board is in the same price range of x79


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> The funny thing is CPU Impedance is suppose to have something to do with the QPI speed


I mean, I just sorta suddenly realised that we're not dealing with any real DC here. The DC voltage for Vcc/Vtt is derived from switched circuits, so it's going to behave more like AC when presented with a circuit with inductance or impedance/power factor... this sorta stuff , then there's the way the energy divides as it "spreads out" through the chips itself as well. Either way, it's complicated


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I mean, I just sorta suddenly realised that we're not dealing with any real DC here. The DC voltage for Vcc/Vtt is derived from switched circuits, so it's going to behave more like AC when presented with a circuit with inductance or impedance/power factor... this sorta stuff , then there's the way the energy divides as it "spreads out" through the chips itself as well. Either way, it's complicated







lol, jk!


----------



## jihe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> So with the price of 2670's now there is zero reason to buy an X58
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you want to overclock?
Click to expand...

An oced x56xx is roughly the same as 2670 at stock. I guess if you just want to oc for oc's sake you might as well get c2d's, that's where the real 100+% ocs are.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hmmm, now I'm feeling the burn


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> An oced x56xx is roughly the same as 2670 at stock. I guess if you just want to oc for oc's sake you might as well get c2d's, that's where the real 100+% ocs are.


In multi-threaded applications, sure. An overclocked x56xx will still be faster for single threaded applications. A stock e5-2670 v1 has similar single threaded performance to a stock x5675 from what I understand.


----------



## gofasterstripes

At a guess, with a Sandy Bridge Arch and process familiarity these puppies would hit 4.4 as easy as we hit 4.0 :/

HOW?

Maybe i should start another thread


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> At a guess, with a Sandy Bridge Arch and process familiarity these puppies would hit 4.4 as easy as we hit 4.0 :/
> 
> HOW?
> 
> Maybe i should start another thread


Being Sandy Bridge, I'm sure they would...If we could overclock them.








A dual 8 core Sandy at 5ghz sure would be fun.









Wonder if the 2690 v1's will drop in price as well, turbo up to 3.8ghz.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jihe*
> 
> An oced x56xx is roughly the same as 2670 at stock. I guess if you just want to oc for oc's sake you might as well get c2d's, that's where the real 100+% ocs are.
> 
> 
> 
> In multi-threaded applications, sure. An overclocked x56xx will still be faster for single threaded applications. A stock e5-2670 v1 has similar single threaded performance to a stock x5675 from what I understand.
Click to expand...

Yeah, an overclocked x56xx will offer faster single thread performance than e5-2670. Anyway I would use Xeon for serious work like video encoding, VMs, etc that utilize multi-core/multi-thread performance.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> At a guess, with a Sandy Bridge Arch and process familiarity these puppies would hit 4.4 as easy as we hit 4.0 :/
> 
> HOW?
> 
> Maybe i should start another thread


Unlocked ones still expensive though.









Here is the thread talking about unlocked Xeon on x79.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1564465/psa-unlocked-8core-for-x79-if-you-cared


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> I cant find any dual g34 board atm on ebay that costs less then 200 euros. Yeah, the cpu costs like 10 euros, but the board is in the same price range of x79


I do not know where you are but I guess across the pond. Not sure if they ship there, and I would think they would charge to ship that far.
But if you make an offer, tell them you know Bill and you do Folding at Home and BOINC.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/321980327174?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


----------



## bill1024

BLCK strap section mmmmmm I am backing up my drives so just in case.... Going to follow this guide and see if...well you know

http://www.overclock.net/t/1189242/sandy-bridge-e-overclocking-guide-walk-through-explanations-and-support-for-all-x79-overclockers/0_20


----------



## Kana-Maru

This is all very imformative guys, but this is still a X58 topic. I don't mind talking about anything relating to technology, PC gaming, SSDs, GPUs etc. as long as you are dropping it into a X58 motherboard. Sandy-Ivy isn't going to be dropped in a X58.

With that being said it's going to be interesting when all of those Sandy-Ivy Xeons flood the market. I've installed a ton of Sandy\Ivy servers over the past few years. Still let's keep it on topic please.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> This is all very imformative guys, but this is still a X58 topic. I don't mind talking about anything relating to technology, PC gaming, SSDs, GPUs etc. as long as you are dropping it into a X58 motherboard. Sandy-Ivy isn't going to be dropped in a X58.
> 
> With that being said it's going to be interesting when all of those Sandy-Ivy Xeons flood the market. I've installed a ton of Sandy\Ivy servers over the past few years. Still let's keep it on topic please.


It seems the server offload has left X58 and moved onto X79. You can't get the Xeons as cheaply now.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's as maybe, but we should make our own thread about it 

EDIT: DONE


----------



## bill1024

I have a feeling there will be more x58 xeons to hit the market over the next couple years.
There are lot of L series X58 50-60$ that hit the market the last month or so, Sooner or later the higher end x58 should be coming too in mass.
Now that Haswell Xeons are being installed by companies the older parts have to go. Time will tell


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That's as maybe, but we should make our own thread about it


Ok started a new thread for it now. I'm joking. I'm still on X58, but if I was getting into the X79 budget builds I would seriously make a topic.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have a feeling there will be more x58 xeons to hit the market over the next couple years.
> There are lot of L series X58 50-60$ that hit the market the last month or so, Sooner or later the higher end x58 should be coming too in mass.
> Now that Haswell Xeons are being installed by companies the older parts have to go. Time will tell


Yeah, it would be nice to see the x5690's come down in price a bit.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I do not know where you are but I guess across the pond. Not sure if they ship there, and I would think they would charge to ship that far.
> But if you make an offer, tell them you know Bill and you do Folding at Home and BOINC.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/321980327174?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


Thanks man!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, it would be nice to see the x5690's come down in price a bit.


Back on topic, I would be happy even with just cheaper motherboards


----------



## gofasterstripes

Wowza....

So, eer, if someone offered to swap your my 970 SLI setup for a single EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid, would you?

I am having a little trouble with the heat from my 970s, this would swap for a case exhaust......

Hmmmm...

I Can OC the 970s to 1350, and I think the 980Ti would hit 1450 with a custom BIOS.

Hmmmm...


----------



## Riktar54

I would do the swap ASAP,,,,, before the other person comes to their senses.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Wowza....
> 
> So, eer, if someone offered to swap your my 970 SLI setup for a single EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid, would you?
> 
> I am having a little trouble with the heat from my 970s, this would swap for a case exhaust......
> 
> Hmmmm...
> 
> I Can OC the 970s to 1350, and I think the 980Ti would hit 1450 with a custom BIOS.
> 
> Hmmmm...


Of course, but there's obviously something wrong with the person selling the 980 Ti or there's something wrong with the 980 Ti hardware itself. I'd be very skeptical. Trading a $329+ GPU for a $750+ GPU isn't a "normal" trade.


----------



## gofasterstripes

AFAIK there's nothing wrong with the 980Ti, but he wants both my 970's, and I know my cards will do 1350 on the cores.

Im guessing a slight hit in maximum framerates and a rise in minimum.

Make sense?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> AFAIK there's nothing wrong with the 980Ti, but he wants both my 970's, and I know my cards will do 1350 on the cores.
> 
> Im guessing a slight hit in maximum framerates and a rise in minimum.
> 
> Make sense?


I meant to say SLI [$329 x2]., I guess he could want more frame ratesbut that will come a cost in performance. I ran SLI and it isn't that bad. It would seem like he wants to game at higher resolutions. I guess I could see the trade better if it was a Radeon 390 or 390X in Crossfire instead of a 970 SLI. I would find it fishy if someone wanted to trade like that with me. Especially from the aftermarket more expensive 980 Ti model.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD7 [UD7] Rev.2

CPU Core/Vcc and Uncore/Vtt Voltage read points, rear of CPU socket:



Any of the ROW of caps, on the legs indicated [closer to the socket] is Core / Vcc +Ve.
Only the SINGLE leg on the "Left" of this image is Uncore / Vtt +Ve.

This is because you cannot read Vtt from the Capacitors behind the socket as you can on the UD5 V2.
And anyway, that's very densely laid-out with a bigger chance of a short than these locations.

Check your orientation before probing! Use the PCIE slot solder [on the right of this image] as orientation!
Beware shorting pins it may kill the CPU/Board!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD7 [UD7] Rev.2
> 
> CPU Core/Vcc and Uncore/Vtt Voltage read points, rear of CPU socket:
> 
> 
> 
> Any of the ROW of caps, on the legs indicated [closer to the socket] is Core / Vcc +Ve.
> Only the SINGLE leg on the "Left" of this image is Uncore / Vtt +Ve.
> 
> This is because you cannot read Vcc from the Capacitors behind the socket as you can on the UD5 V2.
> And anyway, that's very densely laid-out with a bigger chance of a short than these locations.
> 
> Check your orientation before probing! Use the PCIE slot solder [on the right of this image] as orientation!
> Beware shorting pins it may kill the CPU/Board!


Is that layout any similar to the UD5 post I made about read points?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yes, apart from the the UD5 Vtt point on the rear of the socket seems to be Vcc on this board. As mentioned, these points are also a little further away from other components.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yes, apart from the the UD5 Vtt point on the rear of the socket seems to be Vcc on this board. As mentioned, these points are also a little further away from other components.


Nice work! That board is a beast and I'm glad I have one as a backup!


----------



## httpsmaniac

Hi guys. I need your recommendation for a power supply that would power x5650(oced to 4ghz) and 750ti.
I have few in my mind that fit my budget so I'd like to hear your opinion.
-Corsair vs550.
-corsair vs650.
-xfx pro series 450w
=or something else within 60 euro budget. Tnx


----------



## OCmember

Do you have any options for Seasonic?


----------



## httpsmaniac

SEASONIC S12II, GB 80 Plus Bronze Netzteil - 430 Watt-60euros.
SEASONIC S-12II-520W-70euros.

I'm on a budget and yeah, buying the best is also most expensive which isn't so affordable. :/


----------



## Kana-Maru

You can't go wrong with XFX or SeaSonic. 4Ghz should not require a ton of voltage. I'm in the US so I'm not even sure where to go and look for PSUs in your country. You should be fine with 500-600watt just in case. For some reason I have a feeling you will be doing more overclocking past 4Ghz + GPU OCing.


----------



## httpsmaniac

Xfx core edition 450w is 60euros. Is this enough wattage for x5650 and 750ti or is more Ws required?


----------



## httpsmaniac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You can't go wrong with XFX or SeaSonic. 4Ghz should not require a ton of voltage. I'm in the US so I'm not even sure where to go and look for PSUs in your country. You should be fine with 500-600watt just in case. For some reason I have a feeling you will be doing more overclocking past 4Ghz + GPU OCing.


I won't go past 4ghz on xeon and yeah maybe oc 750ti a bit.


----------



## httpsmaniac

Edit: What about EVGA 600B 600W ATX 2.3?


----------



## OCmember

Are you reading the reviews on jonnyguru? Pick a few that you are considering and research reviews on them. Again, Jonnyguru is one of the best PSU reviews sights out there.


----------



## httpsmaniac

I'm on a phone atm so I'm a bit limited. Im looking at some reviews as we speak. I wont spam the forum anymore, tnx for yours and kana Mary's help.


----------



## Kana-Maru

That's Kana "Maru" lol. I'm sure it was the spell check on your phone. Jonnyguru is awesome. I haven't checked out his PSU reviews since I purchased my EVGA SuperNova G2. I was planning on running Quad GPUs back then.

You can probably get away with 450watts, but I'd be safe if I were you. You never know when you will want to upgrade to a better\newer GPU or something. 500-600watts shouldn't hurt. 550watts would be the sweet spot if you can find one at a good price.


----------



## httpsmaniac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's Kana "Maru" lol. I'm sure it was the spell check on your phone. Jonnyguru is awesome. I haven't checked out his PSU reviews since I purchased my EVGA SuperNova G2. I was planning on running Quad GPUs back then.
> 
> You can probably get away with 450watts, but I'd be safe if I were you. You never know when you will want to upgrade to a better\newer GPU or something. 500-600watts shouldn't hurt. 550watts would be the sweet spot if you can find one at a good price.


Yes, auto correct hehe. I didn't even notice. I don't think I will upgrade any time soon so lower wattage psu may be enough. I just don't wanna damage my current hardware by choosing a bad psu now,that's all.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *httpsmaniac*
> 
> Yes, auto correct hehe. I didn't even notice. I don't think I will upgrade any time soon so lower wattage psu may be enough. I just don't wanna damage my current hardware by choosing a bad psu now,that's all.


If you are overclocking I'd go with at least 650w to be safe. That leaves a bit of room for adding hdd's or upgrading your GPU if needed.

The 660W Seasonic 80+ Platinum goes on sale for around $80 AR from time to time and they are solid.

I've had good luck with the Thermaltake 750w Toughpower 80+ Gold, they go on sale for around $59 AR and seem to be solid. I've built three 1366 _(two [email protected] +7950's and a dual x5670+7950)_ machines with them, no issues yet. Johnny Guru reviewed the 850w model and it seemed pretty good.

I've also had my 750w Toughpower XT since 2009 in my primary machine and haven't had any issues. I originally got it because Johnny Guru reviewed it and it was on sale _(also, my old PSU blew out)._


----------



## gofasterstripes

550-650 sounds good, see if you will have headroom on the 12v Rail.

I've measured >450W draw with a chunky GPU and a 4GHZ overclock.

I tend to spec PSU'd with 20%+ spare capacity, and I've not had one fail yet [though I have had to replace one that was accumulating ripple over time].


----------



## 2010rig

I'd go with a 550W minimum, just in case you want a stronger GPU later, plus you're overclocking you want the breathing room. I went with 750W to give me room to SLI down the road.


----------



## httpsmaniac

I got my eyes on Thermaltake 775 TX I can get it used for 50euro. Will go with it probably. Tnx for all your suggestions.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *httpsmaniac*
> 
> I got my eyes on Thermaltake 775 TX I can get it used for 50euro. Will go with it probably. Tnx for all your suggestions.


There ya go. I couldn't really help find anything for you since I'm in the US. You have way more than what you need for future usage if you ever want to upgrade. The PSU is within your price rage as well. That's one heck of a deal and that's a great PSU so you might as well get it ASAP, unless you manage to find something even better in that price range.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 550-650 sounds good, see if you will have headroom on the 12v Rail.
> 
> I've measured >450W draw with a chunky GPU and a 4GHZ overclock.
> 
> I tend to spec PSU'd with 20%+ spare capacity, and I've not had one fail yet [though I have had to replace one that was accumulating ripple over time].


My system pulls ~650-675w using smallffts+furmark according to my killawatt. I do have a lot of drives and other stuff though which probably makes it ~75w higher than just the board/cpu/gpu/fans.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Gonna reach for 4.4GHz
> 
> previously was running 4.2Ghz @ 1.29v ~ 1.33v under load.
> 
> 4.4Ghz needs 1.343v with CPU Impedance set to "Less" on my setup. It hits 1.348v under IBT load
> 
> QPI is working at 3.73GHz with 1.28v IOH, and 1.269v for the QPI PLL, QPI Signal Compensation set to "Less"
> 
> I left the Uncore at 3GHz with 1.28v - I might be able to go less volts
> 
> Memory is pumping out a little over 2GHz cl8.8.8. 21, 2T tRFC 60 - it droops to 1.64v
> 
> Passed Asus Real Bench 15minutes.
> 
> Passed IBT 3072mb, 10 iterations, producing 93.3243 max GFlops
> 
> seems stable


Seemed stable. Then I kept getting weird errors. ntoskrnl.exe - 0xc0000221, and a few others. So I'm going to lower the RAM frequency to 1700MHz and keep the timings except for the command rate from 2T to 1T. If those errors continue then I know it's not the memory. All other settings will continue as they were.


----------



## 8ax

The top HWBOT post for the L5639 is someone running all 6 cores with a x21 multi... how is this possible?
Is this only available on the Rampage III MBOs like that guy was using?

http://hwbot.org/submission/2595008_alphascout_cpu_frequency_xeon_l5639_4837.93_mhz


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> The top HWBOT post for the L5639 is someone running all 6 cores with a x21 multi... how is this possible?
> Is this only available on the Rampage III MBOs like that guy was using?
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/2595008_alphascout_cpu_frequency_xeon_l5639_4837.93_mhz


It's been awhile since I've used my L5639. From what I remember it's only running that frequency on two cores, not all 6 cores. If he were to run a program like Cinebnech the frequency would downclock to x19 I believe. You get x21 with EIST\Turbo enabled.

I could've gotten 4.8Ghz [4788Mhz] if I were to use the x21 multiplier. I used x20 instead which gives me the same speed on all cores and allows me to use lower vCore.


----------



## 8ax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> It's been awhile since I've used my L5639. From what I remember it's only running that frequency on two cores, not all 6 cores. If he were to run a program like Cinebnech the frequency would downclock to x19 I believe. You get x21 with EIST\Turbo enabled.
> 
> I could've gotten 4.8Ghz [4788Mhz] if I were to use the x21 multiplier. I used x20 instead which gives me the same speed on all cores and allows me to use lower vCore.


But the L5639 isn't even supposed to go up to 21x... Its official turbos are 18-20x.

My CPU also needs 1.35v for 4GHz but 1.4+ for 4.1 ?

On another note: I can't get over the FSB wall on my P6T SE. It's been flashed to a P6T WS Pro and I'm getting 222bclk with 100pcie and 228bclk with 103pcie, however it won't go further even if I push the vcore to 1.5 and pcie to 108...


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> The top HWBOT post for the L5639 is someone running all 6 cores with a x21 multi... how is this possible?
> Is this only available on the Rampage III MBOs like that guy was using?
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/2595008_alphascout_cpu_frequency_xeon_l5639_4837.93_mhz


Quote:


> United States alphascout says:
> 
> 1 year and 6 months ago - it was stable for all of 5 seconds with that turbo !! lol


----------



## gofasterstripes

Eeeerrrrrr....?

That's curious. I want to know how it was possible to enable that!


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Kana etc

Can't paste the link in, but TomsHardware is running a brief article on "Undervolting" the R9 Fury to gain efficiency.

They were able to drop power consumption 80W without a slowdown because the GPU binning process was very crude, and apparantly most of the Silicon produced now is comfortably capable of running those clocks with less energy.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> But the L5639 isn't even supposed to go up to 21x... Its official turbos are 18-20x.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> My CPU also needs 1.35v for 4GHz but 1.4+ for 4.1 ?
> 
> On another note: I can't get over the FSB wall on my P6T SE. It's been flashed to a P6T WS Pro and I'm getting 222bclk with 100pcie and 228bclk with 103pcie, however it won't go further even if I push the vcore to 1.5 and pcie to 108..
> 
> 
> .


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Eeeerrrrrr....?
> 
> That's curious. I want to know how it was possible to enable that!


http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6000#post_24915562

Enable EIST+Turbo. I don't mess with the PCIe Frequency. It's usually unnecessary for higher OCs or BCLK.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Kana etc
> 
> Can't paste the link in, but TomsHardware is running a brief article on "Undervolting" the R9 Fury to gain efficiency.
> 
> They were able to drop power consumption 80W without a slowdown because the GPU binning process was very crude, and apparantly most of the Silicon produced now is comfortably capable of running those clocks with less energy.


I've been hearing about undervolting since last year. I never got around to actually testing it. I'm always running stock settings on my Fury X when I game. I probably should overclock one day just to see what types of increases I can get, but the drivers are increasing performance very well. It's cool that they are finally getting around to testing the undervolting. 80W drop sounds extremely efficient at stock. I'll check it out.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I was messing trying some ducting, it's amazing what you can do with a Dr Oetker packet and some blutac.... No real luck yet though.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

I received the Mobo !! It's my first Asus ROG mobo and I think it's not the last one ! I will received my X5670 in 2 weeks if nothing goes wrong.
I'm playing with a I7950. For the moment It reached 3,8Ghz with 1.2v (max temp 71°C). The only thing that if making me worry is the CPUTIN temperature which goes to 108°C underload.
I saw a real bump in performance...Even with this old CPU compared to the FX-8320E...Can't wait to see the difference with the Xeon.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aim a fan at the chipset. See if it goes down.

These readings are often wrong, or glitch. Keep an eye on the temp reading, and note what the current value does under load. Sometimes the chipset thermal paste needs changing or it really is getting very hot, but often it's a glitch in the reading if you see a massive value like 127C.

The X58 chipset is tough. Temps <70 should be fine, <60 is probably fine forever. >70 isn't good, but it's theoretically OK to 90+ IIRC. Though that would be roasting the board a bit and the paste will probably dry up, if it isn't already.


----------



## Dhiru

Are the prices of these Xeon X5670 and X5650 chips actually increasing day by day? I was expecting the prices to come down even more considering x5690 chips are priced at almost $200 and don't really seem to decline.


----------



## OCmember

My X5690 was around 200$ last I recall (about a year ago). Great chip, I love it! I think it's happy continuing stock clocks on my rig. It's never been overclocked. Came from a server.


----------



## Kana-Maru

My X5660 was a little over $200 and my X5639 was like $80 I believe. Now this was back in 2013 so of course the prices got better. When the CPUs start running dry the prices slowly creep upwards. X5660s are still $100-$130. I don't trust many sellers nowadays unless they sell in bulk.

I'd definitely sell my X5600 at a premium since I know it can run 4.8Ghz all day stable and the max was 5.4Ghz. Then again I have no plans to let this baby go. Some have called my L5639 a "golden chip" as well. It's retired in the closet.


----------



## TLCH723

I brought mine x5650 in the beginning of the year and pay 75USD for it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I finally got around to playing Tomb Raider [2013] again. Great game. I really need to find the time to finish it. I have a huge backlog of games I need to finish. I decided run a apples to apples benchmark after my playthrough since AMD has been working on their DX11 overhead. Here are my results in percentages:

*AMD Fury X STOCK Settings*

*Tomb Raider [Ultimate Setting] - 3840×2160 [4K]*
_From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-_
FPS: +6.00%
Frame times: +3.80%

Here are my Crysis 3 improvements from a few weeks ago:

*Crysis 3 4K 100% Maxed - No MSAA- Performance % Increase:*
From Catalyst Driver 15.7.1 -[7/29/2015]- to Crimson Driver 16.1 -[1/17/2016]-
FPS: +13.33%
Frame times: +4.48%

Tomb Raider increases aren't as good as Crysis 3, but Tomb Raider was already getting around 50fps at 4K which is amazing. I'm running all test at stock. The lower frame times only makes the experience even better. I hope they keep it up with the DX11 increases. DX12 is right around the corner.

I could easily overclock, but I haven't really found the need to. Maybe I'll OC and see if I can get Crysis 3 to around 40fps @ 4K. Crysis 3 is a very demanding title. Ryse: Son of Rome is very demanding as well.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Nice one Kana, thanks for putting the effort in









On another note, I keep getting 0x0000001E BSODs, within a few minutes of starting BOINC and only when running BOINC. This is with settings that are otherwise stable [will pass IBT 11GB/1Hr].

A quick google shows OS Corruption? Quite possible, but I can't reinstall for a few days or weeks [limited internet connection].

Suggestions?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Nice one Kana, thanks for putting the effort in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On another note, I keep getting 0x0000001E BSODs, within a few minutes of starting BOINC and only when running BOINC. This is with settings that are otherwise stable [will pass IBT 11GB/1Hr].
> 
> A quick google shows OS Corruption? Quite possible, but I can't reinstall for a few days or weeks [limited internet connection].
> 
> Suggestions?


Try messing with the vcore and vtt, I get that on my oc'ing bench whenever a certain voltage isn't quite right for the oc I'm using.


----------



## OCmember

@gofasterstripes You can try sfc /scannow in an elevated command prompt to check your files, or chkdsk driveletter: /f /v /r


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks guys. Will look into those.

Meanwhile... Try messing with a few Uncore multiplier and seeing what happens to the figures in Memtest.





These two pictures are 3000 and 2800 Uncore, both with 1600/8-8-8-24 RAM. See the massive drop in L2 cache speed? Odd.

I came across this because dropping my uncore from 200*16 to 166*19 (3200 to 3167MHz) also had strange effects:

CPU Clock/Uncore Clk/Level 1/L2/L3/Memory (GB/s)
4000. /3200. /114.3 /46.0/31/15
3600. /3167Mhz /109.2 /44.5/33/16

So, only L1 drops as expected there (clockspeed) but the data rates for the other memory either doesnt drop much, or increases.

This is too odd for me. Im going to bed.

EDIT- Added pics lol


----------



## 8ax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My X5660 was a little over $200 and my X5639 was like $80 I believe. Now this was back in 2013 so of course the prices got better. When the CPUs start running dry the prices slowly creep upwards. X5660s are still $100-$130. I don't trust many sellers nowadays unless they sell in bulk.
> 
> I'd definitely sell my X5600 at a premium since I know it can run 4.8Ghz all day stable and the max was 5.4Ghz. Then again I have no plans to let this baby go. Some have called my L5639 a "golden chip" as well. It's retired in the closet.


How high did your L5639 go?
I'm having headaches trying to stabilize it at 4.1GHz... (228x18)

I might've posted this before, but how do I reach 230+bclk easier? I tried 1.375v VTT and 1.5v vCore but I'm getting very weird issues already at 229 like everything slowing down to a drag, even the BIOS lags and Windows never boot because it takes ages even in safe mode.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Is QPI "slow mode" on in the BIOS?

220+ BClk is very high. Are you sure the board can take it?


----------



## gofasterstripes

OK now BOINC quit itself. After running Prime 95 Blend for 8 hours, BOINC dies in 20 minutes, with no BSOD.

I'm thinking corruption. I can't say I'm surprised, this thing has crashed more than a Firefly class recently with all the messing around.


----------



## 8ax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Is QPI "slow mode" on in the BIOS?
> 
> 220+ BClk is very high. Are you sure the board can take it?


Well I hope it can... 222x18 is my 24/7 setup.
There's no option for slow mode in the BIOS, I usually just set it to the lowest option which is around 7GT/s, I think.

I'll make sure when I get home.

EDIT: It's 8012MT/s at my 24/7 setup.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> How high did your L5639 go?


-4.8Ghz with Turbo enabled. - 125.00% Overclock Increase over base clock - Too much Vcore
-4.55Ghz with x20 multiplier. - 113.60% Overclock Increase over base clock - Too much Vcore
-4.1Ghz with x18 multiplier. - 92.20% Overclock Increase over base clock - Much safer Vcore

4.1Ghz was more than enough for everyday use hitting 10.62pts in Cinebench R11.5.
4Ghz gets 10.37pts with better voltage in my case.

Quote:


> I'm having headaches trying to stabilize it at 4.1GHz... (228x18)
> 
> I might've posted this before, but how do I reach 230+bclk easier? I tried 1.375v VTT and 1.5v vCore but I'm getting very weird issues already at 229 like everything slowing down to a drag, even the BIOS lags and Windows never boot because it takes ages even in safe mode.


Well "slow mode" might help. I never had to use "slow mode". I always set my QPI. Increasing voltages might unlock the BCLK lock\max, but you might have hit your max already. Forcing more voltage or tons of voltage could possibly get you where you want, but you may cause some damage. If it's worth the risk you can keep going or just accept your safe max.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@8ax I can't imagine it'll eat 1.5v safely <1.35v is "Safe". DMM measure it on the board to find the true applied voltage.

Any idea 'bout the cache speeds, Kana?

EDITed


----------



## 8ax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> -4.8Ghz with Turbo enabled. - 125.00% Overclock Increase over base clock - Too much Vcore
> -4.55Ghz with x20 multiplier. - 113.60% Overclock Increase over base clock - Too much Vcore
> -4.1Ghz with x18 multiplier. - 92.20% Overclock Increase over base clock - Much safer Vcore
> 
> 4.1Ghz was more than enough for everyday use hitting 10.62pts in Cinebench R11.5.
> 4Ghz gets 10.37pts with better voltage in my case.
> Well "slow mode" might help. I never had to use "slow mode". I always set my QPI. Increasing voltages might unlock the BCLK lock\max, but you might have hit your max already. Forcing more voltage or tons of voltage could possibly get you where you want, but you may cause some damage. If it's worth the risk you can keep going or just accept your safe max.


Looks like I have to flash the P6X58D-E Premium BIOS to get slow mode... Since P6T WS Pro BIOS works both on the P6T Deluxe and P6T(SE) and the Prem BIOS works on the P6T Deluxe it might be worth a shot... I hope you understood me.

Top clock for now is [email protected]@1.53v


----------



## Kana-Maru

Just kill the CPU while your at it.


----------



## 8ax

I might, LOL. I just can't get the 21x multi to work... Eist and everything is on. Which mbo did you use to achieve it?

Also something I noticed: my network adapter sometimes just vanishes when running at 4.4+GHz...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> Looks like I have to flash the P6X58D-E Premium BIOS to get slow mode...


I never had to use "slow mode".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> I might, LOL. I just can't get the 21x multi to work... Eist and everything is on. Which mbo did you use to achieve it?
> 
> Also something I noticed: my network adapter sometimes just vanishes when running at 4.4+GHz...


Next up is other random loses like data! You have somethings in the BIOS set way to high if you running into issues like that. What's the point of the high OC if it's not going to be stable anyways?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Here are the results from the SteamVR I ran earlier this morning. You guys should run the benchmark as well since it's free on Steam.

*4Ghz DDR3-1400Mhz* = 9.3


*4.8Ghz - DDR3-1675Mhz* = 9.6


4Ghz is still going strong on the 1st gen motherboard. Fiji is definitely ready for VR.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Here are the results from the SteamVR I ran earlier this morning. You guys should run the benchmark as well since it's free on Steam.
> 
> --
> 
> 4Ghz is still going strong on the 1st gen motherboard. Fiji is definitely ready for VR.


Nice score. Here's what I got:

*[email protected]/1630*


Funny thing, I noticed the CPU sat at around 15%-20% usage on average.


----------



## DR4G00N

It's a fairly poor test since it uses the source engine but I gave it a run anyway.

FPS was in the 110-120 range, if I force alternate frame rendering 2 in the NCP so it uses both of my 780 ti's it stays at 200 FPS. Overall score is worse though.

X5670 @ 4.19GHz & 780 Ti @ 1150MHz core.


----------



## bill1024

I took the test X5660 @ 4ghz GTX970 @ 1300 scored 6.8 Raised the GPU to 1475 scored 7.2 Sound about right?

I sold off two motherboards and CPUs. Gigabyte 990 fx ud3and a 970a-UD3 with AMD hexcore 1045T and 8gb Gskill memory.
Plus 3 660Ti video cards

With the money I bought an EVGA GTX 980Ti video card. Figure it will do really well BOINC GPUgrid and [email protected]
With the other GTX970s and a couple R9-280X I should do real well getting some work crunched.

Little bit overkill when I will be using it to game at 1080P but I should be able to turn all the eye candy up to the max and still have good FPS

Soon as the weather starts to warm and before I get the car back out for the season, going to sell off more hardware and see if I can get another one.


----------



## dagget3450

I didn't run it on my dual x5650 yet, but i did on my e5 2670 with a 290x. I also noticed cpu usage around 10%~ didn't monitor fps though



[email protected]/1550 - [email protected] w/Turbo


----------



## Dhiru

It seems you guys are running PCI-E 3.0 GPU on a 2.0 x58 board. Do you see any graphics bottleneck?


----------



## OCmember

Where is this VR test? I've been looking around in steam and can't find it, lol


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Where is this VR test? I've been looking around in steam and can't find it, lol


Here ya go:

http://store.steampowered.com/app/323910/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> It seems you guys are running PCI-E 3.0 GPU on a 2.0 x58 board. Do you see any graphics bottleneck?


Nope. My Shadows of Mordor benchmark I performed last year matched a PCie 3.0 + X79 benchmark. There's still ton of life in PCIe 2.0 x16 single and PCIe x16\x16 [32 lanes of greatness] dual GPUs.

I just got done playing and benchmarking yesterday Ryse: Son of Rome 100% maxed out [no SSAA] and got really good FPS for the resolution. IMO Ryse: Son of Rome, Metro:LL, Max Payne 3 & Crysis 3, Shadows of Mordor should be in EVERY GPU review. Older games, but they are top of the line in the graphic departments. Those games can definitely test the heck out of your GPU with tons of settings.


----------



## OCmember

Horribly painful results. Glad I was never interested in VR.

4.4.Ghz
GTX 670


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Horribly painful results. Glad I was never interested in VR.
> 
> 4.4.Ghz
> GTX 670
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Good lord that's low. I'm not "that" interested in VR either. As usual I will be waiting for affordable prices and not the initial launch hype prices. I'm seeing that these VR headsets will release for hundreds and hundreds of more dollars.

I did run some more SteamVR test with minor overclocks. The overclocks required no voltage or power limit increases.

*STOCK Fury X = GPU Core: 1050Mhz & HBM = 500Mhz*
*4Ghz* DDR3-1400Mhz = 9.3 - 8417
*4.8Ghz* - DDR3-1675Mhz = 9.6 - 8955

*Overclocked Fury X = GPU Core: 1100Mhz & HBM = 500Mhz* minor +50Mhz on Core
*4Ghz* DDR3-1400Mhz - OC Fury X = 9.6 - 9017

4Ghz with a +50Mhz performs better than my 4.8Ghz + stock Fury X results.

*Overclocked Fury X = GPU Core: 1100Mhz & HBM = 550Mhz* minor +50Mhz on Core and HBM.
*4Ghz* DDR3-1400Mhz - OC Fury X = 9.8 - 9199

*Overclocked Fury X = GPU Core: 1125Mhz & HBM = 550Mhz* minor +75Mhz on Core and +50Mhz HBM.
*4Ghz* DDR3-1400Mhz - OC Fury X = 9.9 - 9295

All Frames below 90fps: and Frames CPU Bound were all 0%.

4Ghz plus a minor overclock on the Fury X can match my 4.8Ghz in the source engine. I'm sure we will get better VR benchmarks soon.


----------



## mohiuddin

New cpuz bench. @3.8ghz 1.175v


----------



## OCmember

Yah, I've been waiting for next gen GPUs.


----------



## WoKeN

Would anyone know if the ASUS Rampage III GENE LGA 1366 would work with the xeon X5600 series?


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WoKeN*
> 
> Would anyone know if the ASUS Rampage III GENE LGA 1366 would work with the xeon X5600 series?


Yes, it does. See KM's known-to-work X58 MB list: http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9


----------



## bill1024

I have a Rampage3 Gene with a x5660 and it works fine.
Just update the BIOS to the newest one.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Just in passing; don't forget, everyone, that a reseat can often fix inexplicable problems







I have to keep turning my machine on its front to pick up a weak-ass wifi signal and something (I think an eSATA cable, or my PCIE extender) was a smidgen lose. Having fixed that my bizarre BSODs have pushed off and I dropped core and uncore volts @stable too!

To be honest, that delay @boot and the necessity to thump it occasionally should have warned me!

A bit of a tight fit, especially the smooshed SATA cables. There's 3HDD's hiding in the 5.25 bays.



...the pizza box is helping, just a couple of dB and C


----------



## WoKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Yes, it does. See KM's known-to-work X58 MB list: http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9


Thanks so much


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Yah, I've been waiting for next gen GPUs.


Same here, ok not really. I plan on keeping my Fury X throughout 2016 well into 2017, unless I find someone to sell it to. I am keeping my eye on the latest cards from the big two.

There are new *DirectX 12 benchmarks* out though:

http://www.nordichardware.se/images/labswedish/artiklar/Grafik/Ashes_prestandaanalys/largethumbnails/ashes_1080p.png

DX11 vs DX12 - 1080p
http://www.nordichardware.se/images/labswedish/artiklar/Grafik/Ashes_prestandaanalys/largethumbnails/ashes_1080p_dx11_vs_dx12.png

http://www.nordichardware.se/images/labswedish/artiklar/Grafik/Ashes_prestandaanalys/largethumbnails/ashes_2160.png

DX11 vs DX12 4K
http://www.nordichardware.se/images/labswedish/artiklar/Grafik/Ashes_prestandaanalys/largethumbnails/ashes_2160_dx11_vs_dx12_2.png

@1080p -DX11 to DX12- Fury X gets a crazy 113.60% Frame Rate increase!
@4K -DX11 to DX12- Fury X gets a crazy 59.80% Frame Rate increase.

Nvidia only got a roughly a 3% increase.

Yeah it's definitely time to leave DX11 and move onto DX12 which allows more data to be processed quicker. Nvidia hardware is built around DX11 serial type of data delivery for sure. AMD hardware is better tasked for concurrent data throughput. Now I see why Nvidia was basically trying to stay away from async shaders in their "do's and don't" blog\PDF write up and the benchmarks.

DX12\Vulkan is needed for the future advancement of PC gaming and VR. AMD is still making great process with the restrictive DX11 API though in the Hitman Beta DX11 [Hitman will be DX12 when it releases]

*GTX 970 vs R9 390 FPS Test - DX11*


----------



## Xevi

*Xeon x5675 @ 5719.97 MHz 1.79V*
http://valid.x86.fr/msmbgg


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> *Xeon x5675 @ 5719.97 MHz 1.79V*
> http://valid.x86.fr/msmbgg


1.8 volts lol, surprised it hasn't gone supernova.

That's one heck of an oc though.


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ Same here, I can't believe it's hasn't blown yet, but that's a super high clock. 1Core 1Thread. I don't have the guts to go near 1.5vCore with my X5660. 5.4Ghz near death experience was enough for me. That GPU is hitting 100C with the overclock. The CPU is hitting 100c as well. Dang







.

Congrats on the high OCs.


----------



## MicroCat

Wow! 5.7Ghz! That's crazy. Not sure I'd want 1.8V 24/7 tho with only 1 thread.







But, wow! Congrats!

My 5660 took 1.62V without a whimper back when I was benching for cheap thrills with dyslectic fingers in the BIOS. But my 5675 hasn't had more than 1.37 peak (using offset), since it's in a working system and 4.6Ghz (turbo) is good enough.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The usual epic work, @Xevi.


----------



## media

Lol awesome OC my friend xD

Estas boig xD un recadet del teu amic [email protected]


----------



## DR4G00N

Nice oc @Xevi!







I got a very nice one myself.

X5687 @ 6003.15MHz 1.82V
http://valid.x86.fr/025um0




Spoiler: Pics




^ T1 is the temp of the base of the pot and T2 is the temp of the alcohol inside.







Spoiler: Benchmarks


----------



## Xevi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Nice oc @Xevi!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got a very nice one myself.
> 
> X5687 @ 6003.15MHz 1.82V
> http://valid.x86.fr/025um0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^ T1 is the temp of the base of the pot and T2 is the temp of the alcohol inside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Benchmarks


Congratulations!

¿You use single channel 2:8 Cas9?









I have three motherboards X58A-OC

1# bclkwall 221








2# bclkwall 213








3# bclkwall ¿?


















My processors next








Xeon W3680
Xeon W3690
Xeon X5687


Spoiler: Pics Single Phase














































































.
.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xevi*
> 
> Congratulations!
> 
> ¿You use single channel 2:8 Cas9?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have three motherboards X58A-OC
> 
> 1# bclkwall 221
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2# bclkwall 213
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3# bclkwall ¿?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My processors next
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xeon W3680
> Xeon W3690
> Xeon X5687


Thanks!
The IMC on this X5687 isn't very good so I just leave the ram & uncore low because it's not worth the hassle to turn them up for the minor score boost. It can only do 3.8GHz Uncore @ 1.5V VTT.
My X5650 has a much better IMC, 4.2GHz Uncore @ 1.5V VTT w/ 12GB's 2220MHz 8-10-10-24 1.85V, but is limited by it's low multi.

My board does 227 BCLK with single channel & 222 BCLK with triple.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

I posted this message on the other thread and I try it here as well...:
I Just received my Xeon 5670. Which started nicely but after a restart the cpu led from the R3E lit up and doesn't shut down.
I tried rebooting and reseting the bios. I unplugged all ram and reset everything again.
I put back the i7 950 and it boots. I think the cpu is dead but I didn't do any OC. Is there any tips i should try?

I tried a bios reset, one RAM only then another one then 2...removing the VGA, removing all HDD, the BIOS is up to date (1502).

What more should I tried ?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Did you reset the CMOS after pulling the 950? Then, assuming the 5670 boots again, you should "Load Optimized Defaults" and reboot in the BIOS to check critical voltages and timings before trying to get to the OS.

Did you check the voltages?


----------



## Beufesamiteur

It booted even before resetting the bios option. It says "new CPU installed press F1 to enter setups or F2 to continue"
I press F1 and then "Load Optimized Defaults" before going to windows. The voltage where in auto and it indicated 0.992v so I think it was ok.
The RAM were back to DDR-1066 (1600Mhz normaly). I could launch a 3D mark till the end with a nice score and very low temperatures. (around 40°c with a H80i). I tried rebooting to set the RAM back to 1600Mhz 1.5v but the screen remains black and the CPU LED was lit on.

That's frustrating.


----------



## gofasterstripes

The easiest way to test is with another machine that you know is good with that chip. Maybe best set the chip aside and revert to a known-good configuration for now, to avoid potential damage.

Incorrect QPI/Uncore or CPU PLL voltages would be the easiest ways to break it.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

I will try with the CPU I used on my work station. It's running with a W3680. It should work...
Even with the auto setting for the QPI/Uncore or CPU PLL voltages it could put incorrect values?


----------



## gofasterstripes

It's unlikely.

What I suggest if you check as-soon as you boot, and also after you load optimized defaults [assuming your board shows you the setting you have selected, before you reboot].

With so little information to go on I am just keen to eliminate the possibilities. For the 5650* QPI/Uncore must also be within 0.5v of RAM, better less [IE 1.2v QPI with 1.5v RAM is good]

Just to be on the safe side. Meanwhile you could also check if the seller would accept a return if you find the chip to be faulty...

Bon chance.

*and maybe the 3680, you'll have to go look it up.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've been messing around with my benchmarking program and the algorithms. That way I can continue to bring the best results so people know what to expect from the X58 platform and the GPU I benchmark. Currently it's the Fury X since that the only card I have on hand at the moment. I've been trying to get rid of bad data or as I call it "rotten" data during benchmarking. I won't go to deep detail. I've noticed that the minimum FPS [FPS min] is pointless since it can change depending on a lot of different factors.

For instance when the game is loading, saving. sending data\retrieving data or whatever it's doing can cause inaccurate results. I've tested this with the same games and different games. I got different results every time during loading or checkpoint sections. Very misleading results that I have experienced for years. Pointless data. This is the reason I created the "FPS Min Caliber ™" category last year. It will give a better representation of the rig setup + GPU based on "good" actual data. There's a lot of other things I've done to get accurate results as well.

I was playing Ryse: Son of Rome tonight at 4K. Instead of using my high 4.8Ghz overclock that usually run for benchmarks, I decided to run my 24/7 daily 4Ghz + DDR3-1400Mhz [9-9-9-24-1T]. I normally play games at 4Ghz, but I never benchmark at 4Ghz. I ran Ryse: Son of Rome at it's max settings @ 4K. The gameplay was great and the game is beautiful. That CryEngine 3 is gorgeous. I'm using the Crimson 16.1 Drivers.










*Ryse: Son of Rome [100% Maxed] - 4K*
AMD R9 Fury X @ Stock Settings [Crimson 16.1 Drivers]
[email protected]
RAM: DDR3-1400Mhz [9-9-9-24-1T]
Gameplay Duration: 25 minutes
*FPS Avg: 33.4fps*
FPS Max: 47.4fps
*FPS Min Caliber ™: 24.3fps*
*Frame time Avg: 29.9ms*

*Fury X Info:*
GPU Temp Avg: 41.5c
GPU Temp Max: 42c
GPU Temp Min: 34c

*CPU info:*
CPU Temp Avg: 38.5c
CPU Temp Max: 46c
CPU Temp Min: 36c
CPU Usage Avg: 17.77%
CPU Usage Max: 30.60%

The level I played was Chapter 4. Gorgeous graphics and plenty of physics during the levels. My benchmark program overhead isabout a 3% - 5% so it's very minor. 4Ghz + lower clocked RAM did pretty good with a demanding game. No micro-stutter, no screen tearing and button input was great. The Frame Time was smooth and consistent. I'll probably run the benchmark again some other time with Fury X overclocked to see how many FPS I can pick up. Anyways the stock Fury X does well @ 4K. The GPU temps were great as usual and the CPU temps were as expected.










Notice that I did not add the FPS min in the results above. If you read the paragraph above you'll know why I left that stat out. It's not consistent data. There's other inconsistent data that has to be weeded out. The first several dips you see in the chart are loading\saving\checkpoint areas. The actually FPS Min should be approx. 19fps-20fps which is literally 0.1%....meaning you'll nearly NEVER see the frame rate this low. The *FPS Min Caliber ™*: 24.3fps can be thought of as the 0.9% or 1%. It's not random data either, it's actual data that can be proven. I'm focusing more on data that matters and excluding info that is not consistent or needed. I normally would clean up the chart, but I posted the actual RAW data. I'm still doing a lot of testing and re-programming.

It's difficult, but my program isn't perfect just yet. I'm still working with it. So far so good. For instance if 115fps pops up [and it has], I know that info is incorrect. No GPU is putting out 100+fps @ 4K in this game 100% maxed out. With that being said Ryse: Son of Rome needs to be in every benchmark in my opinion. It's a demanding game and pretty fun.


----------



## Qiko

Hi,

So i am thinking about switching to a xeon for my R3F board. I currently running a 930 @ 4Ghz but now looking at the x5675 for the 25 multiplier and 6 core.

But I noticed some of the Chips are Labeled "A" or "B"

ex. 3129*B*680 or 3045*A*098

What is the difference between the letters? Both clock the same? One worst than the other?

Thanks!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Qiko*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> So i am thinking about switching to a xeon for my R3F board. I currently running a 930 @ 4Ghz but now looking at the x5675 for the 25 multiplier and 6 core.
> 
> But I noticed some of the Chips are Labeled "A" or "B"
> 
> ex. 3129*B*680 or 3045*A*098
> 
> What is the difference between the letters? Both clock the same? One worst than the other?
> 
> Thanks!


B batch and A batch.

Back when the 980x came out, I noticed the B batch typically overclocked better than an A batch. For the Xeons, no idea. I just bought an x5670 without even considering it. Mine is a an A batch. have it @ 4.2Ghz, 1.325v

Uncore, 3.6GHz VTT 1.3v

Ram @2000Mhz 9,10,9,27 1T 1.6v.

All under water. Maybe I'll look for a B batch next!


----------



## alancsalt

Batch Codes

The lot code identifier and Intel year and workweek the finished product was manufactured can be viewed by referencing the following FPO# guide:

(x)Test Site, (x)Year, (xx)Workweek, (xx)Lot Code Identifier (xx)Serialisation Code

1st letter or digit = Test Site
0 = San Jose, Costa Rica
1 = Cavite, Philippines
3 = .............., Costa Rica
6 = Chandler, Arizona
7 = .........., Philippines
8 = Leixlip, Ireland
9 = Penang, Malaysia
L = ............, Malaysia
Q = ..........., Malaysia
R = Manila, Philippines
Y = Leixlip, Ireland

2nd digit = Year of production
8 = 2008
9 = 2009
0 = 2010

3rd & 4th digits = Workweek

5th - 6th digits= Lot Code Identifier

7th - 8th digits = Serialisation Code

Source: http://www.intel.com/design/support/...60_general.htm Used since the early 1990's i960 RISC-based microprocessor.

Whatever a lot code is?


----------



## Qiko

wow, didn't know those digits had meaning. Good to know about the year of production too.


----------



## tbob22

Of the 7 x5670's that I've had, the B batches seem to overclock better. All the A's seem to get hotter and need more voltage. Although four of those were A batches, two were B, and one was F.

The F batch maxed at 4ghz 1.35v and hit 80-85c+
The A batches would max out 4.1-4.2ghz at 1.35v and maxed at around 75-80c.
My primary B batch x5670 would hit 4.5ghz at 1.35v and max at 71c, the other 4.35ghz at 1.35v and maxed at around 74c.

The temps were after 10h+ of smallftts _(other than the F because after 10min it hit that and I stopped the test)._


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have results that agree with this hypothesis.

Guess which one I'm using


----------



## Qiko

thx! B batch ordered. Will give it a try.


----------



## autoshot

Hey guys!

This might be a little off-topic but I don't know where else to ask so there it is: *has anyone of you guys ever tried (or actually succeeded) to boot their X58 rig from a Samsung 950 Pro SSD using one of those M.2-PCIe-Adapters?*
I'm asking because in theory it should be possible thanks to the 950s option rom, but then again the BIOS of those X58 boards definitely doesn't support NVMe. Also, this would eliminate the only remaining bottleneck of my computer since I really don't like those SATA III PCIe expansion cards (they usually cause more trouble than they yield benefits).


----------



## SmOgER

Hey,

so if I assume correctly, GA-EX58-UD3R does in fact support Xeons like X5660 or E5540 despite them not being listen in compatibility list, is that correct?

If so, do I need to inject the bios microcodes first like it is the case with LGA771 CPUs on LGA775 boards or will it work straight away?

Thanks.

EDIT: Baahh, probably wrong thread.
Reposted to X58 Xeon Club.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I used to use a Rev 1.6 with a 5660. Worked fine with the latest BIOS. Voltages were a little higher IRL than in the BIOS though, watch your uncore volts.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> Hey guys!
> 
> This might be a little off-topic but I don't know where else to ask so there it is: *has anyone of you guys ever tried (or actually succeeded) to boot their X58 rig from a Samsung 950 Pro SSD using one of those M.2-PCIe-Adapters?*
> I'm asking because in theory it should be possible thanks to the 950s option rom, but then again the BIOS of those X58 boards definitely doesn't support NVMe. Also, this would eliminate the only remaining bottleneck of my computer since I really don't like those SATA III PCIe expansion cards (they usually cause more trouble than they yield benefits).


Funny you should ask, since i have been doing some research of this the latest days.

As far as I understand you are unable to use any pcie m.2 ssd which uses NVMe.
However the latest from samsung comes in two variants, one NVMe and one ACHI, now the latter one our board should support. But i don't think we will be able to boot from it!

Now i myself bought an Kingston hyperx predator 240gb, and this one should work on my p6tdeluxe, as it has the boot code on the SSD.

I have seen some people that has trouble with this SSD too though, but that's because it doesn't get initialised fast enough, so when the please enter correct boot device, you just press enter some times, and it would boot.

Now some are saying this isn't a problem, and some are having it. So i guess it's the matter of try and fail









When i get mine, i will try this myself though!


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> So i guess it's the matter of try and fail


I would so much like to experiment with a 950 pro on my P6T Deluxe just out of curiosity, but then again I neither have the time nor am I willing to spend the money to do so









EDIT

Turns out someone already did it AND IT WORKED







In this case I'm gonna wait for the next offer and buy one of those for sure


----------



## utking

I just installed my kingston hyperx redator. But it was a big letdown









Booting from it on my p6tdeluxe was no problem, and installing windows was blazing fast.

But when trying to bench with AS SSD, i only get 370MB/s write, and 365 MB/s read sequential. :/

Any ideas what is going on?


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> I just installed my kingston hyperx redator. But it was a big letdown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Booting from it on my p6tdeluxe was no problem, and installing windows was blazing fast.
> 
> But when trying to bench with AS SSD, i only get 370MB/s write, and 365 MB/s read sequential. :/
> 
> Any ideas what is going on?


Maybe you will need to do this


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> I just installed my kingston hyperx redator. But it was a big letdown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Booting from it on my p6tdeluxe was no problem, and installing windows was blazing fast.
> 
> But when trying to bench with AS SSD, i only get 370MB/s write, and 365 MB/s read sequential. :/
> 
> Any ideas what is going on?


Which PCIe slow did you install it on and what other PCIe devices are you running?


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> Maybe you will need to do this


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Which PCIe slow did you install it on and what other PCIe devices are you running?


Ahh i figured it all out, lol i couldn't remember i crossflashed my p6tdeluxe to an px58d some years ago, this board only has a pcie x1 on top, while the p6tdeluxe has an x4.

By crossflashing i put the x4 slot to x1 mode, lol







So now i have to figure out if i want to loose the offset voltage option, or put the ssd between two hot GPU's and move my PSU to the top. phew, this is going to be a lot of work!


----------



## gatorkea

Does anyone know how an x5670 oc to about 4800mhz would fare against a 4790k for gaming? Particularly games that are cpu heavy. I have an x5670 and 980 ti , and I'm worried about bottlenecks and games that require a lot of cpu power , particularly games that use less than 4 cores.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gatorkea*
> 
> Does anyone know how an x5670 oc to about 4800mhz would fare against a 4790k for gaming? Particularly games that are cpu heavy. I have an x5670 and 980 ti , and I'm worried about bottlenecks and games that require a lot of cpu power , particularly games that use less than 4 cores.


Even at that speed you won't come close to the the single threaded performance of a 4790k, it'd probably need 5.5ghz or more.

I highly doubt there will be a CPU bottleneck at those speeds in any newer game, especially at higher resolutions. Games are becoming better at using multiple threads, so single threaded performance isn't as important as it was a few years ago.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Even at that speed you won't come close to the the single threaded performance of a 4790k, it'd probably need 5.5ghz or more.
> 
> I highly doubt there will be a CPU bottleneck at those speeds in any newer game, especially at higher resolutions. Games are becoming better at using multiple threads, so single threaded performance isn't as important as it was a few years ago.


X5670 @ 4.8Ghz Single Threaded Cinebench R10 = *7000*
4770K stock ST Cinebench R10 = *7718*

I think that's still more than enough, considering the likes of:

Phenom FX-9590 220W ST Cinebench R10 = *4905*


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gatorkea*
> 
> Does anyone know how an x5670 oc to about 4800mhz would fare against a 4790k for gaming? Particularly games that are cpu heavy. I have an x5670 and 980 ti , and I'm worried about bottlenecks and games that require a lot of cpu power , particularly games that use less than 4 cores.


My X5670 is @ 4.19GHz and it handles my two 780 Ti's just fine. It will bottleneck them a little but it's already running @ >120fps when that occurs so it doesn't really matter to me.


----------



## utking

I can confirm that the Samsung 950 pro works with p6tdeluxe too! It shows up under device manager as NVMe Samsung SSD 950.
Installing was a breeze, just put it into one of the pcie slots, enabled it as boot device in BIOS, and inserted windows 10 on a USB drive.

It took 11 minutes to install and get me to the desktop, lol this thing is fast!!









This is coupled with an x5660 @4.6ghz, 3x8GB DDR3 ram @7,8,8 1.52V and 2x 7950 in crossfire.
Benchmarks up later!


----------



## Sburms015

You just made my budget for upgrades shoot up lol!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> I can confirm that the Samsung 950 pro works with p6tdeluxe too! It shows up under device manager as NVMe Samsung SSD 950.
> Installing was a breeze, just put it into one of the pcie slots, enabled it as boot device in BIOS, and inserted windows 10 on a USB drive.
> 
> It took 11 minutes to install and get me to the desktop, lol this thing is fast!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is coupled with an x5660 @4.6ghz, 3x8GB DDR3 ram @7,8,8 1.52V and 2x 7950 in crossfire.
> Benchmarks up later!


Wow! Keep us posted. I am pushing EVGA to support NVMe on their EVGA X58 boards


----------



## utking

This was sort of the first run in Crystaldiskmark, it seems to be capped around 1600MB/s which is actually fine by me, seeing this motherboard doesn't have sata 3, lol









Everything is so fast, it's insane! Not a single problem when i tried to install windows or boot, it just worked right out of the box!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> 
> 
> This was sort of the first run in Crystaldiskmark, it seems to be capped around 1600MB/s which is actually fine by me, seeing this motherboard doesn't have sata 3, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything is so fast, it's insane! Not a single problem when i tried to install windows or boot, it just worked right out of the box!


That's fantastic! Make sure your windows power option is set to High Performance when testing.

Is there an option to turn on Rapid Mode? I've done that with both my rigs and the sequential read and write are both well into the 3000Mb realm, almost 100,000 IOPS too.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> I can confirm that the Samsung 950 pro works with p6tdeluxe too! It shows up under device manager as NVMe Samsung SSD 950.
> Installing was a breeze, just put it into one of the pcie slots, enabled it as boot device in BIOS, and inserted windows 10 on a USB drive.
> 
> It took 11 minutes to install and get me to the desktop, lol this thing is fast!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is coupled with an x5660 @4.6ghz, 3x8GB DDR3 ram @7,8,8 1.52V and 2x 7950 in crossfire.
> Benchmarks up later!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow! Keep us posted. I am pushing EVGA to support NVMe on their EVGA X58 boards
Click to expand...

It should work oob.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> It should work oob.


AFAIK not as a BOOT drive, unless you can confirm otherwise


----------



## antivir

Hi Guys,

I need your help with an X5660. I recently switched to this beast from an i7 920 (C0)







, with the following setup:

- Gigabyte EX58-UD5 rev. 1.0
- Xeon 5660
- 3x4 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 1866 Mhz DDR3
- Noctua NH-D14

I managed to make it relatively stable with these settings:

Multi: 22
BCLK: 191
QPI: 3438
Uncore: 3056
Memory: 1528

Voltages:
LLC: Enabled
vCore: 1.3975
QPI: 1.34
Memory: 1.64
PLL: 1.8

Max. temps are 61 degrees after 2 passes of Intel Burn Test. I'll give it more tomorrow, I hadn't had time for it yet.

The problem is, under load, the vCore reported by both CPU-Z and HWinfo is at max. 1.36 (mostly 1.344), which is a lot of drop from the 1.3975 I set in BIOS.

When I started my OC, as a quick test, I set BCLK at 200, memory at 1600, Uncore at 3200, QPI voltage at 1.32 and did a 2-step IBT. The Vcore voltage needed was around 1.36-1.37 as reported by CPU-Z.

Questions:

1. Should I disable LLC? People say yes.

2. Given my great vdroop, can I set the vCore in the BIOS to, say, around 1.41, so it'll drop to 3.8 max. in Windows under load? Will it be safe? I want to reach 200 BCLK.

I'd really like to get as much out of this baby as I can, but I think this huge v-Drop is killing my OC. I want these settings 24/7, for the next 3 years









Any help is greatly appreciated







.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> That's fantastic! Make sure your windows power option is set to High Performance when testing.
> 
> Is there an option to turn on Rapid Mode? I've done that with both my rigs and the sequential read and write are both well into the 3000Mb realm, almost 100,000 IOPS too.


Already set it to High!









No Rapid mode doesn't work with these disks yet, but that's something all the 950 pro struggles with.

Remember, rapid mode only caches to ram, so the ssd itself isn't getting any faster!

Oh, also i use primocache myself instead of rapid mode, i've set up a raw partition at 50GB on the 950 which is cached to from my 7200rpm disk with steam. Works awesome!









This also caches to ram btw, 2gb of ram allocated to each drive!


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> I need your help with an X5660. I recently switched to this beast from an i7 920 (C0)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , with the following setup:
> 
> - Gigabyte EX58-UD5 rev. 1.0
> - Xeon 5660
> - 3x4 GB Kingston HyperX Fury 1866 Mhz DDR3
> - Noctua NH-D14
> 
> I managed to make it relatively stable with these settings:
> 
> Multi: 22
> BCLK: 191
> QPI: 3438
> Uncore: 3056
> Memory: 1528
> 
> Voltages:
> LLC: Enabled
> vCore: 1.3975
> QPI: 1.34
> Memory: 1.64
> PLL: 1.8
> 
> Max. temps are 61 degrees after 2 passes of Intel Burn Test. I'll give it more tomorrow, I hadn't had time for it yet.
> 
> The problem is, under load, the vCore reported by both CPU-Z and HWinfo is at max. 1.36 (mostly 1.344), which is a lot of drop from the 1.3975 I set in BIOS.
> 
> When I started my OC, as a quick test, I set BCLK at 200, memory at 1600, Uncore at 3200, QPI voltage at 1.32 and did a 2-step IBT. The Vcore voltage needed was around 1.36-1.37 as reported by CPU-Z.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. Should I disable LLC? People say yes.
> 
> 2. Given my great vdroop, can I set the vCore in the BIOS to, say, around 1.41, so it'll drop to 3.8 max. in Windows under load? Will it be safe? I want to reach 200 BCLK.
> 
> I'd really like to get as much out of this baby as I can, but I think this huge v-Drop is killing my OC. I want these settings 24/7, for the next 3 years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any help is greatly appreciated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Disable LCC!







Everything else seems spot on!







It's a beast of an CPU you got there, i love mine myself^^


----------



## OCmember

@antivir

Here is a good review of the UD5. In the small box select "Voltage Read Points for UD5.." There you'll be able to see where to use a voltage multi meter and at what places to use the probes. Be careful not to complete the circuit with two hot points.

In my experience keeping the IOH and the QPI volts the same seemed to help stabilize things. I picked up that tip from this thread.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Already set it to High!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Rapid mode doesn't work with these disks yet, but that's something all the 950 pro struggles with.
> 
> Remember, rapid mode only caches to ram, so the ssd itself isn't getting any faster!
> 
> Oh, also i use primocache myself instead of rapid mode, i've set up a raw partition at 50GB on the 950 which is cached to from my 7200rpm disk with steam. Works awesome!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This also caches to ram btw, 2gb of ram allocated to each drive!


that's alot of winks in that post there buddy, what's goin on with that ? lol jk

yeah I understand rapid mode caches to ram







lol

I hope I can get an Intel NVMe drive to boot on my EVGA board.


----------



## antivir

@utking @OCmember

Thanks for the quick replies guys, will give it a try tomorrow, it's kinda late here.

All in all this chip is really amazing, it took me about 1 hour of tinkering to get to these values. Will let you know tomorrow where did I ended up with.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> @utking @OCmember
> 
> Thanks for the quick replies guys, will give it a try tomorrow, it's kinda late here.
> 
> All in all this chip is really amazing, it took me about 1 hour of tinkering to get to these values. Will let you know tomorrow where did I ended up with.


Sounds good. Keep us posted


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> that's alot of winks in that post there buddy, what's goin on with that ? lol jk
> 
> yeah I understand rapid mode caches to ram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol
> 
> I hope I can get an Intel NVMe drive to boot on my EVGA board.


haha, sorry it's just my way to write i guess









Have you tried it on your EVGA board? i was very suprised that it worked on mine board as i haven't found any mention of NVMe support anywhere.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> that's alot of winks in that post there buddy, what's goin on with that ? lol jk
> 
> yeah I understand rapid mode caches to ram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol
> 
> I hope I can get an Intel NVMe drive to boot on my EVGA board.
> 
> 
> 
> haha, sorry it's just my way to write i guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you tried it on your EVGA board? i was very suprised that it worked on mine board as i haven't found any mention of NVMe support anywhere.
Click to expand...

The OROM (firmware) in the Samsung 950 Pro most likely support legacy BIOS. I have read one or two success story but the motherboard have UEFI. Yours first one I read working on legacy BIOS.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> haha, sorry it's just my way to write i guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you tried it on your EVGA board? i was very suprised that it worked on mine board as i haven't found any mention of NVMe support anywhere.


No. I will when I get an Intel NVMe drive. What you are seeing, or not seeing, is that It's out of the company support state and hasn't been tested, I assume. I can't remember if anyone on the EVGA forum has an NVMe drive as a boot drive on their X58 system. I am wondering if my boot options will allow one. I don't see why not


----------



## Kana-Maru

*Incoming:*


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> No. I will when I get an Intel NVMe drive. What you are seeing, or not seeing, is that It's out of the company support state and hasn't been tested, I assume. I can't remember if anyone on the EVGA forum has an NVMe drive as a boot drive on their X58 system. I am wondering if my boot options will allow one. I don't see why not


Mine showed up as an IDE drive in bios. but it booted straight on!

And with my overclocked x5660 and ram i think this build will last a long time!

The only thing i don't like is the thermal throttling. But i can live with that







I run it at BCLK of 194 now @ 1.35v temperature is around 50-65c under moderate/heavy load


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Mine showed up as an IDE drive in bios. but it booted straight on!
> 
> And with my overclocked x5660 and ram i think this build will last a long time!
> 
> The only thing i don't like is the thermal throttling. But i can live with that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I run it at BCLK of 194 now @ 1.35v temperature is around 50-65c under moderate/heavy load


Overclocking these things is so much fun


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Overclocking these things is so much fun


I agree.









I feel bored with my x79 now.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Mine showed up as an IDE drive in bios. but it booted straight on!
> 
> And with my overclocked x5660 and ram i think this build will last a long time!
> 
> The only thing i don't like is the thermal throttling. But i can live with that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I run it at BCLK of 194 now @ 1.35v temperature is around 50-65c under moderate/heavy load


If you don't like thermal throttling then turn it off. Are you missing the feature to disable it or something?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Overclocking these things is so much fun


From 2013 to 2015 I think I'm all overclocked out.

_Click Me_


I almost want to get another CPU and overclock it. I've tapped out my i7-960 @ 4.2Ghz, L5639 @ 4.5Ghz and now my X5660 @ 5.4Ghz. I never go above 4.8Ghz though. I completely changed my OC methodology from brainless simple cranking voltages and settings, to following Intel standards and guidelines. So far so good and hitting 4.6Ghz - 4.8Ghz was a breeze with my X5660.

I have a ton of Hitman DX12 info coming. I was able to get actual frame time and frame rate from game without using the built in benchmark tool. At 4K the game is so smooth. No micro stutter or screen tearing. I've been looking at benchmarks and a R9 390 vs a much higher overclocked 980 Ti is only losing by 7fps. My goodness the $650 - 980 Ti is nearly matching a $320 - R9 390....not the 390X, but the R9 390.


----------



## arnavvr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> If you don't like thermal throttling then turn it off. Are you missing the feature to disable it or something?
> From 2013 to 2015 I think I'm all overclocked out.
> 
> _Click Me_
> 
> 
> I almost want to get another CPU and overclock it. I've tapped out my i7-960 @ 4.2Ghz, L5639 @ 4.5Ghz and now my X5660 @ 5.4Ghz. I never go above 4.8Ghz though. I completely changed my OC methodology from brainless simple cranking voltages and settings, to following Intel standards and guidelines. So far so good and hitting 4.6Ghz - 4.8Ghz was a breeze with my X5660.
> 
> I have a ton of Hitman DX12 info coming. I was able to get actual frame time and frame rate from game without using the built in benchmark tool. At 4K the game is so smooth. No micro stutter or screen tearing. I've been looking at benchmarks and a R9 390 vs a much higher overclocked 980 Ti is only losing by 7fps. My goodness the $650 - 980 Ti is nearly matching a $320 - R9 390....not the 390X, but the R9 390.


Get a 980 or 990X if you really want to crank the clock speed. That chip should sell well if you even decide to.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey, Kana, great new Hitman writeup on your website


----------



## antivir

Just a quick update - I had to stop at a final 4.2Ghz (183 BCLK) for my x5660 as my vCore is high already - 1.375v (in Windows a max. of 1.328v reported by Cpu-z). It's either my x58 board or I got a power hungry chip.

But no real complaints, for 24/7 it's still great compared to my old i7 920







. I guess it'll last me a few more years







.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yo, @antivir Out of interest, What voltage do you need for 200*20 with Uncore to closest frequency?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey, Kana, great new Hitman writeup on your website


Thanks man. I'm going to be performing more in-game benchmarks with DX12.

For those who didn't see my post in the other topic:

*Hitman DirectX 12 X58 + Fury X Benchmarks*

Check out my results here:
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks

Earlier this morning I was gaming at 7860x2160! Believe it or not, the game was actually playable.

http://s26.postimg.org/xtiy2ly93/Hitman_Kana_Maru_7680x2160_small.jpg


----------



## antivir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yo, @antivir Out of interest, What voltage do you need for 200*20 with Uncore to closest frequency?


My guess, it would be around 1.42, maybe 1.43 in BIOS, due to the huge vDrop CPU-Z and HWM are both reporting in Windows. But I'm not sure this would be OK for 24/7.

I'm OK-ish with the current OC, although I hoped for at least a 191 BCLK







.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@antivirI found 200*20 really easy and stable on both my Gigabyte boards. Need to drop QPI to 7200 though.

You could try these...





[This is setting from the stickers on the RAM and Auto for everything else. YMMV.]



You may need to adjust your Core and Uncore volts a little, start with a value you know will work from previous testing.

Also, with a settings "1.375v (in Windows a max. of 1.328v reported by Cpu-z)" can you list frequencies, BIOS voltage, Windows IDLE and LOADED [IBT Max] voltages? I have found a "weird trick" with these boards....


----------



## antivir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @antivirI found 200*20 really easy and stable on both my Gigabyte boards. Need to drop QPI to 7200 though.
> 
> You could try these...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [This is setting from the stickers on the RAM and Auto for everything else. YMMV.]
> 
> 
> 
> You may need to adjust your Core and Uncore volts a little, start with a value you know will work from previous testing.
> 
> Also, with a settings "1.375v (in Windows a max. of 1.328v reported by Cpu-z)" can you list frequencies, BIOS voltage, Windows IDLE and LOADED [IBT Max] voltages? I have found a "weird trick" with these boards....


WOW, thanks for the screenshots. My settings are as follows:

Multi - x21 (speedstep enabled, goes up to 23)
QPI - Auto (x36)
QPI LInk - 3293
Uncore Ratio - x14
Uncore Freq. - 2928
BCLK - 183
XMP - disabled
Memory Multi. - x8
Memory Freq. - 1464

Voltages
LLC - Disabled
VCore - 1.375
QPI - 1.298
Memory - 1.56

Windows voltages:

VCore
- Min. 1.312
- Max. 1.328


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @antivirI found 200*20 really easy and stable on both my Gigabyte boards. Need to drop QPI to 7200 though.
> 
> You could try these...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [This is setting from the stickers on the RAM and Auto for everything else. YMMV.]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You may need to adjust your Core and Uncore volts a little, start with a value you know will work from previous testing.
> 
> Also, with a settings "1.375v (in Windows a max. of 1.328v reported by Cpu-z)" can you list frequencies, BIOS voltage, Windows IDLE and LOADED [IBT Max] voltages? I have found a "weird trick" with these boards....


Which gigabyte broad you have?
You wont mind if I "steal" your setting for my broad?


----------



## gofasterstripes

UD3R V1.6 and UD7 V2 have both been similar. I think I uae 1.255v QPI now, and you could try QPI PLL and IOH both at 1.2v, but mine didn't need it and I'm cautious with the voltage, especially on QPI...

Feel free to try it, or a variation.


----------



## antivir

@gofasterstripes

Thanks for the tips man, I managed a 4.2 Ghz with the following settings:

Multi - 20
BCLK - 210
QPI - x36
Uncore - x16
Memory - x8

*Frequencies*

CPU - 4.200 Mhz
QPI - 7560
Uncore - 2940
Memory - 1680

*Voltages*
vCore - 1.35
QPI - 1.335
Memory - 1.5

I tried for 4.4 Ghz but it needed 1.4v vCore in BIOS and it isn't worth it in my opinion. I'm pretty happy as it is, thanks again for the help







.


----------



## antivir

Ran a Cinebench test out of curiousity, it's nothing spectacular


----------



## gofasterstripes

Looking good, dude. Thats a lot of rendering power!

Now see if you can drop CPU PLL to 1.4. A tempreture comparison might be interesting too, if you can be bothered.


----------



## antivir

I'll do a test tomorrow afternoon - have to work as well







. As for the temps, they are in the low. 60-s in IBT from what I remember (22 degrees room temp). Will see after a new test if PLL will affect temps. and / if it's stable.


----------



## antivir

OK, got some time while making dinner, so made a quick temp. test with my settings as mentioned and PLL at 1.8:



Will try to PLL as requested and will get back with a result tomorrow.


----------



## utking

Hi again guys! Been testing the 950 over the last days, and it truly is awesome! A little shame i'm capped @~1700MB/s but who am i to complain









Anyways, what do you guys think of my x5660 Overclock, should i keep pushing it, or be satisfied with it?

Motherboard is p6tdeluxe.
I'm running bclk at 192,
x24 multiplier with turbo
CPU Vcore is :1.336
CPU Pll is 1.8v, CPU VTT i have no idea, as it's on auto :/

Chip has been rock stable the last week now with heavy and intense gaming, no lockups or anything.
temps are great, never going over 55c unless i burn it with an stress test.

Anything else i can tweak?









Oh, and I have something called VMON in HWinfo64, it's at 1.350 is this the cpu vtt?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Hi again guys! Been testing the 950 over the last days, and it truly is awesome! A little shame i'm capped @~1700MB/s but who am i to complain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, what do you guys think of my x5660 Overclock, should i keep pushing it, or be satisfied with it?
> 
> Motherboard is p6tdeluxe.
> I'm running bclk at 192,
> x24 multiplier with turbo
> CPU Vcore is :1.336
> CPU Pll is 1.8v, *CPU VTT i have no idea, as it's on auto* :/
> 
> Chip has been rock stable the last week now with heavy and intense gaming, no lockups or anything.
> temps are great, never going over 55c unless i burn it with an stress test.
> 
> Anything else i can tweak?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and I have something called VMON in HWinfo64, it's at 1.350 is this the cpu vtt?


Ooo. I would not leave or have that on Auto.


----------



## srialmaster

On the ASUS motherboards the vTT is know as the QPI/DRAM Core voltage.


----------



## srialmaster

Has anyone had any luck running a Xeon processor on an ASUS Rampage III Formula? I am looking to buy a Xeon from ebay to pop in mine to upgrade from my i7-970. I see the X5690 CPU running a little more than the price of the i7-990x and was wondering how that would work.

Current Setup:
CPU: Intel i7-970
Motherboard: ASUS Rampage III Formula
Graphics: 2x EVGA Geforce GTX680s
RAM: Crucial Vengeance 2133MHz Red
Hard Drive: Kingston HyperX 480GB PCIE
Cooling: Corsair H100
OS: Windows 7x64 Ultimate
Power: EVGA 220-P2-1000-XR
Case: Cooler Master HAF Stacker 935


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Has anyone had any luck running a Xeon processor on an ASUS Rampage III Formula? I am looking to buy a Xeon from ebay to pop in mine to upgrade from my i7-970. I see the X5690 CPU running a little more than the price of the i7-990x and was wondering how that would work.
> 
> Current Setup:
> CPU: Intel i7-970
> Motherboard: ASUS Rampage III Formula
> Graphics: 2x EVGA Geforce GTX680s
> RAM: Crucial Vengeance 2133MHz Red
> Hard Drive: Kingston HyperX 480GB PCIE
> Cooling: Corsair H100
> OS: Windows 7x64 Ultimate
> Power: EVGA 220-P2-1000-XR
> Case: Cooler Master HAF Stacker 935


http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=9


----------



## srialmaster

I saw your site. I was wondering if anyone has ran the Xeon processors on the R3F. I wanted to make sure before I drop $350 on the X5690 on ebay.

I am running a modded 0903 BIOS with updated OROMs.

https://www.bios-mods.com/forum/Thread-ASUS-Rampage-III-Formula-Request?page=2

Complete changelog:

Intel ICH10R SATA RAID Controller: v12.7.0.1936
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bios : v1.0.0.1033*
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Firmware: v2.2.0.1125*
Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bootloader: v1.0.1.0002b*
JMicron JMB36X Controller: v1.07.28
Intel 82567V-2 Gigabit Network: v1.5.13
SLIC 2.1


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I saw your site. I was wondering if anyone has ran the Xeon processors on the R3F. I wanted to make sure before I drop $350 on the X5690 on ebay.
> 
> I am running a modded 0903 BIOS with updated OROMs.
> 
> https://www.bios-mods.com/forum/Thread-ASUS-Rampage-III-Formula-Request?page=2
> 
> Complete changelog:
> 
> Intel ICH10R SATA RAID Controller: v12.7.0.1936
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bios : v1.0.0.1033*
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Firmware: v2.2.0.1125*
> Marvell 91xx SATA 6G Controller - Bootloader: v1.0.1.0002b*
> JMicron JMB36X Controller: v1.07.28
> Intel 82567V-2 Gigabit Network: v1.5.13
> SLIC 2.1


You won't be necessarily needing the X5690 . X5650 is better worth for money currently considering you would be overclocking it. It's better to spend $50~$100 on X5650 or X5670 than to opt for X5690.

Get a cheaper 6 core Xeon and give it a shot. I am sure most of the X58 motherboards with updated BIOS would support the chip.


----------



## Sburms015

Since you already have a hexa core I7 970, I don't think you would see much of a benefit to upgrading to a hexa core Xeon, if you can oc your 970 up to 4-4.5ghz I would just stick with that and put the money towards a new gpu.


----------



## utking

Overclocking the pcie bus makes a lot more sense now, my 950 pro went up to 1920/977 from 1670/920.

Don't worry i know the risks of overclocking the pcie bus though!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Overclocking the pcie bus makes a lot more sense now, my 950 pro went up to 1920/977 from 1670/920.
> 
> Don't worry i know the risks of overclocking the pcie bus though!


Good luck. Let us know when something dies. Most people never say anything after they kill something.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Good luck. Let us know when something dies. Most people never say anything after they kill something.


As long as i'm not the one to die, i'll let you know^^ this drive coupled with this cpu is blazing fast, it's unreal!

Have you killed anything kana-maru?

I smoked one of my hd4870 some years ago, the VRM's went up in smoke after an successful vrm mod


----------



## utking

After pcie set to 115mhz.

What do you guys think of the QPI link in CPU-z? i know for a fact that i put it at 2800mhz in bios, but how come it shows 3420 in cpu-z?


----------



## OCmember

lol PCIe to 115MHz, you will more than likely blow something on your board, or something connected to it


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Most people never say anything after they kill something.


Yes they do! They say: "Oh frack".

@utking Well done, kinda. TBH I don't think you're going to notice 2-300MHz on top of what you already have, so unless it's necessary or, unless you know something I don't about overclocking PCIE, I'd set it back to stock dude.

Perhaps file under "Interesting exercise"?


----------



## OCmember

Hmm. Set my IOH to 1.2v, left the QPI PLL at 1.3v, for 3.6GHz QPI Link and it's doin fine. If I change the QPI PLL to 1.2v (3.6GHz) and keep the IOH at 1.2v RealBench crashes upon booting it. Seems IOH and QPI PLL don't necessarily have to be equal volts although it does make sense the way it was recommended to keep them the same volts.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> As long as i'm not the one to die, i'll let you know^^ this drive coupled with this cpu is blazing fast, it's unreal!
> 
> Have you killed anything kana-maru?
> 
> I smoked one of my hd4870 some years ago, the VRM's went up in smoke after an successful vrm mod


Heck yeah. It's was very frustrating as well. Thankfully I kept my "main" data on a different drive. I lost a lot of info messing around with the PCIe Frequency. My friend lost his sound and SSD. His Ethernet port went out temporarily. So have my friends. There's certain things you avoid if possible.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Heck yeah. It's was very frustrating as well. Thankfully I kept my "main" data on a different drive. I lost a lot of info messing around with the PCIe Frequency. My friend lost his sound and SSD. His Ethernet port went out temporarily. So have my friends. There's certain things you avoid if possible.


Not saying i don't belive you or anything, but i've heard stories of other people runnind at 115 and 120 for years without problems.

When you messed around with pcie, did you keep voltages locked or on auto?mi could see the motherboard raising the voltages, thereby frying stuff. but i can't understand why things should break because of a higher frequency.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Not saying i don't belive you or anything, but i've heard stories of other people runnind at 115 and 120 for years without problems.
> 
> When you messed around with pcie, did you keep voltages locked or on auto?mi could see the motherboard raising the voltages, thereby frying stuff. but i can't understand why things should break because of a higher frequency.


The PCie Frequency doesn't have voltage. Only numbers. I've hit 5.4Ghz and never had to touch PCIe. I have some pretty fast SDDs and a very fast SSD that contains my OS. You'll never notice the difference unless you actually have programs that you use a lot that will benefit from fast SSD speeds. I've learned that not all programs benefit from leaving traditional HDDs.

Also it's your rig. Do with it as you like man. It's your money and your stuff. I only try to help people prevent damage. That's all.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The PCie Frequency doesn't have voltage. Only numbers. I've hit 5.4Ghz and never had to touch PCIe. I have some pretty fast SDDs and a very fast SSD that contains my OS. You'll never notice the difference unless you actually have programs that you use a lot that will benefit from fast SSD speeds. I've learned that not all programs benefit from leaving traditional HDDs.
> 
> Also it's your rig. Do with it as you like man. It's your money and your stuff. I only try to help people prevent damage. That's all.


Yes and i appreciate that!







But you said yourself that you lost a lot of data when messing with the pcie, so i was wondering if you locked the pcie voltage at the same time? if you upped the frequenzy without locking the voltage, the motherboard may have done it for you.

Dunno, but i can't for the life of me understand how it can ruin something, at the worst it should make a bsod, or maybe corrupt a couple of files, but OS would crash the the system if it figured out something was wrong.

unless the pcie voltage was raised ofc, that could explain alot.

Edit: Also i noticed a big increase in both booting speed, and regular usage with this one. And after the pcie clock i sometimes don't even see the loading screen.
It made a huge improvement over both my samsung 840 pro and the intel x25 drive!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Yes and i appreciate that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you said yourself that you lost a lot of data when messing with the pcie, so i was wondering if you locked the pcie voltage at the same time? if you upped the frequenzy without locking the voltage, the motherboard may have done it for you.
> 
> Dunno, but i can't for the life of me understand how it can ruin something, at the worst it should make a bsod, or maybe corrupt a couple of files, but OS would crash the the system if it figured out something was wrong.
> 
> unless the pcie voltage was raised ofc, that could explain alot.
> 
> Edit: Also i noticed a big increase in both booting speed, and regular usage with this one. And after the pcie clock i sometimes don't even see the loading screen.
> It made a huge improvement over both my samsung 840 pro and the intel x25 drive!


I haven't seen a loading screen in years [except for quick updates]. Anyways that frequency controls or interferes with a lot of components on your board. I've been hearing about SSD speed increases from PCIe Frequency for many many years [maybe 4+]. It's nothing new. Just be careful.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I haven't seen a loading screen in years [except for quick updates]. Anyways that frequency controls or interferes with a lot of components on your board. I've been hearing about SSD speed increases from PCIe Frequency for many many years [maybe 4+]. It's nothing new. Just be careful.


Well i still see one with this ssd, sometimes it skips it, and sometimes it's there for a second or two. What kind of SSD's and what are the speed of yours? they must be really good then!








is it pcie SSD's to overcome the sata bottleneck?

Yes i know that it interferes with a lot of the components, but i still can't understand what makes them break though.

I'll do some research into this, ask my professor in microprocessors and modern operating systems, maybe he can shed some light on it


----------



## gofasterstripes

Power dissipation. Raising the frequency will rapidly increase the energy dissipated by the I/O circuitry. Oh, and also data corruption


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Well i still see one with this ssd, sometimes it skips it, and sometimes it's there for a second or two. What kind of SSD's and what are the speed of yours? they must be really good then!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is it pcie SSD's to overcome the sata bottleneck?
> 
> Yes i know that it interferes with a lot of the components, but i still can't understand what makes them break though.
> 
> I'll do some research into this, ask my professor in microprocessors and modern operating systems, maybe he can shed some light on it


Yeah I'm running the Predator PCie SSD now as my main OS drive. Before that I was running dual SDDs in RAID 0 [SATA II]. Now those two SSDs hold my Steam\Origin\GOG Library.

http://s26.postimg.org/iaeu6m2ax/ATTO_Upload.jpg

So I get roughly 670 MB\s Write &1400MB\s Read


----------



## OCmember

Someone posted how to get an Intel NVMe (AIC) drive working on an non UEFI bios X58 system

http://mrlithium.blogspot.com/2015/12/how-to-boot-nvme-ssd-from-legacy-bios.html

Have no idea if this would work but for what it's worth


----------



## srialmaster

I want to buy a 2nd CPU so if something goes wrong, I have a contingency plan. So, you all recommend the 5660 or 5670 vs the 5690 or 990X? I saw one person selling 2x 5660s for $199 and the cheapest single for $130+.


----------



## OCmember

Why not try a W3680 or W3690? If your board supports it you can use the unlocked multiplier. It depends on the X58 revision. My X58 chip-set doesn't support the unlocked multi but the bios does.


----------



## MedRed

Anyone with a daily use overclock on a 5680 using an Asus board care to share overclock specs?


----------



## OCmember

user deleted post


----------



## Sburms015

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> I´m currently running this setup for about 7 years (except the video card, and some other stuff that was replaced during the years):
> 
> 
> Asus P6T Deluxe V2
> Intel Core i7 920 C0 @ 3.8Ghz @ 1.19375v
> Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme 2x120mm Push-Pull + Arctic Silver 5
> 3x2GB (6GB) DDR3 1600Mhz OCZ Platinum CAS 7-7-7-24
> Gigabyte Geforce GTX 960 G1 Gaming 2GB
> Samsung Evo 840 - 250gb SSD
> Solytech SL8600EPS - 600w PSU
> Sony W855B 60" 1080p HDTV
> 
> It´s my daily / htpc / gaming pc. The system ram size nowadays is lacking, and i´m considering two options:
> 
> 
> Sell the motherboard + ram + cpu and go for the new Skylake / Z170 platform and reuse all the other components. I have considered getting the following parts:
> Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7 / i7 6700k / 16gb Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 3000MHz + some adapter for the Ultra 120 to fit the new socket...
> 
> OR
> 
> Get more 3x2GB DDR3 1600mhz sticks and a Intel Xeon X5450 or E5639 chip and overclock it to about 4~4.2ghz.
> 
> The point is, does it worth it to jump to skylake? I guess the Sata-3, USB-3.1 and DDR4 would be nice additions, and overall system responsiviness.
> Since i don´t have the bang to go for X99 platform, what should i choose?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Go with the Xeon and you'll find that X58 has plenty of life left in it, as for ram I would go with 24GB as some games coming out are just starting to recommend 16GB.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @CesarDRK
> 
> Sounds like a little upgrade itch bothering you. No problem. This is basically a X58 32nm 6 core anonymous gathering, hah.
> 
> While you have a nice overclock with your 920, you can do the something similar at lower temps and 50% more physical cores. Do the 32nm route and add more memory. That'll be plenty of fun


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> user deleted post


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sburms015*
> 
> Go with the Xeon and you'll find that X58 has plenty of life left in it, as for ram I would go with 24GB as some games coming out are just starting to recommend 16GB.


I have flagged my post here and posted it again in the X58 Xeon Thread, thinking it´s a better place for it.

So, i´ll redirect my answers there !

Thanks.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sburms015*
> 
> Go with the Xeon and you'll find that X58 has plenty of life left in it, as for ram I would go with 24GB as some games coming out are just starting to recommend 16GB.


As Sburms said, go for the Xeon! x5660 is a nice cpu









Add some more ram, i recently got 3x8gb crucial 1600mhz chips, 1.5v and they are awesome!









Also you can add a pcie SSD, which would really make the build fly!







No need for sata 3 then^^ Both the Kingston hyperx and the samsung 950 pro will work right out of the box


----------



## ShooterFX

I am running a Xeon on the Rampage III formula. No issues.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> As Sburms said, go for the Xeon! x5660 is a nice cpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Add some more ram, i recently got 3x8gb crucial 1600mhz chips, 1.5v and they are awesome!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also you can add a pcie SSD, which would really make the build fly!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No need for sata 3 then^^ Both the Kingston hyperx and the samsung 950 pro will work right out of the box


What did you do to use 3x8gb?

I tried with my current setup to use 3 sticks of 8gb DDR3 1333mhz memory just for testing purposes and windows only "saw" 16gb ! No matter wich position i´ve set the sticks in my P6T Deluxe V2.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> What did you do to use 3x8gb?
> 
> I tried with my current setup to use 3 sticks of 8gb DDR3 1333mhz memory just for testing purposes and windows only "saw" 16gb ! No matter wich position i´ve set the sticks in my P6T Deluxe V2.


Nothing actually, just put them into the orange sockets, and it booted straight up, all 24 GB of ram is detected.
Although i manually edited the timings and DDR3 Speed. As well as bump the voltage up to 1.58v

Did you use the latest bios btw? If nothing else works, i wonder if it would work with the bios from the v1 version.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ShooterFX*
> 
> I am running a Xeon on the Rampage III formula. No issues.


What CPU are you running? I just ordered a X5660 and would like to see you settings to compare to.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Nothing actually, just put them into the orange sockets, and it booted straight up, all 24 GB of ram is detected.
> Although i manually edited the timings and DDR3 Speed. As well as bump the voltage up to 1.58v
> 
> Did you use the latest bios btw? If nothing else works, i wonder if it would work with the bios from the v1 version.


I´m using latest bios, 1202.

Wich CPU did you use? 1366 cpus have integrated memory controllers, maybe it has something to do with the CPU?

Mine is a i7 920 C0 revision (not the later one D0).


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> I´m using latest bios, 1202.
> 
> Wich CPU did you use? 1366 cpus have integrated memory controllers, maybe it has something to do with the CPU?
> 
> Mine is a i7 920 C0 revision (not the later one D0).


Aha, mine is an X5660 D1 revision I guess it's because of the IMC in the 920 then.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> Aha, mine is an X5660 D1 revision I guess it's because of the IMC in the 920 then.


I have also put 3x8GB in my R3F with a 970 and worked fine. Seems like you may have made a mistake somewhere........maybe didn't put one in the proper slot for the Tri-channel? I would double check your manual and verify the banks you're putting the memory into.


----------



## dotagaming

Hey guys!
I got some more RAM before prices will eventually rise again (remember DDR2?), so I figured it's time for a new OC.

System
*CPU*: X5675
*MB*: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
*RAM*: 3x Crucial Ballistix Tactical 8GB, DDR3-1866, CL9-9-9-24

OC
*BCLK*: 220
*CPU Mult*: 19x -> 4180 MHz
*C-States*: Enabled for all but EIST
*QP*I: 7.92 GHz [x36]
*Uncore*: 3,3GHz [x15]
*RAM Freq*: 1760 MHz [x8.0 SPD]
*RAM Timings*: 8-8-8-24-1T
*LLC*: Level 2
*VCore*: 1.03750V [Normal]
*Dynamic VCore*: +0.3V
*QPI/VTT*: 1.235V
*CPU PLL*: 1.8V
*IOH Core*: 1.1V
*DRAM Voltage*: 1.64V

On my first OC, I was pretty much just trial-and-erroring. It kinda degraded over time and I had to lower my clock.
This time, I used a more systematic approach (isolate BCLK, memory, CPU, voltages) and I'm very confident in the stability of this system
(passed hours of IBT @ Max, multiple full passes of Memtest, extensive gaming sessions). I'm getting a Cinebench score of ~950 in safe mode.
Maybe this will be useful for someone with a similar board.

Notes

*Memory Mults*:
x12 is not working on my system (mult just reverts to x8).
x6, x8, x10 work. I had to work around that and found high BCLK/low Mult gives me the best compromise.

*QPI/VTT*:
I've had this _way_ too high before, I think it was on 1.3.
I have a feeling this board shows a value too low, be extra careful because high VTT can fry stuff easily.
There was someone way back in this thread with this board & and multmeter who measured like +0.1V extra compared to reported!

*C-States & EIST*:
So, getting a good overclock without Turbo and/or C-States was a breeze, but I've had some problems with them turned on.
Turns out EIST was the culprit. Sometimes it would raise the BCLK to a whopping 237 MHz which is completely absurd. Turned that thing off and now my BCLK stays at a nice stable 220 (I've isolated 227 to be my max stable BCLK, so plenty of headroom there).

*Speedstep*:
So Speedstep (e.g. lowering the Mult) only works for 19x, 21x, 23x Mults on my machine. It will go down as low as 12x, which helps keeps average CPU Temps down. It seems my power supply is struggling a bit, so I needed to increase my dyn. VCore by one step to ensure stability on Speedstep.

*LLC*:
For me this was essential in achieving a stable OC when using C-States or the system would be unstable when going from high->low loads. YMMV.

*Dynamic VCore*:
WARNING this nearly fried my CPU. You have to set VCore to _Normal_ in order to use dynamic VCore. Unfortunately then the BIOS automatically increases VCore without any indication/warning if you raise the CPU Mult. I was testing out lower BCLK/high Mult while using dynamic VCore and my board sent a whopping 1.5V straight to the CPU. I'm surprised it didn't die on the spot.
Once configured properly VCore fluctuates from 1-1.28V (CPU-Z), helps keep heat down.

*Headroom*:
I have so much headroom on this OC. In testing, I could go stable as high as 4.5GHz within reasonable voltages (1.35VCore). But this system has to last me at least 1-2 years, at which point I will upgrade to Skylake-E and take this old lady for a spin. Heat will be a problem, but with 1.4V VCore and some more VTT I think 4.8GHz would be possible.
For now I'm totally happy with this OC! Good performance, C-States, stable. I hope it won't degrade (although the 1.5VCore incident surely impacted the lifetime of this system.)

Maybe this will help someone. If not I'll have a nice resource when I'm gonna OC this baby one last time


----------



## gofasterstripes

Dynamic + Turbo enabled in windows tried to cook my cpu also.

Good point to raise.

Otherwise - Enjoy


----------



## antivir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Looking good, dude. Thats a lot of rendering power!
> 
> Now see if you can drop CPU PLL to 1.4. A tempreture comparison might be interesting too, if you can be bothered.


Sorry for the delay, got too much work to do







. I managed to lower CPU PLL to 1.4 stable, and did a test out of curiosity. Here are 2 screenshots: 1 with the 1.4 PLL, the other at 1.8. Ambient temps. around 21 Celsius, but for the 1.8 test the air temp was slightly lower.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aaah, so it seems to have shaved a degree or two off? Excellent







No harm in that, and probably less stress on the CPU!


----------



## antivir

Yes, it did, and the system is really stable, thanks again for the tips







.

Just out of curiosity, do you know if I could use a PCI-e SSD as boot drive? Maybe a HyperX Predator or something, about 240GB would be enough. I read somewhere that M.2 drives have a serious overheating problem, and I couldn't use one anyway on this old board.

Please note that my board is the very first generation (v 0.1), bought in December 2008 along with all the rest and I'm not sure it'll support bootable PCI-e SSD-s.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Yes, it did, and the system is really stable, thanks again for the tips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Just out of curiosity, do you know if I could use a PCI-e SSD as boot drive? Maybe a HyperX Predator or something, about 240GB would be enough. I read somewhere that M.2 drives have a serious overheating problem, and I couldn't use one anyway on this old board.
> 
> Please note that my board is the very first generation (v 0.1), bought in December 2008 along with all the rest and I'm not sure it'll support bootable PCI-e SSD-s.


I use the Kingston HyperX Predator 480GB with no issues on my Rampage III Formula.


----------



## antivir

Thanks for the info @srialmaster, but i'm still concerned a bit as your Mobo was released 2 years after mine







, so it's less outdated. Anyways, will do a search on Google friend and see is anyone tried it.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Thanks for the info @srialmaster, but i'm still concerned a bit as your Mobo was released 2 years after mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , so it's less outdated. Anyways, will do a search on Google friend and see is anyone tried it.


I will say that there isn't any special requirements for this card like the Samsung SSDs or Intel that use NVMe. It boots up as though it is a normal drive. There are no drivers needed what so ever. You just pop it in, boot off of your windows install media and let it fly.


----------



## CesarDRK

Well, after the tips you guys gave me i started looking for some cheap xeons, and today i´ve a found a great deal on a X5660 Xeon and nailed it!
It will arrive probably next week, and i´ll start the "overcloking fun"









Anyways, i need to decide about the ram now...

I´m using Windows 7 Professional, SP1 latest updates (for now, considering W10 after ram and cpu upgrade to start fresh).
I tried running 3x8gb 1333 cas 9 sticks 1.50v @ 1600mhz cas 9 1.65v (to keep up with my overclocked i7 920 -> 200x19 = 3.8ghz) at the time, that i said windows only recognized 16gb!!
I didn´t tried to run then at stock 1333mhz.

I´m a little concerned about getting 8gb sticks, since then.
So i´m considering getting an used Kingston *HyperX Genesis 3x2gb CAS 8 1.65v* sticks that i´ve found used for cheap also today, to go with my current ram.

Today i have 3x2gb OCZ Platinum CAS 7 1.65v kit. Is it straight forward to run all this sticks (6x2) @ 1600 CAS 8 @ 200 bclk ? Or should i try to sell my 3x2GB kit and go for 3x4GB or even try again 3x8GB?

Thanks all !!


----------



## dotagaming

Memory detection problems are quite common on this platform - I don't think 8GB modules behave any differently. You can try reseating the CPU.

Using all 6 slots puts more stress on the memory controller and could be more difficult to OC. But if you get those sticks for cheap it could be worth a try


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Yes, it did, and the system is really stable, thanks again for the tips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Just out of curiosity, do you know if I could use a PCI-e SSD as boot drive? Maybe a HyperX Predator or something, about 240GB would be enough. I read somewhere that M.2 drives have a serious overheating problem, and I couldn't use one anyway on this old board.
> 
> Please note that my board is the very first generation (v 0.1), bought in December 2008 along with all the rest and I'm not sure it'll support bootable PCI-e SSD-s.


I'm running a HyperX 240GB and the speeds are still the same as the first day I purchased it. No signs of damage and I've never experienced overheating. It's sitting at 30c as I type this. I use it as my boot drive. They do generate a little heat, but usually that due to the temp inside of the case. With good airflow you have no issues. I'm sure a HOT GPU sitting near the SSD would cause some issues as well. My GPU is water cooled so I don't have that issue with my setup. I've been running my HyperX Predator for about 8-9 months now with 0 issues. I don't think you have anything to worry about.


----------



## antivir

Thanks guys, in this case I might jump in for a Predator later on. Right now my wife would probably kill me if I spent any more on the rig







. It cost me about $260 to buy the RAM, cooler and CPU but it was money extremely well spent. And I have the old counterparts in storage should anything go boom







.


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Today i have 3x2gb OCZ Platinum CAS 7 1.65v kit. Is it straight forward to run all this sticks (6x2) @ 1600 CAS 8 @ 200 bclk ? Or should i try to sell my 3x2GB kit and go for 3x4GB or even try again 3x8GB?


I have a DX58SO which has 3 blue slots and 1 black slot. If I populate all the 4 slots, all the 4 ram sticks work in triple channel mode. It's more of a board specific thing and it's a hit or miss. I was using 4x4GB Kingston CL9 16GB kit and I had a lot of similar issues with only 12 Gigs of ram actually usable. I have swapped these ram sticks for 2 x 8GB Kingston HyperX Beast 2400Mhz. It's a dual channel memory but atleast it works better than a Triple channel setup on my board and overclocks good.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Well, after the tips you guys gave me i started looking for some cheap xeons, and today i´ve a found a great deal on a X5660 Xeon and nailed it!
> It will arrive probably next week, and i´ll start the "overcloking fun"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, i need to decide about the ram now...
> 
> I´m using Windows 7 Professional, SP1 latest updates (for now, considering W10 after ram and cpu upgrade to start fresh).
> I tried running 3x8gb 1333 cas 9 sticks 1.50v @ 1600mhz cas 9 1.65v (to keep up with my overclocked i7 920 -> 200x19 = 3.8ghz) at the time, that i said windows only recognized 16gb!!
> I didn´t tried to run then at stock 1333mhz.
> 
> I´m a little concerned about getting 8gb sticks, since then.
> So i´m considering getting an used Kingston *HyperX Genesis 3x2gb CAS 8 1.65v* sticks that i´ve found used for cheap also today, to go with my current ram.
> 
> Today i have 3x2gb OCZ Platinum CAS 7 1.65v kit. Is it straight forward to run all this sticks (6x2) @ 1600 CAS 8 @ 200 bclk ? Or should i try to sell my 3x2GB kit and go for 3x4GB or even try again 3x8GB?
> 
> Thanks all !!


I would try to get 1.5v memory if you can. The 1.65v doesn't give you much room for play since going above 1.65v can damage the CPU. I got 3x Corsair Vengeance 2x4GB at 2133MHz for $54.99/ea on Amazon. I just did an overclock to 4.2GHz with my i7-970 and ran the RAM at 2GHz with a slight increase in vTT and CPU voltage. It was really stable. I didn't have any issues with my 24GB.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm running a HyperX 240GB and the speeds are still the same as the first day I purchased it. No signs of damage and I've never experienced overheating. It's sitting at 30c as I type this. I use it as my boot drive. They do generate a little heat, but usually that due to the temp inside of the case. With good airflow you have no issues. I'm sure a HOT GPU sitting near the SSD would cause some issues as well. My GPU is water cooled so I don't have that issue with my setup. I've been running my HyperX Predator for about 8-9 months now with 0 issues. I don't think you have anything to worry about.


Unfortunately, my HyperX is siting right next to my 680. However, I just stress tested my video cards in SLI and my system didn't crash, but the video card driver crashed....lol.....the GPUs got up to 75C.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I would try to get 1.5v memory if you can. The 1.65v doesn't give you much room for play since going above 1.65v can damage the CPU. I got 3x Corsair Vengeance 2x4GB at 2133MHz for $54.99/ea on Amazon. I just did an overclock to 4.2GHz with my i7-970 and ran the RAM at 2GHz with a slight increase in vTT and CPU voltage. It was really stable. I didn't have any issues with my 24GB.


I´m considering getting (NEW) 3x sticks of 8GB Kingston 1600mhz Value RAM CAS11 - 1.5v (KVR16N11/8).
The seller agreed for me to return then if it didn´t work with my system (full 24GB don´t show up).

Any toughts?

I know CAS11 is a real downgrade from my actual CAS7, but with the lower voltage i´m thinking it could hit 1600 CAS9 @ 1.65v or at least 1866 @ CAS 11 @ 1.65v...


----------



## OCmember

If you don't care about tRFC timings Crucial has a 1600 kit that does 1.35v cl8.8.8.24

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148659&cm_re=crucial_tactical-_-20-148-659-_-Product


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> If you don't care about tRFC timings Crucial has a 1600 kit that does 1.35v cl8.8.8.24
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148659&cm_re=crucial_tactical-_-20-148-659-_-Product


Unfortunately, i live in Brazil mate! No newegg, amazon, or whatever for me


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Unfortunately, i live in Brazil mate! No newegg, amazon, or whatever for me


Awe dang


----------



## srialmaster

@CesarDRK,

I was just thinking about your 3x8GB sticks issue. You never tested them at 1333MHz, only that you tried to OC them to 1600MHz. I would go back and test them if you can at 1333MHz and verify whether or not you really had an issue with 24GB of memory or if 1x stick of 8GB failed to OC to 1600MHz.


----------



## srialmaster

On another note, when my X5660 arrives from eBay, I will try and see if my motherboard can support over 24GB. There has been some people able to accomplish this since the Xeons support over 24GB.

Intel X5660

"Max Memory Size (dependent on memory type) 288 GB"


----------



## bobnoho

So... this is where im at, this is my x58's last whora...(P6T7 WS SUPERCOMPUTER) i just did a compleat rebuild (smaller more streamline, easly movable case) pic's coming.. i upgraded to a x5679 about a year ago and have been running 4.2 1.32 vcore sloid with no problems, but i want more, 4.6+

first i upgraded to 48g of ram (gskill 1866 10-11-10-30 1N 1.5v) i could not get the system stable @1066 untill i uped the qpi to 1.32 now im stable at 1603mhz.. currently im at 4.6 22x20 1.42 vcore 1.8 pll last night i ran the cpuz stress test with msi kombuster doughnut running at the same time (3xgtx680s on the same loop as cpu) for an hour and my max temp peaked at at 72, seems stable, but it crashes when returning from standby, changing SLI settings and after about 10 min of fullscreen gaming (dying light).. i feel like theres a issue with my pci bus or ram timings..

vcore and cpu speed still fuchuates even with speed step and c-state disabled??

if it matters my mobo is fully water cooled with dedicated 360mm radiator and phobia dc12-400 pump

anybody have any ideas what the dram ref voltage would be for or know a reason to change it??


----------



## bobnoho

so its getting better @ 4.6 I lowered the dram voltage to 1.56 and uped the vcore to 1.44, with the same cpuz stress test and msi kombuster doughnut running at the same time for 1 hour my max temp peaked at 74, but its been pretty stable, it was kinda hanggy still so delayed the cpu clock screw to 900 and left the ioh at 300 and put the pcie back to 100.. so far it seems a lot better, but I don't like the temp, under 70 is perfered.. any ideas


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> it was kinda hanggy still so delayed the cpu clock screw to 900 and left the ioh at 300 and put the pcie back to 100.. so far it seems a lot better, but I don't like the temp, under 70 is perfered.. any ideas


Yeah I have an idea, lower your ambient temp. Since that's not always the easiest thing to maintain it doesn't appear that your CPU is not 100% stable. Sounds like you need more vCore actually, unfortunately that will usually lead to more heat. Once you start pushing anything over 1.32v it's going to get a little hot. 1.40+vCore and up is definitely going to heat up the CPU a lot during stress test. To combat heat you have to lower voltages or have much cooler and CONSTANT ambient temp.

You only have a few choices.
1.) Drop back down to 4.2Ghz @1.32v which was stable and safe.
2.) Or continue to want more and keep pushing the voltages to stabilize your 4.6Ghz OC. You'll need some cool air hitting the case though.


----------



## srialmaster

I do have a question. I currently have a Corsair H100 original and was thinking about getting a H110i GT. Would this be a good investment? Also, I know later when I do upgrade to the Skylake-E, I could probably use it with the new chip as well.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Sorry for the delay, got too much work to do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I managed to lower CPU PLL to 1.4 stable, and did a test out of curiosity. Here are 2 screenshots: 1 with the 1.4 PLL, the other at 1.8. Ambient temps. around 21 Celsius, but for the 1.8 test the air temp was slightly lower.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Thanks guys, in this case I might jump in for a Predator later on. Right now my wife would probably kill me if I spent any more on the rig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . It cost me about $260 to buy the RAM, cooler and CPU but it was money extremely well spent. And I have the old counterparts in storage should anything go boom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I bought both the hyperx and the samsung 950 pro, and both worked for me, actually i liked the 950 bettef, as it didnt give me the insert proper boot media and press key to contiunue. I have the first p6tdeluxe board, bought December 08 as well


----------



## bobnoho

so this is the best I'm gonna get until I remove the 3x680,s from the loop.. I reduced the cpu screw to 600 and ENABLED intel speedstep and cstate

[QUOTEYou only have a few choices.
1.) Drop back down to 4.2Ghz @1.32v which was stable and safe.
2.) Or continue to want more and keep pushing the voltages to stabilize your 4.6Ghz OC. You'll need some cool air hitting the case though.][/QUOTE]

hit the nail on the head!! iv been reading this post ALOT last couple of weeks you are the man you always post GREAT information..

this build is in a thermaltake V10 case with 2x200mm in the front and 1 on the top. in the front I have a 420mm radiator I replaced the 200mm fans with 3x corsair AF140s on the top is my mobo radiator 360mm replaced the single 200mm fan with 3x corsair AF120s now theres 6x140s blowing in and 6x120s blowing out.. my cpu temps droped 10 degrees!! put me rite were I wanted be... so let juice the vcards, I added a little overclock the vcards not much, but triple parallel heats up fast.. I ran the same test cpuz stress test and the msi kombuster doughnut for 1 hour and my max temp peaked at the same 74 degrees once in the beginning of the test (I think all 3 cards were at 99% for short time) but my temps hung out around 68-70.. I think I can live with it, havnt had any crashes exept when I force 3gpu alt frame render in windows and leave it there it dosent like coming off standby..

I finaly broke 5k in passmark

http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V8/display.php?id=58829328987


----------



## srialmaster

@bobnoho

I have 2x questions for you:

1. Why are you still using Intel Speed Step?

2. What case are you using?

Also, when I used 6x4GB, I have to bump my QPI to 1.32v as well. I think that's the magic number when we max our slots out on our X58 motherboards.


----------



## bobnoho

my x58s coffin


----------



## bobnoho

I enabled speedstep and cstate because it seemed to make no difference, with them both disabled in bios my cpu speed and vcore were still throttling
and 6x4g sticks were no problem, actually when I had 24gs of ram overclocking was much easyer I got up to 5.2 at 1.56 vcore with 4g sticks.. the best iv got with 48g of ram was 4.9 before she said NO WAY..

thermaltake V10


----------



## bobnoho

you can see my funky elbow rite off the video card, I had a third pump rite there, but head pressure is way more important than flow rate, who knew...


----------



## bobnoho

anybody have any ideas what the dram ref voltage would be for or know a reason to change it??


----------



## gofasterstripes

You can find it on google, Lsdmeasap* has posted some useful things on this, and a range of topics actually.

I am afraid I have no idea how you should use it. I would suggest NOT raising voltages further, especially QPI related ones.....

*I think he used to be a Gigabyte rep or something? Would be good to get in touch with him these days...


----------



## alancsalt

LSDmeasap was Tweaktown moderator for Gigabyte section, also a member here. I think he got a job with Gigabyte, but haven't seen any posts anywhere for awhile.

https://www.google.com.au/?gws_rd=ssl#q=LSDmeasap&nfpr=1


----------



## jvidia

Hi friends!

For an Asus P6T Deluxe V2 what Xeon do you prefer/advise? X5670 or x5675?

And why?

Thanks,
Jorge


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Hi friends!
> 
> For an Asus P6T Deluxe V2 what Xeon do you prefer/advise? X5670 or x5675?
> 
> And why?
> 
> Thanks,
> Jorge


I like the x5660 myself. I can use the 23 multiplier and it seems stable. I have had issues with even multipliers in the past so I do not try to use them.
Most of the time it is a few dollars less too.
If not the x5660 I would go with the one that has the 25 multiplier. I do believe that to be the x5675.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Hi friends!
> 
> For an Asus P6T Deluxe V2 what Xeon do you prefer/advise? X5670 or x5675?
> 
> And why?
> 
> Thanks,
> Jorge


Unless you crossflash to the P6T WS PRO bios you won't be able to use the turbo multipliers at full load on that board. I ran 200x22 for a long time with my x5670, then crossflashed and switched to 185x24 which did lower temps a bit and I was able to run lower QPI/VTT voltage.

With all of that said, it really depends what kind of clocks you are looking at. If you have very good cooling you might want to opt for the x5675 just to have that extra headroom.


----------



## jvidia

I've got water cooling: 3/8" tubbing + Apogee GTZ + BI GT Xtreme 240 + Koolance Nozzles + Eheim Station 600

What's the multipliers on the X5675?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> I've got water cooling: 3/8" tubbing + Apogee GTZ + BI GT Xtreme 240 + Koolance Nozzles + Eheim Station 600
> 
> What's the multipliers on the X5675?


Yeah, unless you are interested in crossflashing you'll want the x5675, especially if you are looking at 4.5ghz+. The max multiplier on the x5675 is 23x or 25x _(maybe 26 depending on the board)_ using turbo.


----------



## jvidia

X5675 is more what i look for.

Do you think 130€ for an X5675 is worth it?
Isn't too much of an investment for an old platform?
Can't get any cheaper

I've been away from this hobbie for along time as you can see from my system .... If I want to move on to a newer platform what would be the minimum setup to get more performance over an X5675 on a P6T Deluxe V2 + 12GB Ddr3 1600?


----------



## gofasterstripes

A bit off topic but I think this could be of use to people, and certainly worth knowing about as the "flip side" of PCIE or BCLK frequency tying.




I'm beginning to think this channel is hidden gem.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Unless you crossflash to the P6T WS PRO bios you won't be able to use the turbo multipliers at full load on that board...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, unless you are interested in crossflashing you'll want the x5675...[/I]using turbo.


I have a P6T Deluxe V2, and will be installing a X5660 this week in it.

Is there any downside in this crossflash? Anything that stop working? I´m interested in it, any guides?

Thanks.


----------



## ShooterFX

Got myself a CM Nepton 120 XL and OC now at 4.3 . Have not benched it but playing games for a long period without any issues. CPU goes up to 70degrees Celsius when gaming for a period of time and this is on a hot day

Had a issue where my mobo only detected 8 gig of 12 gig memory but re-seating them seems to have sorted that issue

Must say this Xeon is fun


----------



## CesarDRK

Well just got my X5660 running, and also 3 sticks of 8GB kingston value ram rated cas10 running cas9 1600mhz! The other test i did with 3 different branded sticks had something wrong, but now its working fine.

Booted the X5660 directly @ 4.2ghz (200x21) and voltage set to 1.28xx in bios with LLC on.
Passed IBT in standard and high profiles.

Now i´m wondering, should i try to go any further? Is that voltage too high?

Thanks.


----------



## jvidia

Today I lost my mind too and joined the Xeon club ... bought an *X5675*









It only arrives next week to replace my [email protected]

Any advice/tips for OCing with the Asus P6T Deluxe V2? What OC do you think is possible for daily use?









CesarDRK, seems we will have some fun together with the P6T Dv2 soon









Love the upgrade rush again ... it was dormant for years


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Now i´m wondering, should i try to go any further? Is that voltage too high?


The Intel specs for max voltage for the X56xx's is 1.350V so you are very far from the "limit"


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> CesarDRK, seems we will have some fun together with the P6T Dv2 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love the upgrade rush again ... it was dormant for years


Well worth the fun!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> The Intel specs for max voltage for the X56xx's is 1.350V so you are very far from the "limit"


Had to up the vCore to 1.30 after running the "Very High" preset at IBT.
I´m getting 80 celsius at full IBT load now... My cooling setup is: Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme + AS5 + 2 Scythe fans (?cfm) @ push-pull.

I guess the temps will hold me back if i try to go any further.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Today I lost my mind too and joined the Xeon club ... bought an *X5675*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It only arrives next week to replace my [email protected]
> 
> Any advice/tips for OCing with the Asus P6T Deluxe V2? What OC do you think is possible for daily use?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CesarDRK, seems we will have some fun together with the P6T Dv2 soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love the upgrade rush again ... it was dormant for years


You'll be lucky if p6T recognizes chip.

Good Luck!


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> You'll be lucky if p6T recognizes chip.
> 
> Good Luck!


Why not??? Its compatible and alot of people have X56xx on the P6T Deluxe v2


----------



## bill1024

My P6T deluxe V2 works great. X5660 173 x 23 = 4ghz. Runs 24/7/365 100% load running BOING no problems at all.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My P6T deluxe V2 works great. X5660 173 x 23 = 4ghz. Runs 24/7/365 100% load running BOING no problems at all.


Of course it does ... P6T Dv2 supports until i7-990 Extreme and this Xeons are alike


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> I have a P6T Deluxe V2, and will be installing a X5660 this week in it.
> 
> Is there any downside in this crossflash? Anything that stop working? I´m interested in it, any guides?
> 
> Thanks.


I don't think there is any downside if you use the WS Pro bios. I think there was a PCI error or something on boot because the Deluxe v2 is missing a controller that the WS Pro has, but it never caused any issues for me.

If you flash the P6X58D bios then you'll get offset voltage control but then you may lose a few USB ports, I haven't tried it so I'm really not sure. I actually bought a WS Pro bios on Ebay instead ($10) and swapped it.

Here's a good guide for crossflashing:
http://linas.16mb.com/asus-p6t-deluxe-crossflash-to-asus-p6t-ws-pro/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Today I lost my mind too and joined the Xeon club ... bought an *X5675*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It only arrives next week to replace my [email protected]
> 
> Any advice/tips for OCing with the Asus P6T Deluxe V2? What OC do you think is possible for daily use?


Try to keep the UCLK around 3200mhz or so.
Set all voltages manually to standard (if you haven't already)
Don't exceed 1.35v on VTT

I'd shoot for 4.2ghz and see what kind of voltage is needed, if you get a good chip you could hit 4.5ghz while keeping it under 1.35v.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> My P6T deluxe V2 works great. X5660 173 x 23 = 4ghz. Runs 24/7/365 100% load running BOING no problems at all.


I think it's only over a certain wattage where it drops the multi under load. I was running [email protected] and it would drop down to 22x under load with the original bios, with the option High TDP Turbo enabled in the WS Pro bios it would stay at 24x under load.


----------



## jvidia

You swapped the P6T Dv2 bios?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> You swapped the P6T Dv2 bios?


Yes, with a WS Pro bios.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yes, with a WS Pro bios.


It's easy to do?

Advantages? Pro's and Cons?

Wort it?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> It's easy to do?
> 
> Advantages? Pro's and Cons?
> 
> Wort it?


I mean it's just a matter of unplugging the bios and plugging the new one in, easier than swapping a CPU I'd say.

Advantages: High TDP Turbo mode, allows 1.2v VTT
Disadvantages: PCI Error on boot (doesn't seem to matter, as mentioned in that guide I linked)

Depends how your chip clocks. It may not be worth it if you need crazy voltages for higher clocks. For me it was worth it to run the lower BCLK and I was able to run 1.2v VTT _(down from 1.275v at 200mhz bclk)_ , this lowered temps about 4-5c.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I mean it's just a matter of unplugging the bios and plugging the new one in, easier than swapping a CPU I'd say.
> 
> Advantages: High TDP Turbo mode, allows 1.2v VTT
> Disadvantages: PCI Error on boot (doesn't seem to matter, as mentioned in that guide I linked)
> 
> Depends how your chip clocks. It may not be worth it if you need crazy voltages for higher clocks. For me it was worth it to run the lower BCLK and I was able to run 1.2v VTT _(down from 1.275v at 200mhz bclk)_ , this lowered temps about 4-5c.


Whats the diference between replacing the bios chip or flashing WS Pro bios file into the Deluxe V2?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Whats the diference between replacing the bios chip or flashing WS Pro bios file into the Deluxe V2?


Nothing. I just didn't want to end up with a bad flash.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Whats the diference between replacing the bios chip or flashing WS Pro bios file into the Deluxe V2?


Nothing actually, i crossflashed all of the bios that are compatible just to check, it works perfect btw, some of the bioses have certain bugs ofc, with missing drivers etc. But they work perfect, i used the one from
the p6x58d for some years just to get the offset one. However i tried the one from the rampage just for fun, and got bricked lol. So i ordered a new one from Ebay, now i always have one at hand, lol


----------



## utking

My latest benchmark on the P6tdeluxe, this SSD works perfect with a pcie boost to 110mhz, i had some weird issues at 115, so had to drop it down a couple of notches.
But at 110mhz i gained a nice SSD boost, as well as my minimum fps increased quite a bit too in some games. (Crossfire 7950 OC)


----------



## bill1024

I run BOINC 24/7 and the x5660 2 100% load down clocks when I run primegrid from 23 to 22. When I run WCG @100% load it does not down clock.
Personally it does not bother me enough to cross flash or buy another flashed bios chip.
Unless you are benchmarking trying to get every last mhz you would not know it even happened.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> My latest benchmark on the P6tdeluxe, this SSD works perfect with a pcie boost to 110mhz, i had some weird issues at 115, so had to drop it down a couple of notches.
> But at 110mhz i gained a nice SSD


What ssd do you have? SATA or m.2 with adapter ?

Are you crossflashed now?

And what is the "offset" you talk about? Didn't get that part.


----------



## revertex

I wondering between these two, X5660 vs W3670 with one is better in real world usage.

http://ark.intel.com/compare/47921,47918

W3670 have a higher clock and multiplier, and seems easier to overclock.

X5660 have a much lower TDP, 2 QPI links but it doesn't make a difference in single socket motherboards

Witch one do you guys think have a better performance comparing both overclocked at the same clock?


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> I wondering between these two, X5660 vs W3670 with one is better in real world usage.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/compare/47921,47918
> 
> W3670 have a higher clock and multiplier, and seems easier to overclock.
> 
> X5660 have a much lower TDP, 2 QPI links but it doesn't make a difference in single socket motherboards
> 
> Witch one do you guys think have a better performance comparing both overclocked at the same clock?


I chose the X5660 over the Wxxxx series for a couple of reasons:
1. Higher Bus Speed 6.4 versus 4.8
2. Slightly higher memory bandwidth 32GB/s versus 25.6GB/s
3. 40-bit Physical Address Extension versus 32-bit. The 40-bit supports more memory and many people have been successful with this on a X58 motherboard
4. Lower TDP means less power used


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> What ssd do you have? SATA or m.2 with adapter ?
> 
> Are you crossflashed now?
> 
> And what is the "offset" you talk about? Didn't get that part.


i use the samsung 950 pro.

No, i had to flash back my p6tdeluxe bios due to limitation on the first pcie slot.

if you want offset voltage use the p6x58-d bios


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I chose the X5660 over the Wxxxx series for a couple of reasons:
> 1. Higher Bus Speed 6.4 versus 4.8
> 2. Slightly higher memory bandwidth 32GB/s versus 25.6GB/s
> 3. 40-bit Physical Address Extension versus 32-bit. The 40-bit supports more memory and many people have been successful with this on a X58 motherboard
> 4. Lower TDP means less power used


Higher Bus because these processors are made to work in dual sockets motherboard, 4.8GT/s seems more than enough, even with overclock.
There are several reports about people running more than 24Gb RAM with I7, but most people wont use more than it.
But you point something that I didn't notice before, 1600Mhz triple channel will use a max theoretical 38.4Gb/s.
Kana-Maru says he's hitting approximately 27GB\s with DDR3-1600Mhz/X5660.
I wonder if it will translate in any real performance improvement gain.
Again, it's hard to find a winner.

W3670 - higher multi (24)
X5660 - lower TDP, higher max temp.

It's hard to choose one or another, both seems to have almost same performance.

EDIT:
Now that i saw that you have a I7-970, it's exact the same specs of W3670.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Higher Bus because these processors are made to work in dual sockets motherboard, 4.8GT/s seems more than enough, even with overclock.
> There are several reports about people running more than 24Gb RAM with I7, but most people wont use more than it.
> But you point something that I didn't notice before, 1600Mhz triple channel will use a max theoretical 38.4Gb/s.
> Kana-Maru says he's hitting approximately 27GB\s with DDR3-1600Mhz/X5660.
> I wonder if it will translate in any real performance improvement gain.
> Again, it's hard to find a winner.
> 
> W3670 - higher multi (24)
> X5660 - lower TDP, higher max temp.
> 
> It's hard to choose one or another, both seems to have almost same performance.
> 
> EDIT:
> Now that i saw that you have a I7-970, it's exact the same specs of W3670.


The 980X and 990X have the higher bus speed of 6.4 as well. I have a need for the extra RAM, but most others do not as stated.


----------



## OCmember

I wouldn't buy another X5xxx I would go for another W3690 or 80, or an i7 970 and >


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I wouldn't buy another X5xxx I would go for another W3690 or 80, or an i7 970 and >


you prefer an i7 970 over your x5690??? Why?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> you prefer an i7 970 over your x5690??? Why?


lol yeah, why?


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> lol yeah, why?


Why is what I want to now mate! You tell me


----------



## OCmember

TDP is described as:

"The Thermal Design Power (TDP) is the average maximum power a processor can dissipate while running commercially available software. TDP is primarily used as a guideline for manufacturers of thermal solutions (heatsinks/fans, etc) which tells them how much heat their solution should dissipate. TDP is not the maximum power the CPU may generate - there may be periods of time when the CPU dissipates more power than designed, in which case either the CPU temperature will rise closer to the maximum, or special CPU circuitry will activate and add idle cycles or reduce CPU frequency with the intent of reducing the amount of generated power. "

From CPU World


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Why is what I want to *k*now mate! You tell me (deleted)


*Fixed*

I prefer a W3690, W3680, or an i7 970, 980X, or 990X.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> *Fixed*
> 
> I prefer a W3690, W3680, or an i7 970, 980X, or 990X.


Still not telling me why but thats ok


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Still not telling me why


I think I did.


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I think I did.


Do you mean higher TDP = more RAW power?

@OCmember,

You have a X5690 and a W3690, both have exactly the same specifications, the only difference is X5690 have 2 QPI links.
As an owner of both CPU's I believe you may have a interesting opinion about, do you mind to share your thoughts?

My apologies if I'm bothering you.


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> *Fixed*
> 
> I prefer a W3690, W3680, or an i7 970, 980X, or 990X.


What about the x5690? Same tdp.


----------



## srialmaster

@OCmember

You get higher clock speeds on the X3690 don't you? I see now that it supports higher voltage and a higher multiplier.

From CPU Benchmarks as of 24 MAR 16:

970 - 8,537
990X - 9,242
X5690 - 9,203
W3690 - 9,562


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Kana-Maru says he's hitting approximately 27GB\s with DDR3-1600Mhz/X5660.
> I wonder if it will translate in any real performance improvement gain.
> Again, it's hard to find a winner.


I actually hit 30GB\s Read - 35GB\s Copy with DDR3-2000Mhz as well.

Real performance gain didn't really didn't translate as much as I hoped it would with high DDR3 frequencies [2000Mhz+]. Outside of a *very few* benchmarks no one will notice the difference at all. Some benchmarks actually performed worse with higher DRAM frequency and loose timings. DDR3-1400Mhz - DDR3-1600Mhz is great for just about anything. Newer platforms should benefit from the high DDR3 frequencies though, but then again from my test and comparisons, the difference or performance increase on the newer platforms+high DRAM freq. isn't that dramatic.


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I chose the X5660 over the Wxxxx series for a couple of reasons:
> 1. Higher Bus Speed 6.4 versus 4.8
> 2. Slightly higher memory bandwidth 32GB/s versus 25.6GB/s
> 3. 40-bit Physical Address Extension versus 32-bit. The 40-bit supports more memory and many people have been successful with this on a X58 motherboard
> 4. Lower TDP means less power used


I don't know where you are getting your information but if you compare the X5690 to the W3690 you will see the following differences and similarities:

http://ark.intel.com/products/52576/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5690-12M-Cache-3_46-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI
http://ark.intel.com/products/52586/Intel-Xeon-Processor-W3690-12M-Cache-3_46-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI

1. They both have 6.4GTs QPI
2. They have the same memory bandwidth.
3. They both have 40bit.
4. Those two processors have the same TDP.

The difference is primarily that the X5690 can be used in dual-socket motherboards and has a higher TCase temperature. That applies to the lower clocked variants as well with many similarities between both X and W series 32nm Hexacore CPU's. Please don't post incorrect information.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *45nm*
> 
> I don't know where you are getting your information but if you compare the X5690 to the W3690 you will see the following differences and similarities:
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/products/52576/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5690-12M-Cache-3_46-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI
> http://ark.intel.com/products/52586/Intel-Xeon-Processor-W3690-12M-Cache-3_46-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI
> 
> 1. They both have 6.4GTs QPI
> 2. They have the same memory bandwidth.
> 3. They both have 40bit.
> 4. Those two processors have the same TDP.
> 
> The difference is primarily that the X5690 can be used in dual-socket motherboards and has a higher TCase temperature. That applies to the lower clocked variants as well with many similarities between both X and W series 32nm Hexacore CPU's. Please don't post incorrect information.


They were talking about x5660 vs W3690 not x5690.


----------



## 45nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> They were talking about x5660 vs W3690 not x5690.


Quote:


> *That applies to the lower clocked variants as well with many similarities between both X and W series 32nm Hexacore CPU's. Please don't post incorrect information.*


http://ark.intel.com/compare/52586,47921

Aside from the TDP difference and also the maximum memory supported and the TCase temperature they are practically the same as they both support the same memory bandwidth, same QPI link 6.4GTs, same 40bit etc....


----------



## bill1024

One other difference I do believe.
The w3680 and 90 Have unlocked multipliers in higher end motherboards where the X, L and E series 56xx CPUs do not.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> I wondering between these two, X5660 vs W3670 with one is better in real world usage.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/compare/47921,47918
> 
> W3670 have a higher clock and multiplier, and seems easier to overclock.
> 
> X5660 have a much lower TDP, 2 QPI links but it doesn't make a difference in single socket motherboards
> 
> Witch one do you guys think have a better performance comparing both overclocked at the same clock?


This is what I was referring to. I was wrong to put Wxxxx.


----------



## trentwatson

Can someone shed some light on this issue PLEASE !
I am getting the FF Code ! I have the EVGA x58 132-bl-e758-tr rev 1.3 bios 83, been running with a core i7-920 D0 with a 45% overclock since 2009 with my 12GB (6x2gb gskill) in triple channel - memory running 7-8-7-28 1T at 1633... Well after reading this forum and seeing the improved benchmarks I decided I really needed the X5660, I also bought an X5667 and an L5630 all off amazon, 2 of the 3 had a One Year warranty with them, the x5667 did not.... anyway from what I understand the rev 1.2 and beyond support the Xeon's without any board mod, as long as you have the 83 bios update that includes the new CPU microcode... anyway i pulled the 920 out and tried the x5660 .. It gives me the instant FF code. so after trying to reset the cmos it still gives FF code , so then I pulled out my RAID card and my USB3.0 card from my second 2 and 3rd video card slots and tried again still INSTANT FF
then I tried the 920 again boots fine... then I tried the X5667 instant FF code then the L5630 INSTANT FF Code ................ so by now I am pretty upset so I stick back in my 920 and then have to redo all my OC settings ...... *** am I missing ????? I can see in the BIOS yes that it is the 83 version..... I was certain I did not need the MOD on the Resistors just a rev 1.2 or higher board can anyone shed any light on what the heck has gone wrong.... the odds of getting 3 bad chips seems extremely high So I must be brain-dead or something


----------



## trentwatson

OK so I am brain dead .... Cpuz was reporting the Board as Rev1.3 I think also Eleet too ....... Anyway just looked at the actual MoBo and DUH it says Rev 1.1 ..........................

Can anyone please give me the MOD info on moving the resistor . I will do the MOD myself ... that is what I get for trusting the stupid Software readout ...

I normally am much more meticulous checking everything.... so feel very stupid now LOL anyway much appreciate any advice on doing the MOD and the specifics ... I think it was 538 desoldered and moved to R539 ... but I will have to try find the info again.......


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I actually hit 30GB\s Read - 35GB\s Copy with DDR3-2000Mhz as well.
> 
> Real performance gain didn't really didn't translate as much as I hoped it would with high DDR3 frequencies [2000Mhz+]. Outside of a *very few* benchmarks no one will notice the difference at all. Some benchmarks actually performed worse with higher DRAM frequency and loose timings. DDR3-1400Mhz - DDR3-1600Mhz is great for just about anything. Newer platforms should benefit from the high DDR3 frequencies though, but then again from my test and comparisons, the difference or performance increase on the newer platforms+high DRAM freq. isn't that dramatic.


One thing I did notice when testing with different memory speeds was the minimum framerate was affected quite a lot _(this was back on my i7 860 which could run 2400mhz)_. The average was mostly unaffected. It does help games to feel a bit more fluid overall.

Of course jumping from 1600mhz to 2133mhz or 2400mhz doesn't make much sense if you already have ram.









More info
http://www.overclock.net/t/1487162/an-independent-study-does-the-speed-of-ram-directly-affect-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios

My results weren't quite as dramatic as that, the old P55/860 couldn't quite take advantage of the 2400mhz memory, but there was still a noticeable difference going from 1600mhz to 2400mhz.


----------



## Xylene

Anyone have any idea how a dual X5660 (not overclockable on the board I am using) would perform with gaming with a R9 290? I know it'll vary widely from game to game but I am wondering if any of you guys have a similar set up?


----------



## SmOgER

Honestly it won't make any difference for gaming if you run it on single or dual stock X5660.

Overclocked single X5660 much better for gaming.


----------



## Xylene

Unfortunately the board is not overclockable. Is it totally going to be worthless with an R9 290? I am willing to give up some performance from my 3570k for the added benefit I am going to get for running VMs and the massive RAM capacity. It's currently got X5570's.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> One thing I did notice when testing with different memory speeds was the minimum framerate was affected quite a lot _(this was back on my i7 860 which could run 2400mhz)_. The average was mostly unaffected. It does help games to feel a bit more fluid overall.
> 
> Of course jumping from 1600mhz to 2133mhz or 2400mhz doesn't make much sense if you already have ram.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More info
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1487162/an-independent-study-does-the-speed-of-ram-directly-affect-fps-during-high-cpu-overhead-scenarios
> 
> My results weren't quite as dramatic as that, the old P55/860 couldn't quite take advantage of the 2400mhz memory, but there was still a noticeable difference going from 1600mhz to 2400mhz.


That's interesting. I've never focused on the FPS min since I find the FPS min to be pointless in most situations during actual gameplay. I touched on this a few pages ago. Here is the link:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6060#post_24951098

Just read that entire post and it'll explain some if not most of my issues with minimum FPS which is usually the 0.1%.

I have ran test to see how much RAM affects benchmark scores and overall experience when I was running my GTX 670s:
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=8

I might run a few benchmarks with higher RAM to see if it will effect my FPS min as well. I usually run DDR3-1600Mhz when benchmarking since it'll give a common speed and gives a good representation of what X58 users can expect without inflated results. I don't know if I can hit 2400Mhz with my current RAM, but I know awhile back I was able to hit DDR3-2200Mhz. I know my current RAM can hit 2000Mhz easily. I'm not sure about 2200Mhz yet since I haven't tested it.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's interesting. I've never focused on the FPS min since I find the FPS min to be pointless in most situations during actual gameplay. I touched on this a few pages ago. Here is the link:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6060#post_24951098
> 
> Just read that entire post and it'll explain some if not most of my issues with minimum FPS which is usually the 0.1%.
> 
> I have ran test to see how much RAM affects benchmark scores and overall experience when I was running my GTX 670s:
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/hardware/computer-tech-reviews/28-x5660-review?showall=&start=8
> 
> I might run a few benchmarks with higher RAM to see if it will effect my FPS min as well. I usually run DDR3-1600Mhz when benchmarking since it'll give a common speed and gives a good representation of what X58 users can expect without inflated results. I don't know if I can hit 2400Mhz with my current RAM, but I know awhile back I was able to hit DDR3-2200Mhz. I know my current RAM can hit 2000Mhz easily. I'm not sure about 2200Mhz yet since I haven't tested it.


Yeah, I know what you're saying, it might be more dramatic on newer platforms where that extra speed can really be taken advantage of. On my current setup I'm getting about 62gb/s read and 67gb/s write. On my x58 setup at 2200mhz it maxed out at around 30gb/s.

As far as I'm aware the x56xx's max memory speed is 10x the speed of the BCLK. My board would max out at around 223mhz, so the max memory speed I was able to run was 2230mhz.
With a w3670 I was able to get my ram running at the full 2400mhz, but the chip only clocked to around 4.1ghz at 1.35v so my [email protected] was much faster even with 2000mhz memory.

Here's an interesting one with direct comparisons:


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, I know what you're saying, it might be more dramatic on newer platforms where that extra speed can really be taken advantage of. On my current setup I'm getting about 62gb/s read and 67gb/s write. On my x58 setup at 2200mhz it maxed out at around 30gb/s.
> 
> As far as I'm aware the x56xx's max memory speed is 10x the speed of the BCLK. My board would max out at around 223mhz, so the max memory speed I was able to run was 2230mhz.
> With a w3670 I was able to get my ram running at the full 2400mhz, but the chip only clocked to around 4.1ghz at 1.35v so my [email protected] was much faster even with 2000mhz memory.
> 
> Here's an interesting one with direct comparisons:


I watched the video. With a good OC and good RAM frequency, the i5 2500K is still fine for gaming. The newer platforms have the benefits of having the PCIe lanes connected directly to the CPU. X58 users still have to run the lanes through the northbridge. The newer platforms can utilize the RAM better as well with great updates. Instead of updating X58, Intel basically just released the side-grade X79 and applied their new tech. I'm not upset with Intel for moving on, but I wish they would have at least simply updated the X58 platform. Obviously Intel had better plans.

I never really went above 2100Mhz since the very small increases didn't really make me feel like it was worth it. I did get around to running the Tomb Raider 2013 benchmark tool with 2000Mhz Cas 10 and 1600 Cas 7.

My FPS min results weren't as dramatic as I hoped:

4.6Ghz + 2000Mhz Loose Timings - FPS Min: 56.2fps [ran twice - same exact FPS min]

4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps
4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 58.0fps
4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps

I didn't noticed a difference in FPS Min. I think slightly overclocking the GPU would give me a better chance at getting a higher FPS Min. I know I should test more games. I went for the easiest benchmark and quickest outcome.

If I were in the market for a CPU solely for gaming, coming from the X58, I would definitely be looking at the i7-6700K. Obviously I would need a Hexa Core for the type of programs I run, but for gaming the 6700K looks like a beast. The single core increases is what I would be paying attention to until DX12 and Vulkan takes off to utilize more cores. Then there's AMD Zen right around the corner that might release at a affordable price for the performance. We will just have to wait, but at the moment I'm still seeing no real reason to upgrade. The newer platforms does allow users to utilize more memory.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I watched the video. With a good OC and good RAM frequency, the i5 2500K is still fine for gaming. The newer platforms have the benefits of having the PCIe lanes connected directly to the CPU. X58 users still have to run the lanes through the northbridge. The newer platforms can utilize the RAM better as well with great updates. Instead of updating X58, Intel basically just released the side-grade X79 and applied their new tech. I'm not upset with Intel for moving on, but I wish they would have at least simply updated the X58 platform. Obviously Intel had better plans.
> 
> I never really went above 2100Mhz since the very small increases didn't really make me feel like it was worth it. I did get around to running the Tomb Raider 2013 benchmark tool with 2000Mhz Cas 10 and 1600 Cas 7.
> 
> My FPS min results weren't as dramatic as I hoped:
> 
> 4.6Ghz + 2000Mhz Loose Timings - FPS Min: 56.2fps [ran twice - same exact FPS min]
> 
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 58.0fps
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps
> 
> I didn't noticed a difference in FPS Min. I think slightly overclocking the GPU would give me a better chance at getting a higher FPS Min. I know I should test more games. I went for the easiest benchmark and quickest outcome.
> 
> If I were in the market for a CPU solely for gaming, coming from the X58, I would definitely be looking at the i7-6700K. Obviously I would need a Hexa Core for the type of programs I run, but for gaming the 6700K looks like a beast. The single core increases is what I would be paying attention to until DX12 and Vulkan takes off to utilize more cores. Then there's AMD Zen right around the corner that might release at a affordable price for the performance. We will just have to wait, but at the moment I'm still seeing no real reason to upgrade. The newer platforms does allow users to utilize more memory.


Hmm, interesting. Yeah I agree Skylake did make a pretty big leap in single core improvements, my chip can almost match it at 5ghz.









I did a quick test as well, didn't notice much difference on min fps, but there was a pretty large difference on the max FPS going from 1600mhz to 2133/2400mhz.

CPU at 4.6ghz all power saving features off (4.6ghz full time)
Fastest timings possible on my setup at each speed, anything lower on any setting will result in sticks missing or instability
GPU at stock clocks and forced to max clocks using GPU Tweak II
Each test was run five times and the best result was taken

Tomb Raider 2013 - 1920x1200 - Ultimate preset

2400mhz 11-12-11-23
Min: 64
Max: 112
Avg 83.1

2133mhz 10-11-10-21
Min: 62
Max: 112
Avg: 81.9

1600mhz 7-8-7-15
Min: 62
Max: 104
Avg: 81.8

I ran the 1600mhz five more times just to make sure. It gets between 101-104 every time. At 2133mhz and 2400mhz it ranges from 108-112fps every time.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Hmm, interesting. Yeah I agree Skylake did make a pretty big leap in single core improvements, my chip can almost match it at 5ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did a quick test as well, didn't notice much difference on min fps, but there was a pretty large difference on the max FPS going from 1600mhz to 2133/2400mhz.
> 
> CPU at 4.6ghz all power saving features off (4.6ghz full time)
> Fastest timings possible on my setup at each speed, anything lower on any setting will result in sticks missing or instability
> GPU at stock clocks and forced to max clocks using GPU Tweak II
> Each test was run five times and the best result was taken
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Tomb Raider 2013 - 1920x1200 - Ultimate preset
> 
> 2400mhz 11-12-11-23
> Min: 64
> Max: 112
> Avg 83.1
> 
> 2133mhz 10-11-10-21
> Min: 62
> Max: 112
> Avg: 81.9
> 
> 1600mhz 7-8-7-15
> Min: 62
> Max: 104
> Avg: 81.8
> 
> 
> 
> I ran the 1600mhz five more times just to make sure. It gets between 101-104 every time. At 2133mhz and 2400mhz it ranges from 108-112fps every time.


Yeah the FPS Max did indeed increase. However, just like the FPS min, the FPS Max probably just peaked their and you'll only see that 0.1% - 0.2% of the time or when you are looking directly in the air during gameplay. However, that's still a interesting increase based of the RAM freq. I've always favored lower DRAM timings and decent frequencies [1600Mhz-1700Mhz] over higher DRAM frequencies and loose timings. I was running my Tomb Raider 2013 Benchmark using the Ultimate Preset @ 1440p. If I run my CPU at 4.8Ghz instead of 4.6Ghz I get better results @ 1440p and the FPS min never drops below 60fps in the benchmark.

I'd have to look more into this now since games are using a ton of memory and speed becomes important when swapping. I have Hitman and Rise of the Tomb Raider and those games and really eat up memory at 1440p and 4K resolutions. Then again I think those games will definitely need some optimization patches soon, well at least Tomb Raider will. 4.6Ghz - 1600Mhz has been giving me great performance so far.

We've reached the end of DX11. It's time to move onto Vulkan and DX12. I don't think high DRAM frequencies will be necessary once the devs start to include multiple cores. I don't care if it's just 2 or 3 cores. Anything is better than one. There are ways for all CPU cores to be utilized on the MS platform easily, but there's a lot of work to be done afterwards. I'm noticing that these powerful cards are throttling from DX11 draw call limitation as well as vRAM issues. Eliminate the vRAM restriction and the higher end cards are just hungry for more asynchronous commands\draw calls, but at the moment they are limited to only a single thread in most games [not all games]. So faster single core speed and RAM is relied upon and has been for the past 5+years or so. I don't think the DRAM frequencies on the X58 platform will be as dramatic as it is on newer platforms [2nd Gen and up]


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xylene*
> 
> Unfortunately the board is not overclockable. Is it totally going to be worthless with an R9 290?


Unfortunately, yes.

The single X5660 theoretically has more than enough total processing power for any kind of gaming. But with the way the current games are made, you need to have a strong single threaded performance and this can be a problem with stock X5660.

If you add another X5660, you will just increase the pool of processing resources that are not being used but your actual gaming experience won't change one bit.
Games are not able to take advantage of the total processing power you have as it is. More of the same ain't gonna change it.

Simply put, your system just isn't built for gaming. But if you insist on using it as such, replacing your X5660 with higher-clocked alternative like X5690 would be a MUCH better idea.









EDIT: looking at the prices, I would just get a pair of X5687s.
This would be even better for gaming since these are clocked even higher. They are 4C/8T, but with 2 of them you will have plenty of MT performance as well. Pretty much best of both worlds, if we talking stock.


----------



## Xylene

Since posting I've actually decided to go with X5677s that I found for $120 a pair. The board won't boot with X5687s according to all the reports a I found... it's a Mac, what do you expect? I got the machine for free and I'll only occasionally being playing games anyways.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xylene*
> 
> Since posting I've actually decided to go with X5677s that I found for $120 a pair. The board won't boot with X5687s according to all the reports a I found... it's a Mac, what do you expect? I got the machine for free and I'll only occasionally being playing games anyways.


Still, great choice, those are only 100Mhz or so slower than X5687.


----------



## moddingnewbie

Hi,
Hope this is posted onto the correct thread.
I'm interested in replacing a Core i7 920 on a Sabertooth X58 Mobo with a Xeon CPU for putting together a [email protected] rig. Can anyone on here suggest what Xeon CPU is considered a good buy where cost vs. performance is considered and also advise whether it's a reasonable idea to upgrade from an i7 920 to the recommended Xeon CPU please?
Assume that a Sabertooth X58 Mobo will function okay with a Xeon CPU straight out of the box so to speak however failing that should any hardware modifications be needed including firmware upgrade/downgrade please advise further.
Thank you.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moddingnewbie*
> 
> Hi,
> Hope this is posted onto the correct thread.
> I'm interested in replacing a Core i7 920 on a Sabertooth X58 Mobo with a Xeon CPU for putting together a [email protected] rig. Can anyone on here suggest what Xeon CPU is considered a good buy where cost vs. performance is considered and also advise whether it's a reasonable idea to upgrade from an i7 920 to the recommended Xeon CPU please?
> Assume that a Sabertooth X58 Mobo will function okay with a Xeon CPU straight out of the box so to speak however failing that should any hardware modifications be needed including firmware upgrade/downgrade please advise further.
> Thank you.


X5660/X5670/X5675 are great CPU's and a good buy where cost vs. performance is considered and are compatible with your board.


----------



## moddingnewbie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> X5660/X5670/X5675 are great CPU's and a good buy where cost vs. performance is considered and are compatible with your board.


Hi jvidia, Thank you. Much appreciated.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I watched the video. With a good OC and good RAM frequency, the i5 2500K is still fine for gaming. The newer platforms have the benefits of having the PCIe lanes connected directly to the CPU. X58 users still have to run the lanes through the northbridge. The newer platforms can utilize the RAM better as well with great updates. Instead of updating X58, Intel basically just released the side-grade X79 and applied their new tech. I'm not upset with Intel for moving on, but I wish they would have at least simply updated the X58 platform. Obviously Intel had better plans.
> 
> I never really went above 2100Mhz since the very small increases didn't really make me feel like it was worth it. I did get around to running the Tomb Raider 2013 benchmark tool with 2000Mhz Cas 10 and 1600 Cas 7.
> 
> My FPS min results weren't as dramatic as I hoped:
> 
> 4.6Ghz + 2000Mhz Loose Timings - FPS Min: 56.2fps [ran twice - same exact FPS min]
> 
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 58.0fps
> 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz Tighter Timings - FPS Min: 56.0fps
> 
> I didn't noticed a difference in FPS Min. I think slightly overclocking the GPU would give me a better chance at getting a higher FPS Min. I know I should test more games. I went for the easiest benchmark and quickest outcome.
> 
> If I were in the market for a CPU solely for gaming, coming from the X58, I would definitely be looking at the i7-6700K. Obviously I would need a Hexa Core for the type of programs I run, but for gaming the 6700K looks like a beast. The single core increases is what I would be paying attention to until DX12 and Vulkan takes off to utilize more cores. Then there's AMD Zen right around the corner that might release at a affordable price for the performance. We will just have to wait, but at the moment I'm still seeing no real reason to upgrade. The newer platforms does allow users to utilize more memory.


I am holding out for the new Skylake-E to see what new features arise with the new socket and chipset. The X79 was a joke of an upgrade from the X58. The X99 was a little better, but as you have shown with a Xeon CPU and some OCing, there is a lot of life left in the X58s. Yes, the X58 only has PCI-E 2.0, but even then GXT 980ti doesn't use all of the bandwidth. However, we are losing out on the M.2 sockets and higher bandwidth for PCI-E SSDs and the SATA 3rd Gen ports.

Unfortunately, I don't have very high hopes for AMD to come out and surprise us with a new CPU and chipset. Ever since Core 2 Duo, they have failed miserably at trying to come back. I hope they do something soon though to help bring these prices down from Intel.


----------



## ieldra

Guys I have an Asus P6T Deluxe sitting in my old case, in a box behind my bed.

There's a Thermalright ultra 120 extreme mounted to it.

I lose the spanner that came with the heatsink, so I've had trouble removing it, but I haven't tried taking the motherboard out the case yet.

I want to sell the damn thing, how the **** do I unscrew this piece of **** heatsink









There's a bolt right above the cpu socket, and the spanner was angled slightly so it would fit under the heatsink


----------



## ieldra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I am holding out for the new Skylake-E to see what new features arise with the new socket and chipset. The X79 was a joke of an upgrade from the X58. The X99 was a little better, but as you have shown with a Xeon CPU and some OCing, there is a lot of life left in the X58s. Yes, the X58 only has PCI-E 2.0, but even then GXT 980ti doesn't use all of the bandwidth. However, we are losing out on the M.2 sockets and higher bandwidth for PCI-E SSDs and the SATA 3rd Gen ports.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't have very high hopes for AMD to come out and surprise us with a new CPU and chipset. Ever since Core 2 Duo, they have failed miserably at trying to come back. I hope they do something soon though to help bring these prices down from Intel.


I just upgraded to x99 from x58 i7 920.i wanted to hold out for skylake-e as well but I really needed more ram urgently and couldn't justify buying ddr3. I guess I'll sell my 5820k and buy broadwell when it's out. Sticking to x99 until next new architecture (what's coming after cannonlake/Katy lake)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I am holding out for the new Skylake-E to see what new features arise with the new socket and chipset. The X79 was a joke of an upgrade from the X58. The X99 was a little better, but as you have shown with a Xeon CPU and some OCing, there is a lot of life left in the X58s. Yes, the X58 only has PCI-E 2.0, but even then GXT 980ti doesn't use all of the bandwidth. However, we are losing out on the M.2 sockets and higher bandwidth for PCI-E SSDs and the SATA 3rd Gen ports.


I always thought that the X79 was a side grade when you compare them on paper. Then theirs the 10% advantage which is saying much of anything outside of benchmarks aka the fake e-peen the never lives longer than a few months. That 10% came at a hefty price point as well. The X99 looked promising until I started viewing the benchmarks. No excitement and IPC barely increased. The i7-6700K is moving things along just like the i7-4770K did. Intel got those two CPUs correct. Unfortunately it didn't translate well over to the Hexa-cores even with massive OCs. That's where Intel keeps dropping the ball for me.

I'm not losing out on anything. I run a 240GB M.2 socket as a boot drive it still gets 680MB\s Read and 1400MB\s Write even after many months of usage. How much bandwidth do you think we really need for SATA III? SATA III has been tapped out and until we see M.2 drives reading and writing 8GB\s there's 100% nothing wrong with PCIe 2.0. We won't be tapping out PCIe 2.0 anytime soon and even if we did we wouldn't notice the it. The software isn't moving as fast as the tech and that has been the case for many years now. I've ran SATA III SSDs and mSATA III drives as well. Performance is great. So I really don't see why X58 users would miss out on anything. The upgrades aren't that expensive when compared to flat out changing platforms.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't have very high hopes for AMD to come out and surprise us with a new CPU and chipset. Ever since Core 2 Duo, they have failed miserably at trying to come back. I hope they do something soon though to help bring these prices down from Intel.


Not many people have high hopes for AMD based on their previous releases. I do have faith, but I know everyone is skeptical at this point. AMD has always been competitive with their prices and performance. They need to get back into the high end market. I feel like I could help them create a platform better than their previous platforms for competition lol. We still can't forget how AMD got to where they are today though. The things Intel did in the past had a huge effect on AMD as a whole. The damage is done and while Intel prevailed and had to pay fines, it left AMD in the dust with limited funds. Without plenty of money it's hard paying the best of the best for R&D.

Once Intel dominated the obvious happened....they have been dragging their feet for years. Yet they still make a lot of money even while flat out gimping some of their own CPUs. They still dominate. We will see how AMD responds and I don't think Intel will ever bring their prices down. They know people will continue to buy their over priced tech.


----------



## srialmaster

@Kana-Maru

I believe you and I are running the same PCI-E SSD except I am running the 480GB.

I have 7x 3TB HDDs in my machine. I am constantly debating taking out my 2nd GTX 680 and getting a RAID controller. I am running a Cooler Master HAF Stacker 935 and have room for more HDDs, but nowhere to plugin into my motherboard. 2x of my 3TBs are in a RAID 0 on the Marvell 3128 and they do pretty well. However, in the past when I had them as 2x individual drives, I still saw more throughput on the Marvell with 3rd Gen SATA versus the 2nd Gen that's on the ICH10R.

The other thing that will eventually hit us all is time. We all know that parts cannot last forever. I just had my Revo Drive x2 die on me which prompted the upgrade to the Kingston HyperX Predator. I am about to install the X5660 that's sitting here on my desk. However, I am still contemplating on ordering a W3690 from ebay since I can get them for sub $200.

I use a FX-9590 to run an ESXi 6 server with 32GB of memory. It's running on an ASUS M5A99FX Pro R2.0 in a Corsair 750D and cooled by a H110i GTX.

Any ideas on a good motherboard to throw into the 750D and get a 2nd X5660 and use that for my ESXi?


----------



## Kana-Maru

^ I'm in the same boat. I have x4 7200rpm HDDs. I have split them in pairs and have them running x2 RAID 0 on Intel chipset [ICH10R]. I also have x2 SSD RAID 0 running on the Intel Chipset. The performance was better on SATA III with my SSDs running in RAID 0, but honestly there's really no difference in everyday usage and performance. I use the drives for Steam\Origin games now. I'm only running my Fury X so I have room to expand.

I'm thinking about getting a PCIe RAID SATA III card as well and adding two 500GBs SSDs in RAID 0 for 1TB. It would definitely help with the loading and saving for specific programs, but my x2 RAID 0 HDDs are getting the job done with much better throughput than a single 7200RPM HDD. Decisions......decisions. I'm not sure what I'm going to do.

As far as parts not lasting forever, this is where warranty comes into play. My Sabertooth came with 5 years warranty and I believe it might be out of warranty now after so many years. Most of the new things I buy for my PC comes with 3 - 5 year warranty [or lifetime warranty]. So time isn't really a problem. Electronics will die no matter what platform we are on. Server boards are meant to last under harsh conditions, but when you are running military test on the board, that gives me greater hope lol.

There's plenty of motherboards out there. I guess it's going to come down to how much you are willing to spend on a 1366 MB. I can only vouch for my Sabertooth since it's the only board I've used on the X58 platform.


----------



## srialmaster

@Kana-Maru

What case are you using?

Also, can you give me your exact BIOS settings for your 4.8GHz X5660?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> What case are you using?
> 
> Also, can you give me your exact BIOS settings for your 4.8GHz X5660?


I'm using the NZXT Phantom 410 and I have never shared my BIOS settings.

I run 4Ghz daily. 4.8Ghz is only for benchmarking. I could run 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz daily, but it causes my northbridge heat to increase by 4c - 6c and I'd rather keep that temp as low as possible.


----------



## srialmaster

I mean your BIOS settings for all of you voltage configurations.

Did you go white or black on the 410? It looks pretty sweet.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I know what you meant. I never share my BIOS settings. I help people reach their high OCs. Every rig is different so the settings might not work, but that still takes all of the fun out of overclocking and accomplishing a high OC. There's specific settings I do not touch though.

I went with the white and blue case. I have old pictures of my rig on the first page under "Click Here for Pictures of my Gaming Rig". I need to update my pictures since I have my Fury X now. The case is great and I've had it for a few years.


----------



## srialmaster

I think I ran out of my Artic Silver Ceramique.....







I like the Ceramique more than the AS5.

I gotta grab my Gelid Solutions GC-Extreme Thermal Compound from the office so I can put my X5660 in today.

I am fairly new to OCing and my motherboard has a lot of settings that I am still learning. Unfortunately, I don't see many people using my motherboard of OCing as well. However, my motherboard and the extreme are very closely related, so I can use some examples from those motherboards for trying things.

Edit:
I found some AS5, so I'll go with this


----------



## Kana-Maru

Most of the settings are the same. Some boards use different terminology and offers more options. I don't think that you will have a hard time overclocking these the 32nm. 3.6Ghz - 4Ghz should be easy as only changing the BCLK for starters on some motherboards. Obviously you'll want to change some settings eventually. You will get plenty of help from users here as well.


----------



## srialmaster

I think my X5660 is junk...









I cannot run my memory at 2133MHz and I put my old 1600MHz memory in and it doesn't like it either.....


----------



## srialmaster

I was able to get 4GHz stable with the memory at 1403.2MHz

I only set CPUv to 1.3v and QPI/DRAM at 1.3 and everything else is Auto.


----------



## CesarDRK

For people running W10 x64 here... Are you installing any extra drivers or just keeping the windows provided ones for the CHIPSET and INTEL RST?

The current intel INF driver has no x58 support, at least in the readme.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> For people running W10 x64 here... Are you installing any extra drivers or just keeping the windows provided ones for the CHIPSET and INTEL RST?
> 
> The current intel INF driver has no x58 support, at least in the readme.


Beside GPU and sound card, didnt install any other drivers.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I think my X5660 is junk...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot run my memory at 2133MHz and I put my old 1600MHz memory in and it doesn't like it either.....


Sometimes you have to work with it. Try loose timings and make sure the DRAM is getting enough voltage. For high DRAM Frequencies you'll more than likely need to increase the QPI\Vtt higher than you normally would like.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> For people running W10 x64 here... Are you installing any extra drivers or just keeping the windows provided ones for the CHIPSET and INTEL RST?
> 
> The current intel INF driver has no x58 support, at least in the readme.


I upgraded to Win 10 x64 and my chipset drivers are installed. I actually installed everything I normally use like USB 3.0 support. Although I don't get the USB 3.0 message that I used to get on Win 7, I still get the USB 3.0 speeds on Win 10:thumb:
I do miss the message though.

I removed the Intel RST. I only used it when I was running x2 SSDs RAID 0 on my Marvell SATA III chipset. I needed a modded RST for my modded BIOS to support TRIM in a RAID configuration.


----------



## revertex

@Kana-Maru

I wonder why X5660 instead a X5670 or a X5675, both have a higher multiplier but every other specs are the same, did I miss something?
As those processors cost almost the same, but you still using a X5660, is there something special in it?
I don't see why a X5660 could be a better choice than a X5675.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> I wonder why X5660 instead a X5670 or a X5675, both have a higher multiplier but every other specs are the same, did I miss something?
> As those processors cost almost the same, but you still using a X5660, is there something special in it?
> I don't see why a X5660 could be a better choice than a X5675.


IMO X5650 is the sweet spot as you can have them for 60-75$ shipped and they can still easily go above 4Ghz with a good board. Afterwards you are probably more limited by the heat/voltage than by the multi anyway.


----------



## bobnoho

anybody try a xeon x56** on a dell x58 xps 730x motherboard??

$80 on ebay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/151586313094

I bout one as a budget build for the old i7 950 I had laying around it turned out to be a great computer, very good gaming machine even with only 2xGTX460's

3602 in passmark

http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V8/display.php?id=56363957712

thinking of a just for fun build... thoughts?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> I wonder why X5660 instead a X5670 or a X5675, both have a higher multiplier but every other specs are the same, did I miss something?
> As those processors cost almost the same, but you still using a X5660, is there something special in it?
> I don't see why a X5660 could be a better choice than a X5675.


@SmOgER touched on some valid points about the X5650 price and Hexa cores generating heat above a certain frequency. However, you must remember that I was one of the first people to jump on the X58 + Xeon Hexa core back in 2013. My X5660 cost me approx $220-$230 or something like that. Those other higher end Hexa cores, X5670, X5679, X5675, X5680, W36xx and so on, were going for $350-$800+ and I wasn't willing to invest that much into the X58 platform. I was on the verge of upgrading my X58 Quad Core i7-960 to a X79 Hexa Core [ i7-3930K ] back in 2013. I took the chance and never looked back.

My first CPU was actually the Xeon L5639 and it was amazing for gaming and multi-tasking. I wrote a review here on OCN in another topic. I maxed the L5639 out at 4.1Ghz and 4.5Ghz with the Turbo engaged [stable]. I wanted more than 4.1Ghz which was already more than enough for daily usage. The L5639 was around $80-$90, I was impressed and took the chance on the X5660 and never looked back. Moving into it's 3rd year installed on my Sabertooth, it has been nothing short of wonderful, especially for gaming and multi-tasking. I feel like I'm not missing out on anything with the newer platforms based on the benchmarks and performance. Even then those are benchmarks and no one is running those benchmark results daily in most cases. So even benchmarks can be misleading.

So as I explained earlier the biggest reason for going with the X5660 at the time [2013] was the price that I was willing to pay. I topped the X5660 off at 5.4Ghz [never again] and it still runs stable at 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz. Those other CPUs might have better stats, but that means nothing since they might require more voltage than I need on my X5660 for specific clocks. The extra multipliers are great, but that doesn't change a thing. There's nothing special about the X5660 and the X5675 MIGHT be the the better choice, but that doesn't mean that it will overclock or perform any better than a X5660. For instance the X5675 "might" have slower IPC and a weaker IMC depending on the CPU, but my X5660 could be stronger in both cases. Who knows it's pure luck and binning.


----------



## bobnoho

x5660 on ebay rite now $75


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ... For instance the X5675 "might" have slower IPC and a weaker IMC depending on the CPU, but my X5660 could be stronger in both cases. Who knows it's pure luck and binning.


Exactly. A x5650 would probably be enough for most if the board can run it loaded when using turbo multipliers, which not all boards can. Even then, the extra multipliers do help if you're going for some extreme clocks.

I've tried 7 x5670's, only two could get past 4.3ghz at 1.35v stable, and one was stable at 1.35v/4.5ghz. So it really is just luck to get a good one. All but one was able to handle 4.2ghz at 1.35v, that one was an F batch and it wasn't even stable at 4ghz/1.35v.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think my 5650 will do 4.2 at 1.35. There's a lot of heat.


----------



## revertex

Thank you both for the answers.
Kana-Maru, i believe that anyone that read Westmere-EP - X5660 Full Review plus most relevant parts of this thread ended up jointing the club.
The richness of the information you provided played a instrumental factor to convince me to upgrade.
I've found that pick a good Xeon these days isn't that easy, most of the W36XX that I saw comes from dead workstations.
Most of then died from overheating, sure it's not a good idea grab a processor from a computer decommissioned that way.
Other processors not even god knows where they come from, because the vendor have no idea, or are lying about the source, or both.
Find a good vendor that have a batch of processors from servers upgraded or decommissioned in 2016 is not as easy as 2 years ago.
That's why I asked, about X56XX differences, not always the higher clock available for sale is the one in most good conditions.
i known that's a silicon lottery, but there's no excuse to play the odds in your favor.


----------



## SmOgER

By the way, since the haswell days, what do you guys think the "safe" temps are for these chips?
I personally think that this whole "keep temps under 70C for 24/7" or "have at least 20C distance to TjMax under IBT stress testing" is a very old school thinking and I don't see any reason why say those chips would be any less heat resistant than those Haswell chips or even mobile chips which can almost hit TjMax on a daily basis and still have turbo multi kicked in almost constantly. I have mid-2011 MBA with Sandy CPU and it hits 97C quite easily with prime95 but I never ever had any stability problems with it or even any kind of throttling. It's always turbo boosted under load.

So I guess my view is that anything under TjMax when stress testing is fine. With TjMax being 100C,
90-95C temps under synthetic stress test are fine in my book.

What's your take on this?

EDIT: Since I only recently joined in this thread and bought ga-ex58-extreme only several days ago I didn't notice that positively ridiculous poll at the top! Those 10 people that voted "no" must be drunk!


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> Since I only recently joined in this thread and bought ga-ex58-extreme only several days ago I didn't notice that positively ridiculous poll at the top! Those 10 people that voted "no" must be drunk!


Those are AMD users.

I think these numbers exist for a reason, higher the temp, higher the risk of electromigration.
Over certain values of temp + voltage, electromigration isn't a risk anymore, but a fact.
You can't ignore physics an math.

Remember the old Northwood P4?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Thank you both for the answers.
> Kana-Maru, i believe that anyone that read Westmere-EP - X5660 Full Review plus most relevant parts of this thread ended up jointing the club.
> The richness of the information you provided played a instrumental factor to convince me to upgrade.
> I've found that pick a good Xeon these days isn't that easy, most of the W36XX that I saw comes from dead workstations.
> Most of then died from overheating, sure it's not a good idea grab a processor from a computer decommissioned that way.
> Other processors not even god knows where they come from, because the vendor have no idea, or are lying about the source, or both.
> Find a good vendor that have a batch of processors from servers upgraded or decommissioned in 2016 is not as easy as 2 years ago.
> That's why I asked, about X56XX differences, not always the higher clock available for sale is the one in most good conditions.
> i known that's a silicon lottery, but there's no excuse to play the odds in your favor.


I have some info that I'll be adding to the review soon. I was benchmarking my butt off to bring results to you guys. Fun times.

Yeah avoid CPUs that have overheated for sure. Since most of the 1366 Xeons have hit the market at affordable prices people basically took advantage of that and bought plenty of them. Most people probably cherry picked and tried to sell off the CPUs that won't OC well. That's the bad thing about bulk sales at affordable prices. People will always get more than what they need. If the prices were a bit higher I think you'll still have plenty of CPUs to choose from, but $40-$70 isn't a lot of money to begin with. Especially when dealing with PC gamers who easily spend hundreds on keyboards and mice\mouse.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> By the way, since the haswell days, what do you guys think the "safe" temps are for these chips?
> I personally think that this whole "keep temps under 70C for 24/7" or "have at least 20C distance to TjMax under IBT stress testing" is a very old school thinking and I don't see any reason why say those chips would be any less heat resistant than those Haswell chips or even mobile chips which can almost hit TjMax on a daily basis and still have turbo multi kicked in almost constantly. I have mid-2011 MBA with Sandy CPU and it hits 97C quite easily with prime95 but I never ever had any stability problems with it or even any kind of throttling. It's always turbo boosted under load.
> 
> So I guess my view is that anything under TjMax when stress testing is fine. With TjMax being 100C,
> 90-95C temps under synthetic stress test are fine in my book.
> 
> What's your take on this?


My take on it is that you'll want to be well under 74c. Anything around 80c or above is way to hot for a 1366 32nm. Turn off the last protecting feature, CPU throttling feature, and you kiss your CPU good bye. There's several ways to kill a CPU and excessive heat is just one of many. I think the degrading will be the first step, but I've seen people not pay attention to the vCore, start up the PC and kill the CPU instantly. When I run my CPU at 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz it's NEVER close to 70c unless I'm purposely benchmarking the CPU. Depending on the ambient temp, which is much warmer now than a few weeks ago, I'm usually sitting at 25c-30c idle. During gaming sections at 4.6Ghz I have recently recorded my CPU temps for Rise of the Tomb Raider and Hitman DX12.

Oh yeah check out my Fury X review for both games here:
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/43-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-fury-x-benchmarks
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks

Check out the amazing 1440p screenshots for Rise of The Tomb Raider I recently uploaded. That game is gorgeous. Anyways, back on topic, if you look at my Real Time Benchmarks™ it shows how hot my CPU gets at 4.6Ghz. The only games that can get the CPU that warm is demanding games like Tomb Raider, Hitman, Crysis 2 & 3, Battlefield series etc. Other games that doesn't require to much CPU usage will normally keep the CPU around 32c-37c. For demanding games it's usually around 40c-45c.

I guess the better question would be: "Why?". Why would you even want your investment, CPU, to reach 75c - 80c or higher? I usually go by Intel recommendations, but even if you ignore Intel guidelines why would anyone want their CPU to get that hot in the first place when so many things "could" go wrong? I'll never let my CPU go above 80c.....heck 76c is pushing it for me. There's no way I'm letting any CPU I own get close to 203 degrees. That's way to hot to sustain in my book and I like to keep all components at a decent temperature including the motherboard itself.

Quote:


> EDIT: Since I only recently joined in this thread and bought ga-ex58-extreme only several days ago I didn't notice that positively ridiculous poll at the top! Those 10 people that voted "no" must be drunk!


Haters gonna hate and some people want to be special. Then again perhaps my review wasn't helpful to those individuals.....who knows. Everyone doesn't like me.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ...
> 
> Oh yeah check out my Fury X review for both games here:
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/43-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-fury-x-benchmarks
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks
> 
> Check out the amazing 1440p screenshots for Rise of The Tomb Raider I recently uploaded. That game is gorgeous.
> 
> ...


Very nice, that game looks great. I actually just finished TR 2013 _(picked it up for $5 a few months back)_ and I'm am looking forward to playing the new one.

Quite surprising about the DX11 to DX12 difference. Did you notice any visible difference or just a drop in performance?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> My take on it is that you'll want to be well under 74c. Anything around 80c or above is way to hot for a 1366 32nm. Turn off the last protecting feature, CPU throttling feature, and you kiss your CPU good bye. There's several ways to kill a CPU and excessive heat is just one of many. I think the degrading will be the first step, but I've seen people not pay attention to the vCore, start up the PC and kill the CPU instantly. When I run my CPU at 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz it's NEVER close to 70c unless I'm purposely benchmarking the CPU. Depending on the ambient temp, which is much warmer now than a few weeks ago, I'm usually sitting at 25c-30c idle. During gaming sections at 4.6Ghz I have recently recorded my CPU temps for Rise of the Tomb Raider and Hitman DX12.
> 
> <...>
> 
> I guess the better question would be: "Why?". Why would you even want your investment, CPU, to reach 75c - 80c or higher? I usually go by Intel recommendations, but even if you ignore Intel guidelines why would anyone want their CPU to get that hot in the first place when so many things "could" go wrong? I'll never let my CPU go above 80c.....heck 76c is pushing it for me. There's no way I'm letting any CPU I own get close to 203 degrees. That's way to hot to sustain in my book and I like to keep all components at a decent temperature including the motherboard itself.
> Haters gonna hate and some people want to be special. Then again perhaps my review wasn't helpful to those individuals.....who knows. Everyone doesn't like me.


The thing is according to intel specs technically they can safely go to as high as 100C TJunction and only then do they start throttling. 76-81C (depending on actual CPU model) is for max TCase which happens to reach that temparute pretty much precisely when the cores reach high 90s (97/98 or so...)
I guess I'am just genuinely curious what exactly made you arrive at that assumption that you need to be "well under 74c" for Tjunction? This has nothing to do with intel recommendations, that's for sure.









According to specs, it's not overheating until either TCase reaches that specified thresold in 76-81C range or Tjunction (core temps that we all go by) reaches 99-100C. Those specs are very similar to those toasty running Haswell or mobile chips that people just assume are "more heat resistant" based on no reason whatsoever other than the fact that they just run hot straight out of the box.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Very nice, that game looks great. I actually just finished TR 2013 _(picked it up for $5 a few months back)_ and I'm am looking forward to playing the new one.
> 
> Quite surprising about the DX11 to DX12 difference. Did you notice any visible difference or just a drop in performance?


I'm guessing you mean graphical or image quality differences. I didn't notice any difference in graphics quality or image quality. DX12 does have some new graphcial features, but the main purpose of DX12 are the technical side of things. Which is to get more low-level access for developers, better management, utilizing more threads and concurrent operations on the GPU. Those were only 1440p screens. I have some 4K screens coming as well. I don't know what AMD has done with the Fury X and their Tomb Raider drivers, but this game is running amazing steady at 4K! I was getting around 32fps-35fps and yes it was very cinematic. I play a lot of games @ 4K and they all seem to perform great. I expected low FPS spikes and random issues, but so far my 4K experience has been going well since I upgraded to the Fury X.

TR 2013 is a great game as well. The graphics are really nice in that game.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> The thing is according to intel specs technically they can safely go to as high as 100C TJunction and only then do they start throttling. 76-81C (depending on actual CPU model) ise for max TCase which happens to reach that temparute pretty much precisely when the cores reach high 90s (97/98 or so...)
> I guess I'am just gnuinely curious what exactly made you arrive at that assumption that you need to be "well under 74c" for Tjunction? This has nothing to do with intel recommendations, that's for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to specs, it's not overheating until either TCase reaches that specified thresold in 76-81C range or Tjunction reaches 99-100C. Those specs are very similar to those toasty running Haswell or mobile chips that people just assume are "more heat resistant" based on no reason whatsoever other than the fact that they just run hot out of the box.


I'm not sure where you are reading 100c-TJunction is safe, but I'm speaking solely for the X58-32nm CPUs. There's nowhere on Intel pages where anything about 100c -TJunction- is safe. 100c was safe back when the CPUs were mini soldiers [65nm], but the temps have dropped a bit since then. Just from reading about the Westmere's 32nm from Intel own website, ARK specs, no one should even consider TJunction with the Westmere-EP as the results are all over the place and a crucial feature is missing. TJunction shown in programs like CoreTemp, Real Temp, HwInfo are all speculations. Those numbers you are seeing aren't official. Tcase is the temp that you should pay attention to of course; but if you want to really see your CPU limits remove the heatsink and see how fast it heats up and when the BIOS starts complaining about a hot CPU catch the temperature. It's going to be nearly impossible going that route. Anyways Intel Tcase temps are never telling people they can reach 90c-100c anything. Don't confuse newer tech with older tech.

Now to address your genuine curiosity....... MY recommendation is generally below 70c-74c @ 100% load. That way I don't have worry. INTEL recommendation is 81c-82c for my CPU and much less for my L5639. So as I said I follow Intel recommendation, but the lower the heat the better. Which is why I said:
Quote:


> "My take on it is that you'll want to be well under 74c. Anything around 80c or above is way to hot for a 1366 32nm."


The first sentence begins with the work "MY". That's my opinion \ recommendations that no one has to follow. It's just a recommendation and\or opinion. The second half of the sentence is according to Intel and you have the right to ignore Intel as well. You won't see many Westmere-EPs safely exceeding 80c-83c that's for sure.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> According to specs, it's not overheating until either TCase reaches that specified thresold in 76-81C range


It looks like we are on the same page. Don't confuse my recommendations with Intel official temps. 76c is getting hot, but 81c-82c is the official lower your frequency moment.


----------



## srialmaster

Anyone know if the Asus P6T6 WS Revolution is good for OCing? I see one on ebay paired with 12gb of ram and 990x for $450.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Anyone know if the Asus P6T6 WS Revolution is good for OCing? I see one on ebay paired with 12gb of ram and 990x for $450.


Yes, it is very good, I had great results with it. That price is not bad if you sell the 990x and ram, would end up paying only around $130 for it.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Sometimes you have to work with it. Try loose timings and make sure the DRAM is getting enough voltage. For high DRAM Frequencies you'll more than likely need to increase the QPI\Vtt higher than you normally would like.


Yeah, I got it a little higher after my stable 4.4GHz OC. My H100 doesn't cool as well on the 4.4. I hit 80°C easily. My 4.0 I hit 78°C max on benching. I am going to order some Scythe Ultra Kaze and make a Push-Pull and see if it helps. Also, I posted my CPU-Z verification and awaiting approval for my X58 tag.....


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yes, it is very good, I had great results with it. That price is not bad if you sell the 990x and ram, would end up paying only around $130 for it.


I kinda wanted the 990x too.....


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I kinda wanted the 990x too.....


Go for it then.








I think the w3690 is a better deal at a little over half the price though.


----------



## srialmaster

I am looking to replace my ESXi server's FX-9590 with a X58 setup OC'd. I have a Corsair 110i GTX for that case and 1KW psu.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ....


So I guess you were referring to TCase then. Makes more sense.








My assumption about TjMax being 100C is based on that most intel CPUs that have TCase over 70C have TjMax at or very close to 100C too. I can't imagine it being lower than 95C on say X5650 which has a ridiculously high TCase of 81.3°C which is probably much higher than any 65nm CPU to be honest. Again, there is nothing to suggest that it's any less heat resistant than 65nm CPU. Oh and people were afraid to push those tanks above 70C Tjunction too back in the day.

As for the BIOS, it reports TCase value I believe, so it's of hardly any use. BIOS will start complaining as soon as it reaches the max specced TCase value and that value is no secret for any X58 CPU anyway.
And for testing purposes manually slowing down the CPU fan from windows while stress testing would be a much safer idea. I actually did that just now to confirm that E5540 starts throttling at 76C TCase.








There is still a prochot several degress above that which should shut the power off before any damage could occur.

In a way TjMax is like a redline on a car and prochot is a rev-limiter. :]


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> So I guess you were referring to TCase then. Makes more sense. wink.gif
> My assumption about TjMax being 100C is based on that most intel CPUs that have TCase over 70C have TjMax at or very close to 100C too. I can't imagine it being lower than 95C on say X5650 which has a ridiculously high TCase of 81.3°C which is probably much higher than any 65nm CPU to be honest. Again, there is nothing to suggest that it's any less heat resistant than 65nm CPU. Oh and people were afraid to push those tanks above 70C Tjunction too back in the day.


The 65nm where actually easily hitting 100c which way more than my 32nm. I can't blame people for wanted optimal cooling with their 65nm.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Ss for the BIOS, it reports TCase value I believe, so it's of hardly any use. BIOS will start complaining as soon as it reaches the max specced TCase value and that value is no secret for any X58 CPU anyway.
> And for testing purposes manually slowing down the CPU fan from windows while stress testing would be a much safer idea. I actually did that just now to confirm that E5540 starts throttling at 76C TCase. biggrin.gif
> There is still a prochot several degress above that which should shut the power off before any damage could occur.


^ Yes the BIOS will complain once the max Tcase and I didn't think that would be the best route lol. The CPU get really hot when there's no cooling. I accidentally removed my water cooler pump cable and the BIOS complained. The CPU was so hot within 15 seconds that it wasn't funny. It was hot enough to burn my hand even when touching the plastic over the pump.

Well prochot won't shut down anything.n It will send communications and throttle the CPU frequency to hopefully cool off the CPU and prevent damage to other compoents. This is similar to what I was saying earlier about how hot my CPU got when I accidentally unplugged the water pump. These Xeons were made with servers in mind and just in case of a fan failure or hot ambient temps the prochot would kick in to keep temps low to prevent further damage to the CPU and other components. The CPU can get extremely hot when there's a fan failure. Each core is monitored as well. You'll definitely loose some performance. The CPU doesn't freeze or shut down until thermal management shuts down the CPU functions. So even if the CPU is throttling, if you don't do something about the CPU or CPU core temps the thermal management system will shut down no matter what at some point.


----------



## revertex

@SmOgER,

Aren't you concerned about how high temps affect components surrounding CPU?

I suppose that at these temps, everything around will be pretty hot too.

Most X58 boards have multi layer PCB's that help to spread the heat, but anyway, if CPU is hot for long time, it means everything around will be hot, unless you have a pretty good cooling solution.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I am looking to replace my ESXi server's FX-9590 with a X58 setup OC'd. I have a Corsair 110i GTX for that case and 1KW psu.


For that price I'd probably just go x79, you can pick up a e5-1650 for around $150-200 and decent boards go for around $150-250. If you get a good chip, 4.6ghz is pretty easy, my chip is actually stable at 4.9ghz/1.4v. You'll also get some bonus stuff like native SATA3, much higher memory bandwidth, and around 10% boost clock to clock in raw CPU power and then the possibility of going to an overclockable 8-core e5-1680 if they ever drop in price.

The x58 setups are great for the lower priced chips, but going for the more expensive chips in a new build doesn't seem worth it to me.


----------



## srialmaster

I went ahead and bit the bullet and bought a W3690 for $169.99 and free shipping today. "pulled from a working workstation"

Also I got my memory up to 1754MHz with a QPI at 1.325v.

http://valid.x86.fr/7u97lh

Now, I will see if my motherboard will support 32GB of memory with my X5660


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> @SmOgER,
> 
> Aren't you concerned about how high temps affect components surrounding CPU?
> 
> I suppose that at these temps, everything around will be pretty hot too.
> 
> Most X68 boards have multi layer PCB's that help to spread the heat, but anyway, if CPU is hot for long time, it means everything around will be hot, unless you have a pretty good cooling solution.


The TCase is no higher than ~70C with fan running in normal mode stress testing and no higher than ~65C during real world loads, so it's not bad.
The IOH of my GA-EX58-Extreme without any additional water block / PCI heatsink to standard IOH heatsink attached (which is flat on top and has screw holes in it for going crazy cooling) tops out at 64C under continuous prime95 stress testing and is specced to 100C thermal limit. Some MSI boards with crappy cooling actually idle at 60s C IOH temps so all good.


----------



## srialmaster

Woohoo! I am solid at 4.2GHz @ 1.35v and RAM 1834MHz! I am happy here. I will modify my H100 with 4x(Push-Pull) Scythe Slipstream instead of 2x (Push).

http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> For that price I'd probably just go x79, you can pick up a e5-1650 for around $150-200 and decent boards go for around $150-250.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> If you get a good chip, 4.6ghz is pretty easy, my chip is actually stable at 4.9ghz/1.4v. You'll also get some bonus stuff like native SATA3, much higher memory bandwidth, and around 10% boost clock to clock in raw CPU power and then the possibility of going to an overclockable 8-core e5-1680 if they ever drop in price.
> 
> The x58 setups are great for the lower priced chips, but going for the more expensive chips in a new build doesn't seem worth it to me
> 
> 
> .


Hey hey hey.....some people just want that X58 pride!







We all know about the side grade X79, but there's nothing X79 can do that X58 can't. Yeah you get higher memory bandwidth that's not noticeable in everyday use. Clock for clock the X79 is only 9.77% [from my test back in 2014]. We all know we can get newer or the latest and greatest tech at this point. X79\X99 topics > that way.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I went ahead and bit the bullet and bought a W3690 for $169.99 and free shipping today. "pulled from a working workstation"
> 
> Also I got my memory up to 1754MHz with a QPI at 1.325v.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/7u97lh
> 
> Now, I will see if my motherboard will support 32GB of memory with my X5660


Well that was quick. Pretty good DRAM freq. and QPI voltage. I'm running 4Ghz 24/7, but with only 1400Mhz. I have 24GBs running as well so good luck with your 32GBs. Let us know if it works properly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Woohoo! I am solid at 4.2GHz @ 1.35v and RAM 1834MHz! I am happy here. I will modify my H100 with 4x(Push-Pull) Scythe Slipstream instead of 2x (Push).
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


Congrats.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> The TCase is no higher than ~70C


Enough with Tcase already. Just say overall CPU temperature for potential readers who don't know the terminology.. There's no need to get scientific with basic Celsius degrees reading from a sensor on the IHS and a diode adjacent to the cores.

70C is the the CPU temperature people.


----------



## Poisoner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> For that price I'd probably just go x79, you can pick up a e5-1650 for around $150-200 and decent boards go for around $150-250. If you get a good chip, 4.6ghz is pretty easy, my chip is actually stable at 4.9ghz/1.4v. You'll also get some bonus stuff like native SATA3, much higher memory bandwidth, and around 10% boost clock to clock in raw CPU power and then the possibility of going to an overclockable 8-core e5-1680 if they ever drop in price.
> 
> The x58 setups are great for the lower priced chips, but going for the more expensive chips in a new build doesn't seem worth it to me.


It was cheap for me to jump from x58 to x99 than it would of been to jump to x79. Now I'm running a 5930k at 4.7ghz


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I went ahead and bit the bullet and bought a W3690 for $169.99 and free shipping today. "pulled from a working workstation"
> 
> Also I got my memory up to 1754MHz with a QPI at 1.325v.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/7u97lh
> 
> Now, I will see if my motherboard will support 32GB of memory with my X5660


Very nice, should be a nice chip.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Hey hey hey.....some people just want that X58 pride!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know about the side grade X79, but there's nothing X79 can do that X58 can't. Yeah you get higher memory bandwidth that's not noticeable in everyday use. Clock for clock the X79 is only 9.77% [from my test back in 2014]. We all know we can get newer or the latest and greatest tech at this point. X79\X99 topics > that way.


Haha, well just saying that a $300+ 990x is a little ridiculous, but the w3690 is basically the same and is half the price so that's a good alternative.









Certain applications do love the extra memory bandwidth, but yeah it isn't really noticeable in most day to day tasks.

Still have a few x58 builds around the house and they work great, not trying to put it down or anything but at a certain price point a newer platform does make more sense.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Poisoner*
> 
> It was cheap for me to jump from x58 to x99 than it would of been to jump to x79. Now I'm running a 5930k at 4.7ghz


Well for me to jump from x58 to x79 was about $30, so it would have been silly of me not to.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Enough with Tcase already. Just say overall CPU temperature for potential readers who don't know the terminology.. There's no need to get scientific with basic Celsius degrees reading from a sensor on the IHS and a diode adjacent to the cores.
> 
> 70C is the the CPU temperature people.


Actually more often than not, people refer to Tjunction/core temps as a CPU temp. Those are much higher than the TCase/package/surface temp.

But alright, alright. You are the OP after all.








If not for this thread, I probably wouldn't even have X58 based system now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> For that price I'd probably just go x79, you can pick up a e5-1650 for around $150-200 and decent boards go for around $150-250. If you get a good chip, 4.6ghz is pretty easy, my chip is actually stable at 4.9ghz/1.4v. You'll also get some bonus stuff like native SATA3*, much higher memory bandwidth*, and around 10% boost clock to clock in raw CPU power and then the possibility of going to an overclockable 8-core e5-1680 if they ever drop in price.
> 
> The x58 setups are great for the lower priced chips, but going for the more expensive chips in a new build doesn't seem worth it to me.


What kind of bandwidth are we talking about, exactly? Let's say read speeds. 30 000 MB/s? Less? More?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> What kind of bandwidth are we talking about, exactly? Let's say read speeds. 30 000 MB/s? Less? More?


67-68gb/s. That seems like a lot, but the 25-30gb/s you get from an x58 system is not really a bottleneck in 99% of typical usage, it about matches a modern dual channel system.

Large databases is where you'd see a significant difference, Photoshop loves memory bandwidth too so it will help there as well.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> :
> Haha, well just saying that a $300+ 990x is a little ridiculous, but the w3690 is basically the same and is half the price so that's a good alternative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Certain applications do love the extra memory bandwidth, but yeah it isn't really noticeable in most day to day tasks.
> 
> Still have a few x58 builds around the house and they work great, not trying to put it down or anything but at a certain price point a newer platform does make more sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well for me to jump from x58 to x79 was about $30, so it would have been silly of me not to.


I was just messing around with you. Price per performance does matter and the older tech like X79 are dropping in price. The jump was $30 after selling off parts and shipping I bet. You aren't jumping on a X79 for $30. Jumping on the X58 vs the X79, well before the X58 prices continue to rise, was cheaper on the X58. Things are slowly changing as people are selling off their X58 builds at ridiculous prices on Ebay and other sites. Seeing some X58 motherboards sell near or higher than some X79 boards is laughable. I can see how side grade X79 is looking better and better as time passes. There's topics for that though. Still that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the X58 platform.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Actually more often than not, people refer to Tjunction/core temps as a CPU temp. Those are much higher than the TCase/package/surface temp.
> 
> But alright, alright. You are the OP after all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If not for this thread, I probably wouldn't even have X58 based system now.


Well I was just saying it to keep things simple for future readers and lurkers. That's basically what it is anyways....the CPU temp and\or core temps. Using software to get the Tjunction is always wrong in most cases anyways and that's according the Intel. Speaking solely for the X58 Westmere getting the Tjunction would mean contacting the correct people and I'm sure the devs [Core Temp\Hwinfo\Real Temp] doesn't have that kind of pull. You can't get them directly from the CPU itself thanks to missing features. I guess seriously only expected Xeon to be used in server environments and removed unnecessary info\features. Using programs is better than nothing I suppose. Some people here have actually connected their multimeters to their boards to check for better accuracy [vCore etc].

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> 67-68gb/s. That seems like a lot, but the 25-30gb/s you get from an x58 system is not really a bottleneck in 99% of typical usage, it about matches a modern dual channel system.
> 
> Large databases is where you'd see a significant difference, Photoshop loves memory bandwidth too so it will help there as well.


It's not a bottleneck on the X58 system.

Unless you are doing some AAA things in Photoshop I don't think many people will even need 20GB\s-25GB\s. For some it's just a hobby. X58 is overkill for a lot of things, but we all want more and newer tech. They make it look so shiny and worth it.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I was just messing around with you. Price per performance does matter and the older tech like X79 are dropping in price. The jump was $30 after selling off parts and shipping I bet. You aren't jumping on a X79 for $30. Jumping on the X58 vs the X79, well before the X58 prices continue to rise, was cheaper on the X58. Things are slowly changing as people are selling off their X58 builds at ridiculous prices on Ebay and other sites. Seeing some X58 motherboards sell near or higher than some X79 boards is laughable. I can see how side grade X79 is looking better and better as time passes. There's topics for that though. Still that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the X58 platform.
> Well I was just saying it to keep things simple for future readers and lurkers. That's basically what it is anyways....the CPU temp and\or core temps. Using software to get the Tjunction is always wrong in most cases anyways and that's according the Intel. Speaking solely for the X58 Westmere getting the Tjunction would mean contacting the correct people and I'm sure the devs [Core Temp\Hwinfo\Real Temp] doesn't have that kind of pull. You can't get them directly from the CPU itself thanks to missing features. I guess seriously only expected Xeon to be used in server environments and removed unnecessary info\features. Using programs is better than nothing I suppose. Some people here have actually connected their multimeters to their boards to check for better accuracy [vCore etc].
> It's not a bottleneck on the X58 system.
> 
> Unless you are doing some AAA things in Photoshop I don't think many people will even need 20GB\s-25GB\s. For some it's just a hobby. X58 is overkill for a lot of things, but we all want more and newer tech. They make it look so shiny and worth it.


Frankly it doesn't even matter what the TjMax is. All you need to know is the current distance to tJMax which is reported by RealTemp and the fact that it will start throttling once it reaches 0. Knowing the actual core temperature is of no real value other than curiosity.
If hypothetically speaking one CPU has TjMax at 70C and another has it at 110C, the latter one running at 90C would be just as durable as the first one running at 50C.

The only real inconvenience with this is when people start reporting their temps and asking questions based on to the temp they see calculated and reported by X software rather than the plain distance to tjMax which is reported by the chip itself and doesn't depend on the software so it just can't be wrong.

As for the memory bandwidth, I thought so too that it's mostly irrelevant, but apparently games can benefit from it quite a bit, at least to a certain degree.










The difference between DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2133 isn't exactly huge, yet it yielded substantial gains.

Who knows how would games repond to the memory bandwidth above 30GB/s... It might be nothing major, but certainly worth looking into.

PS. fun fact which might be relevant. Single threaded performance of stock 2500K equals to ST of X5650 clocked at 4Ghz.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I was just messing around with you. Price per performance does matter and the older tech like X79 are dropping in price. The jump was $30 after selling off parts and shipping I bet. You aren't jumping on a X79 for $30. Jumping on the X58 vs the X79, well before the X58 prices continue to rise, was cheaper on the X58. Things are slowly changing as people are selling off their X58 builds at ridiculous prices on Ebay and other sites. Seeing some X58 motherboards sell near or higher than some X79 boards is laughable. I can see how side grade X79 is looking better and better as time passes. There's topics for that though. Still that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the X58 platform.
> 
> It's not a bottleneck on the X58 system.
> 
> Unless you are doing some AAA things in Photoshop I don't think many people will even need 20GB\s-25GB\s. For some it's just a hobby. X58 is overkill for a lot of things, but we all want more and newer tech. They make it look so shiny and worth it.


Yes, of course that was after selling off the x58 CPU/Board shipping was accounted for in the $30 spent as well as any fees from the auctions. Some of those workstation boards go for crazy amounts. I sold the P6T6 for almost twice what I paid for it. I still have my P6T Deluxe v2 though and it is just as good as the P6T6 for single GPU setups.

Yep, 25gb/s is plenty for almost anything, it can become a bottleneck in very memory heavy situations (server and database use) where dual quad or triple channel will really take a lead.


----------



## revertex

i don't known where you live guys, but for those that live in some third world countries hardware parts are way expensive.

Not mention that find second hard parts in good conditions is not a easy job, most of time it's way overpriced.

As example, if i buy a X56XX plus shipping from ebay for around US$100,00, I will pay extra US$95,00 taxes, if no more.

Not all sellers ship to all countries around the world.

If i can find a used one for sale locally, it will cost at least the same.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> i don't known where you live guys, but for those that live in some third world countries hardware parts are way expensive.
> 
> Not mention that find second hard parts in good conditions is not a easy job, most of time it's way overpriced.
> 
> As example, if i buy a X56XX plus shipping from ebay for around US$100,00, I will pay extra US$95,00 taxes, if no more.
> 
> Not all sellers ship to all countries around the world.
> 
> If i can find a used one for sale locally, it will cost at least the same.


What country do you live in exactly?
I'am selling a few pieces of hardware right now and from what I can recall the way I set up the shipping is I ship to pretty much any country in the world as far as relatively cheap items go (on which I don't need insurance).

And for those costing upwards $100 I made some exclusions based on my postal office insurance policies so I don't ship these to the countries where I can't get the parcel insured. Strangely one of these countries is Canada.









______

And X5XX CPU isn't necessarily $100, I just bought X5650 for $65 shipped from a seller in Israel I think.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> As for the memory bandwidth, I thought so too that it's mostly irrelevant, but apparently games can benefit from it quite a bit, at least to a certain degree.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference between DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2133 isn't exactly huge, yet it yielded substantial gains.
> 
> Who knows how would games repond to the memory bandwidth above 30GB/s... It might be nothing major, but certainly worth looking into.
> 
> PS. fun fact which might be relevant. Single threaded performance of stock 2500K equals to ST of X5650 clocked at 4Ghz.


We went over this a few pages back. It really depends on the game, in Tomb Raider for example I saw basically no difference in average FPS going from 1600 to 2400mhz, other games may differ.

One other thing that may be a factor is the dual channel. A 2500k with 2400mhz in dual channel will put out about the same bandwidth as a x56xx with 1600mhz in triple channel.

As far as the single threaded performance goes, it make sense as Sandy bridge is approximately 9-10% faster clock to clock and the 2500k turbos up to 3.7ghz.


----------



## SmOgER

My point wasn't that you will see big gains across the board, my point was that memory bandwidth CAN in fact make a difference and it's not like anything over 25GB/s is a 'placebo effect' like some may suggest.

Btw, did you really go from 1600Mhz to 2400Mhz or did you just boosted the clock and loosened the timings?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> My point wasn't that you will see big gains across the board, my point was that memory bandwidth CAN make a difference in fact.
> 
> Btw, did you really go from 1600Mhz to 2400Mhz or did you just boosted the clock and loosened the timings?


Look a few pages back. It was [email protected] and [email protected] _(best timings possible on my memory)._ At 2400mhz the bandwidth is much higher in aida64.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Look a few pages back. It was [email protected] and [email protected]


Right.

Now roughly:

[email protected] = [email protected] = [email protected] = 2400C13 (or possibly even 2400C12 depending on internal/secondary timings etc)

In theory all 4 of the above should offer similar performance.

As you can see, the difference is not THAT big at all between your ram setups, so if anything your results only back up the assumption that RAM speed does affect gaming performance.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Right.
> 
> Now roughly:
> 
> [email protected] = [email protected] = [email protected] = 2400C13
> 
> As you can see, the difference is not THAT big, so if anything your results only back up the assumption that RAM speed affects gaming performance.


I'll have to get some numbers to really know the actual bandwidth differences.

I do feel that games are smoother in general with faster memory but I don't really have any numbers to back it up from my own testing. On my old i7 860 setup I did notice a difference in the minimum framerate going from 1600mhz to 2400mhz, but I really haven't paid much attention to it over the last few years.


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> What country do you live in exactly?
> I'am selling a few pieces of hardware right now and from what I can recall the way I set up the shipping is I ship to pretty much any country in the world as far as relatively cheap items go (on which I don't need insurance).
> 
> And for those costing upwards $100 I made some exclusions based on my postal office insurance policies so I don't ship these to the countries where I can't get the parcel insured. Strangely one of these countries is Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______
> 
> And X5XX CPU isn't necessarily $100, I just bought X5650 for $65 shipped from a seller in Israel I think.


Forgot that X5650 is the cheaper one, last time i was looking for a X5670.

I live in Brazil, some sellers avoid ship to my country because shipping takes a very long time, and is pretty common items get "lost".

Deliveries are made by postal system, a state owned company, that have monopoly in deliveries, and offers a terrible service.

It's not a rule, but I known people that receive items 3 to 6 months after purchase.

If you are lucky it takes around 45 days.

The worst thing is that no one can avoid the atrocious government import taxes that make everything twice the price.

Some sellers sent using 1st class international, but most of time shipping costs ended up being higher than the product cost.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Forgot that X5650 is the cheaper one, last time i was looking for a X5670.
> 
> I live in Brazil, some sellers avoid ship to my country because shipping takes a very long time, and is pretty common items get "lost".
> 
> It's not a rule, but I known people that receive items 3 to 6 months after purchase.
> 
> If you are lucky it takes around 45 days.
> 
> The worst thing is that no one can avoid the atrocious government import taxes that make everything twice the price.


I shipped something to Brazil once. Can't remember what did I exactly ship as it was quite a long time ago, but it all went smoothly.
Personally, as long as I can insure and track it, I'am not overly concerned about things potentially getting lost. I will get my money either way.







Those extra 3Eur for insurance are well worth it.

EDIT: That's right, Brazil is NOT one of these countries for which postal office wouldn't allow me to insure the parcels when shipping.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Hey hey hey.....some people just want that X58 pride!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know about the side grade X79, but there's nothing X79 can do that X58 can't. Yeah you get higher memory bandwidth that's not noticeable in everyday use. Clock for clock the X79 is only 9.77% [from my test back in 2014]. We all know we can get newer or the latest and greatest tech at this point. X79\X99 topics > that way.
> Well that was quick. Pretty good DRAM freq. and QPI voltage. I'm running 4Ghz 24/7, but with only 1400Mhz. I have 24GBs running as well so good luck with your 32GBs. Let us know if it works properly.
> Congrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enough with Tcase already. Just say overall CPU temperature for potential readers who don't know the terminology.. There's no need to get scientific with basic Celsius degrees reading from a sensor on the IHS and a diode adjacent to the cores.
> 
> 70C is the the CPU temperature people.


You think I can get a validation for X58 Xeon?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> You think I can get a validation for X58 Xeon?


You mean to join the Xeon Club? Yeah you are in.

I have some new updates for my Rise of the Tomb Raider Benchmark using 4.8Ghz and 2100Mhz RAM. I think that the CPU overclock benefits high end cards the most on the X58 platform. I suppose the RAM helps as well. My timings were fairly loose with the 2100Mhz setup. Give me awhile to go through the data and type up everything. I'll let you guys know when my article has been updated.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> You mean to join the Xeon Club? Yeah you are in.
> 
> I have some new updates for my Rise of the Tomb Raider Benchmark using 4.8Ghz and 2100Mhz RAM. I think that the CPU overclock benefits high end cards the most on the X58 platform. I suppose the RAM helps as well. My timings were fairly loose with the 2100Mhz setup. Give me awhile to go through the data and type up everything. I'll let you guys know when my article has been updated.


I am waiting for my approved stamp


----------



## Kana-Maru

Ah man I haven't given those out in awhile. Here we go...................



Welcome to the dark side









*Rise of the Tomb Raider 1440p updates*

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/43-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-fury-x-benchmarks?showall=&start=2

AMD R9 Fury X @ Stock Settings [1050Mhz] [Crimson 16.3.1 Beta Drivers]

*[email protected] - DDR3-1600Mhz - Siberia
FPS Avg: 58fps*
FPS Max: 93fps
FPS Min: 33fps

AMD R9 Fury X @ 4.8% increase OC Settings [1100Mhz \ +50Mhz] [Crimson 16.3.1 Beta Drivers]

*[email protected] - DDR3-2088Mhz - Siberia
FPS Avg: 65fps* +12%
FPS Max: 122fps +31.18%
FPS Min: 38.2fps +15.15%

Man this Fury X is a beast. Now I need to see what happens with the 1080p benchmark. The 4K results didn't change that much.

Edit:
I was so surprised by the increase I had to go back and double check, triple check & quadruple check. My GPU was set 4.8% higher than the stock clocks [1100Mhz]. So my Fury X was running a minor overclock. Still 4.8% OC increase = 12% in fps when using 4.8Ghz + 2088Mhz over 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz is impressive. nonetheless. I'm going to update my article again with a Fury X overclock section.


----------



## srialmaster

Are the new Radeon drivers ok these days? One of the main reasons I left Radeons was the fact that they had too many drivers issues and didn't update them often. I am still debating on replacing my 2x gtx 680s with a gtx 980 ti or waiting until Pascal comes out.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Are the new Radeon drivers ok these days? One of the main reasons I left Radeons was the fact that they had too many drivers issues and didn't update them often. I am still debating on replacing my 2x gtx 680s with a gtx 980 ti or waiting until Pascal comes out.


I retired my GTX 670s. Nvidia had their fair share of driver issues, but they are quick to release newer drivers. One of the reasons I left Nvidia was due to driver issues after the release of Maxwell. Most recently Nvidia drivers has caused issues for PCs.

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/921332/geforce-drivers/official-364-51-game-ready-whql-display-driver-feedback-thread-released-3-10-16-updated/1/

http://techfrag.com/2016/03/09/nvidia-364-51-drivers-didnt-root-out-all-problems-crashes-and-display-glitches-persist/


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/4a8xmq/should_i_upgrade_to_driver_36451_or_is_it_not/

I think Nvidia has fixed the problem now. I don't know. So there's issues no matter who you support. Luckily I haven't had issues like this with AMD thus far.

AMD has been on a roll lately with their drivers. They have really stepped their game up with the driver releases and fixes. AMD doesn't hide their issues either. I heard all kinds of bad things about AMD and their drivers, but it never was a issue because I was running Nvidia cards. I switched to the Fury X and the driver updates have been coming back to back. I'll try to conduct a small list from what I can dig up from my experience.

-Catalyst 15.7 - 7/08/2015
-Catalyst 15.7.1 - 7/29/2015
-Catalyst 15.8 - 8/23/2015
-Catalyst 15.9.1 - 9/30/2015
-Catalyst 15.11 - 11/05/2015
-Catalyst 15.11.1 - 11/14/2015

-Crimson 15.11.1 - 11/30/2015
-Crimson 15.12 - 12/18/2015
-Crimson 16.1.1 - 2/12/2016
-Crimson 16.2 - 2/23/2016
-Crimson 16.2.1 - 2/27/2016
-Crimson 16.3 - 3/9/2016
-Crimson 16.3.1 - 3/16/2016
-Crimson 16.3.2 - 3/28/2016 <---Most recent driver update released YESTERDAY!

Ok the list wasn't small and wasn't that easy, but I still had most of the drivers in my download folder. So as you can see AMD isn't playing in the driver department. Another cool thing is AMD has lowered their DX9\10 & 11 overhead problems. So you are seeing plenty of performance increases with each driver release even if you are running purely stock settings. So the driver issues appears to have been resolved.


----------



## tbob22

I recently had a weird glitch with 16.3, I couldn't get VSR to work, if I would enable it in the settings it just immediately disables itself. I used DDU to clear all existing drivers and tried a fresh install, no go. I also tried 16.3.1 and it had the same issue, I went ahead and dropped back to 16.2.1 and it has been working fine. I didn't really look into it that much, but maybe 16.3.2 has resolved it.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

I did what you explain. I put back the I7-950 Load optimized default and I checked the Voltage. Everything are within the range you gave... I boot to windows with the I7-950 and I tried some
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Ah man I haven't given those out in awhile. Here we go...................
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the dark side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Rise of the Tomb Raider 1440p updates*
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/43-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-fury-x-benchmarks?showall=&start=2
> 
> AMD R9 Fury X @ Stock Settings [Crimson 16.3 Beta Drivers]
> 
> *[email protected] - DDR3-1600Mhz - Siberia
> FPS Avg: 58fps*
> FPS Max: 93fps
> FPS Min: 33fps
> 
> *[email protected] - DDR3-2088Mhz - Siberia
> FPS Avg: 65fps* +12%
> FPS Max: 122fps +31.18%
> FPS Min: 38.2fps +15.15%
> 
> Man this Fury X is a beast. I still have no reasons to overclock just yet. Now I need to see what happens with the 1080p benchmark. The 4K results didn't change that much.


Impressive !

Can you try with RAM at 1600Mhz and see if the RAM have a real impact on performance?

I have to change my AIO (H80i) which seems to be reducing my OC. I have a X5670 sitting at 4.2Ghz with 1.262V which is good. Temps are good (around) 68°C in load after 3h gaming.

I thinking in buying a EK predator 360 + WB for the TriX-290X in order to delocate the heat sources in front or top of the case.

I can push it to 4.5Ghz (or higher) but It becomes too hot...(more than 80° with intelburn)


----------



## srialmaster

@Kana-Maru

Just FYI, my 32GB is working on my 4.2GHz OC at 1834MHz.

http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


----------



## Qiko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> Just FYI, my 32GB is working on my 4.2GHz OC at 1834MHz.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


Wow, 32GB memory. i have the same board but I didn't know it can go that high.

what are your settings and bios?


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Qiko*
> 
> Wow, 32GB memory. i have the same board but I didn't know it can go that high.
> 
> what are your settings and bios?


The BIOS is Here at Post #20

There wasn't any special settings to get 32GB to work. I just popped it in and pressed the Q-Reset button and my PC booted up. Then, I just started to adjust my settings for higher speeds.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I recently had a weird glitch with 16.3, I couldn't get VSR to work, if I would enable it in the settings it just immediately disables itself. I used DDU to clear all existing drivers and tried a fresh install, no go. I also tried 16.3.1 and it had the same issue, I went ahead and dropped back to 16.2.1 and it has been working fine. I didn't really look into it that much, but maybe 16.3.2 has resolved it.


I'm running 16.3.1 and I have no issues with the driver. VSR is working fine for me. There's more than the DDU tool. AMD offers a removal tool on their website as well. I'd run both of then if I were you and make sure your registry is clean. I still had some old Nvidia files on my computer that were causing problems, but I removed them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> Impressive !
> Can you try with RAM at 1600Mhz and see if the RAM have a real impact on performance?


When I run 4.8Ghz I can only use DDR3-675Mhz and higher. I updated my post. My Fury X was actually running 4.8% faster than stock speeds. 1050Mhz is stock, but it was actually running 1100Mhz. I'll perform more test. It gets time consuming after a while.
Quote:


> AMD R9 Fury X @ Stock Settings [Crimson 16.3.1 Beta Drivers]
> 
> [email protected] - DDR3-1600Mhz - Siberia
> FPS Avg: 58fps
> FPS Max: 93fps
> FPS Min: 33fps
> 
> AMD R9 Fury X @ 4.8% increase OC Settings [ *1100Mhz \ +50Mhz* ] [Crimson 16.3.1 Beta Drivers]
> 
> [email protected] - DDR3-2088Mhz - Siberia
> FPS Avg: 65fps +12%
> FPS Max: 122fps +31.18%
> FPS Min: 38.2fps +15.15%
> 
> Man this Fury X is a beast. Now I need to see what happens with the 1080p benchmark. The 4K results didn't change that much.
> 
> *Edit:
> I was so surprised by the increase I had to go back and double check, triple check & quadruple check. My GPU was set 4.8% higher than the stock clocks [1100Mhz]. So my Fury X was running a minor overclock. Still 4.8% OC increase = 12% in fps when using 4.8Ghz + 2088Mhz over 4.6Ghz + 1600Mhz is impressive. nonetheless. I'm going to update my article again with a Fury X overclock section.*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> Just FYI, my 32GB is working on my 4.2GHz OC at 1834MHz.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


Very nice. I had a feeling everything would work out for you.


----------



## srialmaster

@Kana-Maru

I tried adding you on Steam, but Xeon_Kana_Maru isn't found.......


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Woohoo! I am solid at 4.2GHz @ 1.35v and RAM 1834MHz! I am happy here. I will modify my H100 with 4x(Push-Pull) Scythe Slipstream instead of 2x (Push).
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/qp30gg


The push-pull with the 4x Scythe Slipstream didn't really do any better, it just made my computer much louder.....









I think the next step is to take of the block and re-TIM my CPU with GC-Extreme instead of the AS Ceramique 2 that's on it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> I tried adding you on Steam, but Xeon_Kana_Maru isn't found.......


Well I've been trying to update my first post, but I can't. I'll PM you once I get everything setup.


----------



## CesarDRK

I have a i7920 and another X5660 (i bougth two actually) lying around, and i´m considering getting an used Intel X58DSO tha´t i´ve found for a decent price for a second xeon build, or even put the i7 920 to sell it later as a combo.

Is this board good enough for the xeon/overclock?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> I have a i7920 and another X5660 (i bougth two actually) lying around, and i´m considering getting an used Intel X58DSO tha´t i´ve found for a decent price for a second xeon build, or even put the i7 920 to sell it later as a combo.
> 
> Is this board good enough for the xeon/overclock?


What kind of decent price are we talking about?
With a bit of luck this could prove to be a real bargain: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASUS-P6T-Deluxe-Motherboard-LGA-1366-for-part-repair-B1790/231879002665?_trksid=p2047675.c100009.m1982&_trkparms=aid%3D777000%26algo%3DABA.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D36188%26meid%3Df23b2eca91e845b9b0828a75c0c06b0a%26pid%3D100009%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26sd%3D322050874641#viTabs_0&rmvSB=true

You don't really need a mobo battery socket as long as your PC is plugged in (plus it's not hard to fix in theory) and the socket pins don't look too bad - there doesn't appear to be any broken ones or irreversibly bent out of place (plus 1 or 2 missing pins can still be no big deal due to redundancy of some of them). So if there is really all there is to it, I see no reason not to grab it. Even if it doesn't work and you can't fix it, you should be able to still sell it for parts with very small $ loss.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> What kind of decent price are we talking about?
> With a bit of luck this could prove to be a real bargain: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASUS-P6T-Deluxe-Motherboard-LGA-1366-for-part-repair-B1790/231879002665?_trksid=p2047675.c100009.m1982&_trkparms=aid%3D777000%26algo%3DABA.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D36188%26meid%3Df23b2eca91e845b9b0828a75c0c06b0a%26pid%3D100009%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26sd%3D322050874641#viTabs_0&rmvSB=true
> 
> You don't really need a mobo battery socket as long as your PC is plugged in (plus it's not hard to fix in theory) and the socket pins don't look too bad - there doesn't appear to be any broken ones or irreversibly bent out of place (plus 1 or 2 missing pins can still be no big deal due to redundancy of some of them). So if there is really all there is to it, I see no reason not to grab it. Even if it doesn't work and you can't fix it, you should be able to still sell it for parts with very small $ loss.


"No further testing done"... that creeps me out.

DX58SO working for around $68.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> "No further testing done"... that creeps me out.
> 
> DX58SO working for around $68.


I assume they didn't test it cause of the bent pins. It's not rocket science to bent them back but requires some patience and steady hands. Given that this seller has over 1000 items for sale it's more or less plausible that he didn't bother.

$68 is indeed a very good price. Is this locally? This intel mobo is not ideal, but it still allows some overclocking so for this price you can't go wrong.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm running 16.3.1 and I have no issues with the driver. VSR is working fine for me. There's more than the DDU tool. AMD offers a removal tool on their website as well. I'd run both of then if I were you and make sure your registry is clean. I still had some old Nvidia files on my computer that were causing problems, but I removed them.


I actually ran that as well to be sure, must be something with the 390 as some others were having the same issue. VSR works fine on 16.3.2 but now I had some other strange glitches today, fans went to full blast and I couldn't change the speed it would always just force 100% in the settings, after a reboot things went back to normal. A few hours later I lost my cursor on the second monitor, disabled monitors, unplugged monitors, etc and it just wouldn't come back, it required a reboot and seems to be working ok now. Never had either of these issues with previous drivers.

Edit: Scratch that, lost my cursor again... Will have to report this issue. I remember having the same issue back on my 4870 years ago, opening magnifier resolves the issue but it comes back if I close it.


----------



## CesarDRK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I assume they didn't test it cause of the bent pins. It's not rocket science to bent them back but requires some patience and steady hands. Given that this seller has over 1000 items for sale it's more or less plausible that he didn't bother.
> 
> $68 is indeed a very good price. Is this locally? This intel mobo is not ideal, but it still allows some overclocking so for this price you can't go wrong.


Yeah.. locally!


----------



## CesarDRK

Double post.. sry


----------



## revertex

Have a MOBO with bent pins myself, unbent it was a pain in the neck, but it is working rock solid for more than 4 years now.
As SmOgER said, it needs steady hands.

It's best if you have a old damaged or retired MOBO lying aroud, this way you can do some practice before attempt to fix it.
There is cheap damaged MOBO's for sale, you may have one lying around or can get one for free.

No coffee for you for at least three days before any attempt.
But the most critical is to have a very good magnify lens and good ilumination.
I used one these 18X magnify glass, but it's not enough, you can barely see the pins clearly, a microscope is highly recommended.
A good camera with macro can be helpful to check your progress.

Hypodermic needles and syringe are good to be used as tools.
Preferably do it with anyone around, if someone bump you accidentally, well you known.
Take your time, do it slowly and at the end you will barely notice which pins was bent.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I actually ran that as well to be sure, must be something with the 390 as some others were having the same issue. VSR works fine on 16.3.2 but now I had some other strange glitches today, fans went to full blast and I couldn't change the speed it would always just force 100% in the settings, after a reboot things went back to normal. A few hours later I lost my cursor on the second monitor, disabled monitors, unplugged monitors, etc and it just wouldn't come back, it required a reboot and seems to be working ok now. Never had either of these issues with previous drivers.
> 
> Edit: Scratch that, lost my cursor again... Will have to report this issue. I remember having the same issue back on my 4870 years ago, opening magnifier resolves the issue but it comes back if I close it.


Yeah you definitely need to report some of those weird behaviors. Unless you need to upgrade or a game you are playing is on the list for performance increases\CFX just use the drivers that are working best for you. I'm sure we will be seeing newer drivers soon.

I haven't had any issues in months, but when I did I ran DDU and AMD tool. Roughly 3-4 minutes later everything was running fine. It seems I needed to remove some old Nvidia stuff and other things from the registry etc. The programs did all of the work.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Have a MOBO with bent pins myself, unbent it was a pain in the neck, but it is working rock solid for more than 4 years now.
> As SmOgER said, it needs steady hands.
> 
> It's best if you have a old damaged or retired MOBO lying aroud, this way you can do some practice before attempt to fix it.
> There is cheap damaged MOBO's for sale, you may have one lying around or can get one for free.
> 
> No coffee for you for at least three days before any attempt.
> But the most critical is to have a very good magnify lens and good ilumination.
> I used one these 18X magnify glass, but it's not enough, you can barely see the pins clearly, a microscope is highly recommended.
> A good camera with macro can be helpful to check your progress.
> 
> Hypodermic needles and syringe are good to be used as tools.
> Preferably do it with anyone around, if someone bump you accidentally, well you known.
> Take your time, do it slowly and at the end you will barely notice which pins was bent.


After some close inspection that time actually I now think that as long as the pin in question is somewhere in the straight line trajectory between the place where it should sit without any pressure and where it sits when CPU is fixed in place (those pins actually flex straight into their slots to the side after you insert CPU), it doesn't really matter if it's perfectly aligned or not.
It wasn't very hard for me to see or tackle the needed pin per se, but I might have chipped the top off one of the pins after excessive twisting it back and forth (I first aligned it perfectly, then inserted and removed the CPU only to find out it's not aligned, so I wanted it "perfect" and repeated this process several times but one too many). Luckily, the current length of that pin is either just enough to make the contact with the CPU, or that pin just have great deal of redundancy (very likely as according to socket map it's a power pin).


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Have a MOBO with bent pins myself, unbent it was a pain in the neck, but it is working rock solid for more than 4 years now.
> As SmOgER said, it needs steady hands.
> 
> It's best if you have a old damaged or retired MOBO lying aroud, this way you can do some practice before attempt to fix it.
> There is cheap damaged MOBO's for sale, you may have one lying around or can get one for free.
> 
> No coffee for you for at least three days before any attempt.
> But the most critical is to have a very good magnify lens and good ilumination.
> I used one these 18X magnify glass, but it's not enough, you can barely see the pins clearly, a microscope is highly recommended.
> A good camera with macro can be helpful to check your progress.
> 
> Hypodermic needles and syringe are good to be used as tools.
> Preferably do it with anyone around, if someone bump you accidentally, well you known.
> Take your time, do it slowly and at the end you will barely notice which pins was bent.


Had a two 1366 boards with bent pins given to me, a P6T and MSI Platinum.

Neither were terrible, the P6T had about 5 bent but they were all bent to the side so it was just a matter of pushing them in place. The MSI had only 3 but one was bent backwards, I was sure it was going to break off but after about a half hour of carefully moving that one into place I was able to get it into place without snapping it.

I tried with a magnifying glass but it made it more difficult to tell where my tool was, I eventually just got a very bright light and a small vise to hold the board where I needed it and did it without a magnifying glass. I did use the magnifying glass to verify the progress though.









Both boards now work great and have x5670's in them, the MSI is at 3.6ghz and the P6T is at 4ghz.


----------



## webhito

All this pin bending abilities remind me of when I used to buy phenom 555 chips from a guy that sold new ones, open box, in a tray but had been damaged while shipped. Used to get them for $30 when they were worth much more, it did take me a good week to get the pins aligned though, not something I would do now, but it was definitely worth the effort back in the day.


----------



## srialmaster

@MCCSolutions


----------



## bobnoho

IT WORKS!!!

Dell XPS 730x with xeon x5660... I had to cross flash to dell A11 bios, but it works great with 8g ram sticks too... its not the most user friendly bios, but it recognized the x5660 and automatically overclocked it to 3.3ghz and from there I just uped the vcore to 1.32 and block to 200, so 200x21 and 4.2ghz with ram @2000mhz.... passmark score is 4239

this board could be a great option for someone looking for a cheap 1366 build, and don't want to trust a used board, these are manufacturer refurbished....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-XPS-730X-Motherboard-s1366-w-Tray-Supports-Intel-Core-i7-DDR3-P270J-/151586313094?hash=item234b3f9386:g:3W4AAOSwGotWs8bQ



,


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*


Good find!
Is this ATX or does it have unusual form factor like many other server boards?


----------



## bobnoho

its just a standard atx board, unusual for dell, but the board is made by MSI


----------



## bobnoho

I like the the 3way sli capability


----------



## SmOgER

I just noticed that you are running X5660 at 4.2Ghz with it.
Can it handle it? How many power phases is in here, 6? 7?


----------



## bobnoho

"How many phases is in here, 6? 7?" ???

I ran the cpuz stress test for an hour my temp peaked at 76 (realtemp)


----------



## bobnoho

ran dying light for 3hrs too


----------



## bobnoho

with better cooling it could do better, it booted back to bios at 4.8ghz with vcore 1.36


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I just noticed that you are running X5660 at 4.2Ghz with it.
> Can it handle it? How many power phases is in here, 6? 7?


Looks six phase, the MSI model is MS-7543. Should be able to handle quite a bit, but I probably wouldn't run too much over 4ghz for 24/7 as it'll probably put a lot of stress on the board. These boards do go pretty cheap though, so it could be a good option if one can't find a good deal on a better board.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> with better cooling it could do better, it booted back to bios at 4.8ghz with vcore 1.36


That sounds promising, although booting back to the bios doesn't mean a whole lot. My x5670 could get to the bios at 5ghz/1.35v.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> with better cooling it could do better, it booted back to bios at 4.8ghz with vcore 1.36


I wouldn't push it over 1.3V or so for 24/7.
There is a reason high-end LGA1366 boards come with 12-14 power phases, while you have 6 phases and you've got yourself a 6-core CPU on which you are attempting some serious overclocking. Let's say, that's not the safest thing to do.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> IT WORKS!!!
> 
> Dell XPS 730x with xeon x5660... I had to cross flash to dell A11 bios, but it works great with 8g ram sticks too... its not the most user friendly bios, but it recognized the x5660 and automatically overclocked it to 3.3ghz and from there I just uped the vcore to 1.32 and block to 200, so 200x21 and 4.2ghz with ram @2000mhz.... passmark score is 4239
> 
> this board could be a great option for someone looking for a cheap 1366 build, and don't want to trust a used board, these are manufacturer refurbished....
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-XPS-730X-Motherboard-s1366-w-Tray-Supports-Intel-Core-i7-DDR3-P270J-/151586313094?hash=item234b3f9386:g:3W4AAOSwGotWs8bQ
> 
> 
> 
> ,


I asked awhile back either in this one or the other x58 xeon thread if a dell XPS MB will works. Guess I know now. Thanks

Edit: finger is itching to buy now.


----------



## bobnoho

since the vcore is only at 1.32 it drops to 1.288 under load, 4.2 seems pretty solid.. I wont go any higher with it.. its NOT a 24/7 PC just an extra gaming machine mostly spare parts (I don't sell my old hardware)..

unless you have an extra i7 laying around, you have to crossflah the bios to dell A11b (aroura) before it will post with a 6 core..


----------



## TLCH723

@bobnoho
Hey Bob, it uses the standard ATX PSU right??


----------



## bobnoho

ya I got a old 450w in it 24pin


----------



## srialmaster

@Kana-Maru

What memory speeds have you gotten on your X5660 over 1800MHz? My memory is rated for 2400MHz, but I cannot break 1834MHz with even setting the QDI to 1.375. I shouldn't have to change my timings should I?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> ya I got a old 450w in it 24pin


450w in an overclocked x58 system?! I hope you don't have a power hungry GPU.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> 
> What memory speeds have you gotten on your X5660 over 1800MHz? My memory is rated for 2400MHz, but I cannot break 1834MHz with even setting the QDI to 1.375. I shouldn't have to change my timings should I?


What BCLK are you running? These chips won't allow the memory to run faster than 10x the BCLK.


----------



## srialmaster

@tbob22

The that's why I am limited to 1834. I am running BCLK at 183 (23x183). I will try dropping the multi and raise the BCLK and see what I get.

I am thinking a 20x214.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @tbob22
> 
> The that's why I am limited to 1834. I am running BCLK at 183 (23x183). I will try dropping the multi and raise the BCLK and see what I get.
> 
> I am thinking a 20x214.


Yep, should be able to hit at least 2140mhz or whatever your board can do. Make sure to set all of your timings and voltages manually and that should help get you there. I think the max I was able hit was around 2220mhz while keeping the QPI/VTT at 1.35v.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yep, should be able to hit at least 2140mhz or whatever your board can do. Make sure to set all of your timings and voltages manually and that should help get you there. I think the max I was able hit was around 2220mhz while keeping the QPI/VTT at 1.35v.


Did you use a 19x or 20x multi?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Did you use a 19x or 20x multi?


I was using 21x I believe, I only ran those settings for benching though. I ran 22x200 with tighter timings 24/7 for a long time, then eventually dropped it to 185x24 with even tighter timings which allowed me to run 1.2v QPI and dropped temps.


----------



## SmOgER

I'am curious, what are the AIDA64 benchmark numbers for those 2000Mhz+ RAM speeds?









Is it just me or is win7 more likely to crash due to memory errors than win8 or win10?
Subjectively speaking, it does feel like win8 and upwards has more input/output latency and can even hang for a fraction of a second with the audio loop in certain cases so I guess that might be the reason why?
I'am back on win7 from win10 and other than those mentioned ram problems (which I hope I've just fixed), I don't regret it one bit. More advanced task manager is pretty much the only thing I miss from win10, otherwise it's all around a much better OS for a desktop imo.


----------



## bobnoho

450w plus vishiontek 450w gpu PSU, gamed and benchmarked all day yesterday not a single crash




All and all not too bad for a bunch of old parts


----------



## bobnoho

So talking about power phases, my voltage drops from 1.32 to 1.288 under load, I assumed this was because of my weak power supply or is this because of only 6 phases on the mobo???? My p6t7 throttles up the vcore and multy disabling speed step and cstate makes no difference it pegs at the vcore I select under load


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> 450w plus vishiontek 450w gpu PSU, gamed and benchmarked all day yesterday not a single crash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All and all not too bad for a bunch of old parts


Well, if it's stable I guess it's ok, but it sounds like that is really pushing that PSU, I'd check it with a kill-a-watt to be sure. I was pulling nearly 400w at 4.4ghz at full load. With the GPU+CPU loaded I was pulling over 650w.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> So talking about power phases, my voltage drops from 1.32 to 1.288 under load, I assumed this was because of my weak power supply or is this because of only 6 phases on the mobo???? My p6t7 throttles up the vcore and multy disabling speed step and cstate makes no difference it pegs at the vcore I select under load


Do you have LLC enabled on your P6T7? If so, that would explain part of it.


----------



## TLCH723

My system pull 460w under CPU+GPU loads using a kill-a-watt and I only have 3.7 or 3.8 GHz and a 760.


----------



## asiki

Hi All,
Maybe not identical but similar one - L5638 on Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4
OC'ed to 3.36GHz (bclk=210). Quite good though rather nothing amazing... but:
- PSU is an old 400W chieftec and it supplies also GF gtx960 + 4 HDD (yep!) + 1 SDD - yep, it handles all this stuff!
- colling - some cheap AC (yep!)
- voltages - ridiculously low, vcore=1.25, uncore=1.3v, x15
- temperature - max 59*C after a loooong full load








- Corona1.3.Benchmark - Rays/sec: 2 006 810
Stable as a rock








It took me long to fine tune it but it was wort it. Actually there is still some place to OC it more or reduce voltages etc., on the other hand I'm not going to conquer any record and I'm really happy with it.
These CPUs are amazing


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I'am curious, what are the AIDA64 benchmark numbers for those 2000Mhz+ RAM speeds?


If I remember right it was somewhere in the range of 30gb/s at 2200mhz. I got a couple of sticks of Corsair Dominator 2000mhz 8-8-8-24, but I'm pretty sure they are made for P35/45 as they are 2.00v. May stick them in my P6T Deluxe to see what the can do at 1.65v.


----------



## bobnoho

Anybody got any tricks to get the blk up over 200 on a p6t7 im running 200x23 solid as a rock, but go up to 204 and it won't post..
Anybody know anything about a x5679??? Its not listed on ark.intel...
And when I'm running realtemp it says distance to tjmax, realtemp says x5679's tjmax is 105, I was testing 4.8 my temps got up to 86 (a little hot) but I was still 19 from my tjmax, is 86 safe on this CPU???


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Anybody got any tricks to get the blk up over 200 on a p6t7 im running 200x23 solid as a rock, but go up to 204 and it won't post..
> Anybody know anything about a x5679??? Its not listed on ark.intel...
> And when I'm running realtemp it says distance to tjmax, realtemp says x5679's tjmax is 105, I was testing 4.8 my temps got up to 86 (a little hot) but I was still 19 from my tjmax, is 86 safe on this CPU???


Try boosting your VTT to 1.35v, it's really a combination of your CPU and your board that will limit your max BCLK. Both my P6T6 and P6T Deluxe v2 maxed out at 222mhz with the same CPU so I assume that was the limit of that CPU.

I probably would back it down a bit. What were you running to get those temps? I wouldn't call anything above 80c safe on these CPU's, others may have a different opinion.

Edit: Oh, I see now you're running a separate PSU for the GPUs. Should be fine.


----------



## bobnoho

Ya iv had the qpi (same as vtt?) at 1.4, no luck.. The qpi/vtt that's basically motherboard voltage rite?? Ya and those temp were excessive vcore was at 1.51... I ask because I can't find any info on this CPU, last week we had a lan party I ran dying light @4kres for 16.5 hour strait at 4.6ghz with vcore at 1.46 [email protected] 1.35 [email protected] 1.74 my max temp during testing was 74, pc never crashed, never had to exit the game, I though for sure I killed or at least hurt the CPU, that's why I ordered a extra x5660, but apparently not it still runs 4.31 [email protected] 26x166 I think


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> IT WORKS!!!
> 
> Dell XPS 730x with xeon x5660... I had to cross flash to dell A11 bios, but it works great with 8g ram sticks too... its not the most user friendly bios, but it recognized the x5660 and automatically overclocked it to 3.3ghz and from there I just uped the vcore to 1.32 and block to 200, so 200x21 and 4.2ghz with ram @2000mhz.... passmark score is 4239
> 
> this board could be a great option for someone looking for a cheap 1366 build, and don't want to trust a used board, these are manufacturer refurbished....
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-XPS-730X-Motherboard-s1366-w-Tray-Supports-Intel-Core-i7-DDR3-P270J-/151586313094?hash=item234b3f9386:g:3W4AAOSwGotWs8bQ
> 
> 
> 
> ,


What is your passmark for your CPU and Memory only. There's a lot of other things that play in the overall passmark scores.

I got a system score of 4326.1 with 4GHz (20x200) and RAM at 2005MHz.

CPU Score: 11101
Memory Score: 2314


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I'am curious, what are the AIDA64 benchmark numbers for those 2000Mhz+ RAM speeds?


Which AIDA64 test?

Memory Read: 24349MB/s
Memory Write: 19628MB/s
Memory Copy: 23609MB/S
Memory Latency: 59.4ns

This is 32GB(4x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz (CMY16GX3M2A2400C11) 11-13-13-31-1T at 2005MHz in Triple Channel. CPU at 4GHz (20x200).

I have some 2133MHz with slightly lower CLs (11-11-11-27-1T) that I could try and bench with the 2005MHz speeds.


----------



## srialmaster

Here's what I got when I just upped my CPU to 4.2GHz (21x200):

Memory Read: 24949MB/s
Memory Write: 20017MB/s
Memory Copy: 24815MB/S
Memory Latency: 58.9ns

Same 32GB(4x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz (CMY16GX3M2A2400C11) 11-13-13-31-1T at 2005MHz in Triple Channel.


----------



## bobnoho

Mabye i should look into a stronger PSU

http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V8/display.php?id=59668640186


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Mabye i should look into a stronger PSU
> 
> http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V8/display.php?id=59668640186


Theoretically, you're running 900W with the 2x PSUs. I would spend the money and get a 1K+ Platinum. If you're in the USA, order from amazon and look in the used section for scratched items. I got 20 or so dollars off for just a scratch on my EVGA 1000 PS2.


----------



## srialmaster

So....On my X5660, I have managed so far to drop my CPU PLL to 1.72250v, QPI 1.2875v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.

http://valid.x86.fr/pgu39h


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> So....On my X5660, I have managed so far to drop my CPU PLL to 1.72250v, QPI 1.2875v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/pgu39h


Looking good. You should be able to tighten up your ram. My 2400mhz sticks have the same timings as yours _(according to the XMP 2400mhz in CPU-Z)_ but I was able to run 10-11-10-21-1 at 2000mhz. Of course, make sure to run memtest86 for at least 5-6 passes once you feel you've stable-ish timings.

You may be able to drop the QPI/VTT as well, I was able to run at 1.25v at 2000mhz. But again, you'll need to make sure to stress test and run memtest.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Looking good. You should be able to tighten up your ram. My 2400mhz sticks have the same timings as yours _(according to the XMP 2400mhz in CPU-Z)_ but I was able to run 10-11-10-21-1 at 2000mhz. Of course, make sure to run memtest86 for at least 5-6 passes once you feel you've stable-ish timings.
> 
> You may be able to drop the QPI/VTT as well, I was able to run at 1.25v at 2000mhz. But again, you'll need to make sure to stress test and run memtest.


Do you skip phase 8? This phase takes forever.....When I was running 2133MHz (6x4GB), it would take 8-9hrs for 1x complete cycle.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Here's what I got when I just upped my CPU to 4.2GHz (21x200):
> 
> Memory Read: 24949MB/s
> Memory Write: 20017MB/s
> Memory Copy: 24815MB/S
> Memory Latency: 58.9ns
> 
> Same 32GB(4x8GB) of Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz (CMY16GX3M2A2400C11) 11-13-13-31-1T at 2005MHz in Triple Channel.


Interesting. With Fury 3x4GB 1560Mhz @ 8-9-8-24 160 1T that's almost precisely what I'am getting. Except my latency is 54.4ns. Memory controller bandwidth cap?

btw, try tightening your RTL (round trip latency) to get a better overall latency. With my old Corsair Vengeance running in DC I was able to lower it as much as to 51 and get 50ns latency at 1560Mhz CL7.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Do you skip phase 8? This phase takes forever.....When I was running 2133MHz (6x4GB), it would take 8-9hrs for 1x complete cycle.


I've never had errors after pass 6. I've run some pretty unstable settings just to check and let them run for a week and never got errors after pass 6, and it got up to something like 15-20 passes. Just make sure your ram is getting good airflow, ram that is overheating can produce errors even at otherwise stable settings. 99% of the time errors will show up during the first pass.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Interesting. With Fury 3x4GB 1560Mhz @ 8-9-8-24 160 1T that's almost precisely what I'am getting. Except my latency is 54.4ns. Memory controller bandwidth cap?
> 
> btw, try tightening your RTL (round trip latency) to get a better overall latency. With my old Corsair Vengeance running in DC I was able to lower it as much as to 51 and get 50ns latency at 1560Mhz CL7.


Yeah that does seem a bit low. Here are my results from last year on my P6T Deluxe V2, I did tweak some of the timings more later but they weren't too far off. For the testing I tried to keep the CPU around 4ghz or so. I guess my timings were 9-10-9 for 2000mhz not 10-11-10.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



RAM 1864mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4092mhz -186x22
UCLK 3728mhz

Read 27801
Write: 23640
Copy: 31440
Latency: 52.8

RAM 2045mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4080mhz 186x22
UCLK 3681mhz

Read: 28981
Write: 22960
Copy: 34026
Latency: 50.3

RAM 2200mhz 10-11-10-27 1t
CPU 3960mhz 220x18
UCLK 3728mhz

Read: 28210
Write: 23442
Copy: 33659
Latency: 51.5

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz

Read: 29210
Write: 23882
Copy: 33550
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3600mhz

Read: 28426
Write: 22520
Copy: 33357
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz

Read: 27082
Write: 20065
Copy: 32599
Latency: 53.4

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz

Read: 27047
Write: 23803
Copy: 28107
Latency: 51.5

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz

Read: 25682
Write: 20039
Copy: 27113
Latency: 52.8

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 2400mhz

Read: 22255
Write: 15330
Copy: 26401
Latency: 59.4


----------



## Kana-Maru

I haven't ran the AIDA 64 test lately, but here are my results from a few years ago in 2013.

Triple Channel = DDR3-2000Mhz [9-10-9-27-1N]

*Memory Read:* 30826 MB/s
*Memory Write:* 25140 MB/s
*Memory Copy:* 34785 MB/S
*Memory Latency:* 46.4ns

I'll run a new test soon I guess.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I haven't ran the AIDA 64 test lately, but here are my results from a few years ago in 2013.
> 
> Triple Channel = DDR3-2000Mhz [9-10-9-27-1N]
> 
> *Memory Read:* 30826 MB/s
> *Memory Write:* 25140 MB/s
> *Memory Copy:* 34785 MB/S
> *Memory Latency:* 46.4ns
> 
> I'll run a new test soon I guess.


Very nice. Any idea what your CPU and UCLK was at?


----------



## Kana-Maru

CPU OC was 4.6Ghz and I can't remember what the Uncore settings from way back then.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> So....On my X5660, I have managed so far to drop my CPU PLL to 1.72250v, QPI 1.2875v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/pgu39h


I had to raise my CPU PLL. I noticed that when I booted up, my pc would turn off and on a couple of times before booting and would do the same when trying to recover from sleep.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Looking good. You should be able to tighten up your ram. My 2400mhz sticks have the same timings as yours _(according to the XMP 2400mhz in CPU-Z)_ but I was able to run 10-11-10-21-1 at 2000mhz. Of course, make sure to run memtest86 for at least 5-6 passes once you feel you've stable-ish timings.
> 
> You may be able to drop the QPI/VTT as well, I was able to run at 1.25v at 2000mhz. But again, you'll need to make sure to stress test and run memtest.


I got the QPI down to 1.25v and runs fine. However, I tried 10-11-10-21-1t and no dice.


----------



## bobnoho

Ram speed vs timings?? Wouldnt a higher speed 2000mhz 2133mhz produce a much higher thoughput, while 1600mhz at much lower latency would be better at small task??

Whats the tool you guys are using AIDA64?? My p6t7 is running 48gb 7-8-7-21 1t there is another timing i reduced from 208 down to 160 i dont remember, ill test it when i get home (i work mostly out of town, rite now i am working in Sunnyvale, Ca, the heart of silicon valley and i still rely on amozon, ebay and newegg for all my parts)..


----------



## srialmaster

I tried just lowering to 11-12-12-29-1t and it fails to boot-up too. Should I increase the QPI a little?


----------



## srialmaster

I decided to take out the 2400MHz memory and pop in my 2133MHz memory.

CPU PLL 1.74900v, QPI 1.25v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I decided to take out the 2400MHz memory and pop in my 2133MHz memory.
> 
> CPU PLL 1.74900v, QPI 1.25v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.


Much better. That's pretty close to what I was getting at 9-10-9-27 with the uncore at 3200.


----------



## revertex

I've got 4 4Gb sticks, which is better, triple channel + single channel, or 2x dual channel?

With 4 modules in triple channel I have to bump Vcore a bit compared to 3 modules

Didn't tested 2x dual channel yet, as I avoid at my best change anything without a good reason.

i suppose 4 modules cause a bit of overhead to IMC, my doubt is if dual channel can alleviate this.

I don't care about performance, more RAM is better than faster RAM to me, as i use some memory hungry apps.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> I've got 4 4Gb sticks, which is better, triple channel + single channel, or 2x dual channel?
> 
> With 4 modules in triple channel I have to bump Vcore a bit compared to 3 modules
> 
> Didn't tested 2x dual channel yet, as I avoid at my best change anything without a good reason.
> 
> i suppose 4 modules cause a bit of overhead to IMC, my doubt is if dual channel can alleviate this.
> 
> I don't care about performance, more RAM is better than faster RAM to me, as i use some memory hungry apps.


I run 6 modules in Triple channel. I didn't have to increase my IMC or vCore. The only thing I had to change with 1 or 2 OC profiles were the timings and that's only if I wanted to run 2000+Mhz.

I agree, more RAM is better than faster RAM in some cases [most cases outside of benchmarking], but in reality it's fast no matter what. Even if it's running @ 60ns that's still crazy fast being that it's not even ".1" microsecond! More bandwidth can be more beneficial than tighter timings as well in some programs where "speed" isn't king. I have some programs that can easily eat up 16+GBs of RAM. Thanks to the fact that have so much RAM, I don't have to setup certain programs that optimizes RAM usage, which ultimately allows faster loading. Once it's loaded into memory my workflow greatly improves since there's no buffering or swapping occurring. With less RAM this wasn't the case. Also faster RAM didn't really make much of a difference either in my case.


----------



## srialmaster

When you want to increase the UCLK/UCORE above 3200MHz, what other settings do you normally need to change?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> When you want to increase the UCLK/UCORE above 3200MHz, what other settings do you normally need to change?


Usually just VTT.


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> So....On my X5660, I have managed so far to drop my CPU PLL to 1.72250v, QPI 1.2875v, CPU 1.3v with 4.2GHz (21x200) Max temp for CPU is 75°C.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/pgu39h


That's a nice overclock, all currents below Intel max specs, i suppose you have IEST, C-States, Turbo Mode, Virtualization and HT disabled, is that correct?


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> That's a nice overclock, all currents below Intel max specs, i suppose you have IEST, C-States, Turbo Mode, Virtualization and HT disabled, is that correct?


C-States, Virtualization, and HT enabled.


----------



## revertex

CPU multi locked to 21x, or auto?

i suppose it's 21x, BLCK 200, sorry for my n00b question.

I'm impressed how far these Xeons can go, 4.2Ghz with Vcore 1,3v!


----------



## TK421

Hi
I have a first gen Core i7 920XM mobile

What do I use to test a stability of the OC without damaging the CPU in the long run? I know that P95 and intel burn test is dangerous.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> CPU multi locked to 21x, or auto?
> 
> i suppose it's 21x, BLCK 200, sorry for my n00b question.
> 
> I'm impressed how far these Xeons can go, 4.2Ghz with Vcore 1,3v!


Locked 21x200.


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Hi
> I have a first gen Core i7 920XM mobile
> 
> What do I use to test a stability of the OC without damaging the CPU in the long run? I know that P95 and intel burn test is dangerous.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Lol nothing to do with the thread but ill help you anyways, prime 95 and ibt are fine, they wont "damage" your cpu, just stress it, if the cpu is fine nothing will happen, if your motherboard or cpu is damaged it may crash or cause instability, i wonder why you are doing oc or how u could oc a laptop cpu, they are locked most of the time, and the cooling solution of the laptop may not be sufficient to handle it


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> Lol nothing to do with the thread but ill help you anyways, prime 95 and ibt are fine, they wont "damage" your cpu, just stress it, if the cpu is fine nothing will happen, if your motherboard or cpu is damaged it may crash or cause instability, i wonder why you are doing oc or how u could oc a laptop cpu, they are locked most of the time, and the cooling solution of the laptop may not be sufficient to handle it


Throttlestop, bios does support OC but there's no option to adjust multipliers

I think I need to do a little cooling mod, it's holding 3.4GHz now but runs near 90c

What mode should I test with Prime95 (latest version)?

Also not sure where to post this question, since I'm running something that's comparable to an x58 (1st gen i7)


----------



## SmOgER

With laptops overclocking can become real messy.
You don't really know what temps to look for as the thermal margin tends to be much smaller than with desktops and prime95 temps on stock will probably be much higher at stock speeds than what people are getting here with overclocked desktop Xeons.


----------



## bobnoho




----------



## utking

My lapto
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Hi
> I have a first gen Core i7 920XM mobile
> 
> What do I use to test a stability of the OC without damaging the CPU in the long run? I know that P95 and intel burn test is dangerous.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Go for it ?
My laptop usually runs at 80~90 degree, after i went from dual core non ht, to quad with ht although it shuts itself off at 105, a cooling mod might be good though!


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> With laptops overclocking can become real messy.
> You don't really know what temps to look for as the thermal margin tends to be much smaller than with desktops and prime95 temps on stock will probably be much higher at stock speeds than what people are getting here with overclocked desktop Xeons.


Yeah, I know. It's an M15x though, shouldn't worry too much about OC aside from the slight thermal management issue.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *utking*
> 
> My lapto
> Go for it ?
> My laptop usually runs at 80~90 degree, after i went from dual core non ht, to quad with ht although it shuts itself off at 105, a cooling mod might be good though!


P95? What mode?


----------



## utking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Yeah, I know. It's an M15x though, shouldn't worry too much about OC aside from the slight thermal management issue.
> P95? What mode?


Lol, i can't Even stress test mine, shuts right off when playing hl2 it sits around 90~95


----------



## 4everAnoob

I still have a minor stability issue I cant seem to get rid of.
First of, my settings:
x5660 200x20 vcore 1.2875 qpi 3200 [email protected] mem 1600 8-8-8 (corsair vengeance)

Last night it ran 100 passes IBT vHigh and it passed 88 times then went into sleep mode








The remaining 12 it passed no problem. Ambient temps were on the low side.

This morning it is slightly warmer, I was experimenting with SpeedFan to set the CPU fan speed so I thought might as well use IBT quickly to check the result. I just left it on standard, and the damn thing failed after 3 passes









I have a sort of feeling that this board does not really like 200 bclk or something. At least with 32nm CPUs.

I have now upped the QPI to 1.295v and you guessed it, no problems so far but I feel it does not mean anything.
I get the feeling I need more and more volts for the same overclock









Game stability is fine, Crysis 3 no problems ever.


----------



## revertex

@4everAnoob

Do you have LLc enabled or disabled?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> @4everAnoob
> 
> Do you have LLc enabled or disabled?


Llc lvl 1

Put the qpi Back to 2800 I figure there is some issue with qpi 3200/3000 which means it is not stable unless maybe unsafe voltage are used.
My x5670 I had before this X5660 had the same behaviour.
Still performance wise uncore 2800 vs 3200 can't be a big deal can it?

There is still a small chance somethung else is at play. It is running 100x IBT vHigh again with slow fan speeds to get higher temps.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Failed already. This is not looking good, I had the vcore at 1.275v now which previously passed IBT 40x now it failed in less than 10. No idea what is going on.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Failed already. This is not looking good, I had the vcore at 1.275v now which previously passed IBT 40x now it failed in less than 10. No idea what is going on.


Seems like IBT isn't working so well for you.

What I usually do, is stress test it with prime95 blend for 2 hours for initial stability. If it passes then I do the blend test overnight. If it doesn't pass, usually all it needs is some minor adjustments and if it does pass - you can proceed to small ffts overnight, but more likely than not your OC is already stable. Blend stress testing has some very CPU demanding low-fft passes of its own.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Seems like IBT isn't working so well for you.
> 
> What I usually do, is stress test it with prime95 blend for 2 hours for initial stability. If it passes then I do the blend test overnight. If it doesn't pass, usually all it needs is some minor adjustments and if it does pass - you can proceed to small ffts overnight, but more likely than not your OC is already stable. Blend stress testing has some very CPU demanding low-fft passes of its own.


I've used IntelBurnTest since the socket 775 days. It has always been super reliable for me.
The 32nm Xeon was my first introduction to the X58 platform. I made the switch because I could get both the motherboard (GA-X58A-UD3R) and CPU (X5670) cheaply. That X5670 was my first 1366 CPU. It overclocked reasonably well, about 1.36v w/ llc for 4.2 GHz. Then I switched to the current CPU, the X5660 which needed slightly less volts for 4.2 GHz. But I only tested like 20 passes IBT at that time.
Now I find that even 4ghz is difficult to get stable. Doing memtest now just to be sure and no problems so far.
I did push my X5660 hard for a very short while (like 1.5vcore) to see how high it would go. Temps were never too high during these tests. It has never been over 1.35v for prolonged periods.
I'm going test my known stable clocks (160x23 turbo) to see if that still works. But I still have a suspicion that the motherboard does not like 200 bclk, especially when it warms up over time. Back in the 775 days you increased the northbridge voltage to increase high FSB stability, does that apply with X58?
I also have a W3680 I was planning to sell and get some nice cash for, but now I might use it as I can keep the bclk low and the multi high.

Northbridge gets to about 60 Celsius. Should be fine right?


----------



## webhito

Howdy overclockers!

Due to the close arrival of a new family member I had to get rid of my z170 system to cover some of the costs of the hospital, I sold my 6700k and am waiting on someone to grab my mark 1.

Funny thing though, I finally got the nerve to push my x5650 further from what it was up to a nice 4.0ghz and 1.250 volts, the weird thing however is that at stock clocks while benchmarking ( everything on auto ) My system was pulling 450 watts while at 4.0 it was pulling 480...
My 980ti with windows 10 was getting lower clocks for some reason... not sure why either.
Idle my Skylake build was pulling less than 100 watts while this one is pulling around 200, quite the difference there lol.

Benchmark results:
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147702 Stock
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147381 4.0
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6677878 6700K at 4.0 undervolted.


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Howdy overclockers!
> 
> Due to the close arrival of a new family member I had to get rid of my z170 system to cover some of the costs of the hospital, I sold my 6700k and am waiting on someone to grab my mark 1.
> 
> Funny thing though, I finally got the nerve to push my x5650 further from what it was up to a nice 4.0ghz and 1.250 volts, the weird thing however is that at stock clocks while benchmarking ( everything on auto ) My system was pulling 450 watts while at 4.0 it was pulling 480...
> My 980ti with windows 10 was getting lower clocks for some reason... not sure why either.
> Idle my Skylake build was pulling less than 100 watts while this one is pulling around 200, quite the difference there lol.
> 
> Benchmark results:
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147702 Stock
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147381 4.0
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6677878 6700K at 4.0 undervolted.


Disappointing 1.6644% difference between Westmere-EP and Skylake at same clock in 3D Mark score.

Overclocking gave you 14.4223% increase in score, a 13.4523% difference.

Surely you can overclock 6700k to much higher clocks, but it costs much more.

Do you have a power consumption comparison under full load?

What Intel is really doing is increasing their profits producing more chips per wafer.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Disappointing 1.6644% difference between Westmere-EP and Skylake at same clock in 3D Mark score.
> 
> Overclocking gave you 14.4223% increase in score, a 13.4523% difference.
> 
> Surely you can overclock 6700k to much higher clocks, but it costs much more.
> 
> Do you have a power consumption comparison under full load?
> 
> What Intel is really doing is increasing their profits producing more chips per wafer.


Yea, but keep in mind that this is a 6 core 12 thread vs a 4 core 8 thread so its still quite a gain. I am sure the processor can be pushed more but for my needs this is where it will stay.

Sadly no, I took the system apart without tracking its power consumption under load, but I can say that playing rocket league with my 6700k would never make my psu's fan turn on while this setup has it running all the time ( over 250 watt load afaik ).


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Howdy overclockers!
> 
> Due to the close arrival of a new family member I had to get rid of my z170 system to cover some of the costs of the hospital, I sold my 6700k and am waiting on someone to grab my mark 1.
> 
> Funny thing though, I finally got the nerve to push my x5650 further from what it was up to a nice 4.0ghz and 1.250 volts, the weird thing however is that at stock clocks while benchmarking ( everything on auto ) My system was pulling 450 watts while at 4.0 it was pulling 480...
> My 980ti with windows 10 was getting lower clocks for some reason... not sure why either.
> Idle my Skylake build was pulling less than 100 watts while this one is pulling around 200, quite the difference there lol.
> 
> Benchmark results:
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147702 Stock
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8147381 4.0
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6677878 6700K at 4.0 undervolted.


Not bad considering that CPU costs about 20% of the 6700k







.

200w seems crazy for idle though. My [email protected] was pulling around 150 idle and that was with 5 hdd's, two ssds, 10 fans, and pretty much all the usb ports used up. Speedstep and other power saving options enabled?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Not bad considering that CPU costs about 20% of the 6700k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 200w seems crazy for idle though. My [email protected] was pulling around 150 idle and that was with 5 hdd's, two ssds, 10 fans, and pretty much all the usb ports used up. Speedstep and other power saving options enabled?


Yea, not bad at all, I can get my hands on a brand new x5670 for $200 but in all honesty this one was only $80 so I can't really decide whether or not to take the hit.

I just realized my ups and monitor are connected to it, so it should be a few watts less than that, maybe like you said around 150 watts or so, I have 2 mechanical drives and 1 ssd. Speedstep and all other bells and whistles are also active.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, not bad at all, I can get my hands on a brand new x5670 for $200 but in all honesty this one was only $80 so I can't really decide whether or not to take the hit.
> 
> I just realized my ups and monitor are connected to it, so it should be a few watts less than that, maybe like you said around 150 watts or so, I have 2 mechanical drives and 1 ssd. Speedstep and all other bells and whistles are also active.


"New" x5670's seem to go for around 160 or so on ebay. I honestly wouldn't bother. I don't think it's worth 50-60% over a used one.

And I don't really think it would be worth going from a x5650 to a x5670. You're only at 1.25v right now, you should be able to do 4.2 at 1.3 depending on how your temps are.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> "New" x5670's seem to go for around 160 or so on ebay. I honestly wouldn't bother. I don't think it's worth 50-60% over a used one.
> 
> And I don't really think it would be worth going from a x5650 to a x5670. You're only at 1.25v right now, you should be able to do 4.2 at 1.3 depending on how your temps are.


Yea, I figured as much, I actually thought $200 for a new one was a good deal, good thing I did not buy it lol.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Yea, I figured as much, I actually thought $200 for a new one was a good deal, good thing I did not buy it lol.


But the ones are for $120.
http://www.amazon.com/Intel-SLBV7-2-93GHz-Socket-LGA1366/dp/B004EET1J4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1460243317&sr=8-2&keywords=x5670+xeon


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> But the ones are for $120.
> http://www.amazon.com/Intel-SLBV7-2-93GHz-Socket-LGA1366/dp/B004EET1J4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1460243317&sr=8-2&keywords=x5670+xeon


Cheers, I don't have access to those chips or prices as I am in Mexico, reason why I was tempted on purchasing the x5670 but only if it was brand new, but as tbob22 said, there is just no point getting something slightly better when my overclock could already be better than what I might get out of the new chip.

Also, Shipping to Mexico ( when it actually said it was free ) is a whopping $130 USD lol.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Cheers, I don't have access to those chips or prices as I am in Mexico, reason why I was tempted on purchasing the x5670 but only if it was brand new, but as tbob22 said, there is just no point getting something slightly better when my overclock could already be better than what I might get out of the new chip.
> 
> Also, Shipping to Mexico ( when it actually said it was free ) is a whopping $130 USD lol.


I'am not from US either, but I thought YOU were.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> *Fixed*
> 
> I prefer a W3690, W3680, or an i7 970, 980X, or 990X.


What settings are you running for your 4.4GHz? 26x170?

I have my W3690 installed with my H100. I want to compare the temps versus my H110i GTX.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Does anyone know a way to reliably test Uncore stability?
Like, is there a tool or something available for this?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Does anyone know a way to reliably test Uncore stability?
> Like, is there a tool or something available for this?


I don't think there's a tool directly for uncore stress test, but I'll definitely run SuperPi Mod 32M Benchmark twice if I were you. You can run OCCT - CPU: LINPACK stress test for as long as you think is necessary [at least 30 mins IMO]. Prime95 Stress Test - Blend Test. Then there's always IBT 2.54v Very High & Maximum loops. I'd use the "Maximum" setting.

There are other stress testers available, but these are the easiest to download, unzip and run without needed to install anything.

I think if you can pass all of those test then I believe the uncore is fine. You can customize the stress tests anyway you want if you don't want to take all day, but chances are you'll have to give up at least an hour in a half for rigorous testing.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> What settings are you running for your 4.4GHz? 26x170?
> 
> I have my W3690 installed with my H100. I want to compare the temps versus my H110i GTX.


I normally don't run HT on at that GHz. Yup, 26x170.

If you want another comparison:
Vcore @ 1.35v (set in bios) 1.341v at idle, 1.354v at load
Uncore & QPI @ 3052MHz
Uncore @ 1.3v (can pull 3.6Ghz at same volts)
Pump @ 40%
Ambient temp 69*F
Core idle temps 27-33*c (hottest core)
Custom Loop Parts:
-HeatKiller 3.0
-Swiftech MCR 320 Drive Rev.3 W/pump & res
-Bitspower G1/4 1/2ID x 5/8OD Compression fittings

IBT 3072Mb tested, 10 runs, same ambient temps
Core load temps 65*c (hottest core)


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't think there's a tool directly for uncore stress test, but I'll definitely run SuperPi Mod 32M Benchmark twice if I were you. You can run OCCT - CPU: LINPACK stress test for as long as you think is necessary [at least 30 mins IMO]. Prime95 Stress Test - Blend Test. Then there's always IBT 2.54v Very High & Maximum loops. I'd use the "Maximum" setting.
> 
> There are other stress testers available, but these are the easiest to download, unzip and run without needed to install anything.
> 
> I think if you can pass all of those test then I believe the uncore is fine. You can customize the stress tests anyway you want if you don't want to take all day, but chances are you'll have to give up at least an hour in a half for rigorous testing.


Do you normally manually set your UNCORE/UCLK or do you use Auto?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Does anyone know a way to reliably test Uncore stability?
> Like, is there a tool or something available for this?


Actually I think OCCT (first tab "CPU:OCCT", large data set) could be your best option.
it doesn't create "synthetic" heat, but it does tend to detect controller / cache errors quite well. So I would say it's pretty much as much uncore focused as you can get.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I normally don't run HT on at that GHz. Yup, 26x170.
> 
> If you want another comparison:
> Vcore @ 1.35v (set in bios) 1.341v at idle, 1.354v at load
> Uncore & QPI @ 3052MHz
> Uncore @ 1.3v (can pull 3.6Ghz at same volts)
> Pump @ 40%
> Ambient temp 69*F
> Core idle temps 27-33*c (hottest core)
> Custom Loop Parts:
> -HeatKiller 3.0
> -Swiftech MCR 320 Drive Rev.3 W/pump & res
> -Bitspower G1/4 1/2ID x 5/8OD Compression fittings
> 
> IBT 3072Mb tested, 10 runs, same ambient temps
> Core load temps 65*c (hottest core)


Is this what you normally run or do you run it at a different setting normally?

What speed are running the RAM with? I got my 2133MHz(6x4GB) to run well with just increasing the QPI to 1.3v. My 2133MHz doesn't seem to run low like my 2400MHz (4x8GB). I could run the 2400 with my X5660 at 1.25v easily. The 2133 had to run 1.2875v with the X5660.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Is this what you normally run or do you run it at a different setting normally?
> 
> What speed are running the RAM with? I got my 2133MHz(6x4GB) to run well with just increasing the QPI to 1.3v. My 2133MHz doesn't seem to run low like my 2400MHz (4x8GB). I could run the 2400 with my X5660 at 1.25v easily. The 2133 had to run 1.2875v with the X5660.


Lately I've been doing 4.25Ghz with HT on or off, Uncore and QPI @ 3.6Ghz, Memory at 1960MHz cl8.8.8.21 1T tRFC 98 (3x2Gb kit). Same Memory, QPI & Uncore volts as in the test, but the vcore is @ 1.33 (in bios, forgot the idle and load readings)


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Does anyone know a way to reliably test Uncore stability?
> Like, is there a tool or something available for this?


Prime Large FFT should do it.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Lately I've been doing 4.25Ghz with HT on or off, Uncore and QPI @ 3.6Ghz, Memory at 1960MHz cl8.8.8.21 1T tRFC 98 (3x2Gb kit). Same Memory, QPI & Uncore volts as in the test, but the vcore is @ 1.33 (in bios, forgot the idle and load readings)


Why do you turn HT off?

Also, why do you run such a low OC? The X5660s easily do 4.2GHz.

Have you experimented with just leaving the BCLK lower and increasing the Multiplyer? 32x133 would let you run faster memory and still be 4.25GHz.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Why do you turn HT off?
> 
> Also, why do you run such a low OC? The X5660s easily do 4.2GHz.
> 
> Have you experimented with just leaving the BCLK lower and increasing the Multiplyer? 32x133 would let you run faster memory and still be 4.25GHz.


My board has an early X58 chip-set revision. The unlocked multi doesn't work, found this out after I bought the chip. All these 32nm 6 core chips will do 4.2Ghz easy peasy. My i7 970 does, my old X5660 did (I don't overclock my X5690) I've found a fast QPI speed enhances gaming performance: not a scientific measurement but just simple observation. Also my Uncore can do 3.6Ghz with 1.3vtt so as to not push those two settings hard with harsh volts I keep them around 3.6Ghz. Both of these are at a 22x. I can keep them equal at these speeds while at 4.25Ghz If I had the latest X58 chipset revision I would definitely be using the unlocked multi (27x 164blck) and running 4.4Ghz cpu core. Hence the 4.25Ghz

EDIT: I usually play with the HT, but for the most part I don't notice any difference gaming whether on or off


----------



## Dale-C

I got bored and decided to start overclocking again. I got R3E with X5650 running at;
CPU 200x20 1.3000v
QPI 3600 1.3125v
Uclk 7200

LLC Full Calibration

Everything else like NB/SB/PLL stock (1.21/1.81 I think)

I tried 200x22 for 4.4GHz and can't get it stable even at 1.4v. Keep getting BSOD 0x0101, 124, 3B.

I've tried 1.2v for NB and SB and 1.9v for PLL and same thing. Can't get past 39s in LinX.

I can buy a few X5670s from a server place I can test out but not sure if it's worth it just to satisfy my OC eagerness haha.

Also if anyone has any insight of running a high QPI voltage/frequency long term on these CPUs? My old 950 I had it at 4000 QPI at 1.36v. Also 4ghz at 1.2v. Quite Happy with that, gaming was good. This X5650 wasn't much of an upgrade at all.

Intel says here: http://ark.intel.com/products/47922/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5650-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI
VID Voltage Range 0.750V-1.350V

And also here: http://www.intel.com.au/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/xeon-5600-vol-1-datasheet.pdf Page 31, Table 2-7 Processor Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings

VCC (Core) 1.4v
VCCPLL (PLL) 2.0v 5% tolerance
VDDQ (RAM) 1.8v 5% tolerance
VTTA/VTTD (Analog/Digital Uncore (QPI?)) 1.4v

What are all your thoughts? I've read here and other forums, Max Vcore should be 1.45, PLL 1.9, QPI (Uncore?) 1.35, RAM 1.65. I realise these are absolutes, but has anyone tested this?


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> My board has an early X58 chip-set revision. The unlocked multi doesn't work, found this out after I bought the chip. All these 32nm 6 core chips will do 4.2Ghz easy peasy. My i7 970 does, my old X5660 did (I don't overclock my X5690) I've found a fast QPI speed enhances gaming performance: not a scientific measurement but just simple observation. Also my Uncore can do 3.6Ghz with 1.3vtt so as to not push those two settings hard with harsh volts I keep them around 3.6Ghz. Both of these are at a 22x. I can keep them equal at these speeds while at 4.25Ghz If I had the latest X58 chipset revision I would definitely be using the unlocked multi (27x 164blck) and running 4.4Ghz cpu core. Hence the 4.25Ghz
> 
> EDIT: I usually play with the HT, but for the most part I don't notice any difference gaming whether on or off


I will try 27x164. I have the R3F and my BIOS shows the multi to be 12min 63max.
I haven't played with trying to increase my QPI much. I have tried a couple of times, but I didn't have any luck and my BIOS would say it is corrupt and needs to be reloaded. I would just turn it off and back on and find the BIOS fails to overclock and go into the BIOS and change it.

EDIT: 63 is the max, not 68.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I will try 27x164. I have the R3F and my BIOS shows the multi to be 12min 68max.
> I haven't played with trying to increase my QPI much. I have tried a couple of times, but I didn't have any luck and my BIOS would say it is corrupt and needs to be reloaded. I would just turn it off and back on and find the BIOS fails to overclock and go into the BIOS and change it.


My board is different but here are my current voltage settings:
4.25Ghz
3.6Ghz Uncore & QPI
CPU Vcore = 1.33 (in bios) voltage read points vary
CPU VTT = 1.30v (+100mv) board and bios specific
CPU & IOH PLL both = 1.8v
QPI PLL = 1.275v
IOH Vcore = 1.2v
CPU Impedance (Less)
QPI Signal Compensation (Less) - helps tremendously at high NB/QPI speeds


----------



## srialmaster

[email protected] doesn't work well. It keeps failing after a few seconds in on p95. I changed to [email protected] and will see what I get. There should be no reason this cannot hit 4.5GHz.....


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> [email protected] doesn't work well. It keeps failing after a few seconds in on p95. I changed to [email protected] and will see what I get. There should be no reason this cannot hit 4.5GHz.....


What do you think is causing it to fail? The QPI? Uncore? Memory? CPU Cores?


----------



## Dale-C

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> [email protected] doesn't work well. It keeps failing after a few seconds in on p95. I changed to [email protected] and will see what I get. There should be no reason this cannot hit 4.5GHz.....


Try LinX, see if you can get a BSOD. Therefore it becomes much easier to diagnose why it is failing.


----------



## srialmaster

The voltage seems to be the issue. I am back at stock speeds right now. I did get it to 4.5 with a CPU voltage of 1.375. I just don't understand why it's gotta be so high. The X5660s can hit 4.2GHz at 1.3v easily.


----------



## srialmaster

I got plenty of BSODs. The error isn't the same either.


----------



## Dale-C

Yes but what error codes are they? There is a list here;

http://www.overclock.net/t/940091/bsod-codes-when-ocing-must-have-info/0_50

Somewhat helps you work out what needs tweaking.


----------



## asiki

Hi,
Try to lower uncore multipiler, in my case it was the key.
I have L5638 but I think that your X56xx is more or less the same so the rules will be similar.
These CPUs require uncore ratio at least 1,5 x [memory multipiler], on the other hand it's not recommended to go higher than 2x having voltages increased.
I tested several cases and my sweet spot (as well as for many other guys here) is uncore ratio = 2x[memory multipiler] - 1, so if my memory multipiler is x8 then I set uncore ratio = x15.
Why?
- 1,5x is minimum but such low frequency decreases overall performance, also surprisingly requires quite high qpi/vtt voltage.
- 2x simply doesn't work in my system, don't know why, don't care
- 2x+1, 2x+2 are fine but they also require quite high qpi/vtt voltage
- 2x-1 is actually as efficient as 2x+1 but qpi/vtt voltage can be much much lower
An example, let's set qpi/vtt=1,3v (a really safe value for my CPU), then:
- having uncore multiplier = 2x+1, I could go with BCLK max to ~170,
- having uncore multiplier = 2x-1 I could easily go with BCLK to 210 and still I see some potential to go further (but not on a cheap air cooling I have so I stayed here).
Cheers!


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Prime Large FFT should do it.


Prime blend failed here on 1 core after 8 hours, 112K FFT (rounding error).
Settings used:
X5660 20x20 1.2875v llc1
Uncore 200x19 (3000)
Memory at stock settings and voltage (1600 9-9-9 1.50v)
All other voltages stock/normal.

Did one more test last night, 175x23 on the CPU and 175x10 on the memory with loosened timings. CPU runs at 4025 MHz and the voltage was set slightly lower 1.275v again with llc level 1.
Passed 10x IBT close to maximum memory.

My feeling says its uncore or memory somehow that is just a very very tiny bit unstable. I cannot seem to push the uncore high at all, Id rather keep thr voltage default if possible. I get instant BSOD with 2x uncore ratio, same as with my previous X5670.

I am taking a break from this till later this week.


----------



## gofasterstripes

<256k would be hitting the level 2 cache I think, so its +Vcc or a frequency limit.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Intelburntest is stable, and I thought IBT was harder on the CPU than Prime.
If the vcore really is too low, it would need at least 1.3v for only 4 GHz, that would mean the chip is rather lame or not?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Prime blend failed here on 1 core after 8 hours, 112K FFT (rounding error).
> Settings used:
> X5660 20x20 1.2875v llc1
> Uncore 200x19 (3000)
> Memory at stock settings and voltage (1600 9-9-9 1.50v)
> All other voltages stock/normal.
> 
> Did one more test last night, 175x23 on the CPU and 175x10 on the memory with loosened timings. CPU runs at 4025 MHz and the voltage was set slightly lower 1.275v again with llc level 1.
> Passed 10x IBT close to maximum memory.
> 
> My feeling says its uncore or memory somehow that is just a very very tiny bit unstable. I cannot seem to push the uncore high at all, *Id rather keep thr voltage default if possible*. I get instant BSOD with 2x uncore ratio, same as with my previous X5670.
> 
> I am taking a break from this till later this week.


You rather keep the voltage default than have it stable?

And you uncore is not 3Ghz,
200x19=3.8Ghz, which is high.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Fail I meant 200x15
In my experience as soon as extra voltage is required to stabilize uncore you can keep adding voltage forever and it still wont be stable. But it could be a memory problem however memtest passes ok (only did a few passes)


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Fail I meant 200x15
> In my experience as soon as extra voltage is required to stabilize uncore you can keep adding voltage forever and it still wont be stable. But it could be a memory problem however memtest passes ok (only did a few passes)


Try 200x21 with 1.3v.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Try 200x21 with 1.3v.


You mean cpu + vcore? It needs 1.35v for that.
Uncore would never work that high even at 100volts lol.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> You mean cpu + vcore? It needs 1.35v for that.
> Uncore would never work that high even at 100volts lol.


[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]


----------



## SmOgER

Well 3Ghz is kinda low then, you shouldn't have any problems with it at all in say 3.2-3.4Ghz range.

I'am not sure I didn't miss anything you've mentioned already, but just some ideas:

1. Make sure your QPI is at 18x (lowest possible except "slow mode")
2. Try increasing vDIMM slightly above their rated voltages regardless if you are overclocking your ram
3. increase PLL and NB voltages (in the safe range of course) if you haven't already

4. What is your VTT?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Well 3Ghz is kinda low then, you shouldn't have any problems with it at all in say 3.2-3.4Ghz range.
> 
> I'am not sure I didn't miss anything you've mentioned already, but just some ideas:
> 
> 1. Make sure your QPI is at 18x (lowest possible except "slow mode")
> 2. Try increasing vDIMM slightly above their rated voltages regardless if you are overclocking your ram
> 3. increase PLL and NB voltages (in the safe range of course) if you haven't already
> 
> 4. What is your VTT?


1. This is always set to the lowest option except slow mode. No point in going faster.
2. An in depth memory investigation has been planned for later this week








3. I will try this
4. Normal, which the motherboard claims is 1.175v.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> 1. This is always set to the lowest option except slow mode. No point in going faster.
> 2. An in depth memory investigation has been planned for later this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. I will try this
> *4. Normal, which the motherboard claims is 1.175v*.


Looks like you are very scared of voltages haha.

_Immediately_ increase that VTT to 1.23v+.









I've set mine straight away at close to 1.3V without even thinking about it. There is no point in keeping it low other than causing potential issues like you are having now.
Unless that is, you have super crappy board which can die any second (if that's the case then leave everything at stock and keep your fingers crossed at all times).
You are not gonna degrade your chip with those volts.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> 4. Normal, which the motherboard claims is 1.175v.


If 1.175 nearly works, try 1.25, as above.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> 1. This is always set to the lowest option except slow mode. No point in going faster.
> 2. An in depth memory investigation has been planned for later this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. I will try this
> 4. Normal, which the motherboard claims is 1.175v.


The default should be 1.2v, not 1.175v


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> The default should be 1.2v, not 1.175v


It's 1.175v on mine as well.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> It's 1.175v on mine as well.


Yeah, on gigabyte boards it depends on what the cpu likes. It's a bit odd.
The VTT voltage steps can vary a bit too.

Some do 1.175V, 1.195V, 1.215V, Ect.
While others do 1.170V, 1.190V, 1.210V, Ect.

My X5687 defaults at 1.150V VTT while my X5650 defaults at 1.215V.


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> 1. This is always set to the lowest option except slow mode. No point in going faster.
> 2. An in depth memory investigation has been planned for later this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. I will try this
> 4. Normal, which the motherboard claims is 1.175v.


If you have 1.65V RAM modules like me, you can go upto 1.35V VTT. But, always make sure the difference between DRAM voltage and VTT is not more than 500mV.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Yeah, on gigabyte boards it depends on what the cpu likes. It's a bit odd.
> The VTT voltage steps can vary a bit too.
> 
> Some do 1.175V, 1.195V, 1.215V, Ect.
> While others do 1.170V, 1.190V, 1.210V, Ect.
> 
> My X5687 defaults at 1.150V VTT while my X5650 defaults at 1.215V.


On my R3F, with a i7 970, X5660 and W3690 it defaults to 1.2v for vTT. This is with 1600MHz, 2133MHz and 2400MHz memory. Since I use 6x4GB with the 2133MHz, I always have to increase this one.


----------



## theister

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Looks like you are very scared of voltages haha.
> 
> _Immediately_ increase that VTT to 1.23v+.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've set mine straight away at close to 1.3V without even thinking about it. There is no point in keeping it low other than causing potential issues like you are having now.
> Unless that is, you have super crappy board which can die any second (if that's the case then leave everything at stock and keep your fingers crossed at all times).
> You are not gonna degrade your chip with those volts.


From my personal experience this is something i would not do in any case.

Currently i have a X5687 running @ 4.6 GHZ (27*170) with a RE3.
The BCLK is easily running with 1,2V QPI.

In my case raising the QPI Volts are causing instability (but the CPU and the board are able to hanlde more then 1.2 V QPI but with different BCLK, tested it), so i think going straight to 1,3 V is not preventing you to get into troubles, sometimes it can causing them too.


----------



## OCmember

4.1GHz possible for the QPI/North Bridge?


----------



## GENXLR

The likelyhood falls, chances are no but... some chips can do it


----------



## 4everAnoob

Would this memory work on a GA-X58A-UD3R ?
(Micron) 4GB 240p PC3-12800 CL11 18c 512x4 DDR3-1600 1Rx4 1.35V ECC RDIMM
MFG Code: MT18KSF51272PZ-1G6K1FE


----------



## gofasterstripes

I only ever used 1.65/1.5V, sorry.

EDIT - the UD7 I have now shows 1.3 or 1.4v as options.

I think 1.4v would do you fine, and IIRC slightly reduce Uncore heat output due to less energy being dissipated per row read/write. AFAIK ECC RAM works, though I can't remember if you'll actually get the ECC function on.

Eeer, sure there's a few UD3 owners among us...


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Would this memory work on a GA-X58A-UD3R ?
> (Micron) 4GB 240p PC3-12800 CL11 18c 512x4 DDR3-1600 1Rx4 1.35V ECC RDIMM
> MFG Code: MT18KSF51272PZ-1G6K1FE


there is no problem with the voltage, but I'am not sure if this specific ECC server RAM will work.
It's kinda hit or miss if it'll work or not as far as I'am concerned.

PS. Those timings are terrible. It's probably possible to tighten them with custom settings (can be problematic with ECC apparently), but normally you should aim for at least CL9 (or lower) with 1600.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Would this memory work on a GA-X58A-UD3R ?
> (Micron) 4GB 240p PC3-12800 CL11 18c 512x4 DDR3-1600 1Rx4 1.35V ECC RDIMM
> MFG Code: MT18KSF51272PZ-1G6K1FE


If you have it, try it.
If not, then dont buy it.


----------



## CesarDRK

Well, did some more tests with my X5660 yesterday with the 23x multiplier and 200bclk.

Ive disabled C-States and SpeedStep to see if 23x would remain at full load, but something curious happened, it showed 24x in CPU-Z (4.8ghz) at idle ! When in light load (Super PI for example) dropped to 4.6ghz (23x). So i tried to run Cinebench and after a few seconds dropped again do 21x (4.2ghz).

I was running at 1.35v, wich is amazing. Since my last X5660 would bsod at 1.45v.
So i guess i´ll do the crossflash to the *P6T WS Pro*, to be able to LOCK the 23x multiplier !

If it could handle 4.6ghz at around 1.35 ~ 1.4v should it be safe for everyday use?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Well, did some more tests with my X5660 yesterday with the 23x multiplier and 200bclk.
> 
> Ive disabled C-States and SpeedStep to see if 23x would remain at full load, but something curious happened, it showed 24x in CPU-Z (4.8ghz) at idle ! When in light load (Super PI for example) dropped to 4.6ghz (23x). So i tried to run Cinebench and after a few seconds dropped again do 21x (4.2ghz).
> 
> I was running at 1.35v, wich is amazing. Since my last X5660 would bsod at 1.45v.
> So i guess i´ll do the crossflash to the *P6T WS Pro*, to be able to LOCK the 23x multiplier !
> 
> If it could handle 4.6ghz at around 1.35 ~ 1.4v should it be safe for everyday use?


I've recently enabled C5/C6/C7 states and witnessed the same thing except that when it's _truly_ idle it drops to minimum ratio (CPUz reports it wrong you need to use hwinfo64)

It boosts the ratio for single threaded tasks which plays with my LLC wonderfully (vcore drops by ~0.01V as soon as the ratio drops and CPU gets more MT load).
When running single threaded benchmarks cores stay at turbo boosted ratio most of the time despite the overclock.
This should benefit gaming and should increase the minimum frames, in theory at least.









PS. Is there any way yet discovered to permanently lock the X58 CPU at turbo multi?


----------



## suprc4

So I had a xeon x5670 for about a year until it died from a power surge during a thunder storm. I had it at 22 multiplier and bclk at 200 for a 4.4ghz overclock. It could do 23 multiplier but wouldnt post. I just got a xeon x5675 to replace it and the highest multiplier available to select from in the bios is 23 even though the bios says 25. I tried inputting 24 and 25 but the highest the bios would take is 23. This cpu seems like it has a lot of potential because it literally booted instantly with the same overclocking settings, but with 23 multiplier at 4.6ghz. Ran p95 and its good. The reason i upgraded to the x5675 is because I read that is has the highest multiplier available out of all the x56XX xeons. Anyone know how I can get it to go higher than a 23 multiplier? I have an EVGA x58 3x sli classified 3. CPU-Z also shows the multiplier as x23 (12 - 26) Thanks.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *suprc4*
> 
> So I had a xeon x5670 for about a year until it died from a power surge during a thunder storm. I had it at 22 multiplier and bclk at 200 for a 4.4ghz overclock. It could do 23 multiplier but wouldnt post. I just got a xeon x5675 to replace it and the highest multiplier available to select from in the bios is 23 even though the bios says 25. I tried inputting 24 and 25 but the highest the bios would take is 23. This cpu seems like it has a lot of potential because it literally booted instantly with the same overclocking settings, but with 23 multiplier at 4.6ghz. Ran p95 and its good. The reason i upgraded to the x5675 is because I read that is has the highest multiplier available out of all the x56XX xeons. Anyone know how I can get it to go higher than a 23 multiplier? I have an EVGA x58 3x sli classified 3. CPU-Z also shows the multiplier as x23 (12 - 26) Thanks.


enable turbo boost. In my case this increases the max "lockable" multi from turbo-2 to turbo-1 yet doesn't activate the actual dynamic turbo mode as long as you keep C5/C6/C7 states disabled.


----------



## suprc4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> enable turbo boost. In my case this increases the max "lockable" multi from turbo-2 to turbo-1 yet doesn't activate the actual dynamic turbo mode as long as you keep C5/C6/C7 states disabled.


Thanks. I tried that and it kept my multiplier at 23 in the settings but it showed the applied frequency was with 24 multiplier so it went up to 4.8ghz. However I couldn't get it to boot into windows at all with the turbo on and the multiplier at 24. I guess I should be happy with 4.6ghz then since it is a step up from the x5670 i had at 4.4ghz before lol.


----------



## suprc4

I was just scoping through this thread here while at work and I keep seeing people repeating the same thing that 1.45 volts will kill a cpu quickly within a few weeks. I ran 1.55volts with vdroop(so like 1.46) for over a year and a half straight with no problems on a x5670. I used to leave the computer on like 24/7 also and I didn't have speedstep or any c states enabled so it was always running at 4.4ghz with that voltage. I honestly think that cooling matters more up until like the 1.6volt range. I have a custom waterloop and the cpu never went over 60c so that helps a lot.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Well, did some more tests with my X5660 yesterday with the 23x multiplier and 200bclk.
> 
> Ive disabled C-States and SpeedStep to see if 23x would remain at full load, but something curious happened, it showed 24x in CPU-Z (4.8ghz) at idle ! When in light load (Super PI for example) dropped to 4.6ghz (23x). So i tried to run Cinebench and after a few seconds dropped again do 21x (4.2ghz).
> 
> I was running at 1.35v, wich is amazing. Since my last X5660 would bsod at 1.45v.
> So i guess i´ll do the crossflash to the *P6T WS Pro*, to be able to LOCK the 23x multiplier !
> 
> If it could handle 4.6ghz at around 1.35 ~ 1.4v should it be safe for everyday use?


What interesting is that your CPU dropped to non-turbo boost multi (x21) after few seconds running cinebench. I wonder why though. TDP/TDC limit reached? Power limit reached? If you do anything CPU intensive, does it drop to x21 multi too?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *suprc4*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> enable turbo boost. In my case this increases the max "lockable" multi from turbo-2 to turbo-1 yet doesn't activate the actual dynamic turbo mode as long as you keep C5/C6/C7 states disabled.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. I tried that and it kept my multiplier at 23 in the settings but it showed the applied frequency was with 24 multiplier so it went up to 4.8ghz. However I couldn't get it to boot into windows at all with the turbo on and the multiplier at 24. I guess I should be happy with 4.6ghz then since it is a step up from the x5670 i had at 4.4ghz before lol.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Click to expand...

More voltage?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *CesarDRK*
> 
> Well, did some more tests with my X5660 yesterday with the 23x multiplier and 200bclk.
> 
> Ive disabled C-States and SpeedStep to see if 23x would remain at full load, but something curious happened, it showed 24x in CPU-Z (4.8ghz) at idle ! When in light load (Super PI for example) dropped to 4.6ghz (23x). So i tried to run Cinebench and after a few seconds dropped again do 21x (4.2ghz).
> 
> I was running at 1.35v, wich is amazing. Since my last X5660 would bsod at 1.45v.
> So i guess i´ll do the crossflash to the *P6T WS Pro*, to be able to LOCK the 23x multiplier !
> 
> If it could handle 4.6ghz at around 1.35 ~ 1.4v should it be safe for everyday use?
> 
> 
> 
> I've recently enabled C5/C6/C7 states and witnessed the same thing except that when it's _truly_ idle it drops to minimum ratio (CPUz reports it wrong you need to use hwinfo64)
> 
> It boosts the ratio for single threaded tasks which plays with my LLC wonderfully (vcore drops by ~0.01V as soon as the ratio drops and CPU gets more MT load).
> When running single threaded benchmarks cores stay at turbo boosted ratio most of the time despite the overclock.
> This should benefit gaming and should increase the minimum frames, in theory at least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS. Is there any way yet discovered to permanently lock the X58 CPU at turbo multi?
Click to expand...

Which Xeon 56XX CPUs that are fully unlocked (multiplier)?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Which Xeon 56XX CPUs that are fully unlocked (multiplier)?


Wut?

I meant, there doesn't seem to be a way I'am aware of to permanently set the multi to turbo boost ratio and keep it that way regardless of the load.
It's either permanently 1-2 steps lower, or jumping all over the place and reaching max ratio only during ST tasks.
So I guess there is no way to force X58 CPU to stay at turbo ratio (@all cores) during stress testing/high load when overclocked.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Which Xeon 56XX CPUs that are fully unlocked (multiplier)?
> 
> 
> 
> Wut?
> 
> I meant, there doesn't seem to be a way I'am aware of to permanently set the multi to turbo boost ratio and keep it that way regardless of the load.
> It's either permanently 1-2 steps lower, or jumping all over the place and reaching max ratio only during ST tasks.
> So I guess there is no way to force X58 CPU to stay at turbo ratio (@all cores) during stress testing/high load when overclocked.
Click to expand...

I asked that because you'll need unlocked multiplier CPU for the CPU to "override" the turbo boost ratio & run at max turbo boost multi on all cores. For example E5-1680 v2 on 2011 socket with normal multi x30 & max turbo boost multi x39 (*overclocked to multi x46*). Otherwise it will always depends on the load, number of active cores, etc. The only way I can think of is by hacking the microcode.

When I have 1st gen Intel core CPU, I increased TDP & TDC to allow the CPU turbo boost to the max (or 1 step below) longer but CPU will run slightly hotter though. I have not seen anyone done this in this thread though. Can you check using HWiNFO under CPU section Enhanced Features for Programmable Ratio Limits & Programmable TDC/TDP Limits whether they're supported or not?


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Looks like you are very scared of voltages haha.
> 
> _Immediately_ increase that VTT to 1.23v+.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've set mine straight away at close to 1.3V without even thinking about it. There is no point in keeping it low other than causing potential issues like you are having now.
> Unless that is, you have super crappy board which can die any second (if that's the case then leave everything at stock and keep your fingers crossed at all times).
> You are not gonna degrade your chip with those volts.


Increased on all BIOS profiles to 1.195v for now.
I tested "high" uncore today, 3400 Mhz, even with 1.355v it would BSOD.
3200 MHz also BSOD ar stock volts.
3000 Mhz no BSOD but not certain to be stable at stock. So that will need some finetuning.
So yeah I think the uncore in this chip is lame.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Increased on all BIOS profiles to 1.195v for now.
> I tested "high" uncore today, 3400 Mhz, even with 1.355v it would BSOD.
> 3200 MHz also BSOD ar stock volts.
> 3000 Mhz no BSOD but not certain to be stable at stock. So that will need some finetuning.
> So yeah I think the uncore in this chip is lame.


What's your RAM ratio?
Normally lower uncore should be easily more stable BUT...
Uncore ratio is supposed to be at least 2 times greater than RAM ratio, else it's a problem.


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Uncore ratio is supposed to be at least 2 times greater than RAM ratio, else it's a problem.


It's 1.5x for 32nm Gulftown or Westmere.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> It's 1.5x for 32nm Gulftown or Westmere.


Is that written in stone? Reason I ask is because I had my x5650 at 2.0 lol. Could be the reason I was having several issues I could not figure out.


----------



## gofasterstripes

2x works fine for me on the UD7


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Wut?
> 
> I meant, there doesn't seem to be a way I'am aware of to permanently set the multi to turbo boost ratio and keep it that way regardless of the load.
> It's either permanently 1-2 steps lower, or jumping all over the place and reaching max ratio only during ST tasks.
> So I guess there is no way to force X58 CPU to stay at turbo ratio (@all cores) during stress testing/high load when overclocked.


Certain boards have a High TDP Turbo mode which allows you to use the turbo multi when all threads are loaded. My P6T6 had that option as well as my P6T Deluxe v2 crossflashed to P6T WS Pro.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Wut?
> 
> I meant, there doesn't seem to be a way I'am aware of to permanently set the multi to turbo boost ratio and keep it that way regardless of the load.
> It's either permanently 1-2 steps lower, or jumping all over the place and reaching max ratio only during ST tasks.
> So I guess there is no way to force X58 CPU to stay at turbo ratio (@all cores) during stress testing/high load when overclocked.
> 
> 
> 
> Certain boards have a High TDP Turbo mode which allows you to use the turbo multi when all threads are loaded. My P6T6 had that option as well as my P6T Deluxe v2 crossflashed to P6T WS Pro.
Click to expand...

...and if Programmable TDC/TDP Limits is supported, you can increase it if it's low. As an example below. I only have screenshot of mobile CPU but it doesn't matter because it's just for reference.


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Is that written in stone? Reason I ask is because I had my x5650 at 2.0 lol. Could be the reason I was having several issues I could not figure out.


Having the uncore frequency set at *atleast* 2x the memory multiplier was required only for Bloomfield. With Gulftown or Westmere, you can set the uncore multiplier as low as 1.5x the memory multiplier.

2x will work just fine. On my I7 920, running the memory at 2000Mhz was a challenge, since 2x uncore would mean 4000Mhz and keeping it stable at such high speed required a lot of VTT/QPI voltage. However, on my X5670 I was able to lower the uncore multiplier to 1.5x and have the uncore run at 3600Mhz when running the ram at 2000Mhz, this would mean lesser VTT/QPI voltage.


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> Having the uncore frequency set at *atleast* 2x the memory multiplier was required only for Bloomfield. With Gulftown or Westmere, you can set the uncore multiplier as low as 1.5x the memory multiplier.
> 
> 2x will work just fine. On my I7 920, running the memory at 2000Mhz was a challenge, since 2x uncore would mean 4000Mhz and keeping it stable at such high speed required a lot of VTT/QPI voltage. However, on my X5670 I was able to lower the uncore multiplier to 1.5x and have the uncore run at 3600Mhz when running the ram at 2000Mhz, this would mean lesser VTT/QPI voltage.


Sweet, thanks for the explanation, I have my ram working at 1333 so my uncore is at 2667, which in no way is too high. Just thought that somehow I may have damaged my processor due to it being 2x the speed of the ram and not 1.5.


----------



## the matty

hello all, i was going to be posting on how much of an overclock i got out of an X5570 in the not too distant future, but in this was not to be, seems the X5570 was DOA (just got black screens regardless of what i did with bios updates or cmos resets and the like) will have to order another in a few days, but that aside this should be a fun little adventure


----------



## 4everAnoob

Everything works great now... Passing all stability tests, except I just switch on my PC this morning, it boots, and near the end of the boot process it hard resets, as if I pressed the reset button...


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Everything works great now... Passing all stability tests, except I just switch on my PC this morning, it boots, and near the end of the boot process it hard resets, as if I pressed the reset button...


I had the same issue every now and then with my board also, I am still not sure what was/is causing it, in windows the overclock seemed to be rock solid but every now and then it would do that, turn off then back on again just to give me the unstable overclock message in bios.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I had the same issue every now and then with my board also, I am still not sure what was/is causing it, in windows the overclock seemed to be rock solid but every now and then it would do that, turn off then back on again just to give me the unstable overclock message in bios.


that sounds like a missed memory clock cycle. my antidote was to loosen the tRFC cycle from 59 to 98, doesn't happen anymore


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> I had the same issue every now and then with my board also, I am still not sure what was/is causing it, in windows the overclock seemed to be rock solid but every now and then it would do that, turn off then back on again just to give me the unstable overclock message in bios.


It happened after POST, it was during the windows boot screen, close to the end of the windows boot process. So I didnt get an overclock reset message. You only get that if it fails before it gets to the OS bootloader.


----------



## 4everAnoob

If anyone is interested, I tested power consumption of W3680 vs X5660 at identical settings (21x200, all voltages and speeds identical).
Result was ~400w for the W3680 vs ~355W for the X5660 (at the wall, including monitor and some other small devices). Tested using IBT @ very High. Not much difference really.

I did a test a while back comparing energy saving settings such as EIST C1E etc. and I found they had very little to no effect. Is that normal? Also, how do these settings effect overclock stability during idle, since the voltage might drop too low or does the motherboard compensate for the higher clocks?


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> that sounds like a missed memory clock cycle. my antidote was to loosen the tRFC cycle from 59 to 98, doesn't happen anymore


Nver heard of that before, lemme check my settings and see what they are set at. Much appreciated!


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *webhito*
> 
> Never heard of that before, lemme check my settings and see what they are set at. Much appreciated!


tFRC became important for me when I was trying to OC Yorkdale (Q9650) CPUs on the X38... I stumbled on this article when OCing my R3E a few years later. I won't lie, it is a lot to take in. The article explains everything related to memory timings:
*AnandTech*
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About SDRAM (Memory): But Were Afraid to Ask
_By Rajinder Gill, August 15, 2010_


----------



## webhito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> tFRC became important for me when I was trying to OC Yorkdale (Q9650) CPUs on the X38... I stumbled on this article when OCing my R3E a few years later. I won't lie, it is a lot to take in. The article explains everything related to memory timings:
> *AnandTech*
> Everything You Always Wanted to Know About SDRAM (Memory): But Were Afraid to Ask
> _By Rajinder Gill, August 15, 2010_


Much appreciated!


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> If anyone is interested, I tested power consumption of W3680 vs X5660 at identical settings (21x200, all voltages and speeds identical).
> Result was *~400w for the W3680 vs ~355W for the X5660* (at the wall, including monitor and some other small devices). Tested using IBT @ very High. Not much difference really.
> 
> I did a test a while back comparing energy saving settings such as EIST C1E etc. and I found they had very little to no effect. Is that normal? Also, how do these settings effect overclock stability during idle, since the voltage might drop too low or does the motherboard compensate for the higher clocks?


That's a huge difference in efficiency. Especially for the 2 chips of the same architecture and identical performance.

I wonder if this has something to do with the TCase delta on them. W3680 67.9°C and X5660 81.3°C.

I'am actually kinda glad now I didn't order an W chip.


----------



## revertex

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> That's a huge difference in efficiency. Especially for the 2 chips of the same architecture and identical performance.
> 
> I wonder if this has something to do with the TCase delta on them. W3680 67.9°C and X5660 81.3°C.
> 
> I'am actually kinda glad now I didn't order an W chip.


W3680 is 130W, X5660 is 95W.

I don't see any advantage of W over X, unless you get one really cheap, or want a chip with unlocked multiplier like W3680/W3690.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> W3680 is 130W, X5660 is 95W.
> 
> I don't see any advantage of W over X, unless you get one really cheap, or want a chip with unlocked multiplier like W3680/W3690.


I don't see much of a benefit with the unlocked multi on the W3690. The only true benefit I see is being able to run RAM above 10x the BCLK which is limited on the X56XX.


----------



## revertex

Is there any big difference running 6x 4Gb RAM versus 3x 8Gb RAM?
My guess is that 3 sticks cause less overhead to IMC, maybe making overclock a bit easier.
What's your opinions?


----------



## bobnoho

What about x5680?? Is it different than the w3680??


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> What about x5680?? Is it different than the w3680??


W3680 = 980x. IT has an unlocked multi.
The X series does not have an unlocked multi, but you can freely choose the multi within the range of the CPU (I think for x5680 it is 26x maximum). But I don't think you need an x5680 unless you can't overclock. X5650 is good enough, x5675 might be the best (I believe it was introduced later when the process node was more mature).
X series TDP is 95w vs 130w for W series.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> W3680 = 980x. IT has an unlocked multi.
> The X series does not have an unlocked multi, but you can freely choose the multi within the range of the CPU (I think for x5680 it is 26x maximum). But I don't think you need an x5680 unless you can't overclock. X5650 is good enough, x5675 might be the best (I believe it was introduced later when the process node was more mature).
> X series TDP is 95w vs 130w for W series.


X5650, X5660, X5670 and X5675 are 95W and 0.75-1.35v

W3670, W3680 and W3690 are 130W, 0.8-1.375v and unlocked multiplyer


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> Is there any big difference running 6x 4Gb RAM versus 3x 8Gb RAM?
> My guess is that 3 sticks cause less overhead to IMC, maybe making overclock a bit easier.
> What's your opinions?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> X5650, X5660, X5670 and X5675 are 95W and 0.75-1.35v
> 
> W3670, W3680 and W3690 are 130W, 0.8-1.375v and unlocked multiplyer


Makes you wonder what the heck stopped them from making 95W unlocked chip.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> X5650, X5660, X5670 and X5675 are 95W and 0.75-1.35v
> 
> W3670, W3680 and W3690 are 130W, 0.8-1.375v and unlocked multiplyer


w3670 is locked, basically the same as the 970.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Hitman 2016 was recently patched to version 1.1.0 and I've ran my benchmarks using the devs benchmarking tool. Check out my massive increases here:

Edit:

I've ran my Real Time Benchmarks ™ and it appears that the patch has broken the game. From what I have viewed, the vRAM usage showed me everything I needed to know. Basically it appears that the settings aren't being saved in the option.


----------



## the matty

Fairly new to 1366 overclocking but i managed to get this out of my E5640 (not hex i know) im fairly pleased with it







not finished yet though I have a bit more to do yet hence why the voltage is a bit high up, have another 10MHz i could get out of BCLK so we'll see how that goes









CPUz validation: http://valid.x86.fr/0bd46q

System:


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *the matty*
> 
> Fairly new to 1366 overclocking but i managed to get this out of my E5640 (not hex i know) im fairly pleased with it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not finished yet though I have a bit more to do yet hence why the voltage is a bit high up, have another 10MHz i could get out of BCLK so we'll see how that goes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPUz validation: http://valid.x86.fr/0bd46q
> 
> System:


i have the same motherboard with a x5650, pretty nice little board, the only thing it lacks is usb 3.0


----------



## the matty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> i have the same motherboard with a x5650, pretty nice little board, the only thing it lacks is usb 3.0


agreed, very nice board! max i got out of it was 220 BCLK but i still have to test more with a few tweaks







ill be throwing a hex at it sooner or later, probably few more weeks when i have the funds, might be able to afford an X5670


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

On the Rampage II GENE both the blue slots are x16, so i'd put the GPU at the bottom slot so that both the top x16 and x4 slots are available. Then you can drop in both a PCIe SSD and a newer USB 3.1 x4 card, which is only about $13. And have yourself a system that feels more modern.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I was still able to get some decent info from my results. I've updated my article with DX11 vs DX12 results and overclocked results in DX12.

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks?showall=&start=4

We still have to wait for IO Interactive to fix the graphical settings, but my results were better than nothing I suppose.


----------



## bobnoho

I just built another dell 730x build for a friend (great board just missing Usb 3.1), it's got a x5660 I can get the bclk to 220 very easy 220x21 [email protected] 1.368 Ram @2200mhz and the pc runs fast and very stable it seems I ran prime95 for an hour cpuz stress test plus msi kombuster at same time for an hour itget though aida64 and passmark (4362) just fine, but it won't come back from standby it either with fans on full a black screen or just simply restarts??? Any ideas?? Iv gone up to 1.45 with vcore, it dose it with or without speed step enabled....

One thing I did notice this is my second 730x build same board same same sell I'm using the exact x5660 that I ran in my first 730x and I'm using same Ram too so both systems are running the same setup different PSU's different water coolers 2x120g sad in raid vs single 240g and 2xgtx460 vs single gtx960 the First build did the same thing at first whent away??? But the first build with speed step enabled it would run 4.6ghz at full load 200x23 all day... The second build runs at 4.6 24/7 21x220 but downclocks to 4.2 under load maybe this has to do with it not coming back from standby


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> I just built another dell 730x build for a friend (great board just missing Usb 3.1), it's got a x5660 I can get the bclk to 220 very easy 220x21 [email protected] 1.368 Ram @2200mhz and the pc runs fast and very stable it seems I ran prime95 for an hour cpuz stress test plus msi kombuster at same time for an hour itget though aida64 and passmark (4362) just fine, but it won't come back from standby it either with fans on full a black screen or just simply restarts??? Any ideas?? Iv gone up to 1.45 with vcore, it dose it with or without speed step enabled....
> 
> One thing I did notice this is my second 730x build same board same same sell I'm using the exact x5660 that I ran in my first 730x and I'm using same Ram too so both systems are running the same setup different PSU's different water coolers 2x120g sad in raid vs single 240g and 2xgtx460 vs single gtx960 the First build did the same thing at first whent away??? But the first build with speed step enabled it would run 4.6ghz at full load 200x23 all day... The second build runs at 4.6 24/7 21x220 but downclocks to 4.2 under load maybe this has to do with it not coming back from standby


Check your core temps. It does throttle around 90C core temps despite 100C TjMax even if TCase is nowhere near 80C.
Or disable throttling in BIOS (not recommended).

As for the low multi, are you sure you have turbo-boost enabled?


----------



## GENXLR

the x5660 is a 21 mutli cpu

21 is the max load multiplier

22 and 23 are both are both turbo states and 24 is a c-state


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> the x5660 is a 21 mutli cpu
> 
> 21 is the max load multiplier
> 
> 22 and 23 are both are both turbo states and 24 is a c-state


What are you talking about I'am running X56*5*0 at constant 195x22 as we speak.


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> the x5660 is a 21 mutli cpu
> 
> 21 is the max load multiplier
> 
> 22 and 23 are both are both turbo states and 24 is a c-state


Uh..on my Sabertooth I was running my 5660 at x23 at full load. And x24 turbo. Depends on the Motherboard.


----------



## bobnoho

Core temps never got above 74 turbo boost I have disabled I'm trying for 4.6 with Ram at 2200mhz 21x220, this my third hex core x56** this one x5660 requires the least vcore to run 4.6 the other two x5680 and x5679 1.412-1.42 vcore...

What about the power phasing that came up before with my first 730x could the bclk be to high and the board is downclocking to compensate,
Thinking of reseating the cpu, mabye fix it not coming back from stand by,

My first 730x got reseated about 5 times with diferent CPU's and coolers


----------



## bobnoho

The max I can set the multi is 21 it boost up to 23....

I'm running 21x220 and it's downclovking to 19x220


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Core temps never got above 74 turbo boost I have disabled I'm trying for 4.6 with Ram at 2200mhz 21x220, this my third hex core x56** this one x5660 requires the least vcore to run 4.6 the other two x5680 and x5679 1.412-1.42 vcore...
> 
> What about the power phasing that came up before with my first 730x could the bclk be to high and the board is downclocking to compensate,
> Thinking of reseating the cpu, mabye fix it not coming back from stand by,
> 
> My first 730x got reseated about 5 times with diferent CPU's and coolers


A couple of areas to check for not coming from standby are:
CPU PLL (if too low)
UCLK (if too high)
QPI (if too high)
vTT/DRAM core voltage (if too low)


----------



## GENXLR

Kana maru can verify what i've said. The X5650 is a max 20 multi cpu, it's turbo is 22, c-state 23.

This is part of the chip, you cannot defeat.


----------



## bobnoho

Hmm, the QPI is at 7.2 this board won't let me ajust the PLL or the UCLK, but the VTT (just like ASUS refered to as qpi/dram bus) the bios will not tell me the current vtt volts, iv got auto and + .02 increments so just guessing I added .120 volts to the QPI/VTT..... Probly not enough...

Thank you srialmaster

Are there any tools that will show me QPI/VTT voltage??? I tried "hwmonitor" I could not find it


----------



## bobnoho

Is there a tool look up the uclk speed also?? 730x#1 is running Ram @2000mhz with .08v added to the QPI/VTT now that I think about it there's no way the uclk is at 4000mhz with only .08v added to vtt


----------



## bobnoho

Thank you SRIALMASTER....

730x #1 has XMP enabled and profile #2 loaded.. Manually set at 10x

730x #2 has XMP disabled

The XMP must automaticity downclock the uclk...

Not as big of a deal but I also need to figure out why the multi drops from 21 to 19 @ 100% load


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana maru can verify what i've said. The X5650 is a max 20 multi cpu, it's turbo is 22, c-state 23.
> 
> This is part of the chip, you cannot defeat.


You can "defeat" it. It depends on the mobo like it has been said.
22 is easily achievable with many mobos.

All I have to do on mine to make it work is enable turbo-boost while disabling all the states/C1E/power saving. It then constantly runs on 22x.


----------



## GENXLR

I've tested this on quite a few boards

Foxconn bloodrage
Asus P6T
Asus P6T Delux V2
Asus Rampage III Extreme Black
Gigabyte X58 UD3R?

All of the ran at 22 under2 core load, under full core load showed it reverting back when checked with CPU-Z and Core Temp and HWinfo

Idk what to say

Kana-maru and Scorpn can likely confirm this as well


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I've tested this on quite a few boards
> 
> Foxconn bloodrage
> Asus P6T
> Asus P6T Delux V2
> Asus Rampage III Extreme Black
> Gigabyte X58 UD3R?
> 
> All of the ran at 22 under2 core load, under full core load showed it reverting back when checked with CPU-Z and Core Temp and HWinfo
> 
> Idk what to say
> 
> Kana-maru and Scorpn can likely confirm this as well


The screens from the OP show X5660 running at 23x multi and benchmarks correspond with this (so it's not throttling).

So Sabertooth X58 and GA-EX58-Extreme are both confirmed, I'am sure there are more boards that can do this as well. And I kinda doubt that Rampage III drops the multi, but maybe it depends on the BIOS ver. No idea for the other 3 though.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> the x5660 is a 21 mutli cpu
> 
> 21 is the max load multiplier
> 
> 22 and 23 are both are both turbo states and 24 is a c-state


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Kana maru can verify what i've said. The X5650 is a max 20 multi cpu, it's turbo is 22, c-state 23.
> 
> This is part of the chip, you cannot defeat.


Xeon X5660 Turbo Ratio 2/2/2/2/3/3
Note: (from left to right) 6 cores active, 5 cores active, 4 cores active, 3 cores active, 2 cores active & 1 core active

Max standard multi is x21 & Turbo multi are [x22, x23 & x24]. You can see in the turbo ratio above, you can run at x23 multi with 3 to 6 cores active, while x24 with 2 cores or less active.

Xeon X5650 Turbo Ratio 2/2/2/2/3/3

Max standard multi is x20 & Turbo multi are [x21, x22 & x23]. Likewise, x22 multi with 3 to 6 cores active, while x23 with 2 cores or less active.

It's up to the chip of course. You got that one right. The highest turbo multi x24 on x5660 & x23 on x5650 require C3 or C6 (cstates) enabled.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I've tested this on quite a few boards
> 
> Foxconn bloodrage
> Asus P6T
> Asus P6T Delux V2
> Asus Rampage III Extreme Black
> Gigabyte X58 UD3R?
> 
> All of the ran at 22 under2 core load, under full core load showed it reverting back when checked with CPU-Z and Core Temp and HWinfo
> 
> Idk what to say
> 
> Kana-maru and Scorpn can likely confirm this as well


I'm running a X5660 and I'm running it using "x23" 24/7. The CPU ratio\multiplier can vary depending on a several things including BIOS revision and motherboard you are using. My board allows me to set the CPU ratio up until I reach "x23". To get "x24" you'll have to use settings like C-states and Turbo etc. Most people disabled those power saving settings settings. "x24" are only good for 2 cores, so once you start using more than two cores it will drop to x23 which is what most overclockers want to avoid. We usually want the *SAME* consistent frequency on *all cores* so most people will avoid that boost ratio unless they have some sort of motive.


----------



## GENXLR

mine allows me to set 22 on my x5650 but it still falls to 20 the moment all cores are loaded

TELL ME HOW YOU ARE ALL DOING IT
If i've been doin it wrong for the last 2 years help me, i want the extra 2 mutli if i can. can it hold 22 under 100% load?


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> mine allows me to set 22 on my x5650 but it still falls to 20 the moment all cores are loaded
> 
> TELL ME HOW YOU ARE ALL DOING IT
> If i've been doin it wrong for the last 2 years help me, i want the extra 2 mutli if i can. can it hold 22 under 100% load?


You should not need to do anything to run x22 on all cores. What motherboard do you have? It throttling to non-turbo multi telling me TDP/TDC/Power Limit probably set too low on your motherboard. You can check these value using HWiNFO.


----------



## GENXLR

Occuring on my P6T, P6T Delux V2, Rampage III Extreme Black, and Foxconn Bloodrage (Don't own the Gigabyte X58 UD3R anylonger, in a machine i sent to a friend with a W3520)

Machines not with me right now

any ideas?

"TDP/TDC/Power Limit probably set too low on your motherboard"

I never recall seeing such options


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Hmm, the QPI is at 7.2 this board won't let me ajust the PLL or the UCLK, but the VTT (just like ASUS refered to as qpi/dram bus) the bios will not tell me the current vtt volts, iv got auto and + .02 increments so just guessing I added .120 volts to the QPI/VTT..... Probly not enough...
> 
> Thank you srialmaster
> 
> Are there any tools that will show me QPI/VTT voltage??? I tried "hwmonitor" I could not find it


Have you tried HWInfo64? This shows me my QPI/vTT.


----------



## Dhiru

I made few observations on my MSI Big Bang X power inorder to utilize higher CPU multipliers.

First of all, I had to set EIST to Auto instead of Enabled (Maybe board specific). This gave me an option to raise the CPU multiplier to x24 on X5670. The C-States were disabled and C1E was disabled too (This happened automatically when I have raised the multiplier to x24). The CPU constantly runs at x24 and even on load, the multiplier doesn't change. x24 is the max turbo multiplier on all cores and x25 is the maximum multiplier for core 1 and core 2. The multipliers are in the following core order - (25x/25x/24x/24x/24x/24x).

It's also worth noticing that increasing the multiplier to x24 increased the TDP usage of the processor. It looks like utilizing the higher multiplier is generally upto the proper combination of EIST, Turbo, C-States and Processor VR Limit override. It seems some boards allow these changes while some don't.


----------



## spinFX

just got me a x5660, haven't tried to OC yet, just chucked in to my server in place of a 950.

Server as it stands:

*Asus P6X58D-E* --mobo
*24 GB DDR3 Vengance* --RAM
*AMD ASUS HD5450* --as main gfx card
*AMD XFX R9 280x* --for VM hardware pass-thru
*LSI 9240-8i SAS HBA* --extra 8 sata ports
*assortment of HDD's 2-4TB* --in a SnapRAID array

currently being delivered:
*2 port PCIe x1 NIC* -for link aggregation -will dedicate onboard NIC to VM if iommu groups allow, else dedicate to OpenVPN connection so it can always be on, but not for all traffic









But now I'm out of pcie slots! Gonna get me a *Asus P6T7 WS Supercomputer (7 PCIe x16 lanes





















)* so I can add more HBA cards in future, anyone selling one ? (They're a bit expensive second hand from ebay right now)


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spinFX*
> 
> just got me a x5660, haven't tried to OC yet, just chucked in to my server in place of a 950.
> 
> Server as it stands:
> 
> *Asus P6X58D-E* --mobo
> *24 GB DDR3 Vengance* --RAM
> *AMD ASUS HD5450* --as main gfx card
> *AMD XFX R9 280x* --for VM hardware pass-thru
> *LSI 9240-8i SAS HBA* --extra 8 sata ports
> *assortment of HDD's 2-4TB* --in a SnapRAID array
> 
> currently being delivered:
> *2 port PCIe x1 NIC* -for link aggregation -will dedicate onboard NIC to VM if iommu groups allow, else dedicate to OpenVPN connection so it can always be on, but not for all traffic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But now I'm out of pcie slots! Gonna get me a *Asus P6T7 WS Supercomputer (7 PCIe x16 lanes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )* so I can add more HBA cards in future, anyone selling one ? (They're a bit expensive second hand from ebay right now)


Totally offtopic.. but I was curious. Which OS do you use? If it's Linux, then what's the kernel version are you currently on? Are you using VFIO to passthrough the card?


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Thank you SRIALMASTER....
> 
> 730x #1 has XMP enabled and profile #2 loaded.. Manually set at 10x
> 
> 730x #2 has XMP disabled
> 
> The XMP must automaticity downclock the uclk...
> 
> Not as big of a deal but I also need to figure out why the multi drops from 21 to 19 @ 100% load


Hey @bobnoho do you mind posting your setting for the 730x.
I am having a hard time OCing with that board.
Dont want to keep adding voltage randomly.


----------



## 4everAnoob

So.... What is the secret to winning the silicon lottery?








I have had 4 X56xx CPU's now and my best one does 4.2 GHz just under 1.35v....
People here are talking 4.4, 4.6 even 4.8 GHz. Where did you guys get your CPU?


----------



## santi2104

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> So.... What is the secret to winning the silicon lottery?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have had 4 X56xx CPU's now and my best one does 4.2 GHz just under 1.35v....
> People here are talking 4.4, 4.6 even 4.8 GHz. Where did you guys get your CPU?


Are u using a cheapo board?, previously i used a msi x58 pro e, and i couldnt get more than 3.6-3.8 ghz and 1.364 volts, then i toss that piece of junk to where it belongs, and i bought an asus rampage 2 gene, now i can get 4.2ghz witn 1.272 volts rock solid


----------



## bobnoho

Get a STRONG PSU and better cooling, ohm's law - more heat requires more voltage to deliver the same wattage


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *santi2104*
> 
> Are u using a cheapo board?, previously i used a msi x58 pro e, and i couldnt get more than 3.6-3.8 ghz and 1.364 volts, then i toss that piece of junk to where it belongs, and i bought an asus rampage 2 gene, now i can get 4.2ghz witn 1.272 volts rock solid


I'am stable at 4.3Ghz with 1.27-1.3v and I don't take that as a golden chip.









It's still heating up quite much, especially one of the cores. In fact I'am thinking about replacing my 212EVO.
What's the best bang for the buck cooler for these bigger in size hexa X58 which would be capable to comfortably cool them till at least 1.4V?

_Antec Kuhler H2O 620_ that OP @Kana-Maru has can be had for a reasonable price. Are there any better alternatives?


----------



## Sburms015

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I'am stable at 4.3Ghz with 1.27-1.3v and I don't take that as a golden chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's still heating up quite much, especially one of the cores. In fact I'am thinking about replacing my 212EVO.
> What's the best bang for the buck cooler for these bigger in size hexa X58 which would be capable to comfortably cool them till at least 1.4V?
> 
> _Antec Kuhler H2O 620_ that OP @Kana-Maru has can be had for a reasonable price. Are there any better alternatives?


I would recommend the Lepa Aquachanger 120 or 240 as a good bang for the buck AIO liquid cooler the 120 is $65 and the 240 is $77 currently on Amazon, I've been running the 240 for almost 3 months now and keeps my W3690 @ 4.5Ghz with a vcore of 1.384v quite cool, my idle temps are usually in the mid 20's or low 30's depending on if I'm running the a/c or not and under a 100% load on all cores I haven't seen temps above 68 on any of the cores and this is with the included thermal paste


----------



## bobnoho

@TLCH723

730x #1 x5679 I'm surprised this chip still works its been though hell...






Antec Kuhler H2O 620 does work very well, I got a 4-pin spliter and run both push/pull pwm fans off the motherboard it thottles up and down Very well to manage the heat..

730x #2 x5660 I cant figure out why this board throttles down under full load and it still restarts when resuming from standby 730x #1 runs 21x220 no problem without throttling down under load this chip boost up to 4.8 little or no load 21x200








these boards produce a lot of heat, you need good air flow, but they are phenomenal gaming machines..


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> @TLCH723
> 
> 730x #1 x5679 I'm surprised this chip still works its been though hell...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Antec Kuhler H2O 620 does work very well, I got a 4-pin spliter and run both push/pull pwm fans off the motherboard it thottles up and down Very well to manage the heat..
> 
> 730x #2 x5660 I cant figure out why this board throttles down under full load and it still restarts when resuming from standby 730x #1 runs 21x220 no problem without throttling down under load this chip boost up to 4.8 little or no load 21x200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> these boards produce a lot of heat, you need good air flow, but they are phenomenal gaming machines..


Thanks, but still doesnt like to overclock.
Good thing I wasnt going to use it as my main computer.


----------



## bobnoho

Try to peel the heatsink and and fan off the motherboard clean the old paste off and reapply with some better compound


----------



## bobnoho

What bios version are you running


----------



## bobnoho

So were dose it show the vtt/ qpi voltage in hwinfo64


----------



## tbob22

So I was messing around with my x58 setup. I was really trying to get 4.8ghz, went up to around 1.44v, but I couldn't get it to finish a Cinebench run, temps were just under 80c. A bit on the high side but not anything that should cause an issue. Any tips Kana?

It's interesting because it's pretty much rock solid at these settings:
220x21
Vcore: 1.368v
QPI: 1.350v
Ram: 2200mhz 11-12-11-31-1



I was quite surprised about is the 1600mhz Ripjaws-X I had sitting around was able to do [email protected], although at pretty loose timings and I'm only using one stick so that may help.


----------



## Tiny Trang

I'm looking to move to a smaller form factor preferably m-itx and I'm just wondering if I should invest anymore money into the x58 platform. I could get a m-atx mobo and move almost everything from my current build to a smaller case or I can build a new Skylake system and sell off my current build. Asus P6T Deluxe V2, 12gb ram, Xeon x5660, and Gigabyte 7970 ghz edition (280x equivalent). I attached an image of my current overclock on my x5660. So spend ~$300 for new psu and mobo or sell current system and build new one?


----------



## bobnoho

I'm settling in at almost the exact same settings on p6t7 but vcore is 1.412- x5680


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> I'm looking to move to a smaller form factor preferably m-itx and I'm just wondering if I should invest anymore money into the x58 platform. I could get a m-atx mobo and move almost everything from my current build to a smaller case or I can build a new Skylake system and sell off my current build. Asus P6T Deluxe V2, 12gb ram, Xeon x5660, and Gigabyte 7970 ghz edition (280x equivalent). I attached an image of my current overclock on my x5660. So spend ~$300 for new psu and mobo or sell current system and build new one?


It seems like 1366 chips are selling pretty cheap right now, so I'd say if you want to build it now then go for another board and sell your current one. Prices may go back up, but x5660/70's are going for $60-75 right now and that's the cheapest I've ever seen them.

Assuming that board is in great condition and you have the box and accessories it should go for around $120-150.

If you can wait a bit, I'd say keep what you have and think about Broadwell-E (6800k) instead of Skylake.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> I'm settling in at almost the exact same settings on p6t7 but vcore is 1.412- x5680


Is that something you're looking to run 24/7? If so that voltage is a little on the high side.

It's looking like I'll need to push past 1.45v to get 4.8ghz, I guess that's pretty common even with good chips.


----------



## bobnoho

I think the x58 is still viable with the oc potential for at least another 1-2 years, if you have sata3 and extra pcie slots, my 730x #2 is pretty small it's about a $700 build


----------



## bobnoho

I assumed it was the x5680 needed more volts I'm having issues with the ram I think, iv been watching the temps close I never go above 74 ( I have a big cooling loop 420mm radiator triple thick w/ 6xpush/pull 140mm fans) my p6t7 is a work in progress, my OC is for fun and gaming NOT 24/7


----------



## Tiny Trang

If it's only going to be viable for another year or two I don't think investing anymore money into the platform is a good idea.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> If it's only going to be viable for another year or two I don't think investing anymore money into the platform is a good idea.


You wouldn't really be investing anything but time, assuming you get a decent deal on a board and sell your old one.

It's really hard to know how long x58 will be viable at this point. Things are looking pretty good with DX12 as it loves more cores/threads, but if games start taking advantage of newer extensions like AVX then these chips could be left in the dust.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> You wouldn't really be investing anything but time, assuming you get a decent deal on a board and sell your old one.
> 
> It's really hard to know how long x58 will be viable at this point. Things are looking pretty good with DX12 as it loves more cores/threads, but if games start taking advantage of newer extensions like AVX then these chips will be left in the dust.


Yeah right. "Some" games are just started to require more RAM than usual. With DX12 and when it's used probably there's plenty of life left in the X58 as far as gaming goes

Thanks to a bug I was able to run a ton of apples to apples comparison and check out the CPU usage. . I've ran some test with my Fury X with decent DX12 support and here are my results:

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks?showall=&start=4

Hitman 2016 1080p: CPU DX11 draw call limitation vs DX12 CPU usage
Radeon Fury X @ Stock Settings

*DX11* 4Ghz + DDR3 1400Mhz = *89.40*fps Average
*DX12* 4Ghz + DDR3 1400Mhz = *99.11*fps Average +*11%* increase

That's an increase of 10fps with NO overclock. Just using a different and more efficient API.

*DX12* 4Ghz + DDR3 1400Mhz = *99.11*fps Average
*DX12* 4.8Ghz + DDR3 2095Mhz =*126.02*fps Average +*27%* increase

Overclocking does indeed allow the CPU the send more info to the GPU which doesn't require a high GPU overclock.

Now after the Patch 1.1.0 hotfix @ 4K
Hitman 2016 *4K*: 100% Max Settings - DX12 4.6Ghz Day 1 vs DX12 4.8Ghz Patch 1.1.0 [fix]

*DX12* 4.6Ghz + DDR3 1600Mhz = *36.02*fps Average
*DX12* 4.8Ghz + DDR3 2095Mhz = *43.43*fps Average +*20%* increase

AMD drivers and the developers update made 4K gameplay even better than before. According to AMD this will continue with DX12 games as they are released. So if dev actually learn to use the DX12 API and focus on that and Vulkan then X58 will live longer than I certainly expected.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> If it's only going to be viable for another year or two I don't think investing anymore money into the platform is a good idea.


I have a feeling it's going to be viable for more than a year or two. PCIe 2.0 isn't being tapped out and DX12\Vulcan will ensure it will last even longer. We are moving towards 2017 and high end GPUs on the X58 platform aren't being bottleneck, or dual SLI\CFX setups. SATA 3.0 and higher end SSDs are available. The only money I've been "thinking" about investing in is a RAID 0 SSD 1TB [512Gbs+512GBs] setup.

Just about everything I invest in at this point can easily be moved or used with a new X99 setup if I chose to go that route. So technically it isn't a investment for "this" platform, it's a investment period. There's no way I'll sell anything other than the MB\CPU\RAM. Everything else gets installed on the next platform. That's another way some people should think about it.

I'm pretty sure I'll still be on this platform come mid 2018. I just don't see the PC market speeding up all of a sudden since things has been slow since around 2008 until now.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> AMD drivers and the developers update made 4K gameplay even better than before. According to AMD this will continue with DX12 games as they are released. So if dev actually learn to use the DX12 API and focus on that and Vulkan then X58 will live longer than I certainly expected.
> I have a feeling it's going to be viable for more than a year or two. PCIe 2.0 isn't being tapped out and DX12\Vulcan will ensure it will last even longer. We are moving towards 2017 and high end GPUs on the X58 platform aren't being bottleneck, or dual SLI\CFX setups. SATA 3.0 and higher end SSDs are available. The only money I've been "thinking" about investing in is a RAID 0 SSD 1TB [512Gbs+512GBs] setup.
> 
> Just about everything I invest in at this point can easily be moved or used with a new X99 setup if I chose to go that route. So technically it isn't a investment for "this" platform, it's a investment period. There's no way I'll sell anything other than the MB\CPU\RAM. Everything else gets installed on the next platform. That's another way some people should think about it.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I'll still be on this platform come mid 2018. I just don't see the PC market speeding up all of a sudden since things has been slow since around 2008 until now.


Thanks for the comparison between DX11 and DX12 really cool to see the difference cores can make. But I will be making an investment on this particular platform as I'll be needing a new mobo.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Yeah right. "Some" games are just started to require more RAM than usual. With DX12 and when it's used probably there's plenty of life left in the X58 as far as gaming goes
> ...


I'm just going by what I've seen in BOINC, that's probably an extreme case though. Grid 2, maybe the only game that supports AVX actually has worse performance in some cases when using AVX, so it may not make any difference if not properly implemented.

Either way, I think it's still a great platform and is still plenty powerful enough for gaming for the foreseeable future.

Was looking on the first page and saw you were at 1.464v for 4.8ghz on your Cinebench r15 run, guess I'll have to push a bit more than I am comfortable with to hit 4.8. Not my main rig, so I guess it's not as big of deal.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Thanks for the comparison between DX11 and DX12 really cool to see the difference cores can make. But I will be making an investment on this particular platform as I'll be needing a new mobo.


Are you planning on keeping the P6T Deluxe?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Thanks for the comparison between DX11 and DX12 really cool to see the difference cores can make. But I will be making an investment on this particular platform as I'll be needing a new mobo.


Well unless you can find what you need at a much cheaper price than what you'll pay for a newer platform + 6 core CPU [and possible DDR4 RAM if needed] you should probably just upgrade to a newer platform. X58 prices weren't that high, but I have seen people charge a arm and a leg for some X58 hardware thanks to the Hexa Core boom. Those scalpers and sellers will cause some people to upgrade at some point.

I want to built a m-ATX build as well. I'm waiting to see what AMD is offering with Zen. I'm sort of getting out of the Intel game at this point. The X58 might be my last Intel build for all I know. We've seen AMD budget CPUs compete with Intel high end $1000.00 -$1400.00 CPUs for gaming. AMD traded blows with Intel.

My micro build will be built with nothing, but gaming in mind. I won't care about data crunching, BIONIC, none any of that scientific stuff or benchmarking hardware unless it deals with gaming. I'll either have another PC or I'll still be using my X58 high end programs and data crunching.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'm just going by what I've seen in BOINC, that's probably an extreme case though. Grid 2, maybe the only game that supports AVX actually has worse performance in some cases when using AVX, so it may not make any difference if not properly implemented.
> 
> Either way, I think it's still a great platform and is still plenty powerful enough for gaming for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Was looking on the first page and saw you were at 1.464v for 4.8ghz on your Cinebench r15 run, guess I'll have to push a bit more than I am comfortable with to hit 4.8. Not my main rig, so I guess it's not as big of deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you planning on keeping the P6T Deluxe?


Most likely will sell it if anyone actually buys it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well unless you can find what you need at a much cheaper price than what you'll pay for a newer platform + 6 core CPU [and possible DDR4 RAM if needed] you should probably just upgrade to a newer platform. X58 prices weren't that high, but I have seen people charge a arm and a leg for some X58 hardware thanks to the Hexa Core boom. Those scalpers and sellers will cause some people to upgrade at some point.
> 
> I want to built a m-ATX build as well. I'm waiting to see what AMD is offering with Zen. I'm sort of getting out of the Intel game at this point. The X58 might be my last Intel build for all I know. We've seen AMD budget CPUs compete with Intel high end $1000.00 -$1400.00 CPUs for gaming. AMD traded blows with Intel.
> 
> My micro build will be built with nothing, but gaming in mind. I won't care about data crunching, BIONIC, none any of that scientific stuff or benchmarking hardware unless it deals with gaming. I'll either have another PC or I'll still be using my X58 high end programs and data crunching.


Any idea how an overclocked 6700k stacks up against the x5660?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> Any idea how an overclocked 6700k stacks up against the x5660?


Some people here have spoke about the 6700K or maybe that was in my other topic. From what I've read in Guru's review is that a 6700K @ 4.9Ghz [11.61pts] in Cinebench R11.5 is beaten by my X5660 @ 4.8Ghz [12.40pts].
The stock X5660 around 3.8Ghz -4Ghz is equivalent to a 6700K at stock going by the Cinebench results. The X5660 @4.8Ghz was 11% - 12% faster than the 6700K @ 4.9 in the FryBenchmark.
It's not really fair comparing a Quad Core to a Hexa Core.

The 6700K has newer tech and a faster IPC which helps. Some people have stated that they don't feel the difference for every day use outside of benchmarks. I have no idea, but I know the 6700K runs for about $350-$360. Intel Turbo is still only at 4Ghz as well. I would have thought that after 7+ years beyond the X58 that Intel would have the Turbo's near 4.4Ghz - 4.6Ghz standard. Nope and that goes to show you how much changed. Even the benchmarks are getting old at this point.


----------



## tbob22

Well, I was able to get 4.8ghz to work better at 1.4675v but temps were just too much for the NH-U14S _(with two 100+cfm nmb's)_ to handle, during the bench it was sitting at around 82c then all of a sudden at about 80% through the the bench it spiked to 95c for a split second and then Cinebench crashed, guessing this is the thermal control in action. Looks like i'll need some more hefty cooling for 4.8. I'll see if I can get 4.7.


----------



## Tiny Trang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The 6700K has newer tech and a faster IPC which helps. Some people have stated that they don't feel the difference for every day use outside of benchmarks. I have no idea, but I know the 6700K runs for about $350-$360. Intel Turbo is still only at 4Ghz as well. I would have thought that after 7+ years beyond the X58 that Intel would have the Turbo's near 4.4Ghz - 4.6Ghz standard. Nope and that goes to show you how much changed. Even the benchmarks are getting old at this point.


So there really isn't much reason to upgrade performance wise. Thank you I think I'll try and grab a matx board and move my system over.


----------



## bobnoho

@tbob22 my x5679 needed 1.506 for 4.8 and it was hangy still I x5680 will boot to windows but crash shortly after @4.8 1.49 vcore x5660 is the only one iv got to run at 4.8 and that is boosting it downclocks to 4.2 under load


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tiny Trang*
> 
> So there really isn't much reason to upgrade performance wise. Thank you I think I'll try and grab a matx board and move my system over.


No problem and good luck. Hopefully you'll find some reasonable prices out there. Intel has improved their Quad performance, but I don't see the need to go from a 6 core to a 4 core processor at this point.

When I upgraded from my Bloomfield 1st gen i7 Quad to my Westmere Hexa Core I saw a "huge" gains in benchmarks. Personally I'm waiting from something like that again since everything cost a ton of money now. I could actually "tell" the difference between the Quad and Hexa core.


----------



## gofasterstripes

...."1.49v..."

OKOKOK - who's killed a chip in the last few pages then?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> ...."1.49v..."
> 
> OKOKOK - who's killed a chip in the last few pages then?


I was certainly starting to feel that way with 1.467. It's probably a bigger problem that it spikes to 95c though.









Probably won't be trying anything past 4.7, at least with my U14S.


----------



## prznar1

Guys, im running xeon for some time but im just bored and would change something







IS it worth to go for 3820 over x5650 for gaming (mmos and wot mostly)?


----------



## Dhiru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> IS it worth to go for 3820 over x5650 for gaming (mmos and wot mostly)?


Not for gaming. Considering the price of x79 motherboard, you might as well stick to your x58 and call it a day.


----------



## prznar1

True, even used still costs alot.


----------



## Dhiru

You could invest the money that you will spend on x79 upgrade on a new graphics card. It will give you much bigger improvement in gaming.


----------



## prznar1

And one more thing. CF of r9 380 will choke on my Xeon and pci-e 2.0?


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> You could invest the money that you will spend on x79 upgrade on a new graphics card. It will give you much bigger improvement in gaming.


that is planned seperatly.


----------



## Beufesamiteur

It does seem to be the case. Check Kana Maru website there a ton of explanation!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Guys, im running xeon for some time but im just bored and would change something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IS it worth to go for 3820 over x5650 for gaming (mmos and wot mostly)?


No, that would be a downgrade especially with the x5650 overclocked. You'd want to go for at least a 3930k/E5-1650 to see any kind of improvement, and that's assuming you get a good deal on a board.


----------



## prznar1

X5650 are that powerfull?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> X5650 are that powerfull?


Yes. The 3820 is also only a quad and is multiplier locked. To match the IPC of the 3820 at 3.8ghz the x5650 would need to be at around 4.1-4.2 and you'd still have an extra two cores.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> X5650 are that powerfull?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. The 3820 is also only a quad and is multiplier locked. To match the IPC of the 3820 at 3.8ghz the x5650 would need to be at around 4.1-4.2 and you'd still have an extra two cores.
Click to expand...

What if 3820 at 4.5 - 4.8GHz, at what frequencies the x5650 should be then? 4.8 - 5.1GHz?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> What if 3820 at 4.5 - 4.8GHz, at what frequencies the x5650 should be then? 4.8 - 5.1GHz?


Yeah approx 10% improvement in IPC, of course the x5650 would be much faster with all cores maxed.

Are you running 4.7 on all cores with your 3820?


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> What if 3820 at 4.5 - 4.8GHz, at what frequencies the x5650 should be then? 4.8 - 5.1GHz?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah approx 10% improvement in IPC, of course the x5650 would be much faster with all cores maxed.
> 
> *Are you running 4.7 on all cores with your 3820?*
Click to expand...

Yes. Unlike 3930k have max multiplier x56, 3820 actually partially unlocked with max multiplier x43. For higher freq, you can use bclk strap 125/166/250 but most chips can only use 125/166 strap.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Yes. Unlike 3930k have max multiplier x56, 3820 actually partially unlocked with max multiplier x43. For higher freq, you can use bclk strap 125/166/250 but most chips can only use 125/166 strap.


Ahh interesting, I was under the impression that 43x was limited to one core?


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Yes. Unlike 3930k have max multiplier x56, 3820 actually partially unlocked with max multiplier x43. For higher freq, you can use bclk strap 125/166/250 but most chips can only use 125/166 strap.
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh interesting, I was under the impression that 43x was limited to one core?
Click to expand...

It can run at x43 on all cores.







For gaming, there's no difference in gaming performance between 3820 & 3930k. x5650 to 3820/3930k seems like sidegrade to me if the purpose is just for gaming. Given the cost, it doesn't look like a wise upgrade though. Maybe wait for BW-E.


----------



## bobnoho

@gofasterstripes

ya I have to run the vcore really high to get the clocks I want iv gone up to 1.43 with my x5680 to get a solid 4.6, but my temps are good after a 1hour test temps hit 75 @1.43 vcore even at 1.49 I only saw 76 before it crashed, I would be way more afraid of hitting 90-100 degrees vs 1.5 vcore


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> It can run at x43 on all cores.
> 
> For gaming, there's no difference in gaming performance between 3820 & 3930k. x5650 to 3820/3930k seems like sidegrade to me if the purpose is just for gaming. Given the cost, it doesn't look like a wise upgrade though. Maybe wait for BW-E.


Nice. Yeah it's not really worth jumping to x79 unless you can basically trade up. I was lucky enough to break even going from x58 to x79.


----------



## bobnoho

Unless I'm wrong I'm seeing heat as the enemy not the voltage... I know a high pll will cause degrading but will CPU degrade from a high vcore even if the temps stay low

And really, isn't that the best part of the x58 platform rite now the chips are cheap...
When I get my gtx 1080 and pull the 3xgtx 680s from the loop, I'm gonna burn that x5680.. With fire!!









If there's any advantage the x5680 has over x5660, 70 or75 it can consume more power and produce more heat.. I think it'll do 5ghz around 1.6-1.65 range


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Unless I'm wrong I'm seeing heat as the enemy not the voltage... I know I high pll will cause degrading but will CPU degrade from a high vcore even if the temps stay low


Temp is not your enemy if vcore within Intel specification (take into account vdroop/llc). When you overvolt higher than what Intel recommend, both can be your enemy.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Temp is not your enemy if vcore within Intel specification (take into account vdroop/llc). When you overvolt higher than what Intel recommend, both will be your enemy.


I would take 1.4V with temps comfortably under TjMax over the one which runs the same clock at 1.35V but throttles under prime95 (reaching TJMax) any day of the week.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kizwan*
> 
> Temp is not your enemy if vcore within Intel specification (take into account vdroop/llc). When you overvolt higher than what Intel recommend, both will be your enemy.


Yep, any overclocking could potentially reduce the life of the chip, a chip could even die at stock. I settled in at 4.44ghz @ 1.325v with my x5670 and was very happy, I can't say I've seen a huge improvement with my current setup other than SSD file copy speeds.

Comparing the same clocks it was about 10% faster, at 4.6 vs 4.44ghz it's about 15% faster as expected.

I have seen a increase in heat. These Sandy-E chips seem to get a lot warmer (especially at idle) than the Westmere's for whatever reason.


----------



## bobnoho

So iv got 730x #2 I CAN NOT get it to come out of standby without restarting, well if I set the bios setting "suspend mode" to S1 it sleeps and recovers just fine but the 12v power stays on (fans)...

730x #1 does not have this problem, I'm thinking could it be the PSU???

730x #2 has a NEW 1000w very generic single rail PSU it was like 83a-12v but only like 14a-5v and 14a-3v, is was only $60 new from Newegg..

Do you think the low 5v and 3v could be causing my sleep issue??


----------



## bobnoho

From 4.4-4.6 with x5680 needs alot more vcore went from 1.36-1.431


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> So iv got 730x #2 I CAN NOT get it to come out of standby without restarting, well if I set the bios setting "suspend mode" to S1 it sleeps and recovers just fine but the 12v power stays on (fans)...
> 
> 730x #1 does not have this problem, I'm thinking could it be the PSU???
> 
> 730x #2 has a NEW 1000w very generic single rail PSU it was like 83a-12v but only like 14a-5v and 14a-3v, is was only $60 new from Newegg..
> 
> Do you think the low 5v and 3v could be causing my sleep issue??


Swap drives to make sure it isn't a software issue? Who knows what a generic PSU could do. I'd highly recommend you go with a decent TT Toughpower Gold _(goes on sale for $54 AR regularly_) or EVGA G2 ($80) at minimum.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sburms015*
> 
> I would recommend the Lepa Aquachanger 120 or 240 as a good bang for the buck AIO liquid cooler the 120 is $65 and the 240 is $77 currently on Amazon, I've been running the 240 for almost 3 months now and keeps my W3690 @ 4.5Ghz with a vcore of 1.384v quite cool, my idle temps are usually in the mid 20's or low 30's depending on if I'm running the a/c or not and under a 100% load on all cores I haven't seen temps above 68 on any of the cores and this is with the included thermal paste


Can you tell me what your settings are for your W3690? I am dieing here with mine to get it to OC and not BSOD.


----------



## boombastik

For x58 ud5 v1 i found a newer bios witch enable vt-d. It works i try it.
You can enable it at ctrl+f1 under advanced menu chipset.
http://www.uploadmb.com/dw.php?id=1461661912

you can read there about it:
- http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/48085-gigabyte-modified-bios-460.html
- http://spoonconcept.com/it-ntic/gigabyte-ex58-ud5-bios-f13

Also can anyone witch run a xeon with x58 ud5 make a test for me?
If you run at stock settings(optimized defaults) and run intel burn test you have turbo boot throttling?
The multiplier for a Core i7-920 for example is typically 20.0 and if Turbo mode is enabled, you get a +1.0 boost for a total of 21.0. Turbo throttling can occur at high loads where the +1.0 Turbo boost will start to rapidly cycle on and off hundreds of times a second as you approach the TDP limit.

My gigabyte x58 ud5 with i7 960 dont work well with turbo boost because in hight cpu load my turbo boost throttle.

_I also have posted it in another forum._


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> For x58 ud5 v1 i found a newer bios witch enable vt-d. It works i try it.
> You can enable it at ctrl+f1 under advanced menu chipset.
> http://www.uploadmb.com/dw.php?id=1461661912
> 
> you can read there about it:
> - http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/48085-gigabyte-modified-bios-460.html
> - http://spoonconcept.com/it-ntic/gigabyte-ex58-ud5-bios-f13
> 
> Also can anyone witch run a xeon with x58 ud5 make a test for me?
> If you run at stock settings(optimized defaults) and run intel burn test you have turbo boot throttling?
> The multiplier for a Core i7-920 for example is typically 20.0 and if Turbo mode is enabled, you get a +1.0 boost for a total of 21.0. Turbo throttling can occur at high loads where the +1.0 Turbo boost will start to rapidly cycle on and off hundreds of times a second as you approach the TDP limit.
> 
> My gigabyte x58 ud5 with i7 960 dont work well with turbo boost because in hight cpu load my turbo boost throttle.
> 
> _I also have posted it in another forum._


i7-920 should be able to maintain x21 multiplier all the time when all cores active. It only go up to x22 multiplier when one core active. If it's throttling between x20 & x21 multiplier, likely TDP/TDC & power limit is set too low I believe.

Same thing with 960, it should be able to maintain at x25 multiplier at all time when all cores active. Please post screenshot of the HWiNFO, the CPU section that showing TDP/TDC & power limit & also screenshot of the CPU section called Enhanced Features.

*Edit:*
If possible, disabled these in BIOS:-
- CPU TM or TM1+TM2
- BD PROCHOT


----------



## boombastik

I have c1 and c3/c6 disabled.
turbo boost and eist enabled, tm and procochot enabled.
In gigabyte x58 ud5 u cant disable tdp throttling.
As u can see in foto they made some kind of modification as the tdp is not 130 but 146 but they use default voltage of 1.2650 for 960 and i am tdp limited.
I want to buy a xeon 5650 and i dont know if turbo boost will be ok. That the reason i want someone with a xeon and a gigabyte x58 ud5, to test it.

I dont want to overclock i want only the turbo boost to work ok with a xeon. If i run a prime or intel burn test to not be throttled.
I have also tried with tm and procochot and eist disabled but is the same thing.
If i make the default voltage form 1.2650 to 1.23 i am not tdp limited, but eist dont work.
So i would like to know what default voltage use a gigabyte x58 ud5 for the xeon x5650.
If uses somthink like 1.21 i will be ok.


----------



## kizwan

Please re-read my previous post again. Also enable C-states.


----------



## gofasterstripes

If the above doesn't work. I might be able to help.

Let me know if you still need help after checking kizwan's tip.


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If the above doesn't work. I might be able to help.
> 
> Let me know if you still need help after checking kizwan's tip.


Please go ahead.







I'm still interested with the HWiNFO screenshots though.


----------



## boombastik

Cpu not throttle:









Cpu throttle:









The same thing happen when c1e and c3,c6 is enable but i have them disabled because all gigabyte x58 motherboards make an electrical noise and the official support said as to disable them.
Official answer: http://forum.giga-byte.co.uk/index.php/topic,1426.msg35026.html#msg35026

And a video when i have c1e and c3c6 enabled: 




I Also tried with:
CPU TM disabled
PROCOHOT disabled
c1e enabled
c3/c6 enabled same thing i take the same throttle


----------



## kizwan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cpu not throttle:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cpu throttle:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same thing happen when c1e and c3,c6 is enable but i have them disabled because all gigabyte x58 motherboards make an electrical noise and the official support said as to disable them.
> Official answer: http://forum.giga-byte.co.uk/index.php/topic,1426.msg35026.html#msg35026
> 
> And a video when i have c1e and c3c6 enabled:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Also tried with:
> CPU TM disabled
> PROCOHOT disabled
> c1e enabled
> c3/c6 enabled same thing i take the same throttle


Sorry, you can disable C-states. BTW, can you create new thread in http://www.overclock.net/f/8/intel-general ? Then post link to your thread here.


Spoiler: Post this info in the new thread!



Download ThrottleStop 8 from https://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/Utilities/ThrottleStop/

Run ThrottleStop in Monitoring mode (default). Run IBT & if CPU throttle because of TDP, the button next to the *TDP Throttle* will light up.

- Post screenshot of ThrottleStop when your CPU throttling
- Click TPL button & post screenshot of this window

Post these in new thread. Thanks.


----------



## boombastik

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599258/throttle-i7-960 I made a thread there.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@boombastik

Try this:

If you have Dynamic Energy Saver installed, you should toggle it ON-OFF-ON and then close it. It will ask for permission to run in the background - allow.

If you have not installed it, try installing it [though once it's been installed in a Windows setup, you have to do the toggle trick whenever something mixes up the settings [usually after a crash] - this is the reason I am reluctant to mention it].

Pretty sure that with installed and On, you can surpass the Power limits to some degree:


----------



## Space Marine

Today i spent sometime on comparing (very roughly) my overclocked X5670 results to the ones from an E5-2670 v1.
Since some people here were thinking about this upgrade path, they might be interested in seeing the results.

Here is the post: http://www.overclock.net/t/1591590/xeon-hacking-and-overclocking-x79-x99-beyond-x58/210#post_25131080


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've updated my Hitman [2016] benchmarks. There's a new patch+hotfix and although some people are having issues with it, I'm not having any issues so far.

X58+Fury X Results
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/42-hitman-directx-12-fury-x-benchmarks

For the latest update skip to the "Hitman Update 1.1.2 - Benchmark Results" page.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Space Marine*
> 
> Today i spent sometime on comparing (very roughly) my overclocked X5670 results to the ones from an E5-2670 v1.
> Since some people here were thinking about this upgrade path, they might be interested in seeing the results.
> 
> Here is the post: http://www.overclock.net/t/1591590/xeon-hacking-and-overclocking-x79-x99-beyond-x58/210#post_25131080


Once I get my E5-1660V2 with my GA-X79-UP4 up and going, I will be joining that group and compare it to my X5660.

@Kana-Maru
I went back to my X5660. I think my W3690 was just junk. I can OC my X5660 higher. I am going to push it higher now that I have my H110i GTX installed on it now.


----------



## boombastik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @boombastik
> 
> Try this:
> 
> If you have Dynamic Energy Saver installed, you should toggle it ON-OFF-ON and then close it. It will ask for permission to run in the background - allow.
> 
> If you have not installed it, try installing it [though once it's been installed in a Windows setup, you have to do the toggle trick whenever something mixes up the settings [usually after a crash] - this is the reason I am reluctant to mention it].
> 
> Pretty sure that with installed and On, you can surpass the Power limits to some degree:


I tried it both enabled and disables it is the same.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> @Kana-Maru
> I went back to my X5660. I think my W3690 was just junk. I can OC my X5660 higher. I am going to push it higher now that I have my H110i GTX installed on it now.


Well sometimes better specs doesn't mean a better experience or a better OC. At least you had a good CPU to fall back on. That H110i GTX looks great. I can't wait to see how it performs for you.

I've been thinking about upgrading my cooling to a 280mm Rad. I've also been thinking about getting another case since I've had my current case for nearly 3 years now. The problem is I don't have to or need to change anything. That makes it a tough sell. It'll all be cosmetic mostly. Well the 280mm might give me better temps, but nothing is guaranteed.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Once I get my E5-1660V2 with my GA-X79-UP4 up and going, I will be joining that group and compare it to my X5660.


Is that thing OC'able? It looks to be matching Westmere @ ~4.6ghz.
http://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_xeon_e5_1660_v2-89


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Is that thing OC'able? It looks to be matching Westmere @ ~4.6ghz.
> http://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_xeon_e5_1660_v2-89


1650 V2, 1660 V2 and the 1680 V2 are all unlocked.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well sometimes better specs doesn't mean a better experience or a better OC. At least you had a good CPU to fall back on. That H110i GTX looks great. I can't wait to see how it performs for you.
> 
> I've been thinking about upgrading my cooling to a 280mm Rad. I've also been thinking about getting another case since I've had my current case for nearly 3 years now. The problem is I don't have to or need to change anything. That makes it a tough sell. It'll all be cosmetic mostly. Well the 280mm might give me better temps, but nothing is guaranteed.


The 280mm radiator versus a smaller one will help some. One of the 2nd benefits of the H110igtx/H115i over my H100 was also the larger hoses for more liquid throughput.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Is that thing OC'able? It looks to be matching Westmere @ ~4.6ghz.
> http://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_xeon_e5_1660_v2-89


The E5 1660v2 @ 4Ghz Single Core speed is about 28% faster than my L5639 Hexa @ 4Ghz & i7-960 Quad 4.1Ghz. With my X5660 overclocked to 4.8Ghz the single core speed 1660v2 @ 4Ghz is only 10% faster.

Yes the X5660 @ 4.6Ghz beats the 1660v2 @ 4Ghz, but barely. X5660 4.8Ghz cleans up. Well that's until you overclock the E5 1660v2. I'm not sure how well they overclock.

My only issue with the E5 1660v2 is the $800 - $1500+ price point + the motherboard price. Well that and the fact it's only a X79 side grade. For that price I'd rather move up the scale and get the latest and greatest. Maybe if the price was right, but maybe I'm missing something with the prices. They all seem expensive for the questionable gains and price points.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> The 280mm radiator versus a smaller one will help some. One of the 2nd benefits of the H110igtx/H115i over my H100 was also the larger hoses for more liquid throughput.


I suppose that would be a great benefit. I have a fairly small rad, but I purchased it many years ago when I only had a Quad Core. It has held up well through two 6 cores CPUs.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The E5 1660v2 @ 4Ghz Single Core speed is about 28% faster than my L5639 Hexa @ 4Ghz & i7-960 Quad 4.1Ghz. With my X5660 overclocked to 4.8Ghz the single core speed 1660v2 @ 4Ghz is only 10% faster.
> 
> Yes the X5660 @ 4.6Ghz beats the 1660v2 @ 4Ghz, but barely. X5660 4.8Ghz cleans up. Well that's until you overclock the E5 1660v2. I'm not sure how well they overclock.
> 
> My only issue with the E5 1660v2 is the $800 - $1500+ price point + the motherboard price. Well that and the fact it's only a X79 side grade. For that price I'd rather move up the scale and get the latest and greatest. Maybe if the price was right, but maybe I'm missing something with the prices. They all seem expensive for the questionable gains and price points.


I managed to get my 1660v2 for $600 brand new and my GA-X79-UP4v1.0 for $50.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I managed to get my 1660v2 for $600 brand new and my GA-X79-UP4v1.0 for $50.


That's a nice cpu there, but the board is a turd sorry to say.









Bios is very weak. $50 is still a good deal though for it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I managed to get my 1660v2 for $600 brand new and my GA-X79-UP4v1.0 for $50.










Not bad and much better than what I'm seeing across the web. That motherboard is only $50? That doesn't sound to good to me especially they are usually way more than that for a decent X79 board. Heck that's cheaper than high end X58 motherboards lol.

For me personally, even $600 for the CPU and $50 MB is a no go. Unlocked and potential, but it's just another 6 core Proc with an extra 3MB of cache. Performance looks promising. Degrading happens quicker and it can't take as much heat as a Bloomfield or Westmere, but I'm sure you'll have great cooling with the 280mm. Well I know it has updated tech as well. That money would be getting me newer GPUs, or a new case + SSDs for my sound banks+samples or at least a cold air intake for my sports car. Another server CPU $600.....nah. $200-$350 would make me think twice though if it was worth it.

That's the price of my Fury X, well not now since the price dropped down to around $600-$620.


----------



## Space Marine

I think the right comparison is that that's the price of a 5820k + an x99 board. That combo might cost a little less too.
Why would you spend so much on an x79 cpu? The board was a great deal, but a used 3930k is nearly six times cheaper than that.

I'd sell the board for 150/200, profit 100-150, add that to what I had before, and jump to x99. The "profit" will even cover the ram expenses.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The E5 1660v2 @ 4Ghz Single Core speed is about 28% faster than my L5639 Hexa @ 4Ghz & i7-960 Quad 4.1Ghz. With my X5660 overclocked to 4.8Ghz the single core speed 1660v2 @ 4Ghz is only 10% faster.
> 
> Yes the X5660 @ 4.6Ghz beats the 1660v2 @ 4Ghz, but barely. X5660 4.8Ghz cleans up. Well that's until you overclock the E5 1660v2. I'm not sure how well they overclock.
> 
> My only issue with the E5 1660v2 is the $800 - $1500+ price point + the motherboard price. Well that and the fact it's only a X79 side grade. For that price I'd rather move up the scale and get the latest and greatest. Maybe if the price was right, but maybe I'm missing something with the prices. They all seem expensive for the questionable gains and price points.


This thread seems to have gotten off topic again..









On average Ivy-e will probably clock better than Westmere but not quite as good as Sandy, of course that does depend on the silicon lottery. My 1650v1 is solid at 4.9ghz/1.4v, but temps are a little high for my taste.

I don't think I'd call 28% clock for clock a sidegrade, thats more than Penryn > Nehelem.

Westmere to Sandy probably is more of a sidegrade at around 10-15% at the same clocks, but the higher average overclock at lower volts can make it a pretty decent upgrade. But the price on the Ivy chips certainly isn't worth it over the Westmere chips at this point.

My opinion: unless you find some really good deals _(able to break even)_ then it makes more sense to just stick to x58 at this point.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> This thread seems to have gotten off topic again..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On average Ivy-e will probably clock better than Westmere but not quite as good as Sandy, of course that does depend on the silicon lottery. My 1650v1 is solid at 4.9ghz/1.4v, but temps are a little high for my taste.
> 
> *I don't think I'd call 28% clock for clock a sidegrade,* thats more than Penryn > Nehelem.
> 
> *Westmere to Sandy probably is more of a sidegrade at around 10-15%* at the same clocks, but the higher average overclock at lower volts can make it a pretty decent upgrade. But the price on the Ivy chips certainly isn't worth it over the Westmere chips at this point.
> 
> My opinion: unless you find some really good deals _(able to break even)_ then it makes more sense to just stick to x58 at this point.


Well it's not completely off topic. I enjoy the conversations here.

That 28% was simply one test. If I can manage to beat the 1660v2 in ONE benchmark do I have the right to say that the X5660 is [insert percentage here] faster than the 1660v2? No, which is why I ran a series of benchmarks against Intel high-end CPUs and got an actual performance average. I ran vigorous benchmarks clock for clock against X79. Not only X79, but the very CPUs you are addressing and it's not Penryn to Nehelem at all.

Haswell-E - check
i7-3960X

Ivy-Bridge-E - check
i7-4960X
i7-4930K

Sandy Bridge-E - and check
i7-3970X
i7-3930K

Not only did I run against those high-end extreme processors, I ran against them from highly overclocked HWBOT results with high-end rigs @ 4.8Ghz.
The results were only a *9.77%* difference between the X58 vs X79. *So X58 > X79 = 9.77% or 10%*. The numbers doesn't get into the 30% range unless you compare my results against HWBOTs Number 1 World Records. Even then those #1 record CPUs are running extreme cooling and crazy voltages on several components [nearly 2.00vCore! ] and represent an unrealistic comparison. I compared them anyways.

I was also only using DDR3-1670Mhz against DDR3-2400Mhz+ X79 setups. So my opinion is that X79 is indeed what it was when it released in 2011, a side grade at best. The best upgrade path would have been the X58-Quad [most people had the budget i7-920] to a 4770K thanks to the massive IPC increase. Even then what did that increase add to overall performance when you factor in the prices for the X79 boards and CPU at the time. It wasn't worth it. Obviously some people got the upgrade bug and upgraded and that's great. Based on my actual tests and performance output I'd be looking for performance gains more like this: i7-960 Quad > Westmere Hexa Core.

Yeah going from Bloomfield Quad to a Westmere Hexa core was 76.1%. Now that's a increase I saw and felt and still feel for everyday use, especially when it comes to gaming. Add in the fact that more programmers are starting to focus on parallel and concurrent programming this will ensure X58 will live even longer. This is indeed the case since there's really no need to continuously increase the IPC with so much wasted performance just setting here.

It's obvious the X58 is at a disadvantage, but the data bandwidth is already overkill for just about everyone,.... but..... but.... but scientific programs "BIONICz (BOINC) - [email protected]", the extra Instructionz Setz".







I'm just messing around since some people use those programs as the reason to go spend thousands on a upgrade and even more for gaming. We all know gaming isn't suffering on the X58 platform.

She has aged well and most people don't care about benchmarks results that will be beaten in 3 - 6 months. Or benchmarks that show you data that you'll never personally use or notice. According to my benchmark I can move 2.1 TB/min - 2.1 TERABYTES a minute or 70GB/s every 2 seconds. What in the world needs that much bandwidth on a consumer + gaming PC? Ok well I do need some performance for some of the type of software I run, but still the point stands. When will gamers, consumers, even me, need to 2.1TBs a minute or 126 TB and hour? Perhaps some massive servers will need it, but regular people nah. Benchmarks are mostly hype and you are going to buy for the benchmark performance period.

4.9Ghz is going to be pretty warm for just about every processor unless you have it in a really cool room.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Major GPU upheaval.... if the figures are to believed, this is finally the sodding HUGE jump in perf we have waited, what like 3 years for?



Plans, anyone?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Well it's not completely off topic. I enjoy the conversations here.
> 
> That 28% was simply one test. If I can manage to beat the 1660v2 in ONE benchmark do I have the right to say that the X5660 is [insert percentage here] faster than the 1660v2? No, which is why I ran a series of benchmarks against Intel high-end CPUs and got an actual performance average. I ran vigorous benchmarks clock for clock against X79. Not only X79, but the very CPUs you are addressing and it's not Penryn to Nehelem at all.
> 
> Haswell-E - check
> i7-3960X
> 
> Ivy-Bridge-E - check
> i7-4960X
> i7-4930K
> 
> Sandy Bridge-E - and check
> i7-3970X
> i7-3930K
> 
> Not only did I run against those high-end extreme processors, I ran against them from highly overclocked HWBOT results with high-end rigs @ 4.8Ghz.
> The results were only a *9.77%* difference between the X58 vs X79. *So X58 > X79 = 9.77% or 10%*. The numbers doesn't get into the 30% range unless you compare my results against HWBOTs Number 1 World Records. Even then those #1 record CPUs are running extreme cooling and crazy voltages on several components [nearly 2.00vCore! ] and represent an unrealistic comparison. I compared them anyways.
> 
> I was also only using DDR3-1670Mhz against DDR3-2400Mhz+ X79 setups. So my opinion is that X79 is indeed what it was when it released in 2011, a side grade at best. The best upgrade path would have been the X58-Quad [most people had the budget i7-920] to a 4770K thanks to the massive IPC increase. Even then what did that increase add to overall performance when you factor in the prices for the X79 boards and CPU at the time. It wasn't worth it. Obviously some people got the upgrade bug and upgraded and that's great. Based on my actual tests and performance output I'd be looking for performance gains more like this: i7-960 Quad > Westmere Hexa Core.
> 
> Yeah going from Bloomfield Quad to a Westmere Hexa core was 76.1%. Now that's a increase I saw and felt and still feel for everyday use, especially when it comes to gaming. Add in the fact that more programmers are starting to focus on parallel and concurrent programming this will ensure X58 will live even longer. This is indeed the case since there's really no need to continuously increase the IPC with so much wasted performance just setting here.
> 
> It's obvious the X58 is at a disadvantage, but the data bandwidth is already overkill for just about everyone,.... but..... but.... but scientific programs "BIONICz (BOINC) - [email protected]", the extra Instructionz Setz".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just messing around since some people use those programs as the reason to go spend thousands on a upgrade and even more for gaming. We all know gaming isn't suffering on the X58 platform.
> 
> She has aged well and most people don't care about benchmarks results that will be beaten in 3 - 6 months. Or benchmarks that show you data that you'll never personally use or notice. According to my benchmark I can move 2.1 TB/min - 2.1 TERABYTES a minute or 70GB/s every 2 seconds. What in the world needs that much bandwidth on a consumer + gaming PC? Ok well I do need some performance for some of the type of software I run, but still the point stands. When will gamers, consumers, even me, need to 2.1TBs a minute or 126 TB and hour? Perhaps some massive servers will need it, but regular people nah. Benchmarks are mostly hype and you are going to buy for the benchmark performance period.
> 
> 4.9Ghz is going to be pretty warm for just about every processor unless you have it in a really cool room.


I was primarily talking about IPC, Penryn to Nehelm saw about a 25% boost in single threaded applications.

All that is fine, and I agree for the most part, but if someone uses one application every day that they see a 30% increase in that one application then it is a solid upgrade for them.

Going from Penryn to Nehelem saw almost no difference in some applications and on average it was probably under 20% depending on the comparisons that were picked _(whether the reviewer is trying to advertise to new tech to get it to sell or if someone with a qx9770 is trying to justify his $1400 CPU)_, I remember some saying it wasn't an upgrade at all, but depending on the application there were huge gains.

The same is true with Westmere > Ivy and even Sandy in some cases. Gaming on the other hand will not see much a difference, unless it is IPC heavy like many poorly optimized ports are.

Again, depending on the application going from a Bloomfield quad to Westmere hexa at the same clocks you could see almost no difference depending on the type of applications you compare the two, but in some applications that take advantage of the extra cores would see huge gains.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Major GPU upheaval.... if the figures are to believed, this is finally the sodding HUGE jump in perf we have waited, what like 3 years for?
> 
> 
> 
> Plans, anyone?


Plan A: I don't have plans to spend another $599.99 + tax on a GPU especially a reference cooler.
Plan B: I don't have plans to spend $700 + tax for a founders edition with a "special" design reference cooler.

I know the 1070 is releasing in June for $380 regular - $450 founders edition.

This card [GTX 1080] is suppose to be faster than 980 SLI, faster than the 980 Ti and faster than the Titan X. It's much cheaper than all of those cards as well. If I owned any of those setups I'd be 100% PO'd as a Nvidia user at this point. However, the performance increase should be something impressive.

We will be getting benchmarks soon, but it looks like Nvidia is trying to make sure they keep AMD from gaining market share. Hopefully the benchmarks come before the release date. I'm hearing only the $699 cards will be available, but who knows at this point. I'm not a fan of upgrading GPUs every 6-12months so I'm sure no matter benchmarks I see I won't be switching back to the green team any time soon. I don't plan on getting rid of my Fury X for awhile. I definitely don't plan on going back to air coolers either. Having a water cooled GPU has spoiled me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I was primarily talking about IPC, Penryn to Nehelm saw about a 25% boost in single threaded applications.
> 
> All that is fine, and I agree for the most part, but if someone uses one application every day that they see a 30% increase in that one application then it is a solid upgrade for them.


That's going to be one heck of a application since there are a lot of other factors that depend on the gains outside of the IPC increase. I understand what you are saying though. Let's say everything is setup properly. If that application is poorly programmed then of course you'll see a performance gains if you happen to use the same program everyday and follow the same workflow while using that program everyday [very unlikely]. If the application is programmed properly then it would scale well regardless of the IPC.Perhaps to the point that the 28% is less relevant than a single core benchmark score.

Quote:


> Again, depending on the application going from a Bloomfield quad to Westmere hexa at the same clocks you could see almost no difference depending on the type of applications you compare the two, but in some applications that take advantage of the extra cores would see huge gains.


That's my point and that's where the gains came from. The extra cores worked well with applications that were programmed properly and took advantage of the extra cores. That wasn't the only performance increase, but I wasn't expected that big of a performance increase. You are going to see the 76% all the time.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's going to be one heck of a application since there are a lot of other factors that depend on the gains outside of the IPC increase. I understand what you are saying though. Let's say everything is setup properly. If that application is poorly programmed then of course you'll see a performance gains if you happen to use the same program everyday and follow the same workflow while using that program everyday [very unlikely]. If the application is programmed properly then it would scale well regardless of the IPC.Perhaps to the point that the 28% is less relevant than a single core benchmark score.
> 
> That's my point and that's where the gains came from. The extra cores worked well with applications that were programmed properly and took advantage of the extra cores. That wasn't the only performance increase, but I wasn't expected that big of a performance increase. You are going to see the 76% all the time.


It is not uncommon to see those kind of gains and more in a server environment with thousands of users hitting databases that sit in memory, which is one reason there are so many retired 1366 chips now _(a bigger reason is probably the power consumption)._

At the same clocks I see a 8-15% increase over my x5670 at the same clocks (4.4) with my workflow but this jumps up to 15-20% at my 24/7 clocks on both platforms _([email protected] vs [email protected])._


----------



## bobnoho

gtx 1080!! cant wait.. iv looked at other upgrades too, (like these)....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/162036269112

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111976083232

under $500 for both, but its hard to justify when another chipset should be around the corner.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gtx 1080!! cant wait.. iv looked at other upgrades too, (like these)....
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/162036269112
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/111976083232
> 
> under $500 for both, but its hard to justify when another chipset should be around the corner.


Go ahead and get the Engineering Sample....


----------



## bobnoho

Iv seen a bunch of these cpus on eBay last few weeks.. You think an ES would be bad?? Normally there unlocked aren't they


----------



## suprc4

So I had a xeon x5670 before that i had at 4.4ghz. It died on me doing a thunderstorm. I then ugpraded to a xeon x5675 and with the 1 higher multiplier i was able to get 4.6ghz. Also I bent one cpu pin when putting the cpu in because i put it in the wrong way at first. It was my first time in about two years so I completely forgot lol. But anyway my computer randomly started just shutting off at the desktop, no blue screen or anything. So i tried lowering the overclock and the same thing. I tried every frequency dropping it down 100mhz at a time until I was back at stock settings. The computer works perfectly fine at stock, but as soon as I overclock it, it will turn off immediately once I get to the desktop. Anyone know why this could be happening? It was working fine for the first 3 days at 4.6ghz. Now i'm stuck at 3ghz and I have some 4k video to render and it's taking a long time. Not to mention my fps in some games is lower. I have an evga x58 classified 3. I haven't tried resetting the cmos, but I've done a reset to default settings in the bios multiple times. Could it be my power supply or is it that one bent pin that might be causing this? Or do I need to reset cmos? I haven't done that at all since I changed cpu's.

Any help is very much appreciated as I have a lot of 4k video to render lol. Thanks!


----------



## prznar1

In my opinion bend pin. Have you tried fixing it a bit?


----------



## suprc4

I haven't touched the bent pin yet. I've fixed some before on a previous motherboard that came with them. I guess I gotta try to fix it on this one too.


----------



## Dhiru

It may not be the bent pin if it works fine on stock settings. Are you sure your PSU survived the thunderstorm? Maybe it's not providing enough stable voltage needed for the overclock.


----------



## suprc4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> It may not be the bent pin if it works fine on stock settings. Are you sure your PSU survived the thunderstorm? Maybe it's not providing enough stable voltage needed for the overclock.


That's what I was thinking also. I guess I'll try a new power supply and see how that works.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> Iv seen a bunch of these cpus on eBay last few weeks.. You think an ES would be bad?? Normally there unlocked aren't they


No multi CPU compatible Xeon is unlocked as far as I'm aware. This includes the x56xx, E5-26xx, E5-46xx, etc.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *suprc4*
> 
> That's what I was thinking also. I guess I'll try a new power supply and see how that works.


One way to verify too on the PSU would be to stress test your CPU and GPUs at the same time. I would load up the latest version of [email protected] and open the GUI interface and manually turn on at Full using your CPU and GPU(s). You would find out rather quickly if this is true or not. The amount of stress from just OCing the chip and OCing and maxing the CPU would tender the same results from using [email protected]

However, your motherboard could be damaged and doesn't like increasing the voltages to the CPU. The voltage is still managed on the motherboard.


----------



## srialmaster

Anyone familiar with a 0x18 code for BSOD? It isn't in the BSOD Forum page for any sockets. I have a socket 1366.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Anyone familiar with a 0x18 code for BSOD? It isn't in the BSOD Forum page for any sockets. I have a socket 1366.


Slowly Increase the vCore and nothing else and stress test. That's something you can try.


----------



## Space Marine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> Anyone familiar with a 0x18 code for BSOD? It isn't in the BSOD Forum page for any sockets. I have a socket 1366.


I had this BSOD quite a lot

- check if memory modules are 24/7 stable
- check if qpi voltage is enough for 24/7
- check if vcore is enough for 24/7

If, after stresstesting these 3 things, everything is stable, then it's exactly what happened to me, and that's how I solved it:

- updated every single driver, especially the SATA controller ones, to the lastest version (the version on asus website was outdated and known to cause conflicts, I found the new ones on a forum, look on google for your exact chipset model)
- updated flash player (it was happening to me only during light browsing using flash)
- increased PLL from 1,8 to 1,9

Everything has been rock solid ever since


----------



## prznar1

Changes are coming in my rig. Gonna get r2e for dirty cheap







Wonder how it will do with X5650.

EDIT: seller wanted to rickroll me :S


----------



## 4everAnoob

What would you guys estimate the value of a ga-x58a-ud3r at?
I mean it's at least as good as a p6t or sabertooth right?


----------



## arnavvr

$125


----------



## HardCelery

Going for $150 or higher on ebay usually.


----------



## HardCelery

Can anyone give me some tips on overclocking my x5670? Currently have it at 4.2ghz with no turbo or hyperthreading by just rising vcore. Should I change the same setting I would on a 920?


----------



## OCmember

latest oc porn:

4.3GHz HT on, 1.35v
4.0GHz QPI 1.325v
3.8GHz Uncore 1.325v
2000MHz cl8.8.8.59, 2T


----------



## 4everAnoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> latest oc porn:
> 
> 4.3GHz HT on, 1.35v
> 4.0GHz QPI 1.325v
> 3.8GHz Uncore 1.325v
> 2000MHz cl8.8.8.59, 2T


Ghhh P Noice!


----------



## dagget3450

Hey dudes, so i am running into a bizzare issue on my sr2 and x5650s. I used to have gskill ddr3 in my board for use. Recently i put my sr2 back in service but now have samsung ddr3 ecc ram. I am fairly certain that this has somehow caused an issue i never had before. My uncore multiplier seems to be stuck at 2x my ram speed. So i can't get 200fsb because my uncore is at 4ghz also. No matter what i set it wants to match uncore with cpu clock. Anyways i am almost 100% this was not an issue with ddr3 gskill.

Any suggestions on what i can do? My ddr3 speeds are listed as 800,1066,1333 in bios and my strap shows up to 1600. My uncore is locked and doesnt respond aside from base clock adjustments.

Is it even realistic to get 4ghz uncore working? Right now i am able to use 190fsb with turbo gives me 4.2ghz.


----------



## svfusion

I've hit 4.7Ghz on my x5660 cpu.. trying to get to 4.8. How bad are my BIOS settings? I think I went overboard on somethings.. I'm stable.. But, just don't want to break anything, with the exception of the CPU.. I'll just buy another one.. I'm on a Asus Rampage II Extreme board, 24GB Corsair Dominator Memory..



IMG_1718.JPG 676k .JPG file


----------



## OCmember

@svfusion What's goin on with those volts? No offense but it looks like you just threw up some of those volts to get 4.7Ghz to work. I know it could just be the board design but, wow


----------



## svfusion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @svfusion What's goin on with those volts? No offense but it looks like you just threw up some of those volts to get 4.7Ghz to work. I know it could just be the board design but, wow


No offence taken.. I did some research, but not having much luck on were to keep my voltage.. Do you know a good place to start taking the voltage down?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> No offence taken.. I did some research, but not having much luck on were to keep my voltage.. Do you know a good place to start taking the voltage down?


I wish I had experience with that board, unfortunately I don't and could only give you my volts but boards are worlds apart when it comes to how they react when overclocked. So to take my advice and template of volts wouldn't necessarily work but if you would like I can offer you my volt settings etc.


----------



## svfusion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I wish I had experience with that board, unfortunately I don't and could only give you my volts but boards are worlds apart when it comes to how they react when overclocked. So to take my advice and template of volts wouldn't necessarily work but if you would like I can offer you my volt settings etc.


Sure, that would be nice.. Thanks


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> Sure, that would be nice.. Thanks


Ok. I'll take some volt readings from my multi meter off the board with the speed of any corresponding parts.

Running a game at the moment:
Core volts for 4.3GHz with HT on, 1.345v
QPI 3974 MHz, 1.32v
Uncore 3.8GHz, 1.33v
IOH 1.259v

For some reason I am thinking the QPI Pll, and Uncore volts have to be close to =/equal to each other. I've never seen 3.8GHz Uncore, & 4GHz QPI speeds before and am surprised by it. I do have some other settings in the bios but I don't think you'll have them to make the same adjustments.

EDIT: going to addendum the rest of the volts:
taking these settings from the bios so the actual readings might vary by a %
CPU PLL - 1.8v (Auto)
IOH PLL - 1.8v (Auto)
DIMM Voltage - 1.64v in bios, varies under load and while idle
IOH Vcore - 1.25v
IOH, ICH I/O volts 1.5v (Auto)
ICH Vcore 1.20v
VTT PWM Freq 370KHz
CPU PWM Freq 940KHz
CPU Impedance - Less
QPI SIgnal Compensation - Less

26x166, multi and bclk respectively.

Some good board info on the EVGA Classified X58 board.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2727/evga-x58-classified-first-look/6
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2727/evga-x58-classified-first-look/7


----------



## srialmaster

So....I dropped back to my X5660 from my W3690 and at first it seemed to run well, but now I am getting unexplained reboots. It just randomly reboots with no BSOD. I am really starting to wonder if my MB is starting to flake out on me.....?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> So....I dropped back to my X5660 from my W3690 and at first it seemed to run well, but now I am getting unexplained reboots. It just randomly reboots with no BSOD. I am really starting to wonder if my MB is starting to flake out on me.....?


I was getting those. I read somewhere that sometimes RAM can do that. I lowered my RAM multi to see if it helped and it did.


----------



## THS89

I have a X5670

My motherboard: ASUS Rampage II Extreme

RAM: Triple Channel 12 GB (6 sticks)
1 Kit (3 sticks) of this: https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=cm3x2g1333c9
1 Kit (3 sticks) of this: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145258

CPU Cooler: Cooler Master V8

Currently I have the following overclock:

BCLK: 200
Multiplier: 22
Effective Clock speed: 4400
RAM: 1600
UCLK: Around 3000 (This is the Uncore. It is basically RAM x 1.875... Supposed to use 1.5 - 2 times RAM for Westmere Xeons but I like 1.875)

Vcore: 1.38ish (If I remember right. Was set to 1.38something in bios)
PLL: 1.81v
QPI: 1.25v
DRAM: 1.65v (rating for my memory sticks)

RAM Timings: 9-9-9-24 entered manually. Rest are AUTO.
Load-Line Calibration: Enabled (This is causing vcore to go up under load. It spiked to a max of 1.396V when running Intel Burn Test as reported by HWMoniter.)
Power saving stuff like C1E, Speedstep, Speed State: Disabled.
Hyper-Threading: Disabled

Max temp on the 6 cores when running Intel Burn Test is 66C to 76C.

Some questions.

1) Difference between C1E, Speed Step, C States ? I wouldn't mind a lower power bill so can I enable any of these to work with my overclock ?

2) Leave hyperthreading disabled ? (only use the system for gaming, no video edition or anything)

3) My BIGGEST CONCERN: Load Line Calibration is causing the CPU Voltage to go up under load. HWMonitor is showing 1.39v - 1.42v with a max spike of 1.435v even though I have vcore set in BIOS to 1.38125 or something. Is that vcore too high under load ? I could disable LLC but then it won't be stable.

PS: The system was stable at 4.2 with vcore set to Intel's reccomended max of 1.35. Had to bump it to 1.38something to get it stable for 4.4.

Actually, it might have been stable under 1.35 for 4.2. I was too lazy to test that so I did a quick and dirty 1.35 because my goal was 4.4 to begin with.


----------



## HardCelery

C states are need for overclocking and to get a higher multiplier. Power saving isn't gonna really change your bill, maybe a couple of dollars a year if anything.


----------



## gofasterstripes

If you're running so close/just over to VMax - watch your temps. 76 & >1.35 is risking blowing the chip.


----------



## DR4G00N

I got bored so I did some gaming benchmarks on my main system for fun. Still kicking butt.









X5670 (delidded) @ 4.41GHz 1.4V, 3.2GHz Uncore, 1.225V VTT, 1600MHz 9-9-9-24 1T
GTX 780 Ti SLI @ 1200MHz Core, 7000MHz Mem, 1.212V

Dirt Rally, All settings maxed, 2560x1080, 8XMSAA: Min 62.13, Max 79.00, Avg 70.31

Killing Floor 2, All settings maxed, 2560x1080, FXAA, HBAO+: Min 2, Max 151, Avg 107.694 - At the beginning of every round there's a lag spike which is why the min is so low but during the rounds I don't think it ever goes below 60.

GTA V, 2560x1080, 4XMSAA + 4XMSAA Refections and all settings maxed except some advanced settings and Post FX (Normal): Min 8, Max 131, Avg 77.902 - Low min from the game very rarely lag spiking while loading assets. Mid 50's is around the lowest I've seen it go while causing havoc.

Project CARS, Ultra settings, 2560x1080, DS2M (2X Downsampling + 2X MSAA), Nurburgring, Thunderstorm, 9 AI: Min 71, Max 114, Avg 92.802

Project CARS, Ultra settings, 5120x2160 DSR, No AA, Nurburgring, Thunderstorm, 9 AI: Min 32, Max 72, Avg 59.998 - Random slowdown at the very start, never occurs a second time.

Just bought the new Doom, so I might get around to doing that one as well later today if it finishes downloading.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @svfusion What's goin on with those volts? No offense but it looks like you just threw up some of those volts to get 4.7Ghz to work. I know it could just be the board design but, wow


I doubt it's the board, if it's anything like the P6T Deluxe v2 then it should actually do a bit better than the Asrock x58 Extreme. I compared the two with the same exact chip and the Asrock needed about 0.025v more than the Asus for stability.

Either way those volts are too high, I really got nervous putting 1.45v through my chip. Some chips simply won't do those kind of clocks at reasonable voltages, my chip needs 1.36v for 4.6, but to jump to 4.7 it needs a bit over 1.4v and at 4.8/1.45v it wouldn't even finish a Cinebench run, but I think it was getting a bit too hot at those clocks.


----------



## bobnoho

WOW... I don't know what to make of this x5675, look how much vcore I had to add to run prime95 @ 4.6ghz, but look at the temps, I peaked at 73 so far, prime is set for maximum heat.. this is on my p6t7...





just finished an hour of prime95, like @svfusion I don't care about killing the chips, I'm temped to push higher on the vcore for 4.8 or 5


----------



## THS89

Intel rates them at 1.35 max. Overclocking community tries to stay below 1.4-1.45. You are exceeding 1.5v under load.

I know what to make of this: YOU WILL KILL YOUR CHIP.

EDIT: OK I see you don't care about killing it. Do what you will, it's your money.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobnoho*
> 
> WOW... I don't know what to make of this x5675, look how much vcore I had to add to run prime95 @ 4.6ghz, but look at the temps, I peaked at 73 so far, prime is set for maximum heat.. this is on my p6t7...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just finished an hour of prime95, like @svfusion I don't care about killing the chips, I'm temped to push higher on the vcore for 4.8 or 5


----------



## dagget3450

I am having a strange issue on my SR2 and i have managed to make headway. I found that with my 2nd cpu enabled i have 2 issues develop.
First my 2nd cpu is dropping memory banks with bclk adjustments and remains unstable regardless of my settings. Then the other issue is i my uncore gets locked when i enable both cpus. So i think that is also causing the OC unstability as it instantly goes to 4ghx uncore.

So now i have been running only first cpu enable and it see all ram slots with uncore adjustable. I am going to try to troubleshoot by enabling the CPU1 and turning off CPU 0. If i encounter the issues again then i will swap cpus in sockets. I am hoping its the cpu and not the mobo having issues.

I now have samsung ddr3 1066 ECC dimms and moved my gskill sticks to better boxes that can use the 2133mhz speed. I initially thought it was something with the memory but that seems not to be the case so far. Any suggestions are welcome and i am curious if others have had memory channels drop when upping bclk only say from 133-166 and or unstable lock uncores as well.

<----Post 666























EDIT
This is where i am at on cpu 0, bout to swap jumpers and go to cpu1 to test


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I got bored so I did some gaming benchmarks on my main system for fun. Still kicking butt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> X5670 (delidded) @ 4.41GHz 1.4V, 3.2GHz Uncore, 1.225V VTT, 1600MHz 9-9-9-24 1T
> GTX 780 Ti SLI @ 1200MHz Core, 7000MHz Mem, 1.212V
> 
> Dirt Rally, All settings maxed, 2560x1080, 8XMSAA: Min 62.13, Max 79.00, Avg 70.31
> 
> Killing Floor 2, All settings maxed, 2560x1080, FXAA, HBAO+: Min 2, Max 151, Avg 107.694 - At the beginning of every round there's a lag spike which is why the min is so low but during the rounds I don't think it ever goes below 60.
> 
> GTA V, 2560x1080, 4XMSAA + 4XMSAA Refections and all settings maxed except some advanced settings and Post FX (Normal): Min 8, Max 131, Avg 77.902 - Low min from the game very rarely lag spiking while loading assets. Mid 50's is around the lowest I've seen it go while causing havoc.
> 
> Project CARS, Ultra settings, 2560x1080, DS2M (2X Downsampling + 2X MSAA), Nurburgring, Thunderstorm, 9 AI: Min 71, Max 114, Avg 92.802
> 
> Project CARS, Ultra settings, 5120x2160 DSR, No AA, Nurburgring, Thunderstorm, 9 AI: Min 32, Max 72, Avg 59.998 - Random slowdown at the very start, never occurs a second time.
> 
> Just bought the new Doom, so I might get around to doing that one as well later today if it finishes downloading.


Looks like you are still getting your $$$$$$ worth on the X58 platform + 780 SLI. I haven't purchased Doom yet, but I plan to in a few days to run my own benchmarks. There's a bit of controversy around the Doom title at the moment. There's been so much happening around this GTX 1080 reveal that it isn't funny.

In the Doom benchmarks the Fury X benchmarks are all of the place and I like to run my own benchmarks for a better clarification. There's no way a old X58 should be performing better than new tech. As far as "min fps" goes I wrote about this awhile ago when I was running my Ryse benchmarks.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6060#post_24951098

I use "FPS Min Caliber™" or basically the 97th percentile as a better representation for FPS Min since FPS min isn't consistent. I'm pretty much going to stop using FPS min altogether now.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Looks like you are still getting your $$$$$$ worth on the X58 platform + 780 SLI. I haven't purchased Doom yet, but I plan to in a few days to run my own benchmarks. There's a bit of controversy around the Doom title at the moment. There's been so much happening around this GTX 1080 reveal that it isn't funny.
> 
> In the Doom benchmarks the Fury X benchmarks are all of the place and I like to run my own benchmarks for a better clarification. There's no way a old X58 should be performing better than new tech. As far as "min fps" goes I wrote about this awhile ago when I was running my Ryse benchmarks.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6060#post_24951098
> 
> I use "FPS Min Caliber™" or basically the 97th percentile as a better representation for FPS Min since FPS min isn't consistent. I'm pretty much going to stop using FPS min altogether now.


I've played it on my sr2/[email protected] and ultra with x8tssa on furyX and it maintained roughly around 100ish i do recall seeing mid 50fps up to 160+fps as well. Just depended on the area and action. I don't think it has a benchmark so that's all i can say for me.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Are we ever going to have 120 fps as the absolute minimum frame rate for max settings? I was happy when I saw 4K come into existence because I knew this meant that video cards would have to get even more powerful to push res like that and that would mean more fps for my 120Hz panel. However, all we ever seem to talk about, even after 20 plus years of gaming, is double digit fps numbers.

So do you guys ever think I will enjoy triple digits on my 1440p as the norm someday?


----------



## dagget3450

I think the issue is the industry as a whole is in a constant state of flux. To many companies being greedy and all that. The latest is MS and the win10/xbox garbage. I had hope multigpu would be the answer to the issue you raise but even thats been constantly overridden by devs etc...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> I think the issue is the industry as a whole is in a constant state of flux. To many companies being greedy and all that. The latest is MS and the win10/xbox garbage. I had hope multigpu would be the answer to the issue you raise but even thats been constantly overridden by devs etc...


Yeah talking about multi gpu tech, I am thinking a quite large frame rate increase should eventually come with the advent of Navi, especially if all GPU's on the system appear to be one big unit to the game engine. I don't see a need for something like 250 fps or more, but with 4K VR around the corner and each eye needing a minimum of 120 fps just to work correctly, I am hopeful that my 1440p will be seeing at least 120 fps all the time and with every game. So with that said, I am thinking probably another three years or a tad more. A Navi based Quad-GPU Fury card or something along those lines.

Does this sound like a solid theory?


----------



## srialmaster

I don't mean to interrupt the informative and intriguing conversations, but aren't we supposed to be talking about overclocking Xeons on X58 chipsets? If you guys want, we can discuss this in a new thread. I am liking the conversations.

It is Kana-Maru's thread and you all can do as you wish, but I think we have really gone away from what this thread is for.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Are we ever going to have 120 fps as the absolute minimum frame rate for max settings? I was happy when I saw 4K come into existence because I knew this meant that video cards would have to get even more powerful to push res like that and that would mean more fps for my 120Hz panel. However, all we ever seem to talk about, even after 20 plus years of gaming, is double digit fps numbers.
> 
> So do you guys ever think I will enjoy triple digits on my 1440p as the norm someday?


Triple digits are already possible, at least it is if you lower a few graphical settings. I'm not sure what types of games you are referring to though. Are you talking about maxing out games and running triple digits? 1440p and 4K is great. I don't think every game requires 120fps-144fps and not every game needs a constant 60fps. 45fps-60fps for some games. I'm still sad that we are still talking about 1920x1080p in 2016 with expensive graphics cards or cards than cost more than $350-$400+. I don't understand why $500-$1100 GPUs are being tested against mainstream [cheaper] GPUs in the first place, but that's what marketing and money does.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I don't mean to interrupt the informative and intriguing conversations, but aren't we supposed to be talking about overclocking Xeons on X58 chipsets? If you guys want, we can discuss this in a new thread. I am liking the conversations.
> 
> It is Kana-Maru's thread and you all can do as you wish, but I think we have really gone away from what this thread is for.


I have no issues with discussing technology in general. It all revolves around the X58 platform anyways since that's what we are using. Someone was recently asking if a GTX 1080 would work with their rig and I guess it sort of spun from that.

Have you guys checked out the new GTX 1080 reviews?


----------



## DR4G00N

Doom 4 looks to be very well optimized for many cores/threads, here's my X5670's usage while playing:


Single 780 Ti @ 1200MHz
2560x1080 Ultra TSSAA 8TX
FPS while playing the Meltdown level: Min 45, Max 119, Avg 67.351


----------



## THS89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Doom 4 looks to be very well optimized for many cores/threads, here's my X5670's usage while playing:
> 
> 
> Single 780 Ti @ 1200MHz
> 2560x1080 Ultra TSSAA 8TX
> FPS while playing the Meltdown level: Min 45, Max 119, Avg 67.351


Can you do the same test with Hyper Threading turned off ?

I am willing to bet you will get a few more frames with HT off.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Doom 4 looks to be very well optimized for many cores/threads, here's my X5670's usage while playing:
> 
> 
> Single 780 Ti @ 1200MHz
> 2560x1080 Ultra TSSAA 8TX
> FPS while playing the Meltdown level: Min 45, Max 119, Avg 67.351


I think I might get this game tomorrow. I'm still thinking on it. Good fps for 2560x1080 and Ultra graphical settings.

I've written an article about the GTX 1080 and issues surrounding the reveal and now the NDA lift. Nvidia has done a great job with the card overall, but there's still some issues that have to be addressed. I know that the hype train is completely off the rails now, but I had to write an article on it.

*GTX 1080 - What's not being discussed*

http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/46-gtx-1080-what-s-not-being-discussed

I haven't posted this on the Nvidia side yet. I think it'll be better to let them calm down a little and get some sleep. Tomorrow I'm sure they will be pounding me with insults. This wasn't necessarily a pro Nvidia article.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I think I might get this game tomorrow. I'm still thinking on it. Good fps for 2560x1080 and Ultra graphical settings.
> 
> I've written an article about the GTX 1080 and issues surrounding the reveal and now the NDA lift. Nvidia has done a great job with the card overall, but there's still some issues that have to be addressed. I know that the hype train is completely off the rails now, but I had to write an article on it.
> 
> *GTX 1080 - What's not being discussed*
> 
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/46-gtx-1080-what-s-not-being-discussed
> 
> I haven't posted this on the Nvidia side yet. I think it'll be better to let them calm down a little and get some sleep. Tomorrow I'm sure they will be pounding me with insults. This wasn't necessarily a pro Nvidia article.


Without trying to create a flame war or stoke fires. Nvidia gets way more passes than AMD on this kind of stuff. Nvidia preferred users look at Nvidia as the ONLY choice. It is the Premium brand. It is the best no contest. If your in the mindset that Nvidia is the ONLY choice then it doesn't matter if they lie somewhat, or bend the truth some. I see people talk about Nvidia paying off people(devs,reviewers, etc.) and there is no hard evidence of this.

While i don't trust AMD or Nvidia when it comes to marketing it leaves me wondering something important that your bringing up. Since Nvidia has such a large market share now does it do any justice for reviewers to go against them or call them out? I mean at some point it seems very bad for them to do this. It just makes me think that this contributes to how AMD gets treated differently on reviews. I am not talking about when people have a legitimate call out against AMD, but the way opinions are tossed in on their reviews that cast a negative light.

I mean if your job is only reviewing computer hardware and Vendor A has 90% market share. Wouldn't it be bad for you to go against it even in a small way?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> Without trying to create a flame war or stoke fires. Nvidia gets way more passes than AMD on this kind of stuff. Nvidia preferred users look at Nvidia as the ONLY choice. It is the Premium brand. It is the best no contest. If your in the mindset that Nvidia is the ONLY choice then it doesn't matter if they lie somewhat, or bend the truth some. I see people talk about Nvidia paying off people(devs,reviewers, etc.) and there is no hard evidence of this.
> 
> While i don't trust AMD or Nvidia when it comes to marketing it leaves me wondering something important that your bringing up. Since Nvidia has such a large market share now does it do any justice for reviewers to go against them or call them out? I mean at some point it seems very bad for them to do this. It just makes me think that this contributes to how AMD gets treated differently on reviews. I am not talking about when people have a legitimate call out against AMD, but the way opinions are tossed in on their reviews that cast a negative light.
> 
> I mean if your job is only reviewing computer hardware and Vendor A has 90% market share. Wouldn't it be bad for you to go against it even in a small way?


No worries there is no flame war to be started. Everyone here is cool and respect others opinions. As far as Nvidia paying off people, when they give some Youtubers\Reviewers or other people GTX 980 Ti's and Titan X's, yes more than one, that's nearly as good as money since you can make money from the resale. It also creates a bias IMO. Not to mention the sponsorship which usually includes money or some form of payment eventually. Another eye opener that I didn't touch in my article was that Editors Day Nvidia has down in Texas. They really treated the editors, reviewers, partners and youtubers etc really good. Actually extremely good. It reminded me of how the White House invites the press [MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, Washington Post etc] and they have all of these events for the press. Pool parties and golf. Basically it's a big party and this screams bias. Well the Youtubers obviously recorded everything and those guys\gals were eating good, shooting down range and everything. It's really hard for me to take their reviews seriously and normally don't because I run my own benchmarks and make my own decisions.

AMD has their fair share of problems, but it's nothing in comparison with Nvidia or Intel. AMD has been through a lot it's good to see them continuing to innovate and stay competitive. If you believe the websites and Nvidia fans, AMD never competed at all! lol. I understand what you mean as well. It's hard to talk against the hand that feeds you. Speaking honestly or against a paid sponsor, even if it's the truth, can cause issues. After the latest issues over the past 2 years or so and most recently, the last 2 months, Nvidia does get away with a lot of things. Yes it could be because journalist won't call them out on it. 90% of the market is a lot and at the end of the day money talks. Pay the right people and you'll continue to have the market. Nvidia fans will do the fighting for them.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No worries there is no flame war to be started. Everyone here is cool and respect others opinions. As far as Nvidia paying off people, when they give some Youtubers\Reviewers or other people GTX 980 Ti's and Titan X's, yes more than one, that's nearly as good as money since you can make money from the resale. It also creates a bias IMO. Not to mention the sponsorship which usually includes money or some form of payment eventually. Another eye opener that I didn't touch in my article was that Editors Day Nvidia has down in Texas. They really treated the editors, reviewers, partners and youtubers etc really good. Actually extremely good. It reminded me of how the White House invites the press [MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, Washington Post etc] and they have all of these events for the press. Pool parties and golf. Basically it's a big party and this screams bias. Well the Youtubers obviously recorded everything and those guys\gals were eating good, shooting down range and everything. It's really hard for me to take their reviews seriously and normally don't because I run my own benchmarks and make my own decisions.
> 
> AMD has their fair share of problems, but it's nothing in comparison with Nvidia or Intel. AMD has been through a lot it's good to see them continuing to innovate and stay competitive. If you believe the websites and Nvidia fans, AMD never competed at all! lol. I understand what you mean as well. It's hard to talk against the hand that feeds you. Speaking honestly or against a paid sponsor, even if it's the truth, can cause issues. After the latest issues over the past 2 years or so and most recently, the last 2 months, Nvidia does get away with a lot of things. Yes it could be because journalist won't call them out on it. 90% of the market is a lot and at the end of the day money talks. Pay the right people and you'll continue to have the market. Nvidia fans will do the fighting for them.


SuperZan just made an excellent post in regards to review bias or opinionated punches - Well its obviously a comical one hehe
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> "I find the colours of the accent-striping on the reference cooler to be disconcerting, and at 5 watts TDP over the 1080 this card will really put a dent in your power bill." - [H]
Click to expand...

On a more serious note, I forgot about the whole Texas camp thing. I also didn't realize they get free gpu's but i do recall someone mentioning this before. I know someone who did some reviews for AMD and if i recall, he has to send them back within a time frame. So i just assumed thats normal protocol. So i could see that pay off creating bias. I don't think this is the same for launch day review sites though?

Also, on a side note i saw many reviewers stating the 1080gtx makes 4k gaming possible on one GPU. However the benchmarks show all under 60 fps avg?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> SuperZan just made an excellent post in regards to review bias or opinionated punches - Well its obviously a comical one hehe
> 
> On a more serious note, I forgot about the whole Texas camp thing. I also didn't realize they get free gpu's but i do recall someone mentioning this before. I know someone who did some reviews for AMD and if i recall, he has to send them back within a time frame. So i just assumed thats normal protocol. So i could see that pay off creating bias. I don't think this is the same for launch day review sites though?
> 
> Also, on a side note i saw many reviewers stating the 1080gtx makes 4k gaming possible on one GPU. However the benchmarks show all under 60 fps avg?


Yeah that's pretty funny. I never really understood the power consumption hate. If you can't afford an extra $10-$20 a year then don't buy the GPU. Just give us power. Yeah some of the reviewers and youtubers get free stuff all of the time. They become sponsors and in most cases paid sponsors. I can understand getting a card for about a week or a few days just to benchmark and sending it back. That is the case in most cases, but once you start giving away expensive products with a high value, that makes me look at you kinda funny. These aren't $100 GPUs, some of these GPUs have value into the thousands and that's not including other things you might get like motheboards or SSDs etc.

4K gaming has been possible for sometime now. People want 60fps even in games when 60fps isn't required. For some people though it's an absolute requirement. I've been enjoying 4K gaming for sometime now. I don't know what AMD has done with the Fury X, but the experience is top quality.


----------



## Zaor

Really impressed with this cpu,Chugging along the past 4 months at 4.3ghz,hopefully it will last a couple of years until i do a system rebuild just in time for a modestly priced 4k oled monitor.Does anyone know what the average life is for these chips as i'm assuming the past 6 years were used in servers and degradation begun when overclockers took them in their delicate hands and started pumping volts taking them to 4ghz+.


----------



## Adhmuz

Chip by chip it will all be different, if your chip was used heavily in it's life maybe it won't last as long as others. Depending on how much voltage you have going through it and the daily usage you subject it to it could last years, if not close to a decade. I have a first gen i7 920 that spent it's whole life overclocked past 4GHz, that chip came out in 2008 and over the years I barely had to increase it's core voltage to maintain stability over the years, to this day it still runs fine, but since my X5660 purchase I have turned down the overclock and that chip will surely last many more years to come. For my X5660 I almost swear it was never used and was just a spare for in case a CPU in the server farm went down.



It looked pristine when I got it, not signs of it ever having been installed in a system, and because of this I believe it will last me a very long time, with my previous chips experience especially, my biggest concern now is the motherboards and how long they will last. CPUs are nearly bullet proof, mother boards are never so reliable, although all of my X58 boards seem to be holding up. Other than that I don't think anyone can give you an accurate life span estimate of a CPU, they all overclock slightly different which leads me to believe that has an outcome on life span, usage will as well and lastly how much voltage you want to be feeding it for the next 5 years, but I can almost comfortably say you will get at least 3 years out of it even at this stage of it's life.


----------



## Zaor

Appreciate the fast response .This is the seller http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5670-6x-2-93-GHz-SLBV7-Six-Core-6-Core-2-93-/161429380624?hash=item2595f0de10:g:MwgAAOSwfZ1WYDNj
and i'm assuming it was taken from server looking at the numbers sold,so most of the life operating at stock.

My settings is 4.3ghz core
1.328 vcore
1.335 qpi/vtt
1.8 cpu/pll
12 gb ram 1568 speed,9-9-9-24 at 1.648v


Planning on getting a gtx1080 to last for a couple of years before buying my first 4k oled tv/monitor around 2018/19.Hopefully the cpu or motherboard won't go up in flames by then


----------



## Adhmuz

If you don't mind me asking, what motherboard are you using? That's a really reasonable voltage for the overclock your running, with this POS Intel motherboard I have I'm running higher volts with a lower clock speed, but I do have 6 stick of RAM on the board which I found limited me compared to when I had 3.



Find myself playing it safe to maintain stability, otherwise I'm well above 1.4 volts for my vcore.

And yes you're right to assume it came out of a server farm of the sorts with that many being sold and remaining yet to be sold, not a bad deal either, I paid about $100 US for mine back in January.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Chip by chip it will all be different, if your chip was used heavily in it's life maybe it won't last as long as others. Depending on how much voltage you have going through it and the daily usage you subject it to it could last years, if not close to a decade. I have a first gen i7 920 that spent it's whole life overclocked past 4GHz, that chip came out in 2008 and over the years I barely had to increase it's core voltage to maintain stability over the years, to this day it still runs fine, but since my X5660 purchase I have turned down the overclock and that chip will surely last many more years to come. For my X5660 I almost swear it was never used and was just a spare for in case a CPU in the server farm went down.
> 
> 
> 
> It looked pristine when I got it, not signs of it ever having been installed in a system, and because of this I believe it will last me a very long time, with my previous chips experience especially, my biggest concern now is the motherboards and how long they will last. CPUs are nearly bullet proof, mother boards are never so reliable, although all of my X58 boards seem to be holding up. Other than that I don't think anyone can give you an accurate life span estimate of a CPU, they all overclock slightly different which leads me to believe that has an outcome on life span, usage will as well and lastly how much voltage you want to be feeding it for the next 5 years, but I can almost comfortably say you will get at least 3 years out of it even at this stage of it's life.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, what motherboard are you using? That's a really reasonable voltage for the overclock your running, with this POS Intel motherboard I have I'm running higher volts with a lower clock speed, but I do have 6 stick of RAM on the board which I found limited me compared to when I had 3.
> 
> 
> 
> Find myself playing it safe to maintain stability, otherwise I'm well above 1.4 volts for my vcore.
> 
> And yes you're right to assume it came out of a server farm of the sorts with that many being sold and remaining yet to be sold, not a bad deal either, I paid about $100 US for mine back in January.


This one http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3449#ov
Tested for stability 20 pass IBT on very high,core temp 73-78 ambient 22 celcius.
It's good up to 202 bus speed,nowhere near the 215-220 that i see the sabretooth.It's rock solid though,had it since 2010 with an i7 950 4ghz.


----------



## Adhmuz

Ahh, yes, that's a pretty solid board, Gigabyte makes some of the best motherboards, I'm not a huge fan of the way they setup their BIOS but in general they deliver some above average performance. I've been noticing people with the Sabertooth getting the some of the best overclocks out of these Westmere Xeons, I just wish I could find one new, I'm very skeptical about buying a used one off eBay, although they can be had for a reasonable price. Maybe if I have some disposable income I'll take the chance, right now things are working fine, even at 3.8Ghz I don't find I'm limited by my CPU in any of the games I play, rarely do they use more than 50% of my hexacore. My other option is to send my first gen EVGA X58 SLI to EVGA to have them hard mod the board to accept the Westmere architecture, but that in itself will set me back almost $100 with shipping and exchange rate, plus I'd be out a board for at least 2 months if not longer.


----------



## Zaor

What is your Qpi/vtt?With 6 sticks of ram this will be your limiting factor not vcore which is too high for this kind of overclock.Up the Vtt to 1.3v,lower vcore to 1.34-35v and go for 4ghz.Even that board should be able to do that.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> What is your Qpi/vtt?With 6 sticks of ram this will be your limiting factor not vcore which is too high for this kind of overclock.Up the Vtt to 1.3v,lower vcore to 1.34-35v and go for 4ghz.Even that board should be able to do that.


Let me check quickly and get back to you, but I was pretty sure I had tried raising the VTT to at least 1.3v if not 1.35v. I'll be right back after this reboot.

So for your consideration my settings in BIOS are as followed

Vcore - 1.3750
QPI - 1.3125
RAM - 1.5125
IOH - 1.1500
QPI Rate set to 4.8GT/s
QPI Power Management is Disabled?


----------



## Zaor

Why is your ram voltage so low if you run at your profile speeds?Try to run ram at around 1500-1600 and up the voltage to 1.6-1.64v.Change multiplier and bus speed if necessary and aim for 4 ghz.Lower vcore to 1.34 and the qpi leave it as it is.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Why is your ram voltage so low if you run at your profile speeds?Try to run ram at around 1500-1600 and up the voltage to 1.6-1.64v.Change multiplier and bus speed if necessary and aim for 4 ghz.Lower vcore to 1.34 and the qpi leave it as it is.


It's what my RAM is spec'd at, and I even have it running at a lower speed than it's supposed to.My Bus speed is 161 MHz and RAM is running at 1610 MHz, well within spec.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> It's what my RAM is spec'd at, and I even have it running at a lower speed than it's supposed to.My Bus speed is 161 MHz and RAM is running at 1610 MHz, well within spec.


Ok,i saw 1.65v at your ram profile.Nevertheless,with 24 gb of ram i suspect you need more juice.Up the ram volt incrementaly while running Intel Burn Test at very high.Lower vcore to 1.34 for start,up bus speed to 172 and lower memory multi to 6 if you have it at 8 in Bios to eliminate memory.


----------



## Zaor

Have to get ready for work.Keep me posted on your 4ghz endeavor,keep ram low for the moment(1400-1500) while slowly increasing bus speed up to 176-177(assuming ibt is ok in 5-10 passes),running ram volt a little bit above specified 1.5v won't hurt,try to decrease cpu vcore to 1.3v if possible ,keep cpu vtt no more than 1.84v.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Ok,i saw 1.65v at your ram profile.Nevertheless,with 24 gb of ram i suspect you need more juice.Up the ram volt incrementaly while running Intel Burn Test at very high.Lower vcore to 1.34 for start,up bus speed to 172 and lower memory multi to 6 if you have it at 8 in Bios to eliminate memory.


I'll give it a shot, I had played with it a whole bunch with my old triple channel kit of Corsair but since I put in these 6 sticks of Crucial I never got around to trying to get it back to 4Ghz, 3.8 has been plenty fast for the time being. The only pain is if it does fail to boot I have to start back at square one and slowly ramp back up to my current overclock, this board has been nothing but a pain, also might be worth mentioning it's an engineering sample, got it from a friend who got it as a sample. I'll mess around with it tomorrow, for tonight I just want to play some Hitman, I'll keep you posted as I play with my overclock tomorrow, thank you so far for your recommendations, really hope it allows me to get it back to at least 4.2Ghz.


----------



## hecatomb

Well, I just joined the club with my x5650 in an ASUS P6T SE board (Cross-flashed to P6T WS Pro). It was a breeze to get to 4GHz so far. 1.3v cpu, 1.92 PPL, 1.3 QPI, 1.64V DRAM UCLK 2406Mhz with 1603MHz DRAM.

I'm going to experiment with turbo mode and high TDP turbo, which was added with the WS Pro BIOS. I'll probably need a bit more vcore for that.


----------



## hecatomb

Oh okay. So anyone that has a ASUS P6T board and a 5650 and wants to unlock full potential with turbo 22x multiplier (with all cores), then the WS Pro cross-flashed bios with High TDP turbo mode is the way to do it. I just pushed it quite easily to 4.2GHz at 190 BCLK with turbo and all cores enabled. I'm going to go for 4.4GHz now.

I've noticed my IBT scores for GFLOPS to be a lot better with HT turned off. Is that normal? Does it mean I'm still a little low on the voltage?


----------



## gofasterstripes

No, I think it's due to HT scaling [2>n>1] and the way the throughput is calculated [or a scaling problem ]


----------



## hecatomb

Okay thanks. I was getting about 80Gflops with it off and 59 or so with it on. I ended up getting this stabilized at 4.25GHz @1.36V (193x22). I'm happy with that. I don't know if it was the BCLK or just chip lottery, but I needed way too many volts to make 4.3GHz and above stable.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> I don't know if it was the BCLK or just chip lottery, but I needed way too many volts to make 4.3GHz and above stable.


This is very common. Only those with the Magik sauce can go over 4.2 within spec (I mean, it's less common







)


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> This is very common. Only those with the Magik sauce can go over 4.2 within spec (I mean, it's less common
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Sauce? Really? Or just a good board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah, a really good board, or detailed tweaking (i think @Kana-Maru rubs his chips over the legs of a Cuban virgin first or something, he'll certainly not post his settings/picture of the shrine+sacrifice)

Sauce? Well, just watching the clocks people post [especially if we're talking 24/7 BOINC/IBT stable with HT on and all automatic clock control enabled].

EG see the handy graphic I just made with help from my crayons:

]

(Ps this is all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but you'll get my drift)


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah, a really good board, or detailed tweaking (i think @Kana-Maru rubs his chips over the legs of a Cuban virgin first or something, he'll certainly not post his settings/picture of the shrine+sacrifice)
> 
> Sauce? Well, just watching the clocks people post [especially if we're talking 24/7 BOINC/IBT stable with HT on and all automatic clock control enabled].
> 
> EG see the handy graphic I just made with help from my crayons:
> 
> ]
> 
> (Ps this is all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but you'll get my drift)


Love the graph! Accurate to .1 cubit.







And Kana-Maru's secret rituals do sound intriguing.

Agree going above 4.2 does require more go juice. But, my 5675 sips 1.32V peak all cores at 4425 (177x25) in a Sabertooth (24/7 stable), uses offset, so idles at 1.10V. (Full Disclosure: This 5675 was NOS, a legless virgin - no grimy FB server history to taint it's delicate electrons)

My old 5660 required 1.34V for 4.3 in the Sabertooth - but needed 1.38ish in a plain P6T. Just picked up a P6X58D-E cheap, will see if its got any secret sauce.


----------



## Schmuckley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revertex*
> 
> I wondering between these two, X5660 vs W3670 with one is better in real world usage.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/compare/47921,47918
> 
> W3670 have a higher clock and multiplier, and seems easier to overclock.
> 
> X5660 have a much lower TDP, 2 QPI links but it doesn't make a difference in single socket motherboards
> 
> Witch one do you guys think have a better performance comparing both overclocked at the same clock?


Get the x5660

http://valid.x86.fr/3bt5rt Daily clock.YMMV

I went back to 1366 after ..5 Dead Haswell chips on daily clocks.No more Haswell for me







probably ever..I don't care if it's $10.


----------



## hecatomb

Anyone see anything maybe I could try tightening up on this P6T WS Pro settings to go higher?





Auto ratio is to get the High TDP Turbo mode (all cores @ 4.25GHz).

Cheers

EDIT: Oh, when I run Prime95 with HT on, I've noticed that some of the workers seemingly 'skip' tests. I mean, it will say 8k passed for example when running only 3 tests where other workers will have to run 4 to pass. It doesn't crash or say failed or anything.. weird. Is that normal?

EDIT2: Here's what it looks like. See some workers finishing the 8K Self-test early with no failure. Funny because as I let it run they all seemed to almost synchronize with speed, so perhaps it isn't displaying properly. I'll try at stock speeds.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Certain threads will get ahead as other tasks "distract" the cores from running.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah, a really good board, or detailed tweaking (i think *@Kana-Maru rubs his chips over the legs of a Cuban virgin first or something, he'll certainly not post his settings/picture of the shrine+sacrifice)*
> 
> Sauce? Well, just watching the clocks people post [especially if we're talking 24/7 BOINC/IBT stable with HT on and all automatic clock control enabled].
> 
> EG see the handy graphic I just made with help from my crayons:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> (Ps this is all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but you'll get my drift)


LOL wow. I'm not saying I don't, but I'm also not saying I do.







That's a nice chart by the way.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> And Kana-Maru's secret rituals do sound intriguing.


Trust me it is, i mean.........nevermind. I'll spill the beans someday in a article I guess.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> LOL wow. I'm not saying I don't, but I'm also not saying I do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a nice chart by the way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trust me it is, i mean.........nevermind. I'll spill the beans someday in a article I guess.


When is that?? After everyone has dumped X58??


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> When is that?? After everyone has dumped X58??


LOL. Nah probably when I dump my X58







. No honestly I have no idea.

At one point I was initially planning on writing a modern overclocking guide for the X58 platform to address Westmere's with more relevant info, but there wasn't really a push for it because there are already so many X58 guides out there. The article would've been on my webpage\blog and probably would've taken a while to type up.

Then again the Westmere isn't that hard to overclock. I remember when getting to 4.1Ghz - 4.4Ghz stable was challenging back in the day. Most users can reach 3.8Ghz - 4.4Ghz easily.


----------



## theister

i would be pleased to see a guide from you


----------



## boombastik

*Can anyone tell me if this values are the stock settings for a x5650:*

gigabyte x58 ud5 v.1 :

Qpi: 6.4
uncore: x20 = 2666
ram speed: x10= 1333
ram voltage: 1.5
Qpi/vtt voltage: 1.2

I thought that uncore must be 1.5 to ram ratio. Why my motherboard uses x20 uncore it is safe?

Also i want to ask ram multyplaier is locked in xeons?
because when i change ram multyplier at x12= 1600 ram it qontinues to run at 1333.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> *Can anyone tell me if this values are the stock settings for a x5650:*
> 
> gigabyte x58 ud5 v.1 :
> 
> uncore: x20 = 2666
> ram speed: x10= 1333
> 
> I thought that uncore must be 1.5 to ram ratio. Why my motherboard uses x20 uncore it is safe?


My Asrock X58 Extreme did this. I made my own changes in the bios.


----------



## boombastik

i am sure that the default ram is 1333 from intel spec and qpi at 6.4 , what about uncore ?
Is at 2666 at x10?


----------



## OCmember

It's fine. Just set your CPU vtt to 1.20v and leave it


----------



## boombastik

With cpu vtt do u mean qpi/vtt ?

Also it is possible to run ram at 1600 like i7 920 without overclock?
Thnks


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> With cpu vtt do u mean qpi/vtt ?
> 
> Also it is possible to run ram at 1600 like i7 920 without overclock?
> Thnks


The Uncore vtt, not the QPI, for EVGA they call it the CPU VTT in the bios.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> Also it is possible to run ram at 1600 like i7 920 without overclock?
> Thnks


With the X56XX Xeons, no.
With the W36XX Xeons, yes.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Just in case someone wants to read this.....I'll leave this here:

GTX 1080 - What's Not Being Discussed
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/46-gtx-1080-what-s-not-being-discussed


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Just in case someone wants to read this.....I'll leave this here:
> 
> GTX 1080 - What's Not Being Discussed
> http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/46-gtx-1080-what-s-not-being-discussed


Thanks, Kana. It's not surprising. It's sad actually. The worst part is that there are MANY companies like that in the world. Not to get off subject but see what the marketing company for the sugar industry has been doing the past 30rys. Check out Sugar Coated, on Netflix.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Thanks, Kana. It's not surprising. It's sad actually. The worst part is that there are MANY companies like that in the world. Not to get off subject but see what the marketing company for the sugar industry has been doing the past 30rys. Check out Sugar Coated, on Netflix.


or check out Fed Up. Its all hype and misinformation. In the food industry it will kill you. In the computer industry, it makes you poor and disappointed. I got 980 Tis already, I'm waiting for the 1180s.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Does it make sense to get a W3680 for about $150 (I guess, those are local prices in rubles converted into dollars) to replace an X5650? They (there are two of them available) are B0, Q3VH, ES39491714. I might sell the X5650 for some.. $100 maybe. Overclocking the X5650 on the EVGA X58 SLi3 board leaves me kind of uncertain if the chip itself is a good one, or maybe it's quite old already and it might be better to get a younger chip. Mine does e.g. 186x22 = 4060 Mhz @ about 1.301 - 1.317 with vdroop settingin the unsafe position (with safe vdroop, Ihaven't een able to run Cinebench 15 withot crashing yet). For 4.4, I don't remember exactly, but it was well > 1.44. Can check, should that be required.

Other than that, I have a 3930K here, and it looks like I've found a mobo for it (Gigabyte X79 UP4), which might need a BIOS flash or such - need to test yet if it's functional (which involves going to the owner's place, so in a few days only). Should I better sell the X5650 + EVGA X58 SLI3 and make the switch to X79? Looks like selling the 3930K these days is hard and not really profitable.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Thanks, Kana. It's not surprising. It's sad actually. The worst part is that there are MANY companies like that in the world. Not to get off subject but see what the marketing company for the sugar industry has been doing the past 30rys. Check out Sugar Coated, on Netflix.


I'm definitely going to check out that documentary. Thanks for suggesting it. I've seen a lot of documentary regarding the food companies and it has been pretty sickening to watch.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> I got 980 Tis already, *I'm waiting for the 1180s.*


Everyone come here and crowd around, this ladies and gentleman is how Nvidia gets away with, not 1, but 2 paper launches simultaneously.

Perhaps 1 full and one somewhat full to semi-paper launch, but it's still a paper launch at the end of the game. My we wish for greater price increases and more paper launches in the future.

Let's see if AMD paper launches another card. You can expect every gaming & tech website, including TV stations, to pick up on the news when it's AMD doing such things.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Does it make sense to get a W3680 for about $150 (I guess, those are local prices in rubles converted into dollars) to replace an X5650? They (there are two of them available) are B0, Q3VH, ES39491714. I might sell the X5650 for some.. $100 maybe. Overclocking the X5650 on the EVGA X58 SLi3 board leaves me kind of uncertain if the chip itself is a good one, or maybe it's quite old already and it might be better to get a younger chip. Mine does e.g. 186x22 = 4060 Mhz @ about 1.301 - 1.317 with vdroop settingin the unsafe position (with safe vdroop, Ihaven't een able to run Cinebench 15 withot crashing yet). For 4.4, I don't remember exactly, but it was well > 1.44. Can check, should that be required.
> 
> Other than that, I have a 3930K here, and it looks like I've found a mobo for it (Gigabyte X79 UP4), which might need a BIOS flash or such - need to test yet if it's functional (which involves going to the owner's place, so in a few days only). Should I better sell the X5650 + EVGA X58 SLI3 and make the switch to X79? Looks like selling the 3930K these days is hard and not really profitable.


Getting the W3680 doesn't mean it will perform better or overclock better. You already have a 3930K and X79 board. Why not go ahead and stick with that platform instead if it turns out to work fine. The choice is up to you, but it looks like you are already leaning towards your decision.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK, I see, makes sense. Just made a quick test and this X5650 wants at least 1.47 for 4.4 GHz, is that a typical voltage?

Also, while this is surely off-topic, do you know if the Gigabyte X79 UP4 is any good? I've been looking for ASUS and they're all quite expensive, so maybe you know something from your own experience.

Other than that, I checked out PETest v8 baselines yesterday and the scores for GTX 970 and 980 (simple and Ti) are significantly higher on X79 and X99 than on X58. So, looks like there actually is a limit, or do you think people simply didn't overclock properly (i.e. the QPI and NB)?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK, I see, makes sense. Just made a quick test and this X5650 wants at least 1.47 for 4.4 GHz, is that a typical voltage?
> 
> Also, while this is surely off-topic, do you know if the Gigabyte X79 UP4 is any good? I've been looking for ASUS and they're all quite expensive, so maybe you know something from your own experience.
> 
> Other than that, I checked out PETest v8 baselines yesterday and the scores for GTX 970 and 980 (simple and Ti) are significantly higher on X79 and X99 than on X58. So, looks like there actually is a limit, or do you think people simply didn't overclock properly (i.e. the QPI and NB)?


It's a good board, though the componentry isn't quite as good as the more expensive boards but it makes up for that with other things (Ex. 4-way SLI or CFX support).


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK, I see, makes sense. Just made a quick test and this X5650 wants at least 1.47 for 4.4 GHz, is that a typical voltage?


That's not great voltage at all for 4.4Ghz. I can't speak on the Gigabyte X79 UP4.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK, I see, makes sense. Just made a quick test and this X5650 wants at least 1.47 for 4.4 GHz, is that a typical voltage?


186blck will put alot of pressure on the NB if you don't adjust it properly. The mulitpliers for the QPI Frequency are 24x, 22x, 18x and then slow mode. You might want to see if there is a slow mode. Have you checked those speeds before booting?

186 x 24 = 4464MHz
186 x 22 = 4092MHz
186 x 18 = 3348MHz

EDIT: you do know how to make adjustments to the uncore, right?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

The 4.4 run was 200x22 (turbo on, C-states set to C1E or C3 because C6, on my board, gives the 23 multi -> it would be 4.6 already, not what I wanted), EIST on, uncore 16X (or maybe it was 14X for less stress), QPI is unadjustable on this board, hence 18X.

QPI unadjustable == there is no explicit 18/22/24 setting, though there is the 4800/5466 (correct number here?)/6400 *and* changing this to anything other than 4800 won't boot.

With 186, I do 186x22, same settings otherwise, and it reulst in 1.317 IIRC, or so.

In CPU-Z, I can see that QPI is at ~3600 MHz for 200 bclk, which means it's 18X, and I give it +100mV to run 20 bclk, 3600 QPI, 2800-3200 uncore. When I don't, it may boot, or may give a "AHCI port 04: error", which I've correlated with not enough VTT by experience.

Kana-Maru, what would be the good, and the typical (two values, if that's possible to tell) for 4.4 GHZ on the X5650?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> The 4.4 run was 200x22 (turbo on, C-states set to C1E or C3 because C6, on my board, gives the 23 multi -> it would be 4.6 already, not what I wanted), EIST on, uncore 16X (or maybe it was 14X for less stress), QPI is unadjustable on this board, hence 18X.
> 
> QPI unadjustable == there is no explicit 18/22/24 setting, though there is the 4800/5466 (correct number here?)/6400 *and* changing this to anything other than 4800 won't boot.
> 
> With 186, I do 186x22, same settings otherwise, and it reulst in 1.317 IIRC, or so.
> 
> In CPU-Z, I can see that QPI is at ~3600 MHz for 200 bclk, which means it's 18X, and I give it +100mV to run 20 bclk, 3600 QPI, 2800-3200 uncore. When I don't, it may boot, or may give a "AHCI port 04: error", which I've correlated with not enough VTT by experience.
> 
> Kana-Maru, what would be the good, and the typical (two values, if that's possible to tell) for 4.4 GHZ on the X5650?


Those C-states. EIST and Turbo could be driving up your vCore usage. I'd turn those off because it's making you use the max multiplier on the CPU.
What do you mean two values? I'm guessing you mean vCore. For 4.4Ghz, best case would be under around 1.33v -1.35v and the typical would be 1.41 - 1.44 depending on the CPU and build etc.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Those C-states. EIST and Turbo could be driving up your vCore usage. I'd turn those off because it's making you use the max multiplier on the CPU.
> What do you mean two values? I'm guessing you mean vCore. For 4.4Ghz, best case would be under around 1.33v -1.35v and the typical would be 1.41 - 1.44 depending on the CPU and build etc.


I've discovered that only the C6 makes the CPU use 23 (i.e max multi), whereas C3 and lower result in a 22 multiplier.

The (EVGA X58 SLI3) board is basic if not just primitive, as you can see, I can't even change the QPI setting on it, and of course there are no detailed LLC settings; regarding vroop, there is only "with vdroop" (safe) / "without vdroop" (unsafe).

I can't turn off turbo and EIST because without turbo, the max multiplier is 20, and without EIST, there is no frequency and voltage drop at idle.

Any other settings that I should tweak, e.. VTT, PLL, IOH/ICH?

Yes, sorry, I meant to type VCore, but somehow missed it. Well, 1.41 - 1.44 is quite far away from mine..

Edit: Oh and C6 gives me enormous lag spikes every few seconds in BF3, so I'm going to leave it turned off, for sure.


----------



## OCmember

@CrazyNightOwl What model EVGA? And what board revision? I have an EVGA E760 A1, Rev 1.0


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OCMember, E767 (SLI3), the most basic board in the lineup with USB 3.0 support. Also known as SLI LE (before USB 3.0 had been added). BIOS 83, seemingly the latest one (though the sleep bug with BCLK over 180 isn't fixed in that BIOS revision).

Edit: Rev. 1.0 in the bottom left corner of the board.


----------



## OCmember

@CrazyNightOwl Does your board normally support turbo when not using C6 states?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Sure, I do get the +2 multiplier without C6 (that is, using C1/C1E/C3); whereas with C6, it's +2 for all cores and +3 for .. well, for low load, that's all I can say, because it's more than 1 or 2 cores that get the 23 mutiplier, but only for light loads; for heavy loads, I think it's 1 or 2 cores that get the +3 multi.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Sure, I do get the +2 multiplier without C6 (that is, using C1/C1E/C3); whereas with C6, it's +2 for all cores and +3 for .. well, for low load, that's all I can say, because it's more than 1 or 2 cores that get the 23 mutiplier, but only for light loads; for heavy loads, I think it's 1 or 2 cores that get the +3 multi.


Hmm. Maybe they fixed that with your board. Mine will not use any turbo or even use the unlocked multi on my chip..


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Whatever, I've lost the X79 board it seems, the guy just sold it to someone else, so now Im stuck with X58 for a while, and need to figure out if the board or the chip are bad. But, later, we can do extensive testing about mid next week I think, right now I have quite some studying to do.. :\


----------



## OCmember

Since you are running almost the same board as I am you can refer to my post for help (not sure if you already did) post link


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, that's for the Classified, which is light years ahead of y board. I've found a W3670 for under $100 and the seller says I have two weeks to test it, so, if that's true, that might help shed some light on the issue.

Other than that, is temperature and voltage related? Which temperature should the CPU be at under load?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well, that's for the Classified, which is light years ahead of y board. I've found a W3670 for under $100 and the seller says I have two weeks to test it, so, if that's true, that might help shed some light on the issue.
> 
> Other than that, is temperature and voltage related? Which temperature should the CPU be at under load?


For 4.4ghz you should be looking at 1.35v or less under load with a good chip. I had a x5670 that sounds like yours, it needed nearly 1.4v for a stable 4ghz.

Any idea what batch it is?

Try to keep temps under 80c loaded. Temps will rise when you boost the voltage of course, but there are other factors involved, frequency will raise temps more than voltage in general.

And of course every chip is different, one chip that clocks higher at lower volts may get hotter at load than another chip that needs more volts to reach the same clocks.

As far as your 3930k goes, look out for deals on B&H and Amazon used. I picked up two x79 Deluxes for $150/ea not too long ago.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

tbob22, I'm in Russia, so Amazon is unavailable, unfortunately. B&H - I don't know what that is yet, but guess it's out of reach as well. So, looking on ebay or the local marketplaces. Do you think it's wise to put $150 in an X79 board? That's almost as much as an X99 board (e.g. the Asrocks start at 179 euros on computeruniverse).

Batch and S/N:

X5650 - 3122B837 ('09 SLBV3 Costa Rica 2.6/12M/6.40)

Also, in this notebook that I use to write down tech stuff there is a record reading "1.435V (1.36875V in BIOS w/unsafe vdroop) for 4.388MHz 200x22, 974 CB score)". So, it's really weird that my 4.4 GHz voltage was higher during the last test run, maybe I was testing incorrectly the second time, I hope it's unlikely that I've killed the chip in the meanwhile by running it at about 4 GHz?

Other than that, if you happen to know batches for the W series, what would you say about the following batch numbers:

W3680 - 3949A714 ('09 ES, Q3VH Costa Rica)
W3670 - 3035B617 ('09 SLBVE Costa Rica)


----------



## KLICHO

Hello i Have a question whose processor better to buy ? X5650 or W3670 ?

Whose better overclock and better support 24GB ram 1600/1866MHz ?

Already i have I7 920 @ 4.3 GHz on 16GB ram 1640MHz


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KLICHO*
> 
> Hello i Have a question whose processor better to buy ? X5650 or W3670 ?
> 
> Whose better overclock and better support 24GB ram 1600/1866MHz ?
> 
> Already i have I7 920 @ 4.3 GHz on 16GB ram 1640MHz


BOTH WILL SUPPORT 24 GIGS of ram.
3670= higher stock clock, if you go with a 3680 you will have a completely unlocked processor multiplier, and memory multiplier, max 24 gig ram. single processor only
5650= lower stock clock, more ram supported 248 gig i believe, higher max temperature. support for 2 processor system. locked memory , and core multipliers.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> tbob22, I'm in Russia, so Amazon is unavailable, unfortunately. B&H - I don't know what that is yet, but guess it's out of reach as well. So, looking on ebay or the local marketplaces. Do you think it's wise to put $150 in an X79 board? That's almost as much as an X99 board (e.g. the Asrocks start at 179 euros on computeruniverse).
> 
> Batch and S/N:
> 
> X5650 - 3122B837 ('09 SLBV3 Costa Rica 2.6/12M/6.40)
> 
> Also, in this notebook that I use to write down tech stuff there is a record reading "1.435V (1.36875V in BIOS w/unsafe vdroop) for 4.388MHz 200x22, 974 CB score)". So, it's really weird that my 4.4 GHz voltage was higher during the last test run, maybe I was testing incorrectly the second time, I hope it's unlikely that I've killed the chip in the meanwhile by running it at about 4 GHz?
> 
> Other than that, if you happen to know batches for the W series, what would you say about the following batch numbers:
> 
> W3680 - 3949A714 ('09 ES, Q3VH Costa Rica)
> W3670 - 3035B617 ('09 SLBVE Costa Rica)


Ok, yeah maybe you can win something there at a good price. I think $150 is definitely worth it for a good board as they sell for $250+, especially if you have a 3930k already. When old boards get in the $200+ range, I'd really start thinking about x99+Broadwell-e instead.

B's are usually pretty decent, I'm surprised yours clocks that poorly. I'd look for a B with the last three numbers ranging from 050-150 and maybe you'll get lucky. x5670's are going for $60-70 now, so you may be able to find a better chip.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, for me X79 also means the possibility to perform a GPU passthrough and set up a RAID 0 of SATA 6 Gb/s SSD's (wanted to do the latter ever since I had read that Crucial MX RAID 0 review on TweakTown), so, maybe, it's really worth it. There's a guy selling a R IV Formula for some $150 BUT it's in another region and he refuses to send 'cause hes not sure its fully operational (like a mate asked him to sell or so). Smoking deal but.. yeah. Can't persuade, I'm too bad at it









tbob22, what would you say about a C2 3930K ending in 003? IS that any good sign? I was honestly shocked for a moment when I read that, since, as per http://overclockt.com/forum1/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1887, that's a really good number (it that's really a wafer position code).

On topic: do you recommend to stay away from those W's I've listed above and pursue a good sample of an X instead?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well, for me X79 also means the possibility to perform a GPU passthrough and set up a RAID 0 of SATA 6 Gb/s SSD's (wanted to do the latter ever since I had read that Crucial MX RAID 0 review on TweakTown), so, maybe, it's really worth it. There's a guy selling a R IV Formula for some $150 BUT it's in another region and he refuses to send 'cause hes not sure its fully operational (like a mate asked him to sell or so). Smoking deal but.. yeah. Can't persuade, I'm too bad at it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tbob22, what would you say about a C2 3930K ending in 003? IS that any good sign? I was honestly shocked for a moment when I read that, since, as per http://overclockt.com/forum1/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1887, that's a really good number (it that's really a wafer position code).
> 
> On topic: do you recommend to stay away from those W's I've listed above and pursue a good sample of an X instead?


Yeah, I've been happy moving to x79, but I would have never done it if I didn't basically break even after selling my old parts. The higher potential clocks do help bring it more into the upgrade territory though, and certainly if the 1680v2's ever drop it would be a very solid upgrade.

I don't know much about the batch #'s on sandy-e or if they even make any difference. I've had two 1650's, one has been a C with 156 wafer number and the other a B with 926 wafer number, the B overclocks about 100mhz higher at the same voltage ([email protected]).

I don't see any reason to get the W's, they are typically hotter and more expensive. Unless you really need to run faster memory (faster than 10x the bclk) or need an unlocked multi, I'd stick with the X's.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, regarding memory, I can't do anything higher that what's written on the sticks, that is, 1333 9-9-9-9 @ 1.5 V. Maybe it can go up to 1400, but after that, no matter what I do: up the VTT, up the VDIMM, it won't boot or begin to start Windows. Not sure if it's a bad chip, bad board, or stubborn memory. The RAM itself is Corsair XMS3 3x2 Gb. I wonder if I get e.g. the orange Crucial Tactical's which are said to be able to go as high as 2133, will that change anything or there is a limitaiton in the board and / or the CPU.

Edit: Oh and I was loooking at teh W's because I've been told that high BCLK is bad, and the W's have an unlocked mutiplier, so maybe tyhat'd work out nicer. Also, because of the RAM problems, see above.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well, regarding memory, I can't do anything higher that what's written on the sticks, that is, 1333 9-9-9-9 @ 1.5 V. Maybe it can go up to 1400, but after that, no matter what I do: up the VTT, up the VDIMM, it won't boot or begin to start Windows. Not sure if it's a bad chip, bad board, or stubborn memory. The RAM itself is Corsair XMS3 3x2 Gb. I wonder if I get e.g. the orange Crucial Tactical's which are said to be able to go as high as 2133, will that change anything or there is a limitaiton in the board and / or the CPU.
> 
> Edit: Oh and I was loooking at teh W's because I've been told that high BCLK is bad, and the W's have an unlocked mutiplier, so maybe tyhat'd work out nicer. Also, because of the RAM problems, see above.


It's probably the memory or a setting somewhere, maybe timings. Usually if you loosen the timings a bit memory will clock quite a bit higher. Bumping up the memory voltage can help too. Of course any time you overclock memory you need to run memtest 6+ passes.

High bclk (within reason) is fine on x58. I'd say 200mhz is around the max for daily use depending on the board/chip.

The w3670 does not have an unlocked multi (same as 970), so keep that in mind.


----------



## KLICHO

Hmmmm i think i buy 5650 he can go sable on +/- @ 4.5 GHz ? I have corsair H70 2x Enermax Magma


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Have to get ready for work.Keep me posted on your 4ghz endeavor,keep ram low for the moment(1400-1500) while slowly increasing bus speed up to 176-177(assuming ibt is ok in 5-10 passes),running ram volt a little bit above specified 1.5v won't hurt,try to decrease cpu vcore to 1.3v if possible ,keep cpu vtt no more than 1.84v.


So I'm finally getting around to tweaking my OC, and so far so good on the advice you've given me, it seems to be all in the QPI/VTT.



This was with very little work, just raised my QPI/VTT to 1.4625 and I bumped up the RAM to 1.6625, which might I add is still running at 1:10 ratio resulting in 1830 MHZ. Actually getting really close to 1866 MHZ which is what it's supposed to be rated at.



I had it run IBT last night at a Bclk of 175 without issue, going to run it now that I'm at 183.

After I will go back and start to lower voltages until it doesn't IBT no more.

EDIT: Got it no problem with a Bclk of 183. Just booted up with 187, or 4.3GHz

Looks good and stable @ 4.3GHz, finally had to bump my voltages ever so slightly. Think I'll leave it here for now, my RAM is running at it's spec'd speed, and I'm getting very close to 80*C on full load.


----------



## DR4G00N

Dial your QPI/VTT down, 1.4625V is too high for 24/7 use. Keep it @ 1.35V or below.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> So I'm finally getting around to tweaking my OC, and so far so good on the advice you've given me, it seems to be all in the QPI/VTT.
> 
> This was with very little work, just raised my QPI/VTT to 1.4625 and I bumped up the RAM to 1.6625, which might I add is still running at 1:10 ratio resulting in 1830 MHZ. Actually getting really close to 1866 MHZ which is what it's supposed to be rated at.


Yeah, as DR4G00N said. Drop that VTT, you may have to also drop your UCLK. You should be able to get ~1866mhz without issue under 1.35v VTT, but you may need drop drop your UCLK to around 3200mhz or so.

That voltage also seems really high for 4.3. I'd definitely keep it under 1.4v for 24/7.

WARNING:
Zaor said:
"keep cpu vtt no more than 1.84v."
Don't follow that!! I'm sure he meant PLL, NOT VTT. If you get anywhere near that you'll kill your chip for sure.


----------



## SmOgER

I'am tempted to get some cheap 32nm chip and properly test the VTT limita. All I know is I was running it at 1.6v for a couple of days when I was trying various different IMC/RAM settings and didn't have any issues with those volts. (Now it's at 1.34v or so for 24/7).


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> I'am tempted to get some cheap 32nm chip and properly test the VTT limita. All I know is I was running it at 1.6v for a couple of days when I was trying various different IMC/RAM settings and didn't have any issues with those volts. (Now it's at 1.34v or so for 24/7).


Yeah, hard to know what how it affected the chip as I'm sure some will hold up to high voltages like that better than others. But who knows, you could have taken a year off of the life by doing that.


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> So I'm finally getting around to tweaking my OC, and so far so good on the advice you've given me, it seems to be all in the QPI/VTT.
> 
> 
> 
> This was with very little work, just raised my QPI/VTT to 1.4625 and I bumped up the RAM to 1.6625, which might I add is still running at 1:10 ratio resulting in 1830 MHZ. Actually getting really close to 1866 MHZ which is what it's supposed to be rated at.
> 
> 
> 
> I had it run IBT last night at a Bclk of 175 without issue, going to run it now that I'm at 183.
> 
> After I will go back and start to lower voltages until it doesn't IBT no more.
> 
> EDIT: Got it no problem with a Bclk of 183. Just booted up with 187, or 4.3GHz
> 
> Looks good and stable @ 4.3GHz, finally had to bump my voltages ever so slightly. Think I'll leave it here for now, my RAM is running at it's spec'd speed, and I'm getting very close to 80*C on full load.


You seem to be too high for your CPU voltage too! Should be able to bring it down easily. I can run [email protected] without issues. I am not saying your chip will do the same, but that voltage is really high for just 4.2GHz. I was able to pull a 4.4GHz at 1.4v, but I didn't play with it too long as the temps were higher than I wanted.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Dial your QPI/VTT down, 1.4625V is too high for 24/7 use. Keep it @ 1.35V or below.


Don't seem to have much choice, I tried, it won't load in to Windows, just get a BSOD with anything lower.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, as DR4G00N said. Drop that VTT, you may have to also drop your UCLK. You should be able to get ~1866mhz without issue under 1.35v VTT, but you may need drop drop your UCLK to around 3200mhz or so.
> 
> That voltage also seems really high for 4.3. I'd definitely keep it under 1.4v for 24/7.
> 
> WARNING:
> Zaor said:
> "keep cpu vtt no more than 1.84v."
> Don't follow that!! I'm sure he meant PLL, NOT VTT. If you get anywhere near that you'll kill your chip for sure.


Tried that as well, I was able to lower my VTT a whopping 0.05 volts before it starting crashing, also with it set at 1.5x it was really buggy, crashed my GPU drivers, also turned out slower times in IBT. Also in BIOS Vcore is set to 1.425 but under load drops to 1.400, anything lower than that in BIOS and it also BSODs on me while loading Windows.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> You seem to be too high for your CPU voltage too! Should be able to bring it down easily. I can run [email protected] without issues. I am not saying your chip will do the same, but that voltage is really high for just 4.2GHz. I was able to pull a 4.4GHz at 1.4v, but I didn't play with it too long as the temps were higher than I wanted.


I'm running 4.3GHz at 1.4v, not that far off from your 4.4GHz at 1.4v, please also keep in mind I do not have the luxury of using a good motherboard, I'm using one that's rarely, if ever, used for overclocking. It's an Intel DX58SO2, plus it's an engineering sample so chances are it's not perfect, I'm actually amazed it got me this far. I really need to find something better to do this properly, the mother board really isn't a great overclocker as you can see by my high volts just about everywhere.


----------



## GENXLR

Humor me, try these settings

CPU Voltage 1.375
PLL 1.80
VTT 1.3V
DDR BUS Voltage 1.65
IOH 1.2
ICH 1.4

Blck 200
Multi 21
UNCORE(NB) 2x (3200)
Memory 1600
PCI-E 100

Timing 9-9-9-24-1T

C-states off
C1E off
Speedstep on
Should get you a stable system at 4.2GHZ to start with


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Tried that as well, I was able to lower my VTT a whopping 0.05 volts before it starting crashing, also with it set at 1.5x it was really buggy, crashed my GPU drivers, also turned out slower times in IBT. Also in BIOS Vcore is set to 1.425 but under load drops to 1.400, anything lower than that in BIOS and it also BSODs on me while loading Windows.


You're saying you need 1.4125v for 3200mhz uclk? If so, there is definitely something up with your setup. It could very well be the board.

Either way, if you need a stable system I'd set the bar a little lower. Maybe you can get your memory at around 1400mhz for 2800mhz uclk while keeping the VTT under 1.35v then drop your dram to 1.5v, and shoot for 4-4.1ghz or so on the core. Triple channel at 1400mhz is still very fast, about equal to dual channel @ 2100mhz.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Humor me, try these settings
> 
> CPU Voltage 1.375
> PLL 1.80
> VTT 1.3V
> DDR BUS Voltage 1.65
> IOH 1.2
> ICH 1.4
> 
> Blck 200
> Multi 21
> UNCORE(NB) 2x (3200)
> Memory 1600
> PCI-E 100
> 
> Timing 9-9-9-24-1T
> 
> C-states off
> C1E off
> Speedstep on
> Should get you a stable system at 4.2GHZ to start with


Would if I could, I do not access to my PLL voltage, or my ICH for that matter. Like I'm trying to tell people, I'm using an INTEL DX58SO2, it's a total piece of crap but the only X58 motherboard I have that supports Westmere. I have an EVGA X58 SLI but it's first gen and doesn't support them, that board had all the voltage option you've listed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> You're saying you need 1.4125v for 3200mhz uclk? If so, there is definitely something up with your setup. It could very well be the board.
> 
> Either way, if you need a stable system I'd set the bar a little lower. Maybe you can get your memory at around 1400mhz for 2800mhz uclk while keeping the VTT under 1.35v then drop your dram to 1.5v, and shoot for 4-4.1ghz or so on the core. Triple channel at 1400mhz is still very fast, about equal to dual channel @ 2100mhz.


Unfortunately I already know it's the board that will be my limiting factor, also it made things worse occupying all the slots with memory modules. When I was only using 3 stick I was getting 4.2 GHz without having to push my QPI as high, had it right around 1.35 actually. But since I filled the board with RAM I was only able to hit 3.7GHz with the same settings. Just to get 4.0 GHz I needed to boost the QPI to 1.45+.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Would if I could, I do not access to my PLL voltage, or my ICH for that matter. Like I'm trying to tell people, I'm using an INTEL DX58SO2, it's a total piece of crap but the only X58 motherboard I have that supports Westmere. I have an EVGA X58 SLI but it's first gen and doesn't support them, that board had all the voltage option you've listed.
> 
> Unfortunately I already know it's the board that will be my limiting factor, also it made things worse occupying all the slots with memory modules. When I was only using 3 stick I was getting 4.2 GHz without having to push my QPI as high, had it right around 1.35 actually. But since I filled the board with RAM I was only able to hit 3.7GHz with the same settings. Just to get 4.0 GHz I needed to boost the QPI to 1.45+.


That is strange, I've never had to boost the VTT on any of my boards when overclocking just core.

Have you thought about hard modding the EVGA?
If not, maybe it's just best to get a W3670/80 and drop it in the EVGA and sell the x5660?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> That is strange, I've never had to boost the VTT on any of my boards when overclocking just core.
> 
> Have you thought about hard modding the EVGA?
> If not, maybe it's just best to get a W3670/80 and drop it in the EVGA and sell the x5660?


I have thought about attempting the hard mod, but I lack the right tools to do so, EVGA offers the service for ~$50 plus I gotta pay shipping and handling both ways so it comes out to close to $100, not a huge amount of money, but possible. The problem is I can't really be without that board for an extended period of time, this Intel board was in my server with an i7 920, which suited it fine, and I was using the EVGA board with my i7 960 for years with a pretty lazy overclock, I just had to swap them to be able to put the Hexacore in my gaming rig and the 960 is now on yet another fist gen x58 Rampage II GENE. I know I have too many of these old x58 boards, but I just can't part with them, they work too well.

Now I tried something which I thought I had tried in the past, set my Bclk to 200, memory multiplier to 8x, uncore to 16x, lowered all my voltages and I got in to Windows... I was almost 100% sure I had tried exactly this in the past, like the first thing I tried when I got the chip installed without any luck. So I'm at 4.2 GHz with turbo off, lowered the Vcore to 1.4v in BIOS, RAM to 1.5v and QPI to I think 1.4125. Going to run IBT now to see what happens.

EDIT: That was a whole lot of NOPE, damn it...

I'm starting to get the impression the voltage regulators for my RAM are incapable of supplying 6 sticks at 1.5v, as soon as IBT tries to load into my RAM it crashes, I upped the RAM voltage back to 1.65v and voila no issues, still with my QPI at 1.4125 which I now think I'll be able to lower. As always more testing is required.


----------



## GENXLR

with our chips, they can crash with too much voltage too, follow my exact settings

if you can't change it, leave it


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> I have thought about attempting the hard mod, but I lack the right tools to do so, EVGA offers the service for ~$50 plus I gotta pay shipping and handling both ways so it comes out to close to $100, not a huge amount of money, but possible. The problem is I can't really be without that board for an extended period of time, this Intel board was in my server with an i7 920, which suited it fine, and I was using the EVGA board with my i7 960 for years with a pretty lazy overclock, I just had to swap them to be able to put the Hexacore in my gaming rig and the 960 is now on yet another fist gen x58 Rampage II GENE. I know I have too many of these old x58 boards, but I just can't part with them, they work too well.
> 
> Now I tried something which I thought I had tried in the past, set my Bclk to 200, memory multiplier to 8x, uncore to 16x, lowered all my voltages and I got in to Windows... I was almost 100% sure I had tried exactly this in the past, like the first thing I tried when I got the chip installed without any luck. So I'm at 4.2 GHz with turbo off, lowered the Vcore to 1.4v in BIOS, RAM to 1.5v and QPI to I think 1.4125. Going to run IBT now to see what happens.
> 
> EDIT: That was a whole lot of NOPE, damn it...
> 
> I'm starting to get the impression the voltage regulators for my RAM are incapable of supplying 6 sticks at 1.5v, as soon as IBT tries to load into my RAM it crashes, I upped the RAM voltage back to 1.65v and voila no issues, still with my QPI at 1.4125 which I now think I'll be able to lower. As always more testing is required.


What is your SPD for your memory?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> What is your SPD for your memory?




I think it's BS and should be 1.65v because there's no way in hell it will work at 1.5v at 1600 MHz let alone 1866 MHz

As of right now I'm IBT stable at 4.2 GHz with a BCLK of 200

I really can't get stability any where under 1.392v which is what my Vcore drops to when I set it to 1.4135v in my BIOS, but my temps are fine in the mid 70s

My RAM is at 1.65v because it seems to be much happier there

QPI has been brought down quite a bit, but when I tried lowering it past 1.35v it caused a crash when I ran IBT

And finally probably the least important voltage, my IOH is at 1.25v



I don't think I'll be able to do much more at this point, I still want to do a long run of IBT, more RAM usage and more passes but I'll wait till tomorrow I think.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's BS and should be 1.65v because there's no way in hell it will work at 1.5v at 1600 MHz let alone 1866 MHz


That's nonsense.

The true is quite the opposite of what you wrote. Ballistix sticks tend to dislike higher voltages.


(in BIOS it's set at ~1.54v)


----------



## GENXLR

My Corsair sticks have some kind of fetish for 1.65v at anything above 1600mhz. Gotta love Dominator GT's!!!!


----------



## srialmaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> That's nonsense.
> 
> The true is quite the opposite of what you wrote. Ballistix sticks tend to dislike higher voltages.
> 
> 
> (in BIOS it's set at ~1.54v)


I think the biggest problem is like he said earlier that it is his motherboard.

@Adhmuz

Any reason you have to have this motherboard and not buy another one used?

If you had some good hands, you could grab this one for a good price:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GIGABYTE-GA-EX58-UD3R-LGA1366-Intel-X58-DDR3-CrossFireX-A-GbE-ATX-Motherboard-/222121570614?hash=item33b77a3136:g:hugAAOSwxehXO-gz


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My Corsair sticks have some kind of fetish for 1.65v at anything above 1600mhz. Gotta love Dominator GT's!!!!


As far as I see it there are 3 scenarios when overclocking RAM:

1. Stable at or around stock vDIMM (usually 1.5v)
2. Stable at +0.1-0.2v
3. Unstable at all.

The order: descending from best to worst.

And if it's stable around stock vDIMM, there is no need to even try higher volts.


----------



## OCmember

@Adhmuz I'd bet it's the motherboard. Don't destroy that chip on that motherboard you are going to sell before purchasing another motherboard


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Guys, what's your opinion, should I get the Ramp IV Gene (X79) for $200 or the Ramp III Gene for $150? One of each is on sale here, that sound crazy but true ^^


----------



## GENXLR

Those old Corsair Dominator GT's ran like that. If you recall at the launch of Westemere, the only officially supported memory speeds were 800-1066-1333(lol, it's the FSB of alot of 775 chips)

and the JEDEC table looked like this

400
1.5v

533
1.5v

667
1.5v

XMP
1000
1.65v

i'm not insane at least, 1.65 is what corsair ordered

CMT12GX3M3A2000C9


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Guys, what's your opinion, should I get the Ramp IV Gene (X79) for $200 or the Ramp III Gene for $150? One of each is on sale here, that sound crazy but true ^^


Ramp IV Gene (X79) for $200


----------



## Beufesamiteur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Guys, what's your opinion, should I get the Ramp IV Gene (X79) for $200 or the Ramp III Gene for $150? One of each is on sale here, that sound crazy but true ^^


The R4E price is really interesting.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, yeah, I'm leaning towards the X79 as well, *but* then it cost pretty much the same as X99 except for the fact that I got the CPU at half-price a year ago. Is X79 comparable to X99 overall? I can't think of one feature that I'd use except maybe NVMe SSD's, but a RAID 0 on X79 should let me get close to those speeds.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beufesamiteur*
> 
> The R4E price is really interesting.


I't s a Gene, not an Extreme









On topic: SmOgER, thanks for the info, now I know for sure that the Tactical's should work at 1.5 with X58.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Ramp IV Gene (X79) for $200


This.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well, yeah, I'm leaning towards the X79 as well, *but* then it cost pretty much the same as X99 except for the fact that I got the CPU at half-price a year ago. Is X79 comparable to X99 overall? I can't think of one feature that I'd use except maybe NVMe SSD's, but a RAID 0 on X79 should let me get close to those speeds.
> I't s a Gene, not an Extreme
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On topic: SmOgER, thanks for the info, now I know for sure that the Tactical's should work at 1.5 with X58.


Overall the platform is pretty comparable, similar memory bandwidth, etc. x99 obviously has newer features like USB 3.1, and now with Broadwell-e you're looking at overclockable 10 core chips, of course the price is very high.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> That's nonsense.
> 
> The true is quite the opposite of what you wrote. Ballistix sticks tend to dislike higher voltages.
> 
> 
> (in BIOS it's set at ~1.54v)


I'll try it, but I'm guessing you have not read up anything prior that i have posted.

First this is not the best motherboard in the world, certainly not one I would have chosen to be overclocking with.

Next I mentioned that I didn't have any issues with 1.5v RAM until I occupied all the slots, you may think Ballistix dislike higher voltage, but from my experience thus far it's quite the opposite and I even mention how I think the VRMs for the RAM are the issue.

Thanks for posting the exact same pic of CPU-Z I had just posted, but really not helpful at all...

What I do know is I have things stable right now, with 1.65v on my RAM, not sure how you come up with you conclusion of:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> As far as I see it there are 3 scenarios when overclocking RAM:
> 
> 1. Stable at or around stock vDIMM (usually 1.5v)
> 2. Stable at +0.1-0.2v
> 3. Unstable at all.
> 
> The order: descending from best to worst.
> 
> And if it's stable around stock vDIMM, there is no need to even try higher volts.


You do realize not all motherboard are created equally right? What works on one will not always work on another, thrust me from experience, I've had 3 x58 boards, one from Asus, EVGA and Intel, the Intel one has by far been the hardest to overclock with, it just seems to lack certain things that the other two boards had, also it must have some pretty junky VRMs.

Which is what leads me to believe the ones for my RAM are not the best, probably the same as the CPU ones hence why I need so much voltage to get 4.2GHz where some people just need 1.3v I'm needing 1.4v, having 6 sticks in there must really put a strain on them and at 1.5v it drops too much causing a crash as IBT loads into the RAM to start the first run.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *srialmaster*
> 
> I think the biggest problem is like he said earlier that it is his motherboard.
> 
> @Adhmuz
> 
> Any reason you have to have this motherboard and not buy another one used?
> 
> If you had some good hands, you could grab this one for a good price:
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/GIGABYTE-GA-EX58-UD3R-LGA1366-Intel-X58-DDR3-CrossFireX-A-GbE-ATX-Motherboard-/222121570614?hash=item33b77a3136:g:hugAAOSwxehXO-gz


I'm intending to buy a better board when I have some extra cash to spend on one, also the board you linked won't accept 6 sticks of RAM which I'm pretty adamant on keeping. I have my eye on a couple on eBay right now, hopefully they'll still be there when I do get around to buying one.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> I'm intending to buy a better board when I have some extra cash to spend on one, also the board you linked won't accept 6 sticks of RAM which I'm pretty adamant on keeping. I have my eye on a couple on eBay right now, hopefully they'll still be there when I do get around to buying one.


How about using the x5660 in the Rampage II GENE and using the 960 in the DX58SO2? The Rampage would be much better suited to the x5660.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> How about using the x5660 in the Rampage II GENE and using the 960 in the DX58SO2? The Rampage would be much better suited to the x5660.


Will it work on that board, I thought it was a first gen x58 board like my EVGA SLI and would need some kind of modification to support Westmere-EP, it does support the i7 990x which is the same family just with one QPI link instead of two. Also it's already a nice build as it is, in a SG10 all built up nicely, it would look really strange if I put that board in my full tower chassis, but something I guess can try.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Will it work on that board, I thought it was a first gen x58 board like my EVGA SLI and would need some kind of modification to support Westmere-EP, it does support the i7 990x which is the same family just with one QPI link instead of two. Also it's already a nice build as it is, in a SG10 all built up nicely, it would look really strange if I put that board in my full tower chassis, but something I guess can try.


As far as I know, all Asus x58 boards with with great with these chips.

Edit: should work fine as long as you are running bios 1202 or later.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> As far as I know, all Asus x58 boards with with great with these chips.
> 
> Edit: should work fine as long as you are running bios 1202 or later.


Cool, when I get fed up with this Intel board I know I'll have a backup plan at least.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Will it work on that board, I thought it was a first gen x58 board like my EVGA SLI and would need some kind of modification to support Westmere-EP, it does support the i7 990x which is the same family just with one QPI link instead of two. Also it's already a nice build as it is, in a SG10 all built up nicely, it would look really strange if I put that board in my full tower chassis, but something I guess can try.


Actually Asus once clarified at a review site (I wont be able to find the link now tho) that all ROG series will work with both server and workstation grade cpu's so long it fits in the socket. This is their policy with all ROG series. They never did clarify what generations, but I assume they will include microcode that enables server/workstation chips to work, so long the pin config are the same socket gen. Unfortunately, it cannot be advertised that way simply because, well Intel probably wouldn't like it and neither would server grade hardware manufacturers. ROG is meant for gamers, and gamers were not intended to be running on retired server chips. Safer for Asus (or any manu) to silently include the feature and let real Enthusiasts figure it out on their own. That's is probably what the attorneys told them anyway, lol.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Actually Asus once clarified at a review site (I wont be able to find the link now tho) that all ROG series will work with both server and workstation grade cpu's so long it fits in the socket. This is their policy with all ROG series. They never did clarify what generations, but I assume they will include microcode that enables server/workstation chips to work, so long the pin config are the same socket gen. Unfortunately, it cannot be advertised that way simply because, well Intel probably wouldn't like it and neither would server grade hardware manufacturers. ROG is meant for gamers, and gamers were not intended to be running on retired server chips. Safer for Asus (or any manu) to silently include the feature and let real Enthusiasts figure it out on their own. That's is probably what the attorneys told them anyway, lol.


Awesome information, now I'm seriously reconsidering how I want to proceed with this x5660 I have. It's just a damn shame the EVGA full size board I have won't work with the 32nm CPU out of the box, even if this site seems to say otherwise, it's what I found out from the EVGA forums and way early on in this threads post. Something to do with rev 1.0 not having the the necessary jumper for the two QPI links and a rev 1.1 or later is required, unfortunately I have the rev 1.0. But now that I know the GENE board I have will work I think I can make a pretty awesome little gaming machine with it.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Awesome information, now I'm seriously reconsidering how I want to proceed with this x5660 I have. It's just a damn shame the EVGA full size board I have won't work with the 32nm CPU out of the box, even if this site seems to say otherwise, it's what I found out from the EVGA forums and way early on in this threads post. Something to do with rev 1.0 not having the the necessary jumper for the two QPI links and a rev 1.1 or later is required, unfortunately I have the rev 1.0. But now that I know the GENE board I have will work I think I can make a pretty awesome little gaming machine with it.


I am probably wrong on this, but wasn't there a modification mentioned for the evga board to make the 1.0 work? I thought I read something like that back in early 2014, but I forget now. Use Google and the words modification xeon evga board model etc, see what you find.


----------



## OCmember

There is a guide somewhere.. I would just unload that chip and get a W3680


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I am probably wrong on this, but wasn't there a modification mentioned for the evga board to make the 1.0 work? I thought I read something like that back in early 2014, but I forget now. Use Google and the words modification xeon evga board model etc, see what you find.


You have to de-solder a tiny as resistor and move it to another location, I would need a hot air gun and some very steady hands, I'm not sure I want to risk doing it myself and I don't have the necessary tools anyways. I have the instruction and everything, but knowing I can use the GENE I have might be the better solution now.


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm definitely going to check out that documentary. Thanks for suggesting it. I've seen a lot of documentary regarding the food companies and it has been pretty sickening to watch.
> Everyone come here and crowd around, this ladies and gentleman is how Nvidia gets away with, not 1, but 2 paper launches simultaneously.
> 
> Perhaps 1 full and one somewhat full to semi-paper launch, but it's still a paper launch at the end of the game. My we wish for greater price increases and more paper launches in the future.
> 
> Let's see if AMD paper launches another card. You can expect every gaming & tech website, including TV stations, to pick up on the news when it's AMD doing such things.
> 
> Getting the W3680 doesn't mean it will perform better or overclock better. You already have a 3930K and X79 board. Why not go ahead and stick with that platform instead if it turns out to work fine. The choice is up to you, but it looks like you are already leaning towards your decision.


I was just kidding really. I don't think the 1080 is worth going to ATM. I just figured eventually they would come out with one. Its not like nVidia will stop making cards.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Its not like nVidia will stop making cards


O RLY? I think they will


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> It's what my RAM is spec'd at, and I even have it running at a lower speed than it's supposed to.My Bus speed is 161 MHz and RAM is running at 1610 MHz, well within spec.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> So I'm finally getting around to tweaking my OC, and so far so good on the advice you've given me, it seems to be all in the QPI/VTT.
> 
> 
> 
> This was with very little work, just raised my QPI/VTT to 1.4625 and I bumped up the RAM to 1.6625, which might I add is still running at 1:10 ratio resulting in 1830 MHZ. Actually getting really close to 1866 MHZ which is what it's supposed to be rated at.
> 
> 
> 
> I had it run IBT last night at a Bclk of 175 without issue, going to run it now that I'm at 183.
> 
> After I will go back and start to lower voltages until it doesn't IBT no more.
> 
> EDIT: Got it no problem with a Bclk of 183. Just booted up with 187, or 4.3GHz
> 
> Looks good and stable @ 4.3GHz, finally had to bump my voltages ever so slightly. Think I'll leave it here for now, my RAM is running at it's spec'd speed, and I'm getting very close to 80*C on full load.


Αs the other members said keep Qpi/Vtt up to 1.35v,no more ,i was referring to Cpu/pll to have no more than 1.84v.Annoyingly different motherboards have different definitions for same words on bios.Your problems is your motherboard if you have to achieve such high volts for 4.3ghz.You will need a lot of qpi/vtt if you want to run 1/10 ratio 1800+ 24gb ram and it is not worth to have high speed ram on nehalem/xeon cpus anyway .Lower memory ratio to 8 or 6 as i posted earlier,go for 4-4.1ghz for everyday use without exceeding the golden rule of 1.35volts for QPI/VTT and CPU VCORE.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Αs the other members said keep Qpi/Vtt up to 1.35v,no more ,i was referring to Cpu/pll to have no more than 1.84v.Annoyingly different motherboards have different definitions for same words on bios.Your problems is your motherboard if you have to achieve such high volts for 4.3ghz.You will need a lot of qpi/vtt if you want to run 1/10 ratio 1800+ 24gb ram and *it is not worth to have high speed ram on nehalem/xeon cpus anyway* .Lower memory ratio to 8 or 6 as i posted earlier,go for 4-4.1ghz for everyday use without exceeding the golden rule of 1.35volts for QPI/VTT and CPU VCORE.


As per my testing with Westmere, even higher CAS like 1833C10 yields both higher bandwidth and lower latency than f.e. 1600C8.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> As per my testing with Westmere, even higher CAS like 1833C10 yields both higher bandwidth and lower latency than f.e. 1600C8.


Ιnteresting.I was under the impression that very high memory speed made a difference to skylake processor which exceeds mem speeds of 3700+.Did you notice an improvement in everyday tasks or gaming due to higher bandwith/lower latency ?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> I was just kidding really. I don't think the 1080 is worth going to ATM. I just figured eventually they would come out with one. Its not like nVidia will stop making cards.


I had a feeling you were joking. I couldn't resist posting my own joke.

Onto more serious matters, Broadwell-E prices were officially revealed recently . Intel wants a whopping $1723 for the flagship [i7-6950X 10 core] CPU now.
The 8 core has jumped to $1089
If you though $550-$580 was expensive for a 6-core proc, well now Broadwell-E i7-6850K will set you back $617.
The gimped i7-6800K Hexa core is $434

Once gain I see those prices for workstations at huge companies with large budgets, but not regular consumers or Indie devs. 15MB - 25MB of cache? No one is using that much cache or needs that much cache outside of workstations running crazy programs or servers that need parallel workloads for big companies [Facebook, Google, Amazon, Twitter maybe]. No home user is running data like those companies.

Or another way to think about is it to pay Intel now and get a solid 5 years of usage out of the final price. Benchmarks always love the latest and greatest. E-peen FTW right?

Broadwell-E does appear to be a solid upgrade to the X58+6core-Xeon as I expected, but for a premium price. We all knew the prices were going to be high anyways. It's Intel









According to the CinebenchR15 benchmark leak for the i7-6850K @ 4.2Ghz 6-core CPU [$617], it is 17% faster than my X5660 @ 4.8Ghz in the multi-core test. There were no single core results and no Cinebench R11.5 benchmarks. I can live with 17% right now and it's not going to make me upgrade, but I'm waiting for more reviews and single core scores.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hello guys,

I'm looking for advice on the following issue which may be related to the X5650, but not sure if it's correct to ask right here or make another topic. It might be caused by a CPU or memory problem, or an incompatibility / misconfiguration of the system, so in a sense it is related.

System:

X5650 @ 4.0 (200x20) - 4.1 (186x22)
QPI @ 18X all the time (it is uncofigurable on the board)
Uncore @ 16X for 186 BCLK and 14X - 16X for 200 BCLK
EVGA SLI3 (E767) BIOS 83 (the 83 is said to be the latest one, but the sleep bug is still there)
Corsair XMS3 1.5V 9-9-9-9 1333 MHz, set to 200*6 1200 for the 200 BCLK or 186*6 = 116 Mhz for 186 BCLK
MSI Hawk GTX 460 @ stock
Corsair HX620 PSU

Problem:

Playing BF3 online @ 1280*800, all lows, the graph looks very different than a sample graph that a teammate with a 4770k *stock* sent me. He has a flat line all the time, with constant microspikes (about a few percent tall) every n seconds. Before the spawn screen appears, thre is a spike, but shorter and cleaner than mine. On my system, while the overall FPS is nice, and the graph line relatively even, I see all kind of oscillations around the line, appearing seemingly from nowhere. The spawn screen oscillation looks simply disastrous in my opinion. May I post cropped CPU graph screnshots here or should I create a separate topic in hardware problems (if there is such a subforum)?

The graphs in question are the ones plotted by `render.perfoverlayvisible 1`.

This sort of performance makes we wonder that actually the newer CPU's are better. I need a contant flat line in an online match to have no lag and the cleanest inpit possible, not interrupted but a sudden increase in the frametimes. Can there be a problem in my HW (or HW setup) or is this the limitation for the X58 six-core Xeon?


----------



## svfusion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I'm looking for advice on the following issue which may be related to the X5650, but not sure if it's correct to ask right here or make another topic. It might be caused by a CPU or memory problem, or an incompatibility / misconfiguration of the system, so in a sense it is related.
> 
> System:
> 
> X5650 @ 4.0 (200x20) - 4.1 (186x22)
> EVGA SLI3 (E767) BIOS 83 (the 83 is said to be the latest one, but the sleep bug is still there)
> Corsair XMS3 1.5V 9-9-9-9 1333 MHz, set to 200*6 1200 for the 200 bclk or 186*6 = 116 Mhz for 186 bclk
> MSI Hawk GTX 460 @ stock
> Corsair HX620 PSU
> 
> Problem:
> 
> Playing BF3 online @ 1280*800, all lows, the graph looks very different than a sample graph that a teammate with a 4770k *stock* sent me. He has a flat line all the time, with constant microspikes (about a few percent tall) every n seconds. Before the spawn screen appears, thre is a spike, but shorter and cleaner than mine. On my system, while the overall FPS is nice, and the graph line relatively even, I see all kind of oscillations around the line, appearing seemingly from nowhere. The spawn screen oscillation looks simply disastrous in my opinion. May I post cropped CPU graph screnshots here or should I create a separate topic in hardware problems (if there is such a subforum)?
> 
> This sort of performance makes we wonder that actually the newer CPU's are better. I need a contant flat line in an online match to have no lag and the cleanest inpit possible, not interrupted but a sudden increase in the frametimes. Can there be a problem in my HW (or HW setup) or is this the limitation for the X58 six-core Xeon?


Have you tried setting everything back to stock? I know it can be a pain.. but I had a lot of odd issues with my x5660 overclocked.. I decided it wasn't worth it anymore and I was able to get another year out of my hardware.. It was fun.. But I moved on to the X99 chipset because all the odd things that would happen... I'm sure host of them had to do with the fact I was overclocking to 4.8Ghz.. Still had issues at 4.6Ghz.. That was part of the fun of getting the Xeons because of their OC ability.. Seriously.. try to run it at stock and see what happens..


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I have tried @ stock. In a 64 player server, the lag was so enormous that turning around took 1 second or more of stutter. Went back to OC to make it playaable. At stock, the oscillations are worse, by the way.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I'm looking for advice on the following issue which may be related to the X5650, but not sure if it's correct to ask right here or make another topic. It might be caused by a CPU or memory problem, or an incompatibility / misconfiguration of the system, so in a sense it is related.
> 
> Problem:
> 
> Playing BF3 online @ 1280*800, all lows, the graph looks very different than a sample graph that a teammate with a 4770k *stock* sent me. He has a flat line all the time, with constant microspikes (about a few percent tall) every n seconds. Before the spawn screen appears, thre is a spike, but shorter and cleaner than mine. On my system, while the overall FPS is nice, and the graph line relatively even, I see all kind of oscillations around the line, appearing seemingly from nowhere. The spawn screen oscillation looks simply disastrous in my opinion. May I post cropped CPU graph screnshots here or should I create a separate topic in hardware problems (if there is such a subforum)?
> 
> This sort of performance makes we wonder that actually the newer CPU's are better. I need a contant flat line in an online match to have no lag and the cleanest inpit possible, not interrupted but a sudden increase in the frametimes. Can there be a problem in my HW (or HW setup) or is this the limitation for the X58 six-core Xeon?


Weird, the game has been tested playable on the i7 920, which is clocked at the same speed as the x5650 stock. I'll install the game and see how it runs on my x5660, give me a couple hours to download the files.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Try to find a 64 player Metro, 20-30 players is not really representative of the issue. Oh, and it better be with a lot of grenades! Their explosions add stutter, too. Thanks a lot!


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Try to find a 64 player Metro, 20-30 players is not really representative of the issue. Oh, and it better be with a lot of grenades! Their explosions add stutter, too. Thanks a lot!


If you want to add me on Origin I go by the same display name as I do here, recommend me a server that way. The download will take approximately 1 hour 45 minutes.


----------



## svfusion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> If you want to add me on Origin I go by the same display name as I do here, recommend me a server that way. The download will take approximately 1 hour 45 minutes.


Do you play BF4 also?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *svfusion*
> 
> Do you play BF4 also?


With all the bugs when it launched I decided I'd wait to buy it, also at the time I didn't have a capable GPU to run it. Now I'm waiting for the next iteration out at the end of the year. I did play it quite a bit on a friends PS4, but that's no where near the experience I would of had on PC.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> If you want to add me on Origin I go by the same display name as I do here, recommend me a server that way. The download will take approximately 1 hour 45 minutes.


Just sent you the request in BL.

Edit: By the way, "playable" is too broad a definition. Maybe al they really tested was singleplayer? In an online match with 64 players, CPU usage is a lot different. And, we don't know the minimum and the maximum FPS, as well as the CPU and GPU usage graphs over time. "60 FPS average" is next to useless in describing an online gaming experience.


----------



## Schmuckley

I'd like to know these super-secret Kana-Maru settings.
i run @ umm..4440 on a Westmere-EP.
It works for me.Unlike almost all the newer fragile bovine feces.
Anything past Ivy Bridge is prone to sudden death for no reason.
I killed a Skylake chip just this AM.Sturdy? They are NOT.
I can just imagine the time Intel is having with people that bought into this newer architecture for server use.
Chips failing left and right.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Just sent you the request in BL.
> 
> Edit: By the way, "playable" is too broad a definition. Maybe al they really tested was singleplayer? In an online match with 64 players, CPU usage is a lot different. And, we don't know the minimum and the maximum FPS, as well as the CPU and GPU usage graphs over time. "60 FPS average" is next to useless in describing an online gaming experience.


Alright, got the game going, need to relearn how to play, also the ping isn't even that bad playing on the Metro Server you recommended, stupid me though got kicked for using a grenade almost instantly, doy, things felt pretty smooth however, need to adjust my graphics settings. I wasn't getting any stuttering for the couple minutes I was in the game however, I'll get you a graph of my resource usage in a couple more minutes.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Right, the STR is a no-explosive server, watch out; the other one however is a hardcore nade and 320 fest, good for game-stress-testing your rig.

There may not be a visible stutter, but the graphs looked too noisy compared to my buddy's, you see.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Right, the STR is a no-explosive server, watch out; the other one however is a hardcore nade and 320 fest, good for game-stress-testing your rig.
> 
> There may not be a visible stutter, but the graphs looked too noisy compared to my buddy's, you see.


Where are these Graphs your referring to? I just finished off a round on Metro with 64 players, no restrictions so as you can imagine constant grenade explosions, gun fire and a complete ****fest to say the least. This is what my CPU usage was like during the game, I just used Task Manager, I'll use whatever monitor your using, just need to know what it is.



My frame rate never dropped below 100 and it spent most of it's time north of 120 frames per second despite the constant screen shaking from the explosions.

Please post these graphs, yours and your buddy's so I can see what your talking about. As far as I can tell my game is running beautifully and I'm only clocked at 3.7 GHz with turbo.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I'm looking for advice on the following issue which may be related to the X5650, but not sure if it's correct to ask right here or make another topic. It might be caused by a CPU or memory problem, or an incompatibility / misconfiguration of the system, so in a sense it is related.
> 
> System:
> 
> X5650 @ 4.0 (200x20) - 4.1 (186x22)
> QPI @ 18X all the time (it is uncofigurable on the board)
> Uncore @ 16X for 186 BCLK and 14X - 16X for 200 BCLK
> EVGA SLI3 (E767) BIOS 83 (the 83 is said to be the latest one, but the sleep bug is still there)
> Corsair XMS3 1.5V 9-9-9-9 1333 MHz, set to 200*6 1200 for the 200 BCLK or 186*6 = 116 Mhz for 186 BCLK
> MSI Hawk GTX 460 @ stock
> Corsair HX620 PSU
> 
> Problem:
> 
> Playing BF3 online @ 1280*800, all lows, the graph looks very different than a sample graph that a teammate with a 4770k *stock* sent me. He has a flat line all the time, with constant microspikes (about a few percent tall) every n seconds. Before the spawn screen appears, thre is a spike, but shorter and cleaner than mine. On my system, while the overall FPS is nice, and the graph line relatively even, I see all kind of oscillations around the line, appearing seemingly from nowhere. The spawn screen oscillation looks simply disastrous in my opinion. May I post cropped CPU graph screnshots here or should I create a separate topic in hardware problems (if there is such a subforum)?
> 
> The graphs in question are the ones plotted by `render.perfoverlayvisible 1`.
> 
> This sort of performance makes we wonder that actually the newer CPU's are better. I need a contant flat line in an online match to have no lag and the cleanest inpit possible, not interrupted but a sudden increase in the frametimes. Can there be a problem in my HW (or HW setup) or is this the limitation for the X58 six-core Xeon?


You have a very slow set of ram there... I mean very very slow... On top of that we don't know your full oc settings. I iced my Xeon before but done wrong got 50gflops vs my now 76 GFLOPS. I have played BF4 on my X5650 super stable. I have minor DPC spikes but I believe its my soundcard drivers not my CPU. My twin X5450 rig has a smooth line but much higher dpc and frame times. I'm telling you, better ram and share your ssttings


----------



## GENXLR

He's reffering to the in game graphs


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> He's reffering to the in game graphs


See, I didn't even know there was such a thing, good place to start, yeah I'm getting roughly 73 GFlops in IBT with my current clock speed.

You think it has something to do with his RAM more than anything else? I was thinking maybe just not enough VRAM on the GTX 460, but turning down the settings and playing at a lower resolution should make up for that.

But more info on his OC, voltages in particular would be nice.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> Where are these Graphs your referring to?
> 
> Please post these graphs, yours and your buddy's so I can see what your talking about. As far as I can tell my game is running beautifully and I'm only clocked at 3.7 GHz with turbo.


In the game do the following:

- press ` (the tilde without a shift) to open the debug console
- render.perfoverlayvisible 1

The graph will be next to the minimap. It shows the *cpu and gpu frametimes* as opposed to the *cpu or gpu usage*. Green for the GPU, yellow for the CPU.

The CPU graph in the task Manager is pretty nice for me as well, but it's nice when there's stutter, too.





 <- buddy's

As you can see, it does oscilate a little bit (scroll the video into the middle, it gets a bit nicer in that part), *but* here's the big but it's consistent, the same pattern over and over. For me, there are sometimes spikes like a single tall line about the height of the graph, and general noise as in, for example,

http://i.imgur.com/9pV75NL.png
http://i.imgur.com/qQeN7CE.jpg

Ignore the spikes in the last one, they probably were from taking the screenshots. Otherwise, the graph can start oscillating like that all of a sudden around a point, or, as I've said above, can just spike ona grenade or some event. Don't even need to look at the nade exploding, just the sound or the screenshake.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> See, I didn't even know there was such a thing, good place to start, yeah I'm getting roughly 73 GFlops in IBT with my current clock speed.
> 
> You think it has something to do with his RAM more than anything else? I was thinking maybe just not enough VRAM on the GTX 460, but turning down the settings and playing at a lower resolution should make up for that.
> 
> But more info on his OC, voltages in particular would be nice.


Can't run IBT as it kills CPU's in general, and I don't have enough cooling at the moment in particular, unfortunately.

VRAM: it's about the CPU times, the graphs are separate (see the other post).

Voltage: kinda like 1.284 - 1.294 for 200x20 in Cinebench 15 multicore, and slightly above 1.3 (kinda like 1.3 - even 1.317 at times) for 186*22.

I think I had the settings in an earlier post in the thread here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6720#post_25192982


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Can't run IBT as it kills CPU's in general, and I don't have enough cooling at the moment in particular, unfortunately.
> 
> VRAM: it's about the CPU times, the graphs are separate (see the other post).
> 
> Voltage: kinda like 1.284 - 1.294 for 200x20 in Cinebench 15 multicore, and slightly above 1.3 (kinda like 1.3 - even 1.317 at times) for 186*22.
> 
> I think I had the settings in an earlier post in the thread here:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6720#post_25192982


IBT might me killing you CPU for a good reason, it's not 100% stable, by killing it do you mean it's causes a BSOD crash or are you just worried about your temps getting too high.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> In the game do the following:
> 
> - press ` (the tilde without a shift) to open the debug console
> - render.perfoverlayvisible 1
> 
> The graph will be next to the minimap. It shows the *cpu and gpu frametimes* as opposed to the *cpu or gpu usage*. Green for the GPU, yellow for the CPU.
> 
> The CPU graph in the task Manager is pretty nice for me as well, but it's nice when there's stutter, too.


I'll give this a shot and post my results for you.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> IBT might me killing you CPU for a good reason, it's not 100% stable, by killing it do you mean it's causes a BSOD crash or are you just worried about your temps getting too high.


There have been threads about IBT degrading the CPU in the sense that it (a) shortens its lifetime and (b) decreases the GFLOPS without the possibility to get them back.

What resolution are you playing at?

Thank you for helping out with the testing!

GENXLR, why exactly is the RAM slow, which numbers are bad in your opinion? See, can't overclock it, 1400 is the fastest this board + CPU + RAM will do.

If I get e.g. the Crucial Ballistix (the ones with the orange stickers), that are said to reach 2133 at latencies lower than 10, will this board and CPU support a frequency of 1866 or 2000, what do you think? What about Kingston HyperX 1866 or 1600? Those are the decent kits that I cat get at a reasonable price at the moment.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Kana_Maru what do you think of this HardOCP article








http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility

I really hope Polaris turns out to have a good bang/buck ratio.
Though I am kind of worried that about the fact that there is so little info right now available about it...


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> There have been threads about IBT degrading the CPU in the sense that it (a) shortens its lifetime and (b) decreases the GFLOPS without the possibility to get them back.


Really? I've never noticed it degrades the life of my CPUs, I have an original i7 920 still going strong that i've done hundreds and hundreds of IBT passes trying to get stable overclocks in it's life span and never noticed a reduction in thr GFlops output. It's no longer overclocked today but is working perfectly fine in my media server. I also have an i7 960 which again did hundreds and hundreds of IBT passes with no loss in performance and again, is still running even with an OC of 4.2GHz in my 2nd gaming machine. So far on this Xeon x5660 I've done dozens of passes and since I've fallen back to my 3.7 GHz OC the GLfop output is more or less what it was when I first got here. Once you get a truly solid overclock you should be sound, that is all your voltages are set right, you'd be surprised what a little voltage tweaking can do for your GFlop output in IBT.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> What resolution are you playing at?


Currently running the game fully maxed out at 1920x1080, I just captured some footage and am rendering it to post to YouTube, I captured roughly 10 minutes of footage which corresponded to 42.2GB of raw video, unfortunately it was bouncing back and forth from 60 FPS and 120 FPS while capturing, but the graph was still rather smooth.

Here's a couple screen captures when not running the video capture.







The spikes only occur when I capture a frame, otherwise I don't see any spikes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Thank you for helping out with the testing!


Happy I can help, gave me a reason to play some BF3
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> GENXLR, why exactly is the RAM slow, which numbers are bad in your opinion? See, can't overclock it, 1400 is the fastest this board + CPU + RAM will do.
> 
> If I get e.g. the Crucial Ballistix (the ones with the orange stickers), that are said to reach 2133 at latencies lower than 10, will this board and CPU support a frequency of 1866 or 2000, what do you think? What about Kingston HyperX 1866 or 1600? Those are the decent kits that I cat get at a reasonable price at the moment.


You don't necessarily need to get RAM that fast, but at least 1600 MHz, it's what I have my RAM running at and it's treating me pretty well in all the games I play, I can go up to 1866 MHz but it's doesn't seem to be required.


----------



## GENXLR

I'm using corsair dominator Gt sticks that were 2000MHZ at 1600Mhz at 9-9-9-24 1T but i can do way better

You havent told us your
Uncore freq
VTT voltage
DRAM settings

Also your GTX 460 is doing you no good, I get perfect gameplay in BF4 with a Hard OC'ed 660ti and even my GTX 580(my 570 barely held on)

IBT is based on Linpack.... in case you didn't know Linpack is what Intel uses AT THE FACTORY to test cpu's soooo..... calling BS on killing CPU's, i even run it on LAPTOP cpu's and they are all ok. Just sayin...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Schmuckley*
> 
> I'd like to know these super-secret Kana-Maru settings.
> i run @ umm..4440 on a Westmere-EP.
> It works for me.Unlike almost all the newer fragile bovine feces.
> Anything past Ivy Bridge is prone to sudden death for no reason.
> I killed a Skylake chip just this AM.Sturdy? They are NOT.
> I can just imagine the time Intel is having with people that bought into this newer architecture for server use.
> Chips failing left and right.


I have heard about people killing CPUs on the newer platforms. My settings aren't really super secret at all. I'm doing the same things you guys are doing. I'm just more cautious and if I go outside of Intel recommendations I still follow their ultimate goals. I have Battlefield 3 on Origin, but I've been playing a ton of Bad Company 2 and BC2 on modded servers [weapon damage tweaks\unlocks to give low ranks a chance etc]. If you want more info about BC2 and the modded servers let me know.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Kana_Maru what do you think of this HardOCP article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility
> 
> I really hope Polaris turns out to have a good bang/buck ratio.
> Though I am kind of worried that about the fact that there is so little info right now available about it...


I read that article a few days ago actually. I think it's sad if the news is true. I've also wondered about Lisa Su and Raja Koduri relationship. Sometimes they are likable and funny, other times their reactions are cringe worthy. I seriously hope the speculations about Koduri & RTG isn't true. Intel isn't going to welcome RTG in with open arms for long. They will probably use them to get the tech, write flawless documentations and goals then let them go like every big company and claim the tech. Then again if Koduri is hoping to simply be a supplier that might not last long either.

It's really sad to read this since AMD has been making some great moves recently. That's the part that really makes me doubtful. They already have Intel to worry about plus Nvidia. They obviously could use more funding, but they already have loans to pay off. AMD has been doing great and Raja has his RTG division now so happy-happy-joy-joy right? If the Intel plans are in the works then this could be a big blow to AMD and investors. I don't think that will help RTG\ATI become anymore competitive with Nvidia. AMD has already clawed back to 23% of market share. AMD maket share increased last year by 6.69% around the when the 380X dropped.

So if the article is spot on then it's pretty sad for AMD. They finally have things looking very positive for them across the board.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> What resolution are you playing at?
> 
> Thank you for helping out with the testing!


For your viewing pleasure, here you go: 



, I used Fraps to record the video, it's not as smooth as what ever your buddy was using and impacts my frame rate a little bit, but it gets the job done.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I'm using corsair dominator Gt sticks that were 2000MHZ at 1600Mhz at 9-9-9-24 1T but i can do way better
> 
> You havent told us your
> Uncore freq
> VTT voltage
> DRAM settings
> 
> Also your GTX 460 is doing you no good, I get perfect gameplay in BF4 with a Hard OC'ed 660ti and even my GTX 580(my 570 barely held on)
> 
> IBT is based on Linpack.... in case you didn't know Linpack is what Intel uses AT THE FACTORY to test cpu's soooo..... calling BS on killing CPU's, i even run it on LAPTOP cpu's and they are all ok. Just sayin...


1) Let's take the 186*22 overclock that I've been using for BF3 lately:

Uncore 16 * 186 = 2976 MHz
VTT voltage = +50 mV just for safety sake, becuase it boots fine with +25 mV or even +0 mV
DRAM set to 2:6 which gives 1116 MHz, because the next setting, 2:8, gives 1488 Mhz and thus won't boot, MCH strap set to 1333 Mhz, voltage on auto (1.5V)

2) What do you mean by "GTX 460 doing you no good"? Do you mean it's a faulty unit that's underperforming against its designed performance, or that it's too weak for 2016 and BF3 in particular? I play all lows because that gives the least lag possible anyway.

3) IBT and killing CPU's - google it up, it's been around for a while. I'm not going to run that anyway.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> For your viewing pleasure, here you go:
> 
> 
> 
> , I used Fraps to record the video, it's not as smooth as what ever your buddy was using and impacts my frame rate a little bit, but it gets the job done.


Well, exactly, those are the oscilallations up and down; not to mention the higher amplitude noise at certain moments. That's not smooth and is not how the line looks for people using more modern CPU's. Question is, why?

But, on the other hand, when you switch to 60 FPS (which is basically unplayable - I lose 1v1's even at 120 FPS and higher, but that's not the topic here), the line gets nearly flat! Why could that be?

And, you have no sporadic stutter there, which is different from what I get, that requires investigation!

Edit: Watched more, you do have a few stutter moments exactly on grenade explosions, they're not as pronounced though as mine. So, well, what's the conclusion, are X79 and X99 really better?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well, exactly, those are the oscilallations up and down; not to mention the higher amplitude noise at certain moments. That's not smooth and is not how the line looks for people using more modern CPU's. Question is, why?


Those moments where it jumps up in usage are being caused solely by the video capture software, I'm not sure why exactly it does that but it does it every so often, it goes from about 120-130 FPS down to exactly 60 FPS which is my capture speed. When I do not have fraps running it's a flat line pretty much, look at the very start of the video, it's nice and smooth and then jumps up, that's the added CPU usage caused by Fraps. Even at that the CPU graph from you buddy is nearly identical to the one I have, it fluctuates as he goes towards the fire fight especially nor is the action in his gameplay anywhere near as hectic as when I'm in the subway surrounded by constant explosions, most of his video is pretty sedate in comparison. Admittedly he must be using a lower overhead video capture method, Fraps is quite dated. Tell me what he's using and I'll do another segment.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> But, on the other hand, when you switch to 60 FPS (which is basically unplayable - I lose 1v1's even at 120 FPS and higher, but that's not the topic here), the line gets nearly flat! Why could that be?


I wouldn't call it unplayable, there's so much **** going on on this map with constant explosions it's almost luck of the draw most instances, not to mention I'm very rusty at this game and would need a lot of practice to keep up with the people who have been playing it since it was released.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> And, you have no sporadic stutter there, which is different from what I get, that requires investigation!
> 
> Edit: Watched more, you do have a few stutter moments exactly on grenade explosions, they're not as pronounced though as mine. So, well, what's the conclusion, are X79 and X99 really better?


Again, this could be down to other things running in the background, Fraps is streaming raw video footage to my Windows SSD which creates a significant strain on the system I'm sure, BF3 is running off a separate SSD fortunately but it could still be chocking somewhere at times which causes the spikes your referring to.

Newer architecture will always be better, there's no question there, but to me it's not the make or break part of your system, GPU performance plays a much bigger roll in modern games, that and quantity of RAM, which I'm not sure you ever mentioned, are you using 6GB or 12GB? Also what are your drives? SSD. HDD, multiple drives, what's Windows installed on, is it the same drive your running BF3 off of? I'm just trying to eliminate as many variables as I can now.

I'm going to use the Shadowplay that's part of Nvidia Gameworks, that might yield lower distortions.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, actually, to compare properly I'd need to go that map myself and look at the graph: I can't use shadowplay given teh GTX 460 and anythign that use the CPU to encode the video will skew the results by 50% (tested, and the resulting input and processing lag basically made me a total noob from an aspiring player, as a result I swore not to record anymore until I get a hardware recording capability such as shadowplay). Which means in a few days only. I'll get back to you guys with a report (maybe I'll use an external cam to record the screen, who knows, that's an option as well.)

Yes it is an SSD, attached to an Intel SATA II port, since using the Marvel SATA III is not recommended. It's a Corsair Force GT 120 Gb. The drive is the only drive for windows and its programs and data. 6 GB of RAM which is running at 1200 MHz with a 1333 MHz strap, else the PC won't boot.

By the oscillations, I mean not 120 <-> 60 FPS fluctutations, but rather the small sinusoidal jitter (or better say oscillation) around the flat line with no obvious reason. I'm sure there are setups where this jitter doesn't exist. On your static screenshots without Fraps, there's next to no jutter at all, while I'm getting it regularly even at 4.1 GHz. What could be thhe reason?


----------



## GENXLR

If you refuse to test with what Intel uses at the factory then thats on you.

The settings my X5650 run is
200Blck
20X multi
Ram is I believe 2:8 for 1600Mhz
Uncore is 2x for 3200mhz
QPI link is at the slowest allowable speeds

CPU voltage is 1.365
VTT is 1.30
PLL 1.8
DRAM bus is 1.66

Running IBT on a STOCK AIR COOLER yields 75C full load at 76 Gflops

When I had a bad OC, even at 4.4Ghz stable i got 43 G/flops
There more to this than just Cor eclock, Uncore makes a HUGE DIFFERENCE. So does memory especially timings

If you refuse to post any results we can't help. IBT again is what intel uses AT THE FACTORY. I've NEVER killed a CPu using IBT and I have thousands of CPU's in a box behind me, Pentium 4 HT 560's, 670's 561s, Pentium D 830's, Celeron E1400's, Xeon X3360's, X3370's, Core 2 Quad Q6600's Q9650's, Xeon X5160's, X5450's, QX9775's, I7 920's, 965's, 975's, X5650's, X5670's, X5690's, i7 2600's, I5 3770k's, i5 4440S's, i7 4690k's, i7 5820k's, and a few more Xeon 2011v3 CPU's. I have not killed a SINGLE CPU using IBT EVER!!!!

That number isn't an exaggeration, I used to have FAH farms running and most were powered by Celeron E1400's, Q6600's, Q9650's, and X3370's, which in total, i have 700 775 cpu's in a box. I test Every chip with linpack(IBT) for stability. if it fails, I dump the chip.

Calling BS on IBT killing chips, if you have a poorly setup system, yeah your gonna kill it. my dual X5450 rig oc'ed from 3ghz to 3.6ghz runs almost 190W per cpu and gets upto 56C on twin air coolers and gets 96Gflops. I also can play BF4 with no stutter, just 20ms higher frametimes than my X5650 but it doesn't make a difference considering interpolation times


----------



## GENXLR

also LOL 60 FPS is unplayable now???? So you know It's likely your monitors refresh rate is 60hz in which any higher FPS is 100% useless and causes screen tearing, turn on V-sync, and if you have a 120hz monitor, then your GTX 460 is for sure limiting you. I've played BF4 on a 25 FPS laptop and it was playable

http://www.overclock.net/t/1258164/so-apparently-furmark-and-linpack-ibt-damage-your-computer

Just Ran IBT on my laptop

My Laptop Xeon 3360 77C @ 38 Gflops


----------



## dagget3450

I just hooked my nephew up. He had a dual core sandy bridge i think g620. I set him up on my ol 4 way classified e762 with a x5645 oc'd mildy to 3.8. LOL... he couldn't play many of the newer games without massive stattuering/low fps/crashes. Now hes getting really good performance and he already has a R9 290 gpu i sold him a while back. Most games easily hit 60fps avg which works for him on his 60hz monitor.

Now we can lan and we don't have to wait 5 hours for him to load and lag









I love x58 Xeons!!!


----------



## jvidia

Hello Xeon friends









I bought one x5675 on Ebay supposedly used but the "thing" looks brand new









Look at this photos and tell me what do you think about this package ... does the OEM Xeon cpu's come like this from factory?

  

 

The IHS doesn't have any cooler marks on it!

What do you think?!

Thanks,


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

GENXLR, no need to be so anxious mate, it's just a Xeon and a game ^^

By unplayable, I mean the input speed. 120 FPS vs 60 FPS *does* make a difference in online gaming. Look it up.

I don't have any tearing. V-Sync gives input lag, so it's off.

I can post Cinebench results, hyperpi results, wprime results; what do you mean by saying I refuse to post some result so you can't help me?

BTW, when I switched resolutions and thus my aferage fPS went up, I started winning 1v1's and just playing better overall. The hit registration became a lot better, so there is a difference between low and high frame times.

*Edit*:

OK, installed the utility called "Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool". Is that what you're looking for? It didn't however report any number like 70 GFLOPS on succesful test completion, the closest in meaning was 460 MFLOPS Floating-Point test:

"Floating Point Test
Module Version: 1.0.10.64b.W
Start Time: Tue May 31 12:49:23 2016
Test Result - PASS
Million Floating Points per Second, MFLOPS: 460.8
Error: 0
--- Floating Point Test Passed!!!---
End Time: Tue May 31 12:49:25 2016
Total Time: seconds: 2"

*Edit 2*: Alright, here's the result from IBT: *45 GFLOPS @ 3.7 GHz*
Screenshot:


http://imgur.com/23ivqpH

Settings:
cpu 186 * 20
vcore 1.1875, vdroop off
uncore 186 * 16
qpi 186 * 18
vtt + 75 mV
ram 186 * 6
vdimm 1.5 V (auto)
EIST, C1E on, turbo off
HPET off
rest on auto

So I guess, according to your 70 GFLOPS @ 4.0, that either my chip arrived badly used already or I've killed it in the meanwhile?

*Edit 3*: Set MCH strap to 1067 (8-8-8-8), RAm speed is the same, 1116 MHz, now I'm getting *53 GFLOPS*.

Counter-Strike competitions use 300 FPS and I recall reading that when in one comp, they switched to 200 FPS becuase of the weaker hardware, a scandal erupted because the players immediately noticed that.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Hello Xeon friends
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bought one x5675 on Ebay supposedly used but the "thing" looks brand new
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at this photos and tell me what do you think about this package ... does the OEM Xeon cpu's come like this from factory?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The IHS doesn't have any cooler marks on it!
> 
> What do you think?!
> 
> Thanks,


I think you should install it and see what it can do overclock wise and not worry if it's new or not!


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I think you should install it and see what it can do overclock wise and not worry if it's new or not!


I'm just curious


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Alright guys so here's IBT @ 4 GHz:





_58 GFLOPS_

*Settings*:
_Core_: 200 x 20 = 3989.76 MHz, Turbo OFF, EIST ON, C1E ON, vdroop unsafe (red setting), 1.2500 set in BIOS, 1.282 - 1.294 effective
_Uncore_: 200 x 16 = 3191.8 MHz, VTT +75 mV
_QPI_: fast mode, 4.8 GT/s set in BIOS, 18X effective multiplier, 3590.78 MHz
_RAM_: Model: "Corsair XMS3 1.5V 9-9-9-*" (don't know the last one), CPUZ-Z reports 598.5 MHz (set to 2:6, i.e. 1200 MHz in BIOS), voltage auto, MCH strap set to 1067 Mhz in BIOS, 8-8-8-20-86-1T reported by CPU-Z
_Other_: PLL, ICH, IOH voltages on auto

_Motherboard_: EVGA X58 SLI3 (manufacturer model number E767), running BIOS 83 (the latest one), hardware revision 1.0
_SSD_: Single Corsair Force GT 120 Gb on Intel SATA II
_PSU_: Corsair HX620 multi-rail, modular, active cooling

*Edit*: Tried 17x uncore for about 3400 MHz, gave me 60 GFLOPS; 18x uncore (3600Mhz) BSOD's with the 0x124 code even at +150 QPI, thus is impossible to do.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> I'm just curious


I've bought used motherboards that have come in sealed wrapping like that. Don't let that confuse you into thinking it's "brand new"


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Just found a post here on OCN by a guy who's been able to achieve 95 GFLOPS @ 4.5 GHz on the i7 980X. Downscaling that to 4.0 GHz, we get 84 GFLOPS, which is a drastical difference to my 60. Quesiton is, how to debug the issue that steals the remaining 24?


----------



## hecatomb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Just found a post here on OCN by a guy who's been able to achieve 95 GFLOPS @ 4.5 GHz on the i7 980X. Downscaling that to 4.0 GHz, we get 84 GFLOPS, which is a drastical difference to my 60. Quesiton is, how to debug the issue that steals the remaining 24?


Try disabling Hyperthreading and see what your score is. Mine shot up to the 90s with HT disabled (from 70s). Turn HT back on and forget about that one benchmark score lol


----------



## hecatomb

I've stabilized my x5650 overclock at 4.2GHz now (192x22turbo). This thing is a beast and I'm feeling a distinct difference between it and my old i7 920 @4.2GHz. I can't get over how powerful it is in multicore benches for $75cdn.

I took a chance on an x3440 for my HP Core i3 540 server computer too.. and it worked straight away as well. That cpu only cost me $40cdn on eBay.


----------



## OCmember

@CrazyNightOwl 3.6Ghz Uncore will need more than 1.275v VTT More like 1.3 - 1.325v


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Alright guys so here's IBT @ 4 GHz:
> 
> _58 GFLOPS_
> 
> _Motherboard_: EVGA X58 SLI3 (manufacturer model number E767), running BIOS 83 (the latest one), hardware revision 1.0
> _SSD_: Single Corsair Force GT 120 Gb on Intel SATA II
> _PSU_: Corsair HX620 multi-rail, modular, active cooling
> 
> *Edit*: Tried 17x uncore for about 3400 MHz, gave me 60 GFLOPS; 18x uncore (3600Mhz) BSOD's with the 0x124 code even at +150 QPI, thus is impossible to do.


Yeah you need to increase voltages, I'm almost amazed it's not crashing during IBT, here's what I get @ 3.7 GHz



My Bclk is 161 x 23 to get me 3.7GHz
RAM Multiplier is 10:1610 MHz
Uncore Multiplier is 20:3220 MHz
QPI Data Rate is set at 4.800G but effective is 5.799

My Voltages for these settings are

Vcore - 1.3625v
RAM - 1.5250v
QPI/VTT - 1.3250v
IOH - 1.1500v

Also to show you what 4.2 and 4.3 get me





Much higher than your getting, but these last two required much more voltage than I was comfortable with which is why I'm back at 3.7 GHz, all my BF3 testing has been done @ 3.7 GHz which I have more to post after I have lunch.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Just found a post here on OCN by a guy who's been able to achieve 95 GFLOPS @ 4.5 GHz on the i7 980X. Downscaling that to 4.0 GHz, we get 84 GFLOPS, which is a drastical difference to my 60. Quesiton is, how to debug the issue that steals the remaining 24?


There was a lot of discussion about GFLOPS in one of these topics. I can't remember if it was this one or the Xeon Club topic, but I remember some people saying the increasing vCore will increase the GFLOPS score.

My GLOPS were:
3.8Ghz = 80 GFlops
4.6Ghz = 98 GFlops

I also ran High, Very High, and Extreme since "some" users here used to tell me "'_Standard' doesn't count Kana_".
Yet my Gflops were the same when I ran High, Very High and Extreme. Actually Very High would give me BETTER results than standard in some cases.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

@Adhmuz why would I increase voltages when the test passes? The IBT, Cinebench and Intel CPU Diagnostic Utility all pass, so I guess the volts are OK. Look at how Kana-Maru uses barely more than 1.4 to get to 4.6! Also, you have a lot more RAM which is also faster I guess, that requires a higer amount of VTT as well.

Can this low score be caused by just the RAM being @ 1200 MHz?

Here's AIDA64 cachemem @ the 4 GHz described above:



How good are the cache and memory scores for the core, uncre and mem frequencies shown?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> @Adhmuz why would I increase voltages when the test passes? The IBT, Cinebench and Intel CPU Diagnostic Utility all pass, so I guess the volts are OK. Look at how Kana-Maru uses barely more than 1.4 to get to 4.6! Also, you have a lot more RAM which is also faster I guess, that requires a higer amount of VTT as well.
> 
> Can this low score be caused by just the RAM being @ 1200 MHz?
> 
> How good are the cache and memory scores for the core, uncre and mem frequencies shown?


Different chips, different motherboards, all require different settings, some people are lucky, Kana in particular, also he has some secret technique that people keep referring to, something about passing the chips over the legs of a virgin or something. Kana-Maru is also running 24GB of RAM from the looks of his system specs, so I'm starting to doubt that plays much of a roll, perhaps the speed, but even then your results from Aida are not that terrible.

Here's my Aida Cache & Memory Results.



And I did some 



 testing, it looks nearly identical to your buddy's results to me, don't forget he's on a server that doesn't allow explosions which makes a huge difference in a game like this. Just look how smooth the line gets when the gameplay calms down.

This leads me to believe you have an issues with the motherboard itself being janky as heck, or the CPU you got was toast before you even started hence the low GFlop results you're getting from IBT, set it completely to stock, automatic settings and run IBT again and post those results if you do not mind.

EDIT: I was referring to voltages besides the Vcore, although you could just humor me and bump it up a little and run IBT again to see if it changes things, it's not going to hurt.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Niiice mate, this time we're onto something real! Very consistent; you see, consistency is what I'm aiming for regarding BF3 frametimes.

Though when you get revived, there is a significant increase in the CPU frametimes; meaning teh CPU can't handle this load or the game is poorly written.

I have a stock run of AIDA64 cachemem here (both 4 GHz and stock below):




IBT @ stock later. What are the normal scores?

Yeah, thing is no computer service is going to test and debugfor my complaint of "low GFLOPS on overclock" or even "on stock" sicne the PC is funcitoning fine by definition. I have another X58 at home though, maybe I will be allowed to test the CPU there one day. It's an ASUS P6T SE with OEM RAM, running an i7 920 @ stock.


----------



## GENXLR

Crazy night owl, follow my lead like I asked

Set your block 200
Ram just try pushing 1600, set the timings to 9-9-9-24-1t
Set uncore to whatever multi get you 3200
The qpi link speed to the lowest allowable speed
Multi set to 20

Set your
Vcore to 1.365
Your PLL to 1.8
QPI/VTT or whatever your bios call it to 1.35V
Dram bus to 1.65v

Vdroop may need to be set aggressively

And respond. I'm sure this will get you near 70-80gflops


----------



## Adhmuz

Here's my x5660 running completely on auto settings in the BIOS, and this is why this motherboard is junk, look at how high it sets my Vcore, that can't be normal.

But at least it should give you somewhat of a baseline for your CPU at stock, or very similar to my settings.



I'll do the same if I can with GENXLR's settings he just posted to compare.

EDIT: Results are in



This is more or less with GENXLR's recommended settings, great prediction on the GFlops range, it's almost right in the middle.

With minor changes to voltages

Vcore - 1.3750 in BIOS but it drops to 1.3520 when loaded by IBT
QPI/VTT - 1.3625
RAM - 1.5250

Now I don't know if the chip is breaking in, or just loosening up, but all my voltages have been getting lower the more I do this compared to when I first got the CPU, I'm not complaining but it seems really strange that having tried most of these setting months ago yielded completely different results. Almost like I got it real hot last week and now with my AC installed it's loving lower voltages with the lower ambient temperature in my basement.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

GENXLR,

Set your block 200 - _OK_
Ram just try pushing 1600, set the timings to 9-9-9-24-1t - _won't help, but I'm going to try it once. doesn't boot at 1600 even with 1.65V and timings set to 1866, i.e. 10 or 11. 1400 MHz is the barrier._
Set uncore to whatever multi get you 3200 - _OK_
The qpi link speed to the lowest allowable speed - _slow mode or 4800 GT/s? Slow mode makes GPU performance drop a lot, tested._
Multi set to 20 - _OK_

Set your
Vcore to 1.365 - _if i set to this, I'm going to get this + 0.05V, i.e over 1.4V, with vdroop "unsafe". Is that normal for 4.0? I think not._
Your PLL to 1.8 - _looks like default, OK_
QPI/VTT or whatever your bios call it to 1.35V - _on the edge, but OK for 1 run_
Dram bus to 1.65v - _as I said, doesn't help the RAM, and it's rated at 1.5V, not sure how it handles higher voltage. Can try once again, though._

Vdroop may need to be set aggressively - _this adds +0.05V unconditionally on my board, so I guess I need to subtract 0.05V from 1.365V to get 1.315V and set that in BIOS._

Moreover, look at Skorpn with his 1.25V for 4.0! Well alright, I have 1.294V required to do 4.0, but why as high as 1.365V? (I'll try once, but the temps will end up throttling the CPU, I bet, the cooling is lacking at the moment.)


----------



## GENXLR

Skorpns results are unloaded if I recall. I believe he had dynamic vcore. Also try and avoid QPI over 1.35v, I have my QPI/vtt at 1.3 I think, and your CPU QPI speed should be fast not slow but the other setting should be 4800, anything else won't post.

Judging by your results, your chip is fine, just need some new ram









Cooling is an issue? Grab an airduster, turn it upside, hit go and let it rip, cheap LN2 xD


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Cooling is an issue? Grab an airduster, turn it upside, hit go and let it rip, cheap LN2 xD










You will be coughing and choking for days.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Vdroop may need to be set aggressively - _this adds +0.05V unconditionally on my board, so I guess I need to subtract 0.05V from 1.365V to get 1.315V and set that in BIOS._
> 
> Moreover, look at Skorpn with his 1.25V for 4.0! Well alright, I have 1.294V required to do 4.0, but why as high as 1.365V? (I'll try once, but the temps will end up throttling the CPU, I bet, the cooling is lacking at the moment.)


I had the previous generation of your board, the EVGA X58 SLI, the multicolored one that came out in 2008 if I recall correctly, it was a pretty easy board to overclock with, at least it's what I had been using for years with first my i7 920 and then my i7 960, both easily hit 4.2GHz on it. I don't remember the vdroop control adding that much voltage but used it extensively, but then those CPUs needed far less voltage as well, maybe it was also the motherboard being really good.

Here's what my settings were back in the days of my 920



I burned the **** out of that CPU and as I've been saying (along with others), it did not shorten it's life expectancy, that was back in 2009 and that CPU is still going strong to this very day on that same motherboard...

How hot is "too hot" for you? What heatsink are you using on your CPU that is not allowing you to push it very far?

Here's me running IBT for over an hour on my 960, another chip that still works great to this day.



Also great to compare to the Hexacore CPUs, much higher GFlops scores.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK GENXLR so I've spent a good hour headbanging..









I've posted twice or three times with those 1.65V and +175mV QPI, as well as 1600MHz RAM with 9-9-9-24-1T (on my board, 1.65V means 1.62V - it adds +0.03V! and the QPI adjustment gives me exactly 1.35V).. then once Cinebench froze all but one core, BSOD 0A, BSOD 1E, even BSDO 3B once (weird stuff, that's vCore which is well proven to be 1.282V - 1.294V already), then I decided to go back to work 'cause I have some really important stuff to do this night.

Is it the RAM that needs an upgrade, your bets guys?

WOuld the RAM give me a boost from 60 to 75 GFLOPS? That's a 25% increase, while the ram speed might, well, increase from 1200MHz to 1600MHz, which means a whooping 30%.. is the RAM-FLOPS scaling linear in Linpack? (pun unintended)

Yeah Adhmuz, the board adds +0.05V with vdroop unsafe, and guess what? Right, there's a reversed -0.05V of maximum negative adjustment with vdroop safe. Go figure. Kana-Maru tells us to disable vdroop, well not on this board, it just crashes under load when set up like that. There's no LLC setting or similar stuff.

Re the heatsink: laugh at me, but it's a Scythe Grand Kama Cross II on push-pins, which is currently using.......

hold on to your chairs...

_a Cooler Master 120mm case fan._

True story bro! So it's a miracle that this "cooler" can hold low to mid 70's on this chip in Cinebench and others at 4 GHz.

I want to get either a Scythe Ninja (that's getting very, very nice reviews here) or actually get a decent CLC or something from EKWB maybe.. but I'll be feeling really guilty for spending so much on a PC "toy" if I go the water route, so I'm currently at loss about this.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK GENXLR so I've spent a good hour headbanging..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've posted twice or three times with those 1.65V and +175mV QPI, as well as 1600MHz RAM with 9-9-9-24-1T (on my board, 1.65V means 1.62V - it adds +0.03V! and the QPI adjustment gives me exactly 1.35V).. then once Cinebench froze all but one core, BSOD 0A, BSOD 1E, even BSDO 3B once (weird stuff, that's vCore which is well proven to be 1.282V - 1.294V already), then I decided to go back to work 'cause I have some really important stuff to do this night.


maybe try 9-9-9-27-2T
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Is it the RAM that needs an upgrade, your bets guys?


Well to be honest 6GB won't really cut it anymore as it is, in BF3 my system is using 5.8GB of RAM so I can only imagine at 6GB your getting heaving paging which never helps. Get yourself a nice kit of 12GB that can handle at least 1600 MHz
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> WOuld the RAM give me a boost from 60 to 75 GFLOPS? That's a 25% increase, while the ram speed might, well, increase from 1200MHz to 1600MHz, which means a whooping 30%.. is the RAM-FLOPS scaling linear in Linpack? (pun unintended)
> 
> Yeah Adhmuz, the board adds +0.05V with vdroop unsafe, and guess what? Right, there's a reversed -0.05V of maximum negative adjustment with vdroop safe. Go figure. Kana-Maru tells us to disable vdroop, well not on this board, it just crashes under load when set up like that. There's no LLC setting or similar stuff.
> 
> Re the heatsink: laugh at me, but it's a Scythe Grand Kama Cross II on push-pins, which is currently using.......
> 
> hold on to your chairs...
> 
> _a Cooler Master 120mm case fan._
> 
> True story bro! So it's a miracle that this "cooler" can hold low to mid 70's on this chip in Cinebench and others at 4 GHz.
> 
> I want to get either a Scythe Ninja (that's getting very, very nice reviews here) or actually get a decent CLC or something from EKWB maybe.. but I'll be feeling really guilty for spending so much on a PC "toy" if I go the water route, so I'm currently at loss about this.


One of these?



Funny enough it's on an x58 gen motherboard in the picture I found... Maybe try a much better fan?

I've been pleasantly surprised by the performance of the Cooler-master Nepton 280L I picked up for use with this Xeon, if you do go the route of closed lood liquid go with the biggest you can afford, or fit in your case, but most single 120mm rad designs are comparable to high end heatsinks such as the big Noctuas or Thermaltake ones. I'm actually curious to know how well my Silver Arrow would fare with this Xeon.

So you need to get yourself a couple things, a good 12GB kit of RAM and a much better heatsink for your CPU, until then there's not much more I can recommend you do.


----------



## GENXLR

You need some extra vcore

No joke if I change my vcore to 1.29v then GFLOPS fall to 56 but its stable. Reason being, your Xeon has ECC L2 and 3 so it can detect small errors and correct them at the cost of performance. ECC slows things down but it allows errors to correct on the fly







less errors allows it to do less work and reduces wait cycles(could be the cause of the stuttering you feel is an ECC wait cycle of it correcting itself, remember ECC wasn't made to game, its meant for science and stuff)


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Strange, on my system BF3 isn't using nearly as much RAM, there's 2 - 1.5GB free typically, or even more. Maybe it's low res, low settings vs high res, high settings? I have some variables tweaked like shadowmap size and others, as well as 1280x800 resolution on all lows, so maybe that's why.

Right, I've noticed how you mentioned the Nepton a few pages ago, I'm going to investigate that CLC later.
Quote:


> maybe try 9-9-9-27-2T


Well, I tried the 1867 strap even, which is 11-11-11-31 or 34, meaning it's slower, and it didn't even boot. The RAM is not meant to be used at 1600 MHz, how can I know the native settings for those speeds?I guess there is no way. Maybe by looking up the 1600 MHz flavor of the kit (there surely is one, saw it today in an online shop) and copying?

At the moment I'm leaning towards the Crucial Ballistix Tactical that are 1600 8-8-8 stock, and are said to be able to go as high as 2133 on 10 or 11. Not sure if this chip and board are going to accept them though, the abovementioned RAM is not on the EVGA officially supported memory list. I'm afraid waste money here (not sure about a return, the RAM is packed in a way that I might have to cut the plastic, which means no return in Russia at least.)


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> You need some extra vcore
> 
> No joke if I change my vcore to 1.29v then GFLOPS fall to 56 but its stable. Reason being, your Xeon has ECC L2 and 3 so it can detect small errors and correct them at the cost of performance. ECC slows things down but it allows errors to correct on the fly


What about the RAM, seen my report above?

How is ECC related to vCore exactly?

And, L3 is Uncore IIRc, hence QPI not vCore if anything? (Not sure about L2, that's on the core, so it's vCore for that one.)


----------



## GENXLR

The ECC on the L2 cache passes data from the CPU core, in which if it has errors, it slows down to correct errors, and this is from the vcore being to low. Just use my settings with your ram settings. Set the timings manually, don't use presets, you should be all good to go









Post your full settings soon, you should be okay, you saw someone else use my settings and get 73 GFLOPS, I know you can do it too, set the uncore to 2x ur ram speed, that's key


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Tried 1.35V. 58 GFLOPS.

Uncore to 2x RAM would be 2400 MHz, very very low for GPU and overall performance, so I don't think I'm going to run that.

Also, 2X uncore was for the Nehalem, for Westmere it's 1.5X, isn't it?

Well 9-9-9-27 BSOD on me (some code with 7.. 7E, I didn't look well).

I was using your settings GENXLR, and as you can see above, tried 1.35V vCore, to no avail, it's still 58-50 GFLOPS.

@ 3.7 GHZ it's 53 GFLOPS right now, with 1.225 vCore, 17X uncore, 6x RAM, 18X QPI, +75mV VTT.

Gotta be the RAM I guess.

Edit: Argh wait did I set the RAM voltage last time? Sigh.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Strange, on my system BF3 isn't using nearly as much RAM, there's 2 - 1.5GB free typically, or even more. Maybe it's low res, low settings vs high res, high settings? I have some variables tweaked like shadowmap size and others, as well as 1280x800 resolution on all lows, so maybe that's why.


Just because you have "free" RAM doesn't mean your system isn't heavily caching to the system drive, it's not always advisable when your dealing with low amounts of RAM (I know 6GB isn't really low) but you can disable the page file to completely prevent the system from caching applications back and forth to the drive, it's also not advisable to use an SSD for page files because it will degrade the life of the sectors being used. Ideally you would want to have your page file on a hdd or none at all if you have enough RAM to not require it. Ideally you should have 12GB or more for your system and no page file, it's how I've been running my systems for the longest time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Right, I've noticed how you mentioned the Nepton a few pages ago, I'm going to investigate that CLC later.
> Well, I tried the 1867 strap even, which is 11-11-11-31 or 34, meaning it's slower, and it didn't even boot. The RAM is not meant to be used at 1600 MHz, how can I know the native settings for those speeds?I guess there is no way. Maybe by looking up the 1600 MHz flavor of the kit (there surely is one, saw it today in an online shop) and copying?


Potentially your RAM is your weakest link at the moment, I'm not sure if you mentioned what brand/type it was, but could you let me know what your using just to get an idea of exactly how rubbish it is?

The Nepton will not fit in most cases without a custom setup or the use of less than ideal solution (mines held in with a 3 screws and a 50 lbs zip tie, not to mention I can't actually mount fans on it properly so I have a 120mm push inside and a 140mm pull on the opposite end of the rad outside, despite this I get acceptable temps, even at 4.0GHz. I only bought it because I was able to buy it at cost from a local PC place my friend was working at, came out less than the Noctua NH-D15 I went there for, really a no brainer and have not been disappointed, although the pump is a little loud when I first boot up.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> At the moment I'm leaning towards the Crucial Ballistix Tactical that are 1600 8-8-8 stock, and are said to be able to go as high as 2133 on 10 or 11. Not sure if this chip and board are going to accept them though, the abovementioned RAM is not on the EVGA officially supported memory list. I'm afraid waste money here (not sure about a return, the RAM is packed in a way that I might have to cut the plastic, which means no return in Russia at least.)


For RAM they typically come in a clamshell plastic packaging, I did something a little unorthodox and bought three 8GB kits to get the 24GB I now have, these Exactly, and as I said they showed up in plastic clam shells that pop open without damaging them. Funny enough it was cheaper than getting two 12GB kits and they didn't seem to have them with the LEDs that I wanted, but at this point any performance RAM from Corsair, Crucial or Kingston should be much better than what your currently using, whatever it is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Tried 1.35V. 58 GFLOPS.
> 
> Uncore to 2x RAM would be 2400 MHz, very very low for GPU and overall performance, so I don't think I'm going to run that.
> 
> Also, 2X uncore was for the Nehalem, for Westmere it's 1.5X, isn't it?


It tells me that in my BIOS as well, 1.5x for Westmere, but I have been exclusively using 2x with the exception of testing with the 1.5x recommended settings which did not help me at all, at least not as far as I could tell.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Well 9-9-9-27 BSOD on me (some code with 7.. 7E, I didn't look well).


Was worth a try, from my experience RAM latencies are 7-7-7-21, 8-8-8-24, 9-9-9-27, 10-10-10-30, and rarely a command rate of anything less than 2T. However you do have some janky sounding RAM so who the hell knows.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> @ 3.7 GHZ it's 53 GFLOPS right now, with 1.225 vCore, 17X uncore, 6x RAM, 18X QPI, +75mV VTT.
> 
> Gotta be the RAM I guess.
> 
> Edit: Argh wait did I set the RAM voltage last time? Sigh.


Why is your Uncore 17x? That just stands out badly to me and it's a little hard to decipher when it's not all coherent. Can you list your settings like this:

Bclk YYY x ZZ = 3.7GHz
RAM Multiplier ZZx = YYYYMHz <-This being your actual RAM speed
Uncore ZZx = YYYYMhz <- This being your effective Uncore speed
QPI Data Rate Y.YYYGT/s <- Again this being your effective QPI speed

Otherwise I have no idea what your settings are, how did you get 3.7GHz? Did you use a Bclk of 161 like I had recommended before? I doubt you get that with a Bclk of 200


----------



## GENXLR

200blck moves in increments of 200, so 3600mhz, 3800mhz, 4000mhz, 4200mhz, 4400mhz ect. I'd like him to just follow my recc settings as someone else reported numbers I have and I use mine daily ON A STOCK COOLER and get 76c max in IBT and lower when using normal programs, like 60C. 76 GFLOPS is very fun, I use 1T timmings at 1600mhz at 9-9-9-24 and I'm gonna try more aggressive settings once I have a life again


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

GENXLR I've tried your settings, even teh crazy high vCore, and the problem is I can't get the RAM to work at the settigns you mention! Do you copy?







I can't move on since the RAM misbehaves.. I got it o work ONCE or twice maybe, other than that, it BSOD's or freezes.

Settings used to stabilize RAM first:

12 x 200 = 2400 @ auto with vdroop safe (to eliminate vCore issues, as per the well known strategy)
+175 mV VTT resulting in about 1.35 (this board uses an offset VTT setting, not a direct one)
2:8 RAM
MCH Strap 1600
9-9-9-24-1T set manually, rest on auto (see above, uses the MCH Strap 1600 settings)
QPI 18 x 200 = 3600
Uncore - tried both 12X and 16X for 2400 and 3600 respectively, didn't work (see above)

That BSOD's and freezes.

The board adds .03 or .04 to teh RAM voltage set in BIOS so it's hard to set 1.65V exactly.

It's Corsair XMS3 1333 9-9-9-something 1.5V. Should work at 1600 9-9-9-24 1.65 but I constantly get BSOD's and freezez when trying to make it work.

Admuz please look a couple pages back, I have the settings listed _very_ detailed fashion for my typical setup.

*Edit*: here it is

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/6820#post_25213242

*finally*

Setting VTT offset to +200 mV seems to get the PC working with 1600 MHz RAM @ 9-9-9-24-1T. Uncore @ 3200 MHz right now.

I tried to lower the QPI offset to +175mV and that resulted in BSOD's (it appears now that those were VTT-caused BSOD's!) even with uncore set to 2400 MHz.

But, and here's the big but, this new VTT offset setting results in a VTT voltage of 1.372-1.382







So it's not possible to use 1600 MHz RAM with this board and CPU combo.

*edit 3*:

NOPE.

Evan at 1.37V VTT, I'm getting BSOD's and crashes and unstable behavior like booting every second time, Windows crashing on boot, etc.

Also, Windows memory diagnostic says "there is a hardware problem". Is it the RAM maybe?.. Damn, absolute disaster without a way to debug.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Tried 1.35V. 58 GFLOPS.
> 
> Uncore to 2x RAM would be 2400 MHz, very very low for GPU and overall performance, so I don't think I'm going to run that.
> 
> Also, 2X uncore was for the Nehalem, for Westmere it's 1.5X, isn't it?
> 
> Well 9-9-9-27 BSOD on me (some code with 7.. 7E, I didn't look well).
> 
> I was using your settings GENXLR, and as you can see above, tried 1.35V vCore, to no avail, it's still 58-50 GFLOPS.
> 
> @ 3.7 GHZ it's 53 GFLOPS right now, with 1.225 vCore, 17X uncore, 6x RAM, 18X QPI, +75mV VTT.
> 
> Gotta be the RAM I guess.
> 
> Edit: Argh wait did I set the RAM voltage last time? Sigh.


take the IBT thread count and drop it to 6 (6 physical cores) for the correct throughput. WILL INCREASE SUBSTANTIALLY.

ECC only gets activated when ECC ram is used, communicates with the error correcting chip on the RAM itself. so don't worry about that.

AS FOR THE ERRORS YOU ARE GETTING, I would start small. one item clocked at a time. drop your core clock down to stock (lower the multiplier only) and check for memory stability. The main cause for ram instability is usually timings and voltage. use AIDA to locate the secondary timings, set them in your bios. leave as little set to "auto" as possible. Biggest one to look out for is the "TFAW". this being low can cause all sorts of issues. nail down the correct memory timings, with uncore set to 1.5x 2400. once you get the ram stable, slowly increase the Uncore one notch at a time. not every Xeon is gonna be stable at 2x uncore, it's pretty standard to run 1.8x. test stability with large FFT's in prime95 (quick to show errors). you should easily be able to achieve the advertised ram speed on the kit. But this can only be achieved with the Base clock. Xeon "X" series only support 1333mhz officially.

What ram do you have exactly??


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> It's Corsair XMS3 1333 9-9-9-something 1.5V. Should work at 1600 9-9-9-24 1.65 but I constantly get BSOD's and freezez when trying to make it work.


Is the corsair kit you have THIS? Here's the same KIT

Or maybe THIS?

Why do you think it "Should" work at 1600MHz 9-9-9-24 1.65v if it's not rated at those speeds? From what I gather it's probably rated at 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 1.5v and trying to run it faster at the same timings will not be pretty, even if you set the timings looser like 10-10-10-27 or even 11-11-11-30 it might not be happy running at 1600MHz with increased voltage.

Do you have Memtest you can boot up before entering windows to see if there RAM itself might have a bad module?

This is going no where fast and the more you try the more I think your RAM is toast or just not up to any kind of overclocking...


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK guys I'm fed up and I've bought a set of Crucial Ballistix Tactical 4 GB sticks that are rated 1600 8-8-8 1.5V, and are reported to be able to go much higher than that.

DrKreiger, tried exactly that, with 12x core and 12x uncore multi, to no avail...

Do you think I should return the new kit and try your settings instead? What should the tfaw value be like? Whre can I find the right ones?

Adhmuz yeah the one at Amazon, with raw metallic trimming on one side.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK guys I'm fed up and I've bought a set of Crucial Ballistix Tactical 4 GB sticks that are rated 1600 8-8-8 1.5V, and are reported to be able to go much higher than that.


Great News! Now we might be able to get somewhere.

Let us know when you have them installed and how things go from there.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Let's do that tomorrow guys, this night will be busy with maths as well..

Now.. DrKreiger, I've set 6 threads

*BOOM 74 GFLOPS*

On 12 threads, 42 GFLOPS.

Didi I buy the RAM in vain, what do you think guys?


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Let's do that tomorrow guys, this night will be busy with maths as well..
> 
> Now.. DrKreiger, I've set 6 threads
> 
> *BOOM 74 GFLOPS*
> 
> On 12 threads, 42 GFLOPS.
> 
> Didi I buy the RAM in vain, what do you think guys?


So your excited that running the CPU at 50% load yields 74GLops where as running the CPU at 100% load yields just 42GFlops?

I get the same result from both 6 Thread runs as I do 12 Thread runs, does this not concern you? Make you think there's something wrong still?

If not then try playing BF3 and see how things perform, to me there's still something not right with your setup.

Your CPU is being starved for either Power or memory throughput.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK, now I see, the two runs should yield identical results. Hmm. Do you get an amount of FLOPS per GHz similar to those 73 GFLOPS / 4GHz?

As far as power goes, well that's exactly what a few BF3 friends told me: memory or PSU. The PSU is a Corsair HX620, which isn't ad at all, but it's got 2 separate rails for 12V and some say this might be the reason.

But, look, in Cinebench, my scores are alright with 12 threads, isn't that a power and memory hungry application?

P.S. Going to the 1200 MHz 8-8-8-20 RAM setting did improve the CB scores by a few percent, about 6% to be exact.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK, now I see, the two runs should yield identical results. Hmm. Do you get an amount of FLOPS per GHz similar to those 73 GFLOPS / 4GHz?


Your 6 Thread results are on par with my 6 Thread results, I just did them to check and I get 73-74 GFlops with my current 4.0GHz OC. The same as when I ran 12 Threads and posted the picture a few pages back, 73-74 GFlops so at least you have something working for you.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> As far as power goes, well that's exactly what a few BF3 friends told me: memory or PSU. The PSU is a Corsair HX620, which isn't ad at all, but it's got 2 separate rails for 12V and some say this might be the reason.


You don't have a particularly power hungry GPU in your system and even then when your running IBT your just using the CPU and the GPU is in low power mode using maybe 20 watts. Leaving your motherboard, CPU and RAM with the rest, assume degradation and loss in efficiency your looking in the ball park of 500 watts. The Westmere at stock only pulls 95 watts and overclocked I don't see you doubling it so at most Motherboard, CPU and RAM is taking 250 watts which should be fine even on one of the rails of that PSU, although I am no fan of multi-rail PSUs and much prefer single 60+ AMP single rail PSUs.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> But, look, in Cinebench, my scores are alright with 12 threads, isn't that a power and memory hungry application?


Not the same as IBT, it's called Intel BURN Test for a reason, it puts a level of stress that no real world application can, as far as I know at least Cinebench can't put the same level of load on your CPU, not even Prime95 can stress as hard as IBT.

EDIT: Do you have a way to watch the voltages of your PSU when IBT starts to run? AIDA does have this ability but I'm not sure the unlicensed version does.


----------



## GENXLR

Hi, with my settings I said try lower ram settings, specifically change your timing from 1T to 2T and use 1.57v, should get you posting









At least for now

So you know 1.365 vcore isn't super duper high, its actually pretty decent

And I swear if my stock Intel aircooler is better than whatever you got, gonna cry


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> And I swear if my stock Intel aircooler is better than whatever you got, gonna cry


Do you by chance have a large fan or air conditioner pumping air into your case? There's no way in hell one of These can keep anything other than stock at the temps your suggesting.

Unless your referring to one of These as your "Stock" cooler better known as the DBX-B, in which case I'd believe you a little more, those were the first well designed heatsink to come out of Intel in the better part of a decade and actually performed decently, they were designed to handle overclocking the 980x which was the "consumer" grade version of the Westmere x5680 with a single QPI link and unlocked multiplier.

But please don't confuse the guy by calling it stock, he might be thinking of the first one I linked which is a sad POS of a cooler for such an expensive CPU, I remember when I purchased my i7 920, opened the box and saw the same thing my Q6600 came with but slightly larger and thought "Well this needs to go" and immediately went back to the store and got the latest and greatest Noctua.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

GENXLR, well it mostly posts but BSOD's then. Why 1.57V now, you used to say 1.65V?

Also,
Quote:


> Ram just try pushing 1600, set the timings to 9-9-9-24-1t


were your exact words two pages ago. You keep changing your words like if you were being detained in a police office for smth realy nasty









Your cooler may be better yes, because this one has a faulty push-pin and I'm afraid the retention isn't as tight as it should be.

Adhmuz, I can watch the voltages in HWmonitor64, does that suffice for our purpose? What should I be watching for?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Let's do that tomorrow guys, this night will be busy with maths as well..
> 
> Now.. DrKreiger, I've set 6 threads
> 
> *BOOM 74 GFLOPS*
> 
> On 12 threads, 42 GFLOPS.
> 
> Didi I buy the RAM in vain, what do you think guys?


You did not buy them in vein, I have the same set, in "LP" version. currently running them at 1926mhz 8-8-8-24 1.57 v's
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> So your excited that running the CPU at 50% load yields 74GLops where as running the CPU at 100% load yields just 42GFlops?
> 
> I get the same result from both 6 Thread runs as I do 12 Thread runs, does this not concern you? Make you think there's something wrong still?
> 
> If not then try playing BF3 and see how things perform, to me there's still something not right with your setup.
> 
> Your CPU is being starved for either Power or memory throughput.


It has nothing to do with either, My system does the same thing, My PSU is huge, and the system has 24 gigs. am able break 100 Gflops with HT off. I pretty much leave it off anyways.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> OK guys I'm fed up and I've bought a set of Crucial Ballistix Tactical 4 GB sticks that are rated 1600 8-8-8 1.5V, and are reported to be able to go much higher than that.
> 
> DrKreiger, tried exactly that, with 12x core and 12x uncore multi, to no avail...
> 
> Do you think I should return the new kit and try your settings instead? What should the tfaw value be like? Whre can I find the right ones?
> 
> Adhmuz yeah the one at Amazon, with raw metallic trimming on one side.


The 2 rank style tactcals are faster by all means. chips on both sides of the ram
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> GENXLR, well it mostly posts but BSOD's then. Why 1.57V now, you used to say 1.65V?
> 
> Also,
> were your exact words two pages ago. You keep changing your words like if you were being detained in a police office for smth realy nasty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your cooler may be better yes, because this one has a faulty push-pin and I'm afraid the retention isn't as tight as it should be.
> 
> Adhmuz, I can watch the voltages in HWmonitor64, does that suffice for our purpose? What should I be watching for?


LOL


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Holy Lord, that's even faster than here:

http://www.overclockers.com/crucial-ballistix-tactical-lp-16-gb-ddr3-1600-review/

Where they did 2000 @ 9-9-10-24 1N 1.5V. How did you achieve this?


----------



## GENXLR

I was saying if 9-9-9-24-1T doesn't work, try 9-9-9-24-2T and the lower volts because it shouldn't need it at that speed

Yes my cooler is a DBX-B


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Holy Lord, that's even faster than here:
> 
> http://www.overclockers.com/crucial-ballistix-tactical-lp-16-gb-ddr3-1600-review/
> 
> Where they did 2000 @ 9-9-10-24 1N 1.5V. How did you achieve this?


The particular chips they used in that review are certainly not the best from this model line judging by the programmed high tRFC.


----------



## GENXLR

even my 2000Mhz sticks which i ran at 2000mhz and 8-9-8-21-2T are actually performing the same at 1600mhz and 9-9-9-24-1T so i've been figuring if you can run a high freq at 1T its better than running higher at 2T

learned that from testing

I haven't tried to improve my timings but i know what once my uncore passes over about 3600mhz my chip becomes unstable but it may be my board and PSU as my PSU last year was out of ATX spec as the 12VR1 was reading 10.8V at idle and 10.7V at full load, and my 3.3Rail is even at 2.9V so the PSU finally after 6 years of being beaten around is giving up

it done good, time to get a new one, and the ASUS P6T wasn't known as a record setter but it also does decent OC's


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Got the Crucials to work at 1600 MHz 8-8-8-24 2T first, then with a slight voltage bump - 1.50 in BIOS, 1.588 reported in HWMonitor64 - at 2000 MHz 9-9-9-24 1T. Cinebench scores don't differ much though, the differ very little in fact. Well, those are very quick settings just to test how things are working, at the moment the MCH strap is set to 2133, and I guess the timings can be tightened quite a lot - I simply don't have the time and knowledge yet.

~ 65 GFLOPS IBT 12 threads, ~75 GFLOPS 6 threads.

VTT is set to +125 or even to a generous +150 mV for now, but I guess it can be lowered to a certain extent.


----------



## GENXLR

Vcore?


----------



## GENXLR

Someone posted here about ECC not working without ECC ram, YOU DIDN'T READ

i said Our CPU's have ECC internally on the L2 Cache and L1 and possibly the L3(if i recall intels sheets) and it's NOT disableable. so Thats still active and will help in low voltage situations a bit at the cost of performance.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

vCore next tick north of 1.25V in BIOS, circa 1.3V under load I think. 924 cinebench 15 multicore. uncore 3200, qpi 3600.

*Edit*:

Wait mate, I was wrong, it's 83-85 GFLOPS now with 6 threads!


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quick testing in BF3 shows, well.. mixed results. I'm getting weird regular GPU frame time spikes every few seconds. I bet they are the reason why I feel like as if smth was dragging me around or hitting me every now and tehn - guess that's how stutter feels?

Windows 7 power plan: high performance
GPU power management : prefer maximum performance (set for bf3.exe in the NVIDIA Control Panel)

That occurs *even* with framerate locked to 120 FPS. The CPU line is then flat most of the time, but tose GPU frame time spikes appear. I think I've had them as CPU frame time spikes as well in the past.

Is the PSU bad as well? Or is the C1E / EIST maybe?

Edit:

Obligatory screenshots:


----------



## Adhmuz

Install MSI afterburner to see how much of your VRAM is being used and actual GPU usage, post some results of the graphs.


----------



## GENXLR

Again increase vcore to around 1.35 and try 12 threads


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, I think 85 GFLOPS isn't bad at all, is it? Why increase vCore for a single weird benchmark if it's otherwise stable for every day tasks?

But, to be honest here, it's mostly about the cooling; once I get the real cooling, be it air or some CLC or even the Predator, I'll try 1.35 as well.

By the way, is 1.35V what you want to see in CPU-Z (i.e. the applied voltage) or what is set in BIOS? Remember, on my board, there is a 0.05V difference between the two with unsafe vdroop.


----------



## DRKreiger

don't worry about the 12 thread scenario, you only benefit from HT if you are using a highly optimized application geared for multi threaded performance. HT helps when other cores are in scheduled waiting. in the case of IBT or Lynx, are always busy, and will never be freed to receive, due to all threads being utilized. If you have HT on, and run the test with it set to 6 threads, the second scheduled "thread" will always be free. Thus producing higher throughput. same goes if you actually turn off HT all together. Running the test with HT on, and set to "all" or "12" threads, means that the extra scheduling will be offloaded onto the next free thread to receive. Which are already busy with a full work load.

Vcore can help if you are on the edge of stability, and are receiving a fluctuating "Gflop" result. You coul try to stabilize the system, by dropping 200 mhz from the core clock, and upping the Uncore a bit. believe it or not, the higher quality memory may now allow a bit more uncore clock.




The super consistent output, is from perfect stability.

It's all about finding a balance for your specific setup. say core clock 3900mhz 1866mhz ram @ 8-8-8-24-1t, uncore 3400-3600mhz

Again this all dependent on your chip and board.

I can help with a bit more performance. fill out your whole system stats in the rig builder.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

DrKreiger, will fill later, thank you for the help!

Look, at the moment I'm not looking for abstract "performance"; on the previous page you can see GPU frame time spikes in BF3. they cause discernible stutter that honestly almost ruins the game. Sometimes they are there, sometimes not. I also remember seeing similar CPU frame time spikes, though with the new memory and lockdown to 120 FPS you can see thre is a smooth line most of the time (not always, though, we can research into that later as well). Can we figure out the GPU spikes?

By the way, this RAM seems to be able to do 2133 9-9-9--27 @ 1.5V! I'm testing that for now.

Also, I've noticed that with this RAM, I can run a lot lower uncore voltage!

And, finally, my CPU sample is a bit on the stubborn side.. yeah, looking at your screenshots, 4.6 GHz @ under 1.4V is impossible for mine. It will do 4.4 GHz @ 1.44 - 1.45V only. Looks like either (a) it's just really that bad, (b) the board is bad (don't believe that 'cause it does > 200 BCLK's easily) or (c) PSU maybe or wrong setup?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> DrKreiger, will fill later, thank you for the help!
> 
> Look, at the moment I'm not looking for abstract "performance"; on the previous page you can see GPU frame time spikes in BF3. they cause discernible stutter that honestly almost ruins the game. Sometimes they are there, sometimes not. I also remember seeing similar CPU frame time spikes, though with the new memory and lockdown to 120 FPS you can see thre is a smooth line most of the time (not always, though, we can research into that later as well). Can we figure out the GPU spikes?
> 
> By the way, this RAM seems to be able to do 2133 9-9-9--27 @ 1.5V! I'm testing that for now.
> 
> Also, I've noticed that with this RAM, I can run a lot lower uncore voltage!
> 
> And, finally, my CPU sample is a bit on the stubborn side.. yeah, looking at your screenshots, 4.6 GHz @ under 1.4V is impossible for mine. It will do 4.4 GHz @ 1.44 - 1.45V only. Looks like either (a) it's just really that bad, (b) the board is bad (don't believe that 'cause it does > 200 BCLK's easily) or (c) PSU maybe or wrong setup?


Well I would advise against anything above 2000 mhz on an X58 system. it has a tendency to cook the IMC in the Chip, or in some cases just kill an entire memory channel. be careful.

As for the frame rate spike. what GPU'(s) are you running? I may have some input there too


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Well I would advise against anything above 2000 mhz on an X58 system. it has a tendency to cook the IMC in the Chip, or in some cases just kill an entire memory channel. be careful.
> 
> As for the frame rate spike. what GPU'(s) are you running? I may have some input there too


He has a GTX 460.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> He has a GTX 460.


Give this a go http://www.overclock.net/t/1601321/fast-sync-howto


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hmm maybe it's because I have triple buffering enabled in BF3 Setings Editor. Disabled it, going for a tetst run. The trick is that in the description it reads "at the cost of additional RAM".

DrKrieger, here's the result of a Cinebench 15 run @ the following settings:

Core: 186 x 22 = 4081 MHz; 1.317 under load; vdroop unsafe; turbo on (+2 multi on all cores); EIST, C1E on
Uncore: 186 x 18 = 3348 MHz
QPI 186 x 18 = 3348 MHz (fast mode)
VTT +125 mV
RAM: 2:10 = 1866 MHz; 8-8-8-20-2T; 1.5V

Results:




I think that's a nice score, I used to score under 900 with the old RAM.

Most immportantly, this setup has a rather high uncore speed, a decent QPI speed, a > 4 GHz core overclock and a reasonable BCLK on top of that. Then only concern is the vCore, isn't it a bit too high? Sure I know every chip is different but still, you know what i mean.

Been using this setup except RAM configuraton before the RAM switch to a great success in BF3 (except 64 player servers, of course, we'll see how the RAM changes that.)


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Try to find a 64 player Metro, 20-30 players is not really representative of the issue. Oh, and it better be with a lot of grenades! Their explosions add stutter, too. Thanks a lot!


Is the 4770k system also using a 460? It's hard to compare if they aren't using the same GPU. Have you monitored your GPU memory usage?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

The buddy's? Nah it's a 780 and maybe a Ti at that, not sure about the latter part.









Yeah but.. can't we compare CPU frame times on their own without taking the GPU into account?

Added: Well, the spikes are there with a fixed 120 FPS, they are killing the gameplay. Giong to watch MSI AB now.

Edit: Sometimes the spikes randomly disappear for a short while.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> The buddy's? Nah it's a 780 and maybe a Ti at that, not sure about the latter part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but.. can't we compare CPU frame times on their own without taking the GPU into account?


I suppose at low res you somewhat can, but the GPU will still affect it.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Funny observation: the spikes scale down considerably at FullHD. At 1280x800 however, they are a real nightmare. Both res played full-screen, no black frame around the image.

Edit: Can an uncore too low caouse this? Loigc behind this is that uncore is related to the GPU data feed. *Or*, QPI freq = uncore freq - some say this causes instability.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Funny observation: the spikes scale down considerably at FullHD. At 1280x800 however, they are a real nightmare. Both res played full-screen, no black frame around the image.
> 
> Edit: Can an uncore too low caouse this? Loigc behind this is that uncore is related to the GPU data feed. *Or*, QPI freq = uncore freq - some say this causes instability.


No, this is normal behavior. the lower the resolution the more the graphics work load is set to the CPU


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Wait, please read carefully.

The graph shwon by the command

render.perfoverlaysivible 1

shows 2 types of frametiems: CPU and GPU.

CPU frametimes are a perfect line.

GPU frametimes *spike* ona regular basis, which feels like as if someone hit or pushed or dragge dme in teh game. Unplayable. Wasn't there 2 weeks ago before I had removed the game and reinstalled it.

With teh same CPU and GPU I was playing without those terrible spikes. They block my aim, movement, etc, so it's *not* normal.

Added: Well, we're OT way too much already, my apologies in case it breaks the rules. *But look*:the effect seems to go away when the FPS limit is removed. (i.e. max FPS = 200). Weird, weird.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

DrKrieger, let's try to get the max out of this RAM at 1866 MHz, that's probably going to be my setup for a while. I mean tuning the timings and voltages - know very little yet about RAM setup and tweaking. Thank you!

Nevermind, figured out the RAM, but..

Adhmuz your graph makes me want to cry. Post your complete settings please. At the moment I nothing but stutter and lag even at my old settings - 4.1 GHz with 186 BCLK... New RAM seems to be even worse, maybe I'll just RMA it









Limiting framrate to 120 gives me an almost perfect line, but then GPU stutter every 1 second appears. Like, every 1 second, regular stutter spikes. I can see them green on the graph.

Other than that, a lot of "noise" - the graph is very noisy compared to yours.

So please post your settings - right now it looks like i'll have to sell this junk (poor person who buys it) and go X79.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Also, I can't install 3D Mark, it simply fails to install, or if it installs, it refuses to run, so I can't do proper benchmarks to test the GPU + CPU combo.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Also, I can't install 3D Mark, it simply fails to install, or if it installs, it refuses to run, so I can't do proper benchmarks to test the GPU + CPU combo.


Not sure how much it will tell you, seeing now your GPU only has 768mb of VRAM makes me question it's ability to play BF3 smoothly without swapping textures to the RAM. Did you ever install MSI Afterburner to see how much of your GPU resources are being utilized? Also what version of 3D Mark are you trying to install?

EDIT: You can always try Unigine to see how you stack up.


----------



## DRKreiger

Honestly it seems your Vram will be holding you back far more than the rest of your ysytem
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> DrKrieger, let's try to get the max out of this RAM at 1866 MHz, that's probably going to be my setup for a while. I mean tuning the timings and voltages - know very little yet about RAM setup and tweaking. Thank you!
> 
> Nevermind, figured out the RAM, but..
> 
> Adhmuz your graph makes me want to cry. Post your complete settings please. At the moment I nothing but stutter and lag even at my old settings - 4.1 GHz with 186 BCLK... New RAM seems to be even worse, maybe I'll just RMA it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Limiting framrate to 120 gives me an almost perfect line, but then GPU stutter every 1 second appears. Like, every 1 second, regular stutter spikes. I can see them green on the graph.
> 
> Other than that, a lot of "noise" - the graph is very noisy compared to yours.
> 
> So please post your settings - right now it looks like i'll have to sell this junk (poor person who buys it) and go X79.


The board and platform are not your problem. I would load GPUZ and have the sensors tab open, click log to file, and check your Vram usage. I think the weakest link here is the 768mb 460 you are running. play BF3, or run a benchmark, and check you VRam usage. less than a gig, with any "eye candy" enabled will run out really quick. This will cause the spikes, when it off loads those frames to the system memory. When i have my 2 460's, i would play games and notice the spikes in frame times, and stuttering. this while playing at 1920x1080. was pulling my hair out, until i logged my system stats using AIDA64 (Everest at the time) for system memory, and GPUZ's sensor tab.

the ram is for sure not an issue. We established that prior.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK, look, what is this in your opinion (1):



_Perfectly_ unloaded CPU and GPU -> sutter. at 0 load.

And this (2):



The last one, (2), it's the oscillations / noise / fluctuaion in *CPU* frametimes, am I right? Yellow means CPU, green means GPU frame times respectively. Why the hell does it oscillate in that fashion all over the place? Adhmuz has none of it in his video. Adn if it's CPU frame time, then it's either the RAM, the CPU itself being toast or something else in the line, but not the GPU, as far as I understand. The green line is fine behind the yellow noise, look close!

And finally (3):



Game resolutoin is 1280x800, screen resolution 1920x1080. Settings all "low" and "off", with some settings lowered artificially, such as shadowmap resolution (form the default 1024 down to 256).

I have been looking for a "VRAM" graph in Afterburner, but all there is, is "Framebuffer", and it's only half full. _Oh wait, is it called "Memory"?_


----------



## GENXLR

Yes its called memory


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Great, thank you, going to monitor that. Still unclear how CPU frame times can be related to video memory. I've been posting these issues here because I've always been sure it's a CPU quality or CPU setup issue, else it would surely be off-topic.


----------



## gofasterstripes

If you run out of available VRAM ("memory") then things start to be swapped out through the PCIE bus, and this causes stuttering as the access to RAM is much slower than to VRAM.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I understand how this makes the GPU slower, but look at teh screenshots: the CPU frame times are oscillating as well!

And, why would the GPU swap out in a perfect rhytm, about every second or so?

Can we split this out into a separate topic in some technical issue subforum please? It probably violates the rules being here as it is.


----------



## GENXLR

Your CPU can receive interrupts from the PCI-E bus and it requires the CPU to pass data from the PCI-E to the IMC to be stored in the RAM


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Observed that the spikes occur regularly even when the memory is at 555 MB, which is lower than the 768 MB limit. Hence it's unrelated I guess.

GENXLR, what kind of interrupt, when does it occur?

Edit: ALso, how would you explain the oscillating nature of those CPU lags?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Observed that the spikes occur regularly even when the memory is at 555 MB, which is lower than the 768 MB limit. Hence it's unrelated I guess.
> 
> GENXLR, what kind of interrupt, when does it occur?
> 
> Edit: ALso, how would you explain the oscillating nature of those CPU lags?


Well the next step is to turn off HT in the bios, try to run the game again and check the spikes.
Keep the GPUZ sensors tab open, open task manager, open the performance tab, and stretch it out. you are looking for corresponding spikes in memory load, CPU usage, Vram usage, and Processes that come to the very top at the same time.

Another thing to consider is to run another game, and test that. You could have a program specific problem.

Download an old version of Nvidia drivers, perform a clean install. You also could have a corrupt, or problematic driver too


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Tested with {HT,EIST, C-states, Turbo, VT-x} off at the same time. Same =]

They disappear over time, it seems, as well as under good load. I'm currently downloading BF4 trial to test. Could've done in BFBC2 but there's not built-in graph, unfortunately, it's a lot simpler game in a number of aspects.

Other than that, waiting for Polaris 480/480X









I mean, Cinebench 825 isn't bad for 4 GHz, is it? So the overall performance is alright. I've been priming the memory ofr a good 2 or 3 hours total today, was stable with 1866 8-8-8-24-2T @ 1.55V. Tomorrow I'm going to prime 2000 9-9-9-27 @ 1.58. I wonder if it's possible to do 2000 8-8-8-24 just like you do with yours. LP's and the 1.5V ones are slightly different, it seems.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Tested with {HT,EIST, C-states, Turbo, VT-x} off at the same time. Same =]
> 
> They disappear over time, it seems, as well as under good load. I'm currently downloading BF4 trial to test. Could've done in BFBC2 but there's not built-in graph, unfortunately, it's a lot simpler game in a number of aspects.
> 
> Other than that, waiting for Polaris 480/480X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, Cinebench 825 isn't bad for 4 GHz, is it? So the overall performance is alright. I've been priming the memory ofr a good 2 or 3 hours total today, was stable with 1866 8-8-8-24-2T @ 1.55V. Tomorrow I'm going to prime 2000 9-9-9-27 @ 1.58. I wonder if it's possible to do 2000 8-8-8-24 just like you do with yours. LP's and the 1.5V ones are slightly different, it seems.


I run them @ 1926 8-8-8-24 1T, anything higher at those timings causes instability. I can run the 9's timings at 2000, mhz, but the gain is minimal. Tighter timings seem to be better at the right frequency. My TRFC is at 232, Tfaw 24, leave the Trfc on auto, and it should set on it's own. set the TFAW to 24 manually. this will help with latency a bit.
Another option you may have is differential amplitude. I have that set to 700 mv. seems to help produce the best stability and throughput.
check if you have AI clock skew too. I have my CPU, and IOH skews both set to -300ps

Other than the BF3 being difficult, your system is quite formidable. Adding a stronger GFX card will be a huge upgrade.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

So I've been testing BF4 trial for a good few hours today and there's no stutter, the line is more or less even, of course the GPU can't handle that game at high FPS, but 1600x1050 averages at 60-80 FPS I think. Not bad overall, for a platform that's many years older than the game. Wonder what I might achieve with a GPU swap.

Other than that, is the QPI speed or the Uncore speed crucial for not "bottlenecking" a high-end GPU? I've looked around in the Passmark (PETest8 to be exact) database and he GTX 970 scores on X58 6-cores are generally lower than those on the modern systems, the difference being quite high, I think as high as 30% in some submissions. What are those guys doing wrong and what should I do to make sure a GP like the GTX 970 / RX 480(X) runs about as fast as on a Skylake (if that's possible)? I hear people saying "old platform" and "GPU bottleneck" as well as "chipset features" all over the place, and while the "chipset features" are understandable, the other two generally sound like marketing cliches to me.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> DrKrieger, let's try to get the max out of this RAM at 1866 MHz, that's probably going to be my setup for a while. I mean tuning the timings and voltages - know very little yet about RAM setup and tweaking. Thank you!
> 
> Nevermind, figured out the RAM, but..
> 
> Adhmuz your graph makes me want to cry. Post your complete settings please. At the moment I nothing but stutter and lag even at my old settings - 4.1 GHz with 186 BCLK... New RAM seems to be even worse, maybe I'll just RMA it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Limiting framrate to 120 gives me an almost perfect line, but then GPU stutter every 1 second appears. Like, every 1 second, regular stutter spikes. I can see them green on the graph.
> 
> Other than that, a lot of "noise" - the graph is very noisy compared to yours.
> 
> So please post your settings - right now it looks like i'll have to sell this junk (poor person who buys it) and go X79.


My settings for what? My OC or my in-game settings?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

First of all, the OC settings, including the RAM settings. In-game video settings are secondary, but may be useful as well.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> First of all, the OC settings, including the RAM settings. In-game video settings are secondary, but may be useful as well.










My in-game settings are easy, everything is maxed out and I had set the frame rate to 1280x768.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> So I've been testing BF4 trial for a good few hours today and there's no stutter, the line is more or less even, of course the GPU can't handle that game at high FPS, but 1600x1050 averages at 60-80 FPS I think. Not bad overall, for a platform that's many years older than the game. Wonder what I might achieve with a GPU swap.
> 
> Other than that, is the QPI speed or the Uncore speed crucial for not "bottlenecking" a high-end GPU? I've looked around in the Passmark (PETest8 to be exact) database and he GTX 970 scores on X58 6-cores are generally lower than those on the modern systems, the difference being quite high, I think as high as 30% in some submissions. What are those guys doing wrong and what should I do to make sure a GP like the GTX 970 / RX 480(X) runs about as fast as on a Skylake (if that's possible)? I hear people saying "old platform" and "GPU bottleneck" as well as "chipset features" all over the place, and while the "chipset features" are understandable, the other two generally sound like marketing cliches to me.


TechPowerUP did a nice Comparison across the PCIE bus. And shows very little difference from Gen 2.0 to Gen 3.0 16x so that shouldn't be too much of a concern.

I personally have a GTX 970 and it never shows signs of being held back by my X5660, benchmark scores in graphic heavy scenarios are all up there with the newer architecture CPUs, clock for clock the older your CPU the slower it will be generally which may have an effect in some benchmarks that test both CPU and GPU, but as far as I know games won't be so highly affected by this. I've yet to play a game that comes anywhere near maxing out my CPU, the latest Hitman for example uses it roughly 30-40%, if I play in DX12 it uses it even less. Which brings me to my next point, DX12 is going to change the way the CPU is used and taxed, from my testing at least. I had some pictures of my CPU usage in both DX11 and DX12 I can show you once I locate them, or I can just redo them. I'll add them in this post in a couple minutes for you to see.

First DX11 CPU Usage during the Hitman benchmark


Second DX12 CPU Usage


If this is anything to go by, CPU usage will actually get better in games to come that use DX12, unfortunately, Nvidia hasn't mad a GPU that is particularly good at DX12 yet.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My in-game settings are easy, everything is maxed out and I had set the frame rate to 1280x768.
> TechPowerUP did a nice Comparison across the PCIE bus. And shows very little difference from Gen 2.0 to Gen 3.0 16x so that shouldn't be too much of a concern.
> 
> I personally have a GTX 970 and it never shows signs of being held back by my X5660, benchmark scores in graphic heavy scenarios are all up there with the newer architecture CPUs, clock for clock the older your CPU the slower it will be generally which may have an effect in some benchmarks that test both CPU and GPU, but as far as I know games won't be so highly affected by this. I've yet to play a game that comes anywhere near maxing out my CPU, the latest Hitman for example uses it roughly 30-40%, if I play in DX12 it uses it even less. Which brings me to my next point, DX12 is going to change the way the CPU is used and taxed, from my testing at least. I had some pictures of my CPU usage in both DX11 and DX12 I can show you once I locate them, or I can just redo them. I'll add them in this post in a couple minutes for you to see.
> 
> First DX11 CPU Usage during the Hitman benchmark
> 
> 
> Second DX12 CPU Usage
> 
> 
> If this is anything to go by, CPU usage will actually get better in games to come that use DX12, unfortunately, Nvidia hasn't mad a GPU that is particularly good at DX12 yet.


Very good comparison here. The gen 3.0 PCIE will be marginal at best. Our platform performs in my eyes, amazingly, especially with a well clocked 6 core Xeon. Again I game with HT off. smooths out my game play for FPS.

As for the older platforms causing a "bottleneck", this can be true for an i7 920, any quad core AMD, and some of the 6 core AMD's. main reason that i understood, is the speed of the memory, we have triple channel, plus the ability to get some seriously high uncore (northbridge) speeds. The Uncore, Northbridge speeds are what communicate with the GPU's. This is what still makes our platform with this chip still viable.

@Kana Maru has done a lot of comparisons about this exact thing. The general difference can be as little as 3%. I remember one where the 5820 was only ahead by 11%. Which is next to nothing, you would never see it in real life, or gaming.


----------



## GENXLR

My X5650 kept up with a 5820k if you saw my benchmark in 3dmark, physics scores were 18% different, and that with my x5650 at 4ghz and the 5820k @ 4 GHz and it has 2 extra cores


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My X5650 kept up with a 5820k if you saw my benchmark in 3dmark, physics scores were 18% different, and that with my x5650 at 4ghz and the 5820k @ 4 GHz and it has 2 extra cores


Both 5820k and x5650 are 6 core 12 thread cpus. You mean 4820k?


----------



## Kana-Maru

I've written an article about AMD Mainstream on my blog, but I can't post the link due to getting modded again, smh. Check it out and let me know what you guys think. Apparently I can't post the link, but other people can post my links. Anyways there's one about Nvidia GTX 1080 as well if any one missed. I can't post it here since it'll be to long [and there are pictures]. It's a interesting time to be a PC gamer at the moment.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> @Kana Maru has done a lot of comparisons about this exact thing.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> The general difference can be as little as 3%
> 
> 
> . I remember one where the 5820 was only ahead by 11%. Which is next to nothing, you would never see it in real life, or gaming.


The general difference can be less than 0.05% and sometimes the X58 actually beats the X79 Sandy Bridge-E \ Ivy Bridge-E in specific benchmarks.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> My X5650 kept up with a 5820k if you saw my benchmark in 3dmark, physics scores were 18% different, and that with my x5650 at 4ghz and the 5820k @ 4 GHz and it has 2 extra cores


3DMark and other synthetic benchmarks are becoming more and more worthless as the months pass. Actual gameplay usually, no it always tells another story. Maybe if the devs stop dragging their feet and release a DX12 benchmark that they have been showing off over the past 7+ months, we can get a better picture, but until then most synthetic benchmarks are all show and tell.

5820k [gimped] 6 core vs X5650 6 core. Did you disable the cores or mix up the GPU names?

4Ghz does pretty well for me while gaming. 4.6Ghz is what I normally use to overclock. I don't think I'll be pushing my GPU above 4.6Ghz any longer since 4.8Ghz doesn't give me better results while gaming. With only 4Ghz I never have to worry about my CPU exceed 56c [based on IBT stress test] and 4.6Ghz is usually 62c-64c max. Obviously I'm never getting close to those temps while playing, but it feels good to know the CPU temp limit.


----------



## MicroCat

Hey, there's this great article on the AMD Mainstream right *here*. What an eery coincidence.









Thanks for sharing your insights, KM.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Hey, there's this great article on the AMD Mainstream right *here*. What an eery coincidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for sharing your insights, KM.


Dang........your post is just full win. QFT QFW.

No problem and thanks. We need competition and Nvidia has the upper mid range to high and AMD is focusing on the mainstream right now.

I just played a little Batman: Arkham Knight at 4K 100% max settings [no Nvidia Gameworks] with my X5660 @ 4Ghz - DDR3-1400Mhz. I started from the beginning of the game to after Poison Ivy\Batmobile battle. No screen tearing or micro stutter and I average 42fps. That's not bad for 4Ghz-DDR3-1400Mhz @ 4K IMO. I get approx 50fps average with 4.6Ghz\4.8Ghz. I'm sure I can get better fps if I lower the Tessellation being that this is a Nvidia Gameworks title, and we know Nvidia loves the Tessellation in their games. I didn't mess with the Tessellation settings though The game still performs much better now than it did when it first released.

CPU temp average was 43c and the Fury X temp was 44c [on a warm day] . Very good temps IMO. Can't wait for the Big Pascal and Vega showdown.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The general difference can be less than 0.05% and sometimes the X58 actually beats the X79 Sandy Bridge-E \ Ivy Bridge-E in specific benchmarks.


I'd be interested in seeing where x58 is faster than x79 with all other things being equal (_same clock speed/memory speed and amount/GPU)_ because I sure haven't seen it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'd be interested in seeing where x58 is faster than x79 with all other things being equal (_same clock speed/memory speed and amount/GPU)_ because I sure haven't seen it.


Check my X5660 review. I tried my best to find clock vs clock benchmarks for comparison and I think I did pretty good overall. It took forever though. Better yet I'll try to find a few for you.

*7.zip 9.20 Benchmark:*
A thin win [0.15%] for Decompressing.
Compression difference is 3.67% vs a $1,283.18 - i7-4960X @ 4.7Ghz - Ivy Bridge
http://s26.postimg.org/qmj6hcw15/a37dbe24_k55079.jpg

*3DPM-MT*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = *1200.9119* [Ranked #8 in the world at the time, yay X58]
i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz = *1194.7093*

*Black Hold Benchmark*
Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = *22,408 marks* [Ranked #11 in the world at the time, yay X58]
i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz = *20,800 marks*

All test were less than 10% in performance difference. You can see the actual picture of the benchmark in the review. Very few wins, but that's better than nothing a aging platform. Winning isn't everything when you include the price for "winning". When it's less than 10% overall I'll take my X58 platform over $500-$1000+ CPUs all day.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Check my X5660 review. I tried my best to find clock vs clock benchmarks for comparison and I think I did pretty good overall. It took forever though. Better yet I'll try to find a few for you.
> 
> 7.zip 9.20 Benchmark:
> A thin win [0.15%] for Decompressing.
> Compression difference is 3.67% vs a $1,283.18 - i7-4960X @ 4.7Ghz - Ivy Bridge
> http://s26.postimg.org/qmj6hcw15/a37dbe24_k55079.jpg
> 
> 3DPM-MT
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 1200.9119 [Ranked #8 in the world at the time, yay X58]
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz = 1194.7093
> 
> Black Hold Benchmark
> Xeon X5660 @ 4.8Ghz = 22,408 marks [Ranked #11 in the world at the time, yay X58]
> i7-3930K @ 4.8Ghz = 20,800 marks
> 
> All test were less than 10% in performance difference. You can see the actual picture of the benchmark in the review. Very few wins, but that's better than nothing a aging platform. Winning isn't everything when you include the price for "winning". When it's less than 10% overall I'll take my X58 platform over $500-$1000+ CPUs all day.


I realize there isn't a big difference. In my own comparisons I saw between 5-15% in real world CPU heavy tests. Of course in gaming I saw basically no difference.

The $500+ up_(side)_grade at the time certainly didn't make sense, but the $120-150 prices now are pretty solid for a fully unlocked chip _(assuming one can get a good deal on a board)_.

The big difference for me was running higher clocks at safe voltages. Sandy-E simply overclocks better at lower volts, I have two 1650's and a 1660 and they all have no problem doing 4.6 at 1.3v, and the 1660 does 4.7 at 1.3v with quad channel @ 2400mhz.

That 3DPM score seems a little low for 4.8ghz on that 3930k, I just ran it at 4.7 and got 1221 with a bunch of stuff running in the background.
That is a nice Black Hole score, I scored 21520 @ 4.7.

Of course if you want to compare Cinebench, then you'd see a different story. At 4.7 I get about 1215 and 165 in the single threaded test.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I ran a ton of benchmarks awhile ago against highly clocked HWBOT scores. Based on the benchmarks *overall* from HWBOT at the time it the different was 9.77%. Obviously this was great news for the X58 and results will vary from benchmark to benchmark.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> The $500+ up(side)grade at the time certainly didn't make sense, but the $120-150 prices now are pretty solid for a fully unlocked chip (assuming one can get a good deal on a board).


That 1660 sounds great, but the unless the prices are exactly where I want them I'll rather wait for Zen at this point. I hate buying used motherboards and good MB will probably cost nearly $300 or more. I'll need a new PC case [$200 for my new case I want] and CPU water coolers [At least $250 for the CPU loop I want and the sale might be over], & RAM as well. Then there's little cosmetic things like lights etc. That's going to end up pretty much being a "upgrade" price wise so I think I'll wait. I plan to continue to use my X58 machine after upgrading so I won't be able to just strip it completely. Intel still has more releasing coming and who knows what might pop up between Q4 2016 - Q2017. If I found something for the price I couldn't refuse I would jump all over it, but it'll have to be something way past the X79 [2011] of all things.

Quote:


> Of course if you want to compare Cinebench, then you'd see a different story. At 4.7 I get about 1215 and 165 in the single threaded test.


That's still a 13% & 8% difference. That's not going to make me run out to spend money on a X79 side grade. I don't think would make many people run out and spend hundreds on a side grade. Let alone possibly abused processors and motherboards.
Quote:


> The big difference for me was running higher clocks at safe voltages. Sandy-E simply overclocks better at lower volts, I have two 1650's and a 1660 and they all have no problem doing 4.6 at 1.3v, and the 1660 does 4.7 at 1.3v with quad channel @ 2400mhz.


Safe voltages aren't a problem on the X58 if you know what you are doing. Well I have no problems running 3.8Ghz [average vCore 0.97v], [4Ghz daily] but I can easily run:
-4.6Ghz 1.15v Average for daily usage including gaming.
-4.8Ghz 1.25v Average.

So when it comes to the safe voltages I'm not worried. As for what "max" voltages are required for 100%, then those are:
-3.8Ghz -1.16v Max
-4.6Ghz - 1.35v Max
-4.8Ghz - 1.43v Max
-5.4Ghz - I don't wanna talk about it

However, I'm never hitting 100% loads on the cores unless I'm purposely benchmarking and I have nothing left to benchmark except my Fury X performance in games now. So in other words I'm never getting near the max voltages nowadays and get great temps regardless. I have no issues when it comes to low vCore usage.

I have my eyes on a few possible upgrade paths.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I ran a ton of benchmarks awhile ago against highly clocked HWBOT scores. Based on the benchmarks *overall* from HWBOT at the time it the different was 9.77%. Obviously this was great news for the X58 and results will vary from benchmark to benchmark.
> That 1660 sounds great, but the unless the prices are exactly where I want them I'll rather wait for Zen at this point. I hate buying used motherboards and good MB will probably cost nearly $300 or more. I'll need a new PC case [$200 for my new case I want] and CPU water coolers [At least $250 for the CPU loop I want and the sale might be over], & RAM as well. Then there's little cosmetic things like lights etc. That's going to end up pretty much being a "upgrade" price wise so I think I'll wait. I plan to continue to use my X58 machine after upgrading so I won't be able to just strip it completely. Intel still has more releasing coming and who knows what might pop up between Q4 2016 - Q2017. If I found something for the price I couldn't refuse I would jump all over it, but it'll have to be something way past the X79 [2011] of all things.
> That's still a 13% & 8% difference. That's not going to make me run out to spend money on a X79 side grade. I don't think would make many people run out and spend hundreds on a side grade. Let alone possibly abused processors and motherboards.
> Safe voltages aren't a problem on the X58 if you know what you are doing. Well I have no problems running 3.8Ghz [average vCore 0.97v], [4Ghz daily] but I can easily run:
> -4.6Ghz 1.15v Average for daily usage including gaming.
> -4.8Ghz 1.25v Average.
> 
> So when it comes to the safe voltages I'm not worried. As for what "max" voltages are required for 100%, then those are:
> -3.8Ghz -1.16v Max
> -4.6Ghz - 1.35v Max
> -4.8Ghz - 1.43v Max
> -5.4Ghz - I don't wanna talk about it
> 
> However, I'm never hitting 100% loads on the cores unless I'm purposely benchmarking and I have nothing left to benchmark except my Fury X performance in games now. So in other words I'm never getting near the max voltages nowadays and get great temps regardless. I have no issues when it comes to low vCore usage.
> 
> I have my eyes on a few possible upgrade paths.


Boards can be had for cheap, I picked up two x79 deluxes for $150 a pop in very good condition with all sealed accessories and very good condition. Both working great so far.

I only buy used parts at prices where I can't lose if I decide to turn around and sell it. For example recently picked up the 1660 along with a 2670 and 2650 for $200. At those prices it isn't so much spending a bunch of money as much as spending a bunch of time fiddling with settings, which I enjoy anyway.









I consider 1.35v in the "safe" 24/7 range on 32nm as long as temps are good, but if cooling is good enough 1.4v is OK. My x5670 is fairly close to yours, but I never did get 4.8ghz quite stable as temps were simply too high on my air setup.

All things considered I do look forward to seeing what Zen has to offer, I'd really like a solid 8+ core chip that has good single thread performance _(for all the terribly optimized applications that still linger)._


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Boards can be had for cheap, I picked up two x79 deluxes for $150 a pop in very good condition with all sealed accessories and very good condition. Both working great so far.


Where??? I just check Ebay and it looks like the cheapest start around $250, some of them are broken\needs repairs [For parts or not working], missing parts, bent pins etc, and go well past $500.00+. The cheaper boards have some issues and the 1600 will be around $200 or purchased individually. When it comes to CPUs I'd rather buy them from a bulk seller instead of people who has possibly or obviously cherry picked to sell the worse CPUs.

You caught a deal so congrats. That's not going to happen for everyone like the X5650\X5660\L5639 and so on.

Quote:


> I only buy used parts at prices where I can't lose if I decide to turn around and sell it. For example recently picked up the 1660 along with a 2670 and 2650 for $200. At those prices it isn't so much spending a bunch of money as much as spending a bunch of time fiddling with settings, which I enjoy anyway.










You got more deals hooray. Everyone isn't going to get those types of deals or luck regularly. $200 is bill money for me and many other people. $200 is fine when you don't need a Motherboard, PC case, RAM, CPU cooler and so on. It adds up quickly to get what you need and what you want.
Quote:


> All things considered I do look forward to seeing what Zen has to offer, I'd really like a solid 8+ core chip that has good single thread performance (for all the terribly optimized applications that still linger).


I'll be perfectly fine with 6 cores since 8 cores doesn't seem to scale that well and performance fall of the map. Once more programs starts to utilize more cores then maybe we will see more 8 core performance outside of benchmarks, server environments and very few programs. For single core speed across all cores the Quad core is where it's at, at least at the moment. I'm waiting to see what Zen will do. Intel is rising all of their prices so apparently they don't care at all.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Where??? I just check Ebay and it looks like the cheapest start around $250, some of them are broken\needs repairs [For parts or not working], missing parts, bent pins etc, and go well past $500.00+. The cheaper boards have some issues and the 1600 will be around $200 or purchased individually. When it comes to CPUs I'd rather buy them from a bulk seller instead of people who has possibly or obviously cherry picked to sell the worse CPUs.
> 
> You caught a deal so congrats. That's not going to happen for everyone like the X5650\X5660\L5639 and so on.


I got them from B&H. But the same could be said about proper x58 boards, good deals are pretty hard to come by, even now, but you'll find that Sabertooth or P6T6 for $120 occasionally.
Quote:


> :thumb:You got more deals hooray. Everyone isn't going to get those types of deals or luck regularly. $200 is bill money for me and many other people. $200 is fine when you don't need a Motherboard, PC case, RAM, CPU cooler and so on. It adds up quickly to get what you need and what you want.


Well, I simply swapped the board/cpu and used the same ram/psu/case then sold off the board and one of my x5670's, I actually had an extra stick of ram as I bought two kits before. The 1650's regularly go for around 150, but the boards are a little bit more difficult to find good deals on.
Quote:


> I'll be perfectly fine with 6 cores since 8 cores doesn't seem to scale that well and performance fall of the map. Once more programs starts to utilize more cores then maybe we will see more 8 core performance outside of benchmarks, server environments and very few programs. For single core speed across all cores the Quad core is where it's at. At least at the moment. I'm waiting to see what Zen will do. Intel is rising all of their prices so apparently they don't care at all.


It really depends on the workload I suppose. I'm just hoping for the 1680 v2's to come down in price. That's the main reason I traded my x58 parts off.

Edit: And that $200 is bill money for me as well, but when I know I can turn around and sell my old 1650 for 130-160 and the other two chips for $60-70 there is basically no risk even after accounting for seller fees, etc.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sounds like you are getting your money worth. That's great







. I plan to keep my X5660\X58 build running for some task. If I find a price I can't refuse I'd definitely upgrade. There's some much going on and we are closer to Zen. I'm waiting to see if the prices and performance will hold up for Zen. If they do Intel will have no choice, but to come back to reality with their enthusiast pricing at some point.


----------



## OCmember

1.325v too high for the QPI PLL?

love this platform .. just don't want to burn it out.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 1.325v too high for the QPI PLL?
> love this platform .. just don't want to burn it out.


I don't have that setting on my board so I'll just include my two cents. It doesn't sound to high and shouldn't be as dangerous as the CPU PLL since it is dealing with other things altogether. What voltage does it run when you use "AUTO"?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 1.325v too high for the QPI PLL?
> 
> love this platform .. just don't want to burn it out.


No, but why do you need to increase it?

As far as I know for best stability you'd want QPI PLL = IOH Core (NB voltage).

Both of them usually have very little effect on stability once you go above 1.2-1.25.
Mine is rocking at 1.2v (both).


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't have that setting on my board so I'll just include my two cents. It doesn't sound to high and shouldn't be as dangerous as the CPU PLL since it is dealing with other things altogether. What voltage does it run when you use "AUTO"?


I think 1.2v. I haven't had it on Auto for a while. Learning this motherboard and X58 overclocking has taken me close to 4-5yrs lol..

@SmOgER

I've been able to stabilize my QPI Frequency @ 4GHz with those volts in bios but it drops to 1.320v on terminal. The IOH doesn't need to be equal just in range.. I thought the same thing for a while. I'm pushing 1.25v in bios - 1.259 on voltage terminal. I've put all my add-on cards on the X58 PCIe hub and things are quicker at 4GHz.

Also been able to hit 3.8GHz with the uncore at 1.325v.. but i recently lowered it, the volts, and my memory for the summer. What's odd is the round trip latency on my memory lowered for each channel e.g. channel 1 went from 57 to 51 rtl. The other channels dropped respectively. Uncore is 1.8x the memory at the moment.


----------



## SmOgER

It should be 1.1v on auto. At least on mine it is.

As for the RTL, the lower the uncore, the more you can tighten it.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> It should be 1.1v on auto. At least on mine it is.
> 
> As for the RTL, the lower the uncore, the more you can tighten it.


Kept my uncore the same @ 3GHz and I raised my RAM speed from 1656MHz back to 1986MHz and the RTL changed from 51 to 44 on channel 1, and respectively on the others. The Uncore had nothing to do with RTL in this case. Maybe there is something else that gets thrown into play.


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Kept my uncore the same @ 3GHz and I raised my RAM speed from 1656MHz back to 1986MHz and the RTL changed from 51 to 44 on channel 1, and respectively on the others. The Uncore had nothing to do with RTL in this case. Maybe there is something else that gets thrown into play.


Well in that case it was pribably auto setting keeping RTL very loose before you altered RAM clock. Thats why I prefer to set it manuaaly most of the time.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Well in that case it was pribably auto setting keeping RTL very loose before you altered RAM clock. Thats why I prefer to set it manuaaly most of the time.


That's interesting. Every time I've lowered the RTL one step below the AUTO setting for each channel the system would show sings of instability and fail some stress tests. Sometimes not even boot. And sometimes not even show the full 6GB in the system.

I'm thinking it has something to do with the ratio of the DRAM frequency to the Uncore. It's exactly 1.5 at the moment.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> That's interesting. Every time I've lowered the RTL one step below the AUTO setting for each channel the system would show sings of instability and fail some stress tests. Sometimes not even boot. And sometimes not even show the full 6GB in the system.
> 
> I'm thinking it has something to do with the ratio of the DRAM frequency to the Uncore. It's exactly 1.5 at the moment.


I'm right there with you. I have tried to tighten beyond the auto before, with no luck. maybe loosening them will let me run a higher uncore. that is the only weak link in my W3680. won't run with a multi that brings it above 3600. have to do with base clock to get near 3800. My X5670 would do 4200mhz with 1.38v's for benching. but the max core was weak, at 4.35GHz.

So if i try to set these manually, what kind of difference between the channels should i try?
Has anyone messed with back to back latency, and control, and data voltages??


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I'm right there with you. I have tried to tighten beyond the auto before, with no luck. maybe loosening them will let me run a higher uncore. that is the only weak link in my W3680. won't run with a multi that brings it above 3600. have to do with base clock to get near 3800. My X5670 would do 4200mhz with 1.38v's for benching. but the max core was weak, at 4.35GHz.


Could depend on the mobo and many different variables. But auto is, well, auto - the BIOS sets whatever it feels like.

Another thing is that what BIOS reports as a "grey" value is not necessarily a current value being use under auto. Sometimes it reports previously used or straight stock setting.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> So if i try to set these manually, what kind of difference between the channels should i try?
> Has anyone messed with back to back latency, and control, and data voltages??


Personally I see little to no point having different settings on different channels.But, whatever floats your boat I guess.


----------



## OCmember

@SmOgER I lowered my Ram to 1656 and put the uncore at 1.5x the RAM and it did lower the RTL a little. Channel 1 42, Channgel 2 & 3 44


----------



## OCmember

Revisiting an old RAM kit. Well my latest kit that I bought but in my Gaming rig. Using the Crucial LP Tactical Ballistix. Got the kit doing 2320MHz at some really loose timings. Running Realbench at the moment. Uncore 3.5Ghz, QPI Freqs 4Ghz, DRAM 1.65v. Will update if it passes and provide the timings. I know the timings are total loose crap but just having some fun. Will tighten timings later, just trying to push the DRAM Freq and see how it does.

EDIT: Passed Real Bench 16G, 15m

All settings on AUTO
CL 11,12,12,31. tRFC 232, tREF 849, 1T
RTL 56 (1), RTL 58 (2)


----------



## killer625

hey guys,
i recently bought x5660, sadly the thing seems to not like my gigabye ga-ex58-UD4P. When I went through this thread I saw couple guys with similar problems to mine. I can run the procesor fine, but when I want to restart it, I have to shut it down and turn on again. Restarting ends up being black screen. Gonna try all the possible versions of bios available to my motherboard on the saturday when I have some more time. Wondering if someone maybe manage to get it running on UD4P.

Cheers


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killer625*
> 
> hey guys,
> i recently bought x5660, sadly the thing seems to not like my gigabye ga-ex58-UD4P. When I went through this thread I saw couple guys with similar problems to mine. I can run the procesor fine, but when I want to restart it, I have to shut it down and turn on again. Restarting ends up being black screen. Gonna try all the possible versions of bios available to my motherboard on the saturday when I have some more time. Wondering if someone maybe manage to get it running on UD4P.
> 
> Cheers


I know i have seen guys inject the microcode into a bios with an editor. Could ask here or over at http://www.overclock.net/t/1489955/official-x58-xeon-club


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Revisiting an old RAM kit. Well my latest kit that I bought but in my Gaming rig. Using the Crucial LP Tactical Ballistix. Got the kit doing 2320MHz at some really loose timings. Running Realbench at the moment. Uncore 3.5Ghz, QPI Freqs 4Ghz, DRAM 1.65v. Will update if it passes and provide the timings. I know the timings are total loose crap but just having some fun. Will tighten timings later, just trying to push the DRAM Freq and see how it does.
> 
> EDIT: Passed Real Bench 16G, 15m
> 
> All settings on AUTO
> CL 11,12,12,31. tRFC 232, tREF 849, 1T
> RTL 56 (1), RTL 58 (2)


Well the kit is running great. Just not sure if the sub system can handle it. It passes every test. 500% on memtest ich. IBT is fine. One thing I'm noticing is in UT sometimes weapons don't fire properly where as with my other kit things aren't noticeable. I know the game is still in Alpha mode but there is an obvious difference.

I've ran Real Bench 2.4 and benched it and I can't tell what some of the results mean:

System = 4.3GHz HT on, QPI 4GHz, forgot the Uncore between the two.

*Crucial DDR3 @ 2320MHz* CL 11,12,12,31. tRFC 232, 1T
Image Editing
112386
Time: 76.344

Encoding
104310
Time: 114.929

Open CL
31131
KSamples/sec 581

Heavy Multitasking
105212
Time: 92.955

System Score
82033

*G.Skill Perfect Storm @ 1986MHz* CL 8.8.8.21, tRFC 60, 2T
Image Editing
112312
Time: 76.394

Encoding
105078
Time: 114.086

OpenCL
31131
KSamples/sec: 582

Heavy Multitasking
106392
Time: 91.924

System Score
82502


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well the kit is running great. Just not sure if the sub system can handle it. It passes every test. 500% on memtest ich. IBT is fine. One thing I'm noticing is in UT sometimes weapons don't fire properly where as with my other kit things aren't noticeable. I know the game is still in Alpha mode but there is an obvious difference.
> 
> I've ran Real Bench 2.4 and benched it and I can't tell what some of the results mean:
> 
> *Crucial DDR3 @ 2320MHz*
> Image Editing
> 112386
> Time: 76.344
> 
> Encoding
> 104310
> Time: 114.929
> 
> Open CL
> 31131
> KSamples/sec 581
> 
> Heavy Multitasking
> 105212
> Time: 92.955
> 
> System Score
> 82033
> 
> *G.Skill Perfect Storm @ 1986MHz*
> Image Editing
> 112312
> Time: 76.394
> 
> Encoding
> 105078
> Time: 114.086
> 
> OpenCL
> 31131
> KSamples/sec: 582
> 
> Heavy Multitasking
> 106392
> Time: 91.924
> 
> System Score
> 82502


Those scores are so negligibly different it's not even funny.. But i did actually laugh a bit. I think that you should settle with where ever your system feels better. The synthetic benches only go so far, and sometimes the best benches result in some really weird stuff.

You may try a really tight 9-9-9-24 in the 1980mhz area
or even 8-8-8-24 1866mhz. Actually the best config I have found with a decent core clock


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Those scores are so negligibly different it's not even funny.. But i did actually laugh a bit. I think that you should settle with where ever your system feels better. The synthetic benches only go so far, and sometimes the best benches result in some really weird stuff.
> 
> You may try a really tight 9-9-9-24 in the 1980mhz area
> or even 8-8-8-24 1866mhz. Actually the best config I have found with a decent core clock


Sorry. What do you think about the G.Skill running at cl 8.8.8.21 tRFC 60 2T, 1986MHz ? I forgot to include that info, will edit the post

EDIT: what apps would you recommend to find the difference in performance?


----------



## killer625

I gave up with my ga-ex58-ud4p. Looking to buy new motherboard, currently deciding between GA-X58A-UD5 v1, Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5, P6T DELUXE V2, P6T WS PRO and ASUS Rampage II Extreme. Gigabyte boards are cheaper than their asus counterparts, Rampage II being the most expensive. Question is if they are worth the price difference ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killer625*
> 
> I gave up with my ga-ex58-ud4p. Looking to buy new motherboard, currently deciding between GA-X58A-UD5 v1, Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5, P6T DELUXE V2, P6T WS PRO and ASUS Rampage II Extreme. Gigabyte boards are cheaper than their asus counterparts, Rampage II being the most expensive. Question is if they are worth the price difference ?


I read the UD5 is a monster for performance. Go with the v1. There is an article somewhere about how nice it is.

EDIT: Ah, here is something about the Rev 2

https://web.archive.org/web/20151113112437/http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?262904-GA-X58A-UD5-Revision-2-0-the-MOST-in-Depth-Review-Analysis


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sorry. What do you think about the G.Skill running at cl 8.8.8.21 tRFC 60 2T, 1986MHz ? I forgot to include that info, will edit the post
> 
> EDIT: what apps would you recommend to find the difference in performance?


AIDA64 is the most familiar x58 mem test around. Curious to see your results.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I read the UD5 is a monster for performance. Go with the v1. There is an article somewhere about how nice it is.
> 
> EDIT: Ah, here is something about the Rev 2
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/20151113112437/http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?262904-GA-X58A-UD5-Revision-2-0-the-MOST-in-Depth-Review-Analysis


Careful about some of those Gigabyte boards. It may not work correctly according to this. It may "work" but may not be able to get the BCLK past a certain point or may lock the uncore multiplier. I'd personally stick with known working boards.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killer625*
> 
> I gave up with my ga-ex58-ud4p. Looking to buy new motherboard, currently deciding between GA-X58A-UD5 v1, Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5, P6T DELUXE V2, P6T WS PRO and ASUS Rampage II Extreme. Gigabyte boards are cheaper than their asus counterparts, Rampage II being the most expensive. Question is if they are worth the price difference ?


What kind of price difference are you talking? The P6T Deluxe V2 usually goes pretty cheap and will overclock almost as well as any other board, it's just missing some of the nicer features like USB3 and offset voltage.


----------



## OCmember

My memory fails me but I thought there was someone in this thread or the other that had no issues with their UD5 ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> AIDA64 is the most familiar x58 mem test around. Curious to see your results.


What is the trial version like? 30 Days then it won't function or does the trial have limited features? Or is there a full free version out?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What is the trial version like? 30 Days then it won't function or does the trial have limited features? Or is there a full free version out?


Well the trial is a locked watered down version. There is always free full versions of anything. just a matter how you search









The extreme version gives some great options. I will say i do love having the "LCD panel" option. This is a from scratch system monitor that stays on my old tf101 at all times through wifi


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Well the trial is a locked watered down version. There is always free full versions of anything. just a matter how you search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The extreme version gives some great options. I will say i do love having the "LCD panel" option. This is a from scratch system monitor that stays on my old tf101 at all times through wifi


So the 30 day trial functions the same after 30 days like it usually would? Don't think I need the LCD thing...


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> So the 30 day trial functions the same after 30 days like it usually would? Don't think I need the LCD thing...


No, the trial version is pretty comprehensive when it comes to information on your system, but the benches and some of the other beneficial functionality is partially or completely closed off. You DO have to purchase it for full functionality. Or find it in another "MANOR"


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> My memory fails me but I thought there was someone in this thread or the other that had no issues with their UD5 ?


Depends on the UD5. The EX58-UD5 works without issue, but the X58-UD5 could have some compatibility issues.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Well the trial is a locked watered down version. There is always free full versions of anything. just a matter how you search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The extreme version gives some great options. I will say i do love having the "LCD panel" option. This is a from scratch system monitor that stays on my old tf101 at all times through wifi
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That's pretty cool. I have an old unused HP Touchpad with android on it. May have to try that out.


----------



## killer625

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Careful about some of those Gigabyte boards. It may not work correctly according to this. It may "work" but may not be able to get the BCLK past a certain point or may lock the uncore multiplier. I'd personally stick with known working boards.
> What kind of price difference are you talking? The P6T Deluxe V2 usually goes pretty cheap and will overclock almost as well as any other board, it's just missing some of the nicer features like USB3 and offset voltage.


The thread you posted is ancient knowledge, there were couple newer bios versions released since then, does not have any ground today. They list UD4P as incompatible, dunno what they mean, but my board works with it, just won't let me play with it too much ( 150 bclk limit) and i cant restart PC, gotta shut it down and turn on again, thats all the issues. Works well and is 24h prime95 stable at 3,45ghz. Plus many people even in this thread got some nice OCs on their UD5s. P6T Deluxe V2 is around 50$ more expensive than UD5s, thats current motherboards selling though.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killer625*
> 
> The thread you posted is ancient knowledge, there were couple newer bios versions released since then, does not have any ground today. They list UD4P as incompatible, dunno what they mean, but my board works with it, just won't let me play with it too much ( 150 bclk limit) and i cant restart PC, gotta shut it down and turn on again, thats all the issues. Works well and is 24h prime95 stable at 3,45ghz. Plus many people even in this thread got some nice OCs on their UD5s. P6T Deluxe V2 is around 50$ more expensive than UD5s, thats current motherboards selling though.


That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. 150mhz limit to me means that it is not 100% compatible for overclocking the x56xx's as most decent boards have no problem with 200mhz+. My P6T Deluxe v2 was stable all the way up to 221mhz.

P6T Deluxe V2's regularly go for less than $150 and sometimes less. The UD5's actually seem to go for more. _(just looking at ebay)_

I'm not saying the asus is a better board, it's just that it has a higher chance of working well at higher clocks with the x56xx's.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Well the kit is running great. Just not sure if the sub system can handle it. It passes every test. 500% on memtest ich. IBT is fine. One thing I'm noticing is in UT sometimes weapons don't fire properly where as with my other kit things aren't noticeable. I know the game is still in Alpha mode but there is an obvious difference.
> 
> I've ran Real Bench 2.4 and benched it and I can't tell what some of the results mean:
> 
> System = 4.3GHz HT on, QPI 4GHz, forgot the Uncore between the two.
> 
> *Crucial DDR3 @ 2320MHz* CL 11,12,12,31. tRFC 232, 1T
> Image Editing
> 112386
> Time: 76.344
> 
> Encoding
> 104310
> Time: 114.929
> 
> Open CL
> 31131
> KSamples/sec 581
> 
> Heavy Multitasking
> 105212
> Time: 92.955
> 
> System Score
> 82033
> 
> *G.Skill Perfect Storm @ 1986MHz* CL 8.8.8.21, tRFC 60, 2T
> Image Editing
> 112312
> Time: 76.394
> 
> Encoding
> 105078
> Time: 114.086
> 
> OpenCL
> 31131
> KSamples/sec: 582
> 
> Heavy Multitasking
> 106392
> Time: 91.924
> 
> System Score
> 82502


You got me going when i was reading this one. I'm kind of a bit of a ram overclock freak. So i did some late night system testing (about the only time i get it) , and was able t reach a stable OC that was quite surprising.



Was really shocked that it posted at 9-9-9-27 CR1 @ 1.59v's

Gonna do some some stability testing, and run real bench for you now


----------



## DRKreiger

Here's the realbench 2.4

Image Editing
192072
Time:26.49

Encoding
167736
Time:57.161

OpenCL
50817
KSamples/sec: 1090

Heavy Multitasking
178898
Time:54.668

System Score
137217


----------



## OCmember

If that's the Crucial LP Tactical Ballistix it should be able to hit the same as mine did. I was using 1.65v Just keep the Uncore VTT within .50 of the DRAM voltages.





With my system I looked at an old RB test when I had my system at 4.1Ghz and it was slower obviously, and I noticed that HT off also made a difference. With your results your CPU isn't clocked much higher than mine at 4.3GHz, and from what I can see you have a GTX 780. No surprise but it makes sense. Nice work

Hmm, the trial version doesn't tell me much. Tested it on my X5690 machine.


----------



## DRKreiger

I really think something else is still wrong. I think the only major difference should be the open CL. But all the scores are considerably lower.

EDIT: I was just looking at the AIDA results. I think the memory latency has a serious problem. If i run almost the same settings, I get a latency of 50ns or less


----------



## DRKreiger

Actually, evry score that is visible seems quite low. Have tried anything to correct that?

You could also be running double that uncore speed. huge jump in performance


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> If that's the Crucial LP Tactical Ballistix it should be able to hit the same as mine did. I was using 1.65v Just keep the Uncore VTT within .50 of the DRAM voltages.


I'll take 2133 at 9-9-9-27 over the 11's and 31 any day


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Actually, evry score that is visible seems quite low. Have tried anything to correct that?
> 
> You could also be running double that uncore speed. huge jump in performance


There was a user here that got great results without using a massive amount uncore. I forgot the RAM he purchased. I guess the cheap way out is to increase the heat and voltage to run high uncore, but usually it isn't necessary.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> There was a user here that got great results without using a massive amount uncore. I forgot the RAM he purchased. I guess the cheap way out is to increase the heat and voltage to run high uncore, but usually it isn't necessary.


So how does that help with such a serious difference in scores that we are seeing??

I know the 11's weill cause a bit of a drop in latency, but even the read times for the RAM alone should be double that at 2300mhz.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> So how does that help with such a serious difference in scores that we are seeing??
> 
> I know the 11's weill cause a bit of a drop in latency, but even the read times for the RAM alone should be double that at 2300mhz.


I'll see if I can find the post.


----------



## OCmember

Not sure if you are aware but the AIDA results are from my main rig. I set the uncore low. The bios, for some reason, was setting the Uncore to something like 3.2GHz on Auto. I don't have a readout for the VTT so I manually set the volts to 1.2v (my EVGA does this on auto) I was a little worried about corruption without knowing the VTT while the Uncore was at 3.2GHz. It's quick the way it is now. The kit in it is an old Muskin Kit, 1333 CL7.7.7.20 but I have it running from default settings. I took crucial out of both machines. I'm going to stick the Crucial kit back in this X5690 machine and see what the results show at the same settings as they are now.

As for the Real Bench results. The first two are at the same core speed, the Uncore I'm not sure of though. I think 3.5GHz Uncore was with the Crucial kit (2320MHz) and the G.Skill kit had the Uncore at 3.8GHz.. I think.

I'll retest again later. Also I'm not sure I'm going to run the AIDA software on my game rig. I might..


----------



## OCmember

Forgot to mention I did have a few apps open while running AIDA64 on my main rig. Whoops.


----------



## OCmember

Muskin Kit on X5690



Crucial Kit on X5690


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I'll take 2133 at 9-9-9-27 over the 11's and 31 any day


My X58 chipset on my EVGA rig (gaming rig) doesn't allow for an unlocked chip. Also the Turbo doesn't work on it so I am stuck with the results of the BCLK on the Memory freq. Try 1160MHz (2320MHz) on your kit if you can.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> My X58 chipset on my EVGA rig (gaming rig) doesn't allow for an unlocked chip. Also the Turbo doesn't work on it so I am stuck with the results of the BCLK on the Memory freq. Try 1160MHz (2320MHz) on your kit if you can.


I have had a chip eat the dirt due to really high memory speed, so I would like to stay where i'm at. Maybe someone else here that has not had my nasty luck with this result can give it a whirl.

I am too quite curious at the result of another system with the same settings (or close to it) running the ADIA64 memory bench


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I have had a chip eat the dirt due to really high memory speed, so I would like to stay where i'm at. Maybe someone else here that has not had my nasty luck with this result can give it a whirl.
> 
> I am too quite curious at the result of another system with the same settings (or close to it) running the ADIA64 memory bench


That sucks! How and what happened? Did you overlook something and blow it up? I've heard about the 2GHz max memory speed on X58 but I'm not sure how or why that is?


----------



## OCmember

Here is the Crucial on the same system same timings but with the Uncore at 2666MHz



EDITED:

Here is the Mushkin kit same system same timings but with the Uncore at 2666MHz


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I have had a chip eat the dirt due to really high memory speed, so I would like to stay where i'm at. Maybe someone else here that has not had my nasty luck with this result can give it a whirl.
> 
> I am too quite curious at the result of another system with the same settings (or close to it) running the ADIA64 memory bench


Here were my results from a while back when I compared a bunch of different speeds:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



RAM 1864mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4092mhz -186x22
UCLK 3728mhz
Read 27801
Write: 23640
Copy: 31440
Latency: 52.8

RAM 2045mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4080mhz 186x22
UCLK 3681mhz
Read: 28981
Write: 22960
Copy: 34026
Latency: 50.3

RAM 2200mhz 10-11-10-27 1t
CPU 3960mhz 220x18
UCLK 3728mhz
Read: 28210
Write: 23442
Copy: 33659
Latency: 51.5

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz
Read: 29210
Write: 23882
Copy: 33550
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3600mhz
Read: 28426
Write: 22520
Copy: 33357
Latency: 50.4

RAM 2000mhz 9-10-9-24 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz
Read: 27082
Write: 20065
Copy: 32599
Latency: 53.4

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3800mhz
Read: 27047
Write: 23803
Copy: 28107
Latency: 51.5

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 3200mhz
Read: 25682
Write: 20039
Copy: 27113
Latency: 52.8

RAM 1600mhz 7-8-7-21 1t
CPU 4000mhz 200x20
UCLK 2400mhz
Read: 22255
Write: 15330
Copy: 26401
Latency: 59.4


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Here is the Crucial on the same system same timings but with the Uncore at 2666MHz


Bump up that uclk to 3200mhz+ and you'll probably see much better results.


----------



## SmOgER

Those are some terrible numbers to be completely honest. I would never settle on anything close to 15MB/s (only) read speeds with x58 system. That's more like what the ancient LGA775 P45T would get which hardly manages to beat DDR2.

Same goes for latency, 56-63ns is what I would consider acceptable, 53-56 average, 48-52 good, <47 really good.


----------



## OCmember

Totally understand. That's my daily machine. I've no interest in compromising stability with that machine. My game rig is a different story









Gonna get around to running some numbers on it later today.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Totally understand. That's my daily machine. I've no interest in compromising stability with that machine. My game rig is a different story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna get around to running some numbers on it later today.


Is 1066mhz the limit of that memory? I think that will almost certainly cause a bottleneck. 1600mhz -1866mhz is about the sweet spot for x58, much higher and it really doesn't make much difference.


----------



## OCmember

BTW that crucial kit is just dual channel the muskin is tripple, if that matters


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> BTW that crucial kit is just dual channel the muskin is tripple, if that matters


It 'does' matter, but only by 5-10% of total bandwidth or so.
The difference is actually much smaller than most think.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Is 1066mhz the limit of that memory? I think that will almost certainly cause a bottleneck. 1600mhz -1866mhz is about the sweet spot for x58, much higher and it really doesn't make much difference.


The kit will do 1333MHz ~ 1.5-1.6v cl7.7.7.20. I've pushed it before on my game rig but wasn't too experienced with the overclocking on the EVGA board. My best was in the 1400MHz range but again something else could of been holding it back. I don't know. I might try it later tonight, though and see how they do. The game rig is currently doing 1656 cl8.8.8.21, 1T @ 1.6v Uncore 2.4Ghz Seems to be a sweet spot. Still gonna play around with it, where is the fun if one doesn't?!?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Uncore 2.4Ghz


That's _very_ low.
It's so low that the RAM speed hardly even matters at this point, you _won't_ have a decent bandwidth regardless of your RAM.

I would say don't even start overclocking your RAM unless you have your uncore at at least 3Ghz or so. Around 3.4Ghz is usually the sweet spot for final settings.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> It 'does' matter, but only by 5-10% of total bandwidth or so.
> The difference is actually much smaller than most think.


That's only because of the limitations of x58. If you'd do that on 2011 you'd actually lose almost exactly 25%. _(for example, on my system it drops from ~65gb/s to ~50gb/s if I remove one stick)_

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The kit will do 1333MHz ~ 1.5-1.6v cl7.7.7.20. I've pushed it before on my game rig but wasn't too experienced with the overclocking on the EVGA board. My best was in the 1400MHz range but again something else could of been holding it back. I don't know. I might try it later tonight, though and see how they do. The game rig is currently doing 1656 cl8.8.8.21, 1T @ 1.6v Uncore 2.4Ghz Seems to be a sweet spot. Still gonna play around with it, where is the fun if one doesn't?!?


Yeah, I guess it doesn't matter too much if you aren't using any memory heavy applications.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> It 'does' matter, but only by 5-10% of total bandwidth or so.
> The difference is actually much smaller than most think.


I thought my G.Skill kit was crapping out so I bought the Crucial as a replacement. Actually bought one 8Gb stick at a time (wrong move, i know) It's a decent kit but for now I'm sticking with the G.Skill kit in the Game rig. It's an Elpida Hyper kit MGH-E ICs. They survived while most other kits have died (knock on wood)


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Here is the Crucial on the same system same timings but with the Uncore at 2666MHz
> 
> 
> 
> EDITED:
> 
> Here is the Mushkin kit same system same timings but with the Uncore at 2666MHz


Looks like the Tripple channel on the Muskin kit started to stretch it's legs when the Uncore was changed to 2666MHz from 1600MHz. The Crucial kit stayed somewhere in the same vicinity.


----------



## DRKreiger

may be the lay out of the memory chips. are theses all dual rank sticks?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> may be the lay out of the memory chips. are theses all dual rank sticks?


I don't have the link for the Muskin kit I'm benching but I have links for the other two if that helps.

EDIT: Ah, searched through my order history and found the Muskin kit

G.Skill Perfect Storm

Crucial Ballistix low profile

Muskin Enhanced Blackline

Thanks


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Looks like the Tripple channel on the Muskin kit started to stretch it's legs when the Uncore was changed to 2666MHz from 1600MHz. The Crucial kit stayed somewhere in the same vicinity.


No no no no .....push push push.....more more more.....uncore uncore uncore! That's what most people will tell you.

No seriously usually it's the RAM and high uncore isn't needed for good performance overall. Pushing uncore is voltage isn't always the answer. I couldn't find the post, but when I do I'll post it.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No no no no .....push push push.....more more more.....uncore uncore uncore! That's what most people will tell you.
> 
> No seriously usually it's the RAM and high uncore isn't needed for good performance overall. Pushing uncore is voltage isn't always the answer. I couldn't find the post, but when I do I'll post it.


Haha, sounds good! In the meantime I'm testing my G.Skill Triple channel kit at 1986MHz at cl8.8.8.24. tRFC 98, 1T. It won't do cl8.8.8.21 tRFC 60 1T. Testing with Real Bench and IBT 3072mb 10 runs. It passed Real Bench, waiting to see if IBT passes. I've disabled HT as of late. Just testing things out. Uncore @ 3.47GHz

EDIT: getting a steady 92.5 GFlops/s (HT Off), couple of close 93s and some low 92s..

EDIT2: passed IBT. Gonna run 3 instances of Memtest HCI at 1024mb a piece

EDIT3: Passed Memtest HCI > 200%; doing some P95 1 min iterations. v27.9 build1


----------



## OCmember

Is there a best Prime 95 version for X58 and these Westmere chips?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Is there a best Prime 95 version for X58 and these Westmere chips?


Just use the latest version and stress test.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Just use the latest version and stress test.


Ok. It kept failing and rebooting. I think the memory can't do 8's 24 at 1T @ 1986MHz It can do 8.8.8.21, tRFC 60 2T all day long. Gonna settle for 1656MHz at 8.8.8.24 1T and just double the Uncore for now.

That 1T 2T difference is very noticeable in gaming


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No no no no .....push push push.....more more more.....uncore uncore uncore! That's what most people will tell you.
> 
> No seriously usually it's the RAM and high uncore isn't needed for good performance overall. Pushing uncore is voltage isn't always the answer. I couldn't find the post, but when I do I'll post it.


Well, you have to admit 1600mhz uncore is a bit too low. Stock usually sits around 2400-2800mhz depending on the configuration.

I tested some memory clocked at 1600mhz and compared the uncore at 2400mhz, 3200mhz, and 3800mhz _(posted a few pages back)_. The write speeds increased a bit over 30% just going from 2400mhz _(15,330 mb/s)_ to 3200mhz _(20,039mb/s)_, and about 55% going to 3800mhz _(23,803 mb/s)._


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Well, you have to admit 1600mhz uncore is a bit too low. Stock usually sits around 2400-2800mhz depending on the configuration.
> 
> I tested some memory clocked at 1600mhz and compared the uncore at 2400mhz, 3200mhz, and 3800mhz _(posted a few pages back)_. The write speeds increased a bit over 30% just going from 2400mhz _(15,330 mb/s)_ to 3200mhz _(20,039mb/s)_, and about 55% going to 3800mhz _(23,803 mb/s)._


Great info.

I like the Uncore at 3.8Ghz but I need 1.320v to make it work. It's a tiny thorn in my side thinking about it and I hate running stability tests with the volts that high on the uncore and the uncore at that speed. It's stable but I don't want to burn it out.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Great info.
> 
> I like the Uncore at 3.8Ghz but I need 1.320v to make it work. It's a tiny thorn in my side thinking about it and I hate running stability tests with the volts that high on the uncore and the uncore at that speed. It's stable but I don't want to burn it out.


Yeah, I don't think 3800mhz is worth the extra volts. Around 3000-3200mhz seems to be the sweet spot, I ended up at 3200mhz for 24/7 and was able to run only 1.2v VTT.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah, I don't think 3800mhz is worth the extra volts. Around 3000-3200mhz seems to be the sweet spot, I ended up at 3200mhz for 24/7 and was able to run only 1.2v VTT.


It's all a relative end result, especially when it comes to the performance you are looking to get out of the system, vs temps and voltage you are comfortable with.

tbob22 likes his VTT around 1.2. I personally can go to 1.34. Vcore I run 1.375 (sometimes higher) for benching 1.3475 all day to keep it alive.
But mine is a W series.

The X series is not so forgiving with the juice.


----------



## OCmember

Here is the triple channel Mushkin kit at 1333Mhz and 2400Mhz Uncore. The scores look better than simply raising the Uncore to 2666 while leaving the RAM at 1066. I bet if the Uncore was 2666 the L3 numbers would be higher.



EDIT: added the Mushkin kit @ 1333 and Uncore @ 2666


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Here is the triple channel Mushkin kit at 1333Mhz and 2400Mhz Uncore. The scores look better than simply raising the Uncore to 2666 while leaving the RAM at 1066. I bet if the Uncore was 2666 the L3 numbers would be higher.


Those are pretty good numbers, from what is visible. That is a super conservative OC, so it looks pretty on par.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Those are pretty good numbers, from what is visible. That is a super conservative OC, so it looks pretty on par.


Thanks. I edited the previous post with the Uncore at 2666 and RAM at 1333.. the numbers look a little better.

The cores are not overclocked. It's all running on auto except for the Uncore and RAM.

I tried the Mushkin kit in my EVGA rig and it failed miserably. I think it has compatibility issues. Ended up sticking the triple channel G.skill kit back in. Love that kit

I was fooling with my Gaming rig last night and swapped around some BCLK numbers and multipliers. I got it running @ 180.5 x 24. It's still giving me around the same core speed 4.33GHz. The QPI Frequency is 3Mhz lower but still close to 4GHz. It's like 3971MHz. Had to drop the QPI multiplier to 22. The Uncore is right around 3.6Ghz doing 3611MHz. I ended up with some nice RAM speed numbers. It's hitting ~ 900MHz. I got it doing cl8.8.8.21 tRFC 60 @ 1T Stability tested it and it passed. The system feels quicker. Not sure why, I could be imagining things.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> It's all a relative end result, especially when it comes to the performance you are looking to get out of the system, vs temps and voltage you are comfortable with.
> 
> tbob22 likes his VTT around 1.2. I personally can go to 1.34. Vcore I run 1.375 (sometimes higher) for benching 1.3475 all day to keep it alive.
> But mine is a W series.
> 
> The X series is not so forgiving with the juice.


For me it was more like choosing between these to keep temps under 70c:
4.4ghz 1.325v 3200mhz uncore 1.2v
4.2ghz 1.25v 3600mhz uncore 1.3v
4.1ghz 1.225v 3800mhz uncore 1.35v

They all produced similar temps. I ended up with the first as that gave me the best performance all around.


----------



## Ferro10

Hello
I am new to the forum and would like to ask a help on coming overclock a X5660.

my system is as follows:
p6t deluxe V2
ZOTAC GTX 970 AMP! Omega Core Edition
i7 920 [email protected] 4.2ghz (ex cpu Now mount the X5660)
Thermalright venus x
6gb G.skill Trident 1600mhz 6-7-6-18 t1

I managed to be stable at 4.4ghz with these settings:
210x21=4.4ghz
Vcore= 1.39
qpi/dram core vol= 1.34
dram bus Voltage 1.64
cpu pll= 1.84

temp max 77°

a 1.39 Vcore you can keep it for daily use?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> *4.4ghz 1.325v* 3200mhz uncore 1.2v
> 4.2ghz 1.25v 3600mhz uncore 1.3v
> 4.1ghz 1.225v 3800mhz uncore 1.35v


Is that a golden chip you have there tbob22 or are the W's like that in contrast to the X's?

And a question for all the users in here. Are those read speeds good enough for 1600, 2000 and 2133 MHz RAM respectively, running on the X5650:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









How can I break the 30 GB/s barrier if at all?


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Is that a golden chip you have there tbob22 or are the W's like that in contrast to the X's?
> 
> And a question for all the users in here. Are those read speeds good enough for 1600, 2000 and 2133 MHz RAM respectively, running on the X5650:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can I break the 30 GB/s barrier if at all?


With the corresponding 3.2 and 3.35Ghz uncore your read speeds are perfectly fine.
But since it's a trial version, it doesn't show the whole story unfortunately.

Copy speeds is where it likes to climb closer to 35Gb/s with good RAM.

But ignoring what it's not shown, your [email protected]|2T|_3.35Ghz setup scores almost the same like mine [email protected]|1T|_3.4Ghz. With the exception of latency being slightly higher.
So as far as the images go, I would say you are set.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

OK, great news!

As far as the latencies go, you see, the highest I've dared to go so far with RAM voltage is 1.6 - 1.61V. I know that people run 1.65V 24/7 and then some other people bench at voltages as high as 1.75 - 1.8V, but I don't feel safe about either. At the moment I'm running 1600 @ 8-8-8-24 on Linux for perfect stability (_I was getting crashes, and while those were with a 99% probability caused by Turbo Boost kicking in while it was turned off in the BIOS - Linux P.M. is weird - still I put everything back to stock having no time to debug the case properly at he moment)_, or 1600 7-7-8-21, both at 1.5V (1.53V with my motherboard).

Bottom line: do you think it's safe to use 1.6V to 1.65V on the Crucials with the X5650 and what should the RAM temps be like? Really, really don't want to accidentally degrade the kit. The idea behind running higher voltage is to get tighter latencies, if only for a few bench runs.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Is that a golden chip you have there tbob22 or are the W's like that in contrast to the X's?
> 
> And a question for all the users in here. Are those read speeds good enough for 1600, 2000 and 2133 MHz RAM respectively, running on the X5650:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can I break the 30 GB/s barrier if at all?


I don't know about golden, a few others here have had a bit better chips (closer to [email protected]) but certainly above average. A good W chip can clock just as well, but do usually get a bit warmer.

As far as hitting 30gb/s on read, you'll need to get your uncore to at least 3800mhz or so.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> With the corresponding 3.2 and 3.35Ghz uncore your read speeds are perfectly fine.
> But since it's a trial version, it doesn't show the whole story unfortunately.
> 
> Copy speeds is where it likes to climb closer to 35Gb/s with good RAM.
> 
> But ignoring what it's not shown, your [email protected]|2T|_3.35Ghz setup scores almost the same like mine [email protected]|1T|_3.4Ghz. With the exception of latency being slightly higher.
> So as far as the images go, I would say you are set.


Oh yeah.. those are much better. He was running some 60's and 70's in latency before. great improvement

You are right on par now!!

Edit: I think that was OCmember


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Judging by the screens I've posted here, used to have 60's - 70's latencies as well. Does it make a difference in everyday usage though? The bench results have increased for sure, but other than that, the only area where I think I might feel a difference is BF gaming, and it's been hard to estimate since after a BF3 reinstall, terrible stutter emerged. BF4 was smooth though without a hiccup in the performance overlay graph with ~60 FPS @ 1920x1080 on all lows (and no NVIDIA CP tweaking had been made!), but I only played it after installing the Crucials, through the Origin Game Time limited 1-week trial.

However, the 6 vs 12 threads IBT difference still is there. E..g on my last test run, for 3.5 GHz I think, it was 58 vs 64 GFLOPS.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Judging by the screens I've posted here, used to have 60's - 70's latencies as well. Does it make a difference in everyday usage though? The bench results have increased for sure, but other than that, the only area where I think I might feel a difference is BF gaming, and it's been hard to estimate since after a BF3 reinstall, terrible stutter emerged. BF4 was smooth though without a hiccup in the performance overlay graph with ~60 FPS @ 1920x1080 on all lows (and no NVIDIA CP tweaking had been made!), but I only played it after installing the Crucials, through the Origin Game Time limited 1-week trial.
> 
> However, the 6 vs 12 threads IBT difference still is there. E..g on my last test run, for 3.5 GHz I think, it was 58 vs 64 GFLOPS.


I don't think it'll make much difference. If you are getting 20gb/s+ you're unlikely to see any difference in anything but the most memory intensive applications _(not games)._

That IBT seems a little low, but maybe that's about right for 3.5. How are your cinebench scores?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well, I've been getting less freezes in BF3 on 64 player Metro with the new RAM, so it's either the doubled amount or the increased "speed" of it, or maybe both.

Cinebench 15 is about 925-930 for 200 BCLK, 4.0 GHz, 3.6 GHz QPI, 3.2 GHz uncore, and good RAM settings. OpenGl test in CB15 is slightly above 100 FPS.

Cinebench 11.5 awarded me with a score between 10 and 11 points for 4 GHz, can't recall precisely straight off my head, since I have two runs, one < 10.5 and one > 10.5, recorded.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> Hello
> I am new to the forum and would like to ask a help on coming overclock a X5660.
> 
> my system is as follows:
> p6t deluxe V2
> ZOTAC GTX 970 AMP! Omega Core Edition
> i7 920 [email protected] 4.2ghz (ex cpu Now mount the X5660)
> Thermalright venus x
> 6gb G.skill Trident 1600mhz 6-7-6-18 t1
> 
> I managed to be stable at 4.4ghz with these settings:
> 210x21=4.4ghz
> Vcore= 1.39
> qpi/dram core vol= 1.34
> dram bus Voltage 1.64
> cpu pll= 1.84
> 
> temp max 77°
> 
> a 1.39 Vcore you can keep it for daily use?


no one to help me?


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> no one to help me?


No, i wouldn't go for more than 1.36v for 24/7 and the official guideline is 1.35v.Just drop to 205x21 and put cpu vcore to 1.328-1.350v and start stress testing.You'll be golden.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I'd say the VTT (also called QPI) voltage is a bit too high, what's the exact reason to run it like that? Especially seeing how the RAM is at a mere 1600 MHz, that QPI voltage appears unjustified to me. Regarding safety, it's under the 1.35V limit and is thus safe by the specifications, but from what I understand, it's on the very edge.

77C is high enough on its own and too high for 1.39V vCore in my opinion, since it's not just the voltage that might degrade the CPU, but rather a certain amount of voltage being used under high temps for a prolonged period of time. 1.39V for 4.4.GHZ is alright, there are better results out there, but for my X5650 wants about 1.44V - 1.45V at that frequency, for example.

Also, it may be possible that at a lower temperature, say 60 - 65C, you may be able to run a lower vCore for the same frequency. I'd recommend investing into a stronger air cooler or getting a decent AIO, since the latter have become more affordable than ever now.


----------



## DRKreiger

^^^ for sure. If you could get 4.2 @ 1.35v's and keep the temps in the 60's, you would be quite good.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> ... I'd recommend investing into a stronger air cooler or getting a decent AIO, since the latter have become more affordable than ever now.


The Thermalright Venomous X is a solid cooler, matching low end AIO's and is pretty close to the D14 if I remember correctly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> no one to help me?


That vcore is a bit high, keep it under or at 1.35v as already mentioned. Drop the QPI voltage as low as possible and run memtest to see if it's still stable, set the uncore to 3000-3200mhz. Set all other voltages to "normal" as specified in the bios, this includes PLL which should be 1.8v at stock.

I'd also recommend keeping temps at or around 70c max for 24/7 use, a bit higher is OK if you see big performance gains with a different combination of settings.


----------



## OCmember

@Ferro10 That's a great ram kit. When were those made?


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> The Thermalright Venomous X is a solid cooler, matching low end AIO's and is pretty close to the D14 if I remember correctly.
> That vcore is a bit high, keep it under or at 1.35v as already mentioned. Drop the QPI voltage as low as possible and run memtest to see if it's still stable, set the uncore to 3000-3200mhz. Set all other voltages to "normal" as specified in the bios, this includes PLL which should be 1.8v at stock.
> 
> I'd also recommend keeping temps at or around 70c max for 24/7 use, a bit higher is OK if you see big performance gains with a different combination of settings.


Tomorrow we get the Noctua NH-D15S so the problem of temperature we solved it
with 1.35 Vcore surely 4.4ghz are not stable I try to 4.3ghz
Then I lower the QPI / DRAM 1.30 and see if the system keeps


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Ferro10 That's a great ram kit. When were those made?


This is the exact model F3-16000CL9-6GBTD
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/Trident_16000_6GB_Kit/1.html


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> This is the exact model F3-16000CL9-6GBTD
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/Trident_16000_6GB_Kit/1.html


That is a pretty good kit. may be able to run them faster, or tighten timings a bit at a little lower speed to get them to run at less than 1.65v's

Ram voltage is a huge temperature overhead on the X58. Newer Intel chipsets have had the ram voltage moved out of the die, for the board to take care of. I was all about finding some 1.35 - 1.5 volt ram kits. When i switched over, and left every setting exactly the same. just was able to run much lower ram voltage. That dropped my temps by 5-7 degrees under load.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> That is a pretty good kit. may be able to run them faster, or tighten timings a bit at a little lower speed to get them to run at less than 1.65v's
> 
> Ram voltage is a huge temperature overhead on the X58. Newer Intel chipsets have had the ram voltage moved out of the die, for the board to take care of. I was all about finding some 1.35 - 1.5 volt ram kits. When i switched over, and left every setting exactly the same. just was able to run much lower ram voltage. That dropped my temps by 5-7 degrees under load.


You sure the ambient temps were the same?

I have that 1.35v Crucial kit. It's decent but some of the secondary timings are noticeable when playing UT4


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> That is a pretty good kit. may be able to run them faster, or tighten timings a bit at a little lower speed to get them to run at less than 1.65v's
> 
> Ram voltage is a huge temperature overhead on the X58. Newer Intel chipsets have had the ram voltage moved out of the die, for the board to take care of. I was all about finding some 1.35 - 1.5 volt ram kits. When i switched over, and left every setting exactly the same. just was able to run much lower ram voltage. That dropped my temps by 5-7 degrees under load.


Damn,wasn't aware of this.This is the ram i'm using.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226185

You think if i go for 1.5v ram i'll be able to lower qpi/vtt thus lowering much further the cpu temps,since now anything below 1.335 vtt i have to up vcore to maintain 4.3ghz?


----------



## DRKreiger

the ambients may have varied a bit. but i did also go from 6 sticks to 3. that may have been a bigger contributor.

The secondary timings are quite tight, well compared to some other i have tested. Trfc is a bit high. Tfaw of 24 is great


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> That is a pretty good kit. may be able to run them faster, or tighten timings a bit at a little lower speed to get them to run at less than 1.65v's
> 
> Ram voltage is a huge temperature overhead on the X58. Newer Intel chipsets have had the ram voltage moved out of the die, for the board to take care of. I was all about finding some 1.35 - 1.5 volt ram kits. When i switched over, and left every setting exactly the same. just was able to run much lower ram voltage. That dropped my temps by 5-7 degrees under load.


currently stable
21x205
Vcore 1.35
dram voltage 1.64
cpu pll 1.80
qpi/dram volt 1.30

max temp 73°


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> currently stable
> 21x205
> Vcore 1.35
> dram voltage 1.64
> cpu pll 1.80
> qpi/dram volt 1.30
> 
> max temp 73°


You are good as it is.See if you can lower cpu vcore to 1.334-36v without changing anything and test.If not i would personally increase one scale qpi/vtt to 1.315v and lower a click or 2 cpu vcore just to run below Intel recommended specs.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> You are good as it is.See if you can lower cpu vcore to 1.334-36v without changing anything and test.If not i would personally increase one scale qpi/vtt to 1.315v and lower a click or 2 cpu vcore just to run below Intel recommended specs.


Now I try with a Vcore of 1.33 to 1.34 then do we know


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> Now I try with a Vcore of 1.33 to 1.34 then do we know


Zaor gave you good advice. I have my VTT adjusted to 1.30v in bios and it reads a little different on the voltage terminal point, software reads 1.4v. There are a few others that are alarmingly far off as well so it's a good idea to be below Intel recommended specs. My DRAM idles around 1.67v but drops hard to 1.64 1.63v at times during stability tests.. This is with it set at 1.65v in bios.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Zaor gave you good advice. I have my VTT adjusted to 1.30v in bios and it reads a little different on the voltage terminal point, software reads 1.4v. There are a few others that are alarmingly far off as well so it's a good idea to be below Intel recommended specs. My DRAM idles around 1.67v but drops hard to 1.64 1.63v at times during stability tests.. This is with it set at 1.65v in bios.


I doubt even 1.3v is needed on that board/chip. Even with my 1600mhz G Skill Ripjaws @ 2000mhz (10-11-10-27-1) it only needs 1.2v VTT with the uncore at 3200mhz.

Where the VTT really needs to be pushed is when you start pushing your uncore past 3500mhz or so, of course it will depend on the setup but the P6T Deluxe v2 has very stable voltages all around.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I doubt even 1.3v is needed on that board/chip. Even with my 1600mhz G Skill Ripjaws @ 2000mhz (10-11-10-27-1) it only needs 1.2v VTT with the uncore at 3200mhz.
> 
> Where the VTT really needs to be pushed is when you start pushing your uncore past 3500mhz or so, of course it will depend on the setup but the P6T Deluxe v2 has very stable voltages all around.


I was encouraging him to keep it under Intel specs. Yeah I need 1.325v for 3.8GHz uncore. 3Ghz barely needs 1.2v VTT


----------



## GENXLR

Just as I've said before the following settings work nice on any CPU and leaves a lot of room to push any X5650+

Blck 200
Multi 20
QPI link (lowest speed)
Ram 1600mhz(use 1T timming if possible, otherwise 2T)
Uncore 3200mhz(or x2)
PCI-E 100

CPU Voltage 1.365
PLL 1.8
VTT/QPI/DRAM Core 1.3v(if fails try 1.35)
IOH 1.2v
ICH 1.4v
DRAM Bus 1.66(if your ram allows, otherwise set your max)

LLC/vDroop Enabled
All spread spectrum disabled
Speed step on
C1E
C states off(may cause major instability with these settings)

You can get to 4.2ghz with ease one the X5660 but then bumping the multiplier, the X5670 bumped twice can easily pull 4.4Ghz and ect.

This is only a quick and dirty OC that could use optimization, I run these settings 24/7 with a stock Intel cooler under IBT max load with ram at 9-9-9-24-1t and 76c max temps and about 76 GFLOPS in IBT(estimated range is 70-78)

I warn you all a good motherboard makes a difference for power filtering capabilities along with a clean power supply to avoid ripples!

Using a Asus P6T and a BFG 1000-EX

Just my two cents, good luck all!!!


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I doubt even 1.3v is needed on that board/chip. Even with my 1600mhz G Skill Ripjaws @ 2000mhz (10-11-10-27-1) it only needs 1.2v VTT with the uncore at 3200mhz.
> 
> Where the VTT really needs to be pushed is when you start pushing your uncore past 3500mhz or so, of course it will depend on the setup but the P6T Deluxe v2 has very stable voltages all around.


I don't know,my memory is 1568,uncore 3136,196x22,1328 cpu vcore, and if i lower vtt to 1.315v i get BSOD 00000x124.Maybe it has to do with running a high voltage ram at 1.65v for 1600mhz thus needing more qpi/vtt?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> I don't know,my memory is 1568,uncore 3136,196x22,1328 cpu vcore, and if i lower vtt to 1.315v i get BSOD 00000x124.Maybe it has to do with running a high voltage ram at 1.65v for 1600mhz thus needing more qpi/vtt?


What board? Using a standard p6t i needed close to 1.3v vtt for only 1600mhz/3200mhz uncore, but the p6t deluxe v2 could go all the way up to 2000mhz/3200mhz uncore while keeping the vtt at 1.2v. Same chip used in both.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> What board? Using a standard p6t i needed close to 1.3v vtt for only 1600mhz/3200mhz uncore, but the p6t deluxe v2 could go all the way up to 2000mhz/3200mhz uncore while keeping the vtt at 1.2v. Same chip used in both.


http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3449#ov
Could well be the mb.These gigabytes while stable they don't post the best numbers,for example i couldn't get bus speed above 202,while others here can go up to 220.


----------



## Ferro10

there is a problem

after 20 cycles of linx with 4gb of ram occupied the system reboots by itself.
so I was not completely stable.

21x205
Vcore 1.35
dram voltage 1.64
CPU PLL 1.80
QPI / DRAM volts 1:30

I try to increase the Vcore 1.36?


----------



## 4everAnoob

No errors?
Maybe Uncore too high/unstable.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> No errors?
> Maybe Uncore too high/unstable.


the error did not see I was not in front of the PC

settings
https://s31.postimg.org/6szr8q1uj/Immagine111111.jpg

voltage values from BIOS
https://postimg.org/image/gzap43vzr/


----------



## Ferro10

stable system with Vcore 1.36


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> stable system with Vcore 1.36


That 100mhz may not be worth the extra voltage. trry to run 4.2 even, and get below the 1.35v's

The "X" series not so forgiving on voltage.

Be sure "LLC" or "compensation" is on full as well


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> stable system with Vcore 1.36


Just do what i said









Qpi/vtt 1.315V and cpu vcore 1.36v-1.344v,you'be okay,temps are fine you can't have 60s on IBT on very high unless you have extreme cooling especially with summer ambients.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Just do what i said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Qpi/vtt 1.315V and cpu vcore 1.36v-1.344v,you'be okay,temps are fine you can't have 60s on IBT on very high unless you have extreme cooling especially with summer ambients.


ok I try to 4.2GHz with a Vcore 1.35-34

but these CPUs are really that sensitive? the difference by 1.35 and 1.36 is very low can give so many serious problems


----------



## OCmember

I would bump up that QPI volt a hair, for 3.6Ghz to maybe 1.325v, bumb up the IOH Vcore to 1.25v, and the ICH Vcore to 1.2v. Or it could be the RAM unstable at those timings.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> ok I try to 4.2GHz with a Vcore 1.35-34
> 
> but these CPUs are really that sensitive? the difference by 1.35 and 1.36 is very low can give so many serious problems


Sorry i mistyped.Keep the 4.3ghz,up the cpu/vtt one step to 1.315volt,lower cpu vcore to 1.33-1.344v,below 1.35v.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Sorry i mistyped.Keep the 4.3ghz,up the cpu/vtt one step to 1.315volt,lower cpu vcore to 1.33-1.344v,below 1.35v.


ok then if I have to stay below 1:35 I have to get off frequency.
I try 203x21


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> ok I try to 4.2GHz with a Vcore 1.35-34
> 
> but these CPUs are really that sensitive? the difference by 1.35 and 1.36 is very low can give so many serious problems


Well yes. Especially the QPI/VTT. I killed a memory channel running at 1.368-1.37v's. have a 5670 here that only cooperates in dual channel mode.

The Xeons only overclock great because they are usually binned better than their desktop counterparts. I'm a bit of a clock speed junky, and just went for the older "W" series.

If you can keep the voltage at (better below) Intel's max spec, the temps in the 60's (some guys run them a lot hotter) you could get a very long time out of the chip.

6 years and still a very viable potent chip. I personally think think the best platform as far as ingenuity by Intel. Especially for it's time.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Well yes. Especially the QPI/VTT. I killed a memory channel running at 1.368-1.37v's. have a 5670 here that only cooperates in dual channel mode.
> 
> The Xeons only overclock great because they are usually binned better than their desktop counterparts. I'm a bit of a clock speed junky, and just went for the older "W" series.
> 
> If you can keep the voltage at (better below) Intel's max spec, the temps in the 60's (some guys run them a lot hotter) you could get a very long time out of the chip.
> 
> 6 years and still a very viable potent chip. I personally think think the best platform as far as ingenuity by Intel. Especially for it's time.


ok thanks for the explanation.

But we talk about QPI / DRAM volts to keep under 1.35 (mine is currently 1.31)

so if I understand correctly the QPI/DRAM volt - Vcore and are to be kept under 1.35


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> ok thanks for the explanation.
> 
> But we talk about QPI / DRAM volts to keep under 1.35 (mine is currently 1.31)
> 
> so if I understand correctly the QPI/DRAM volt - Vcore and are to be kept under 1.35


Can you open up Real Bench without it glitching? If so then that's a good sign you're stable. Of course run the tests though. Again the QPI volts seem a little low for 3.6GHz in my experience.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> ok thanks for the explanation.
> 
> But we talk about QPI / DRAM volts to keep under 1.35 (mine is currently 1.31)
> 
> so if I understand correctly the QPI/DRAM volt - Vcore and are to be kept under 1.35


Yes,correct both below 1.35v.What is the next step for your QPI?DRAM(VTT),like 1.320-1.325v?Up that one step and drop cpu vcore to 1.336-1.344volts if you want 4.3ghz,you are within official Intel limits,otherwise just go for 4.2ghz,you can achieve that around 1.31-1328v cpu core looking at your chip.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Yes,correct both below 1.35v.What is the next step for your QPI?DRAM(VTT),like 1.320-1.325v?Up that one step and drop cpu vcore to 1.336-1.344volts if you want 4.3ghz,you are within official Intel limits,otherwise just go for 4.2ghz,you can achieve that around 1.31-1328v cpu core looking at your chip.


ok I try to 202x21 with a Vcore 1.34


----------



## SmOgER

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Well yes. Especially the QPI/VTT. I killed a memory channel running at 1.368-1.37v's. have a 5670 here that only cooperates in dual channel mode.


Ha, are you sure that was the onky reason and not something else like damaged capacitors was the main factor?
Mine 5650 didn't seem to mind 1.62v QPI/VTT haha. I didn't run that for extensive period of time obviously, but it didn't degrade and nothing bad happened to it during those several hours.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmOgER*
> 
> Ha, are you sure that was the onky reason and not something else like damaged capacitors was the main factor?
> Mine 5650 didn't seem to mind 1.62v QPI/VTT haha. I didn't run that for extensive period of time obviously, but it didn't degrade and nothing bad happened to it during those several hours.


LOL!!!! I was running the same setting for a long time 4.4 core... 2000 ram... 3400 QPI. 1.35-1.65-1.32 volts respectively.
Upped the QPI 2 ticks to 3800 mhz. 1.367 ish volts.
ran some stabilty test (prime i think) and the system shut down after 10-15 seconds. never had channel 3 memory again after that.


----------



## GENXLR

46gflops at that speed is very low. You never provided a uncore speed, try 2x ram speed and then run again, also hold qpi at 1.325 for that but you might be able to use lower


----------



## Ferro10

the system is stable
after an hour of linx with 4gb of ram occupied

202x21
Vcore 1.35
dram voltage 1.64
CPU PLL 1.80
QPI / DRAM volts 1.30


----------



## GENXLR

you aren't providing uncore speed

my i7 920 at 4GHZ produced more G/flops than your current settings... my X5650 at 4Ghz gets 80 G/flops


----------



## DRKreiger

Just set intel burn test to 6 threads it will close to double


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dhiru*
> 
> Totally offtopic.. but I was curious. Which OS do you use? If it's Linux, then what's the kernel version are you currently on? Are you using VFIO to passthrough the card?


using ubuntu server 14.04 lts
yes i am using VFIO passthrough.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> you aren't providing uncore speed
> 
> my i7 920 at 4GHZ produced more G/flops than your current settings... my X5650 at 4Ghz gets 80 G/flops


my speed uncore is 3038mhz and qpi link data rate "auto"

how can I solve the problem of G / flops so low ?


----------



## Ferro10

purchased two X5670 for 50 € each.
we hope to be more lucky

Today the coming of the Noctua NH-D15s hope to recover at least 10 degrees Celsius.


----------



## Punisher64

So this is what I've been running for around a year now. Wasn't 10/10 understanding on OC, but now that I'm looking at my settings (3.8Ghz with x5670) I'm thinking my VTT is way to high? Let me know what you all think:



I'm on an EVGA 132-Bl-E758 board.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well my EVGA X58 is either dead or damaged (one F3, then one F6, afterwards it goes FF and stays like that, on boot). Picked up an ASUS P6T SE from the parents' PC.

This has been a major disappointment. The stuff that I take for granted on the EVGA board, for example, 186 BCLK, 3000 uncore, 1866 RAM at maybe +100 mV QPI or even less, this board simply refuses to do. Tried the highest safe value for the QPI voltage (1.3475V) but no, it wouldn't boot. Tried 200 BCLK, 1600 RAM, 2400 uncore, same QPI, to no avail. It has only been able to do 160 BCLK, auto multi, turbo on, C6 on, EIST on, 2400 uncore, 1600 RAM on auto with vdroop set to safe.

Updating the BIOS to the latest one didn't help, either.

So, well, is it really like that, or is my EVGA board a miracle, or am I doing something wrong?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

punisher64, that VTT is through the roof, the Intel's safety rule is to keep the VTT voltage under 1.35V for daily use, and ven then it's better stay lower than that.


----------



## OCmember

If he has any luck that VTT voltage might be off. Mine reads the same thing on my EVGA 760 A1 Classified while it's set to 1.3v

The Classified is among the best overclocking boards. Rev 1.1 is better.


----------



## Punisher64

Yea I may mess with the OC a bit. What are you all running setting wise? Can someone post a picture of their BIOs? I'm using an x5670


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> my speed uncore is 3038mhz and qpi link data rate "auto"
> 
> how can I solve the problem of G / flops so low ?


If you reduce the thread count on Intel burn Test to 6, instead of running it at 12.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Yea I may mess with the OC a bit. What are you all running setting wise? Can someone post a picture of their BIOs? I'm using an x5670


@punisher64

24x180.5 = 4.33GHz HT off, 1.34v Vcore
+100mV CPU VTT (1.30v) = 3.61GHz uncore
QPI PLL Vcore 1.35v
DIMM 1.65v
IOH Vcore 1.275v
ICH Vcore 1.20v
VTT PWM Freq 370KHz
CPU PWM Freq 940KHz
CPU Impedance Less
QPI Signal Comp Less

QPI multi 22x - 4Ghz


----------



## Punisher64

What can high VTT hurt?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> What can high VTT hurt?


The Integrated Memory Controller (IMC)

EDIT: if it's set under 1.35v then you are good. Like I said mine reads 1.4v on software in the OS, on the voltage terminal it reads 1.3v like I have set in bios.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Yea I may mess with the OC a bit. What are you all running setting wise? Can someone post a picture of their BIOs? I'm using an x5670


I will shoot a pic of my bios, but it is a matter of what board you have. you may have to do some terminology translating to match what reads in your bios.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

What about the P6T SE, is it bad for overclocking?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> What about the P6T SE, is it bad for overclocking?


Not a bad board by any means. Not really known for it's amazing abilities either. base clock max is average to below average. 185-200.
Voltage control acceptable. not loaded with many bells and whistles.
For the price, if you can get a good deal nowadays, it will likely perform with middle of the road results.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Yea I may mess with the OC a bit. What are you all running setting wise? Can someone post a picture of their BIOs? I'm using an x5670


Here you go






EDIT: apparently you have to click on them individually


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> If you reduce the thread count on Intel burn Test to 6, instead of running it at 12.


that is so false! I'm running all threads, if others have to cripple by testing with only 6 threads while I can test all 12 clearly something is wrong!


----------



## GENXLR

Anyone have feedback with X5600 on the Rampage III Extreme


----------



## Punisher64

@DRKreiger it says no image available


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Well finally I'm getting somewhere with the P6T SE, had to disable XMP to get started with decent overclocks, it seems. It doesn't drop vCore at idle with LLC enabled, as opposed to my EVGA SLI3. But, it seems to be able to go further with LLC disabled, on the other hand. The heatsinks also appear to be cooler on the ASUS board.

Managed to get the Crucial Balistix Tactical runnning at 8-8-9-24-1T @ 1.58V. Haven't primed that yet, but Cinebench 15 can finish a few runs successfully with those settings.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> that is so false! I'm running all threads, if others have to cripple by testing with only 6 threads while I can test all 12 clearly something is wrong!


Not the case.. If it is set to auto or all, it may only max out the physical core count. Set it to "12" and see if the throughput drops. HT only useful in highly optimized applications. [email protected], Boinc, photo/video editing, ETC.
The physical cores are exponentially faster than a split core into 2 threads. I am not sure why it may not have this affect with your system. But Turning HT off does not cripple a CPU in any way. In fact it has positive affects on many things.

All I know is that I and many others only get 40-60 Gflops when testing in "HT" mode. Disable "HT" or run IBT at "6" threads, and I personally go to 90+ Gflops. I have offered that as a way to check a rough estimate (Gflops in Lynx/IBT is BS anyways) of your systems poer. Especially if you want to see if your fine tuning is have a positive, or negative impact on your system. As well as if your voltage is sufficient for you current speeds. Inconsistent Gflops often means too little Vcore, or VTT, sometime ram issues as well.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Anyone have feedback with X5600 on the Rampage III Extreme


As for this question yes. Great combo. I was running a 5670 on my R3E for some time. very capable pair, and easy to over clock. Should be able to hit 210-217 base clock on 80% of R3E boards, granted the chance at the silicon lottery doesn't yield a "clunker". A science to choosing the batch number exists.


----------



## GENXLR

On my P6T with an old poor PSU I have my x5650 @ 4ghz pulling 76gflops constantly at 12 threads. Haven't tried 6 and can't for a while. But it seems to be working awesome


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> On my P6T with an old poor PSU I have my x5650 @ 4ghz pulling 76gflops constantly at 12 threads. Haven't tried 6 and can't for a while. But it seems to be working awesome


Thats pretty good for all 12 threads on, at least based on my experience (which may be askew due my slight insanity







)

I was turning out like 70-78 gflops. then turned off HT and ran it again.


----------



## DRKreiger

@Punisher64

I fixed it!!!!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Yea I may mess with the OC a bit. What are you all running setting wise? Can someone post a picture of their BIOs? I'm using an x5670


Here you go


----------



## Punisher64

What CPU is that Kroger?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> What CPU is that Kroger?


Xeon W3680. Xeon variant of the 980x. completely unlocked. The board can take me to 215 ish base clock. but the chip will let me set any multiplier, including memory.


----------



## GENXLR

Whats that adorable little monitoring device in the lower corner?


----------



## gofasterstripes

crosspost from the x79+ thread :

http://www.overclock.net/t/1591590/xeon-hacking-and-overclocking-x79-x99-beyond-x58/280_40#post_25268041

Anyone with nothing to lose fancy trying to block the one set of QPI connections on a Dual-QPI Xeon?

The hope would be that if there is an identical or nearly identical single-QPI chip, it would be detected as such and or perhaps unlock the multiplier [particually if the single QPI version otherwises matches an unblocked chip].


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> crosspost from the x79+ thread :
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1591590/xeon-hacking-and-overclocking-x79-x99-beyond-x58/280_40#post_25268041
> 
> Anyone with nothing to lose fancy trying to block the one set of QPI connections on a Dual-QPI Xeon?
> 
> The hope would be that if there is an identical or nearly identical single-QPI chip, it would be detected as such and or perhaps unlock the multiplier [particually if the single QPI version otherwises matches an unblocked chip].


I think the packages are different between those two series of chips. At least in the X58 counterparts. x5680 has a different max temperature, and takes 10x the amount of ram. as apposed to the unlocked counterpart, the W3680. The chips them selves I believe are different, not just a locked out version one another.

I would link the Intel Ark spec sheet, but apparently it is down right now









So here is CPU boss

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-X5680-vs-Intel-Xeon-W3680

But i could be wrong


----------



## Punisher64

I saw somewhere else here (Safe QPI Voltage for x58) that the max is 1.5 and people are running 1.45 24/7. Any ideas?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I saw somewhere else here (Safe QPI Voltage for x58) that the max is 1.5 and people are running 1.45 24/7. Any ideas?


Maybe for a bloomfield CPU. but that even seems a tad high. I know the 920 i had, I tried to keep the QPI under 1.45. with the 32nm westmere CPU's, that what dropped to 1.35V's. With the exception of My chip. From a lot of reading, I saw next to zero complaints of it dying at 1.4V's.

Again, this all relative, especially to your cooling


----------



## Punisher64

I've got an NH-D15 on mine. Mines right at 1.4. Now that I see that W3680, I'm really tempted to trade my x5670 in for one.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I've got an NH-D15 on mine. Mines right at 1.4. Now that I see that W3680, I'm really tempted to trade my x5670 in for one.


LOL.. It does make things quite a bit easier. I was really not concerned with the Ram limitations of 24 GB. But the max safe temp. is also 68°c. so that will have to be accounted for.

The batch number seems a little more important with the "W" series as well. "A" series may clock higher with added heat, While "B" series will be a little cooler, and may clock close to the same.

The really important numbers being the last 3. I shot for between 50-150. That is the actual cut location on the wafer Die. lowest being dead center, which has more of a luck of the draw. But the 50-150's have "almost" always proven to be a great chip. I can hit 4.7ghz at 1.42V's "HT OFF" 4.57ghz "HT ON" same voltage. Which I have seen guys running the 980x at 1.45V's vcore 24/7 with enough cooling.


----------



## Punisher64

I'm only at 1.36ish VCore, but at 1.4VTT ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I'm only at 1.36ish VCore, but at 1.4VTT ?


Did you set your VTT to 1.4 in bios?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I'm only at 1.36ish VCore, but at 1.4VTT ?


Do you have voltage measuring points on your board. Mine always reads a bit high in bios and software. 1.375 reads 1.3525 with a multimeter


----------



## DRKreiger

OCMember!!!! you


----------



## OCmember

Haha 10chars


----------



## Elisabeth Rehn

Hi guys,

I'm new here and looking for instructions for overclocking my x5660. My rig:

Mobo: Asus p6x58d premium
CPU: Intel Xeon x5660 & noctua cooler
GPU: Asus R9 290 4gb
RAM: Corsair Vengeance 12gb 2000mhz (3x4gb)
PSU: Zalman ZM-850HP
SSD: Samsung 830 240gb

Question is that I don't know nothing about overclocking so what should I do? I'm satisfied with 3.6ghz-4ghz and sticking with air cooling.

This community is so supportive that even I had courage to ask from you guys! Thanks from advance from your expertise!


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elisabeth Rehn*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> I'm new here and looking for instructions for overclocking my x5660. My rig:
> 
> Mobo: Asus p6x58d premium
> CPU: Intel Xeon x5660 & noctua cooler
> GPU: Asus R9 290 4gb
> RAM: Corsair Vengeance 12gb 2000mhz (3x4gb)
> PSU: Zalman ZM-850HP
> SSD: Samsung 830 240gb
> 
> Question is that I don't know nothing about overclocking so what should I do? I'm satisfied with 3.6ghz-4ghz and sticking with air cooling.
> 
> This community is so supportive that even I had courage to ask from you guys! Thanks from advance from your expertise!


Quick and dirty.
In bios: multiplier 21
bus speed 196
memory x8
ram timings 9-9-9-24 1t

Cpu vcore 1.30v-1.320v
Qpi/Vtt 1.27-1.30v
Load Line Calibration level 2

Run Intel Burn Test on very high 20 passes for stability and prime 4-8h.


----------



## DRKreiger

Welcome to OCN!!!
you could start with a really simple OC
set base clock to 180
make sure the memory speed is set to a default of 1333 mhz (what X5660 multiplier will allow) before the base clock is taken into affect
set the uncore to 3000 or as close as possible.
keep the QPI Link on lowest setting (not slow)
Memory will be dependent on where you base clock sets everything. 180 base clock should put the memory at 1800mhz
Set your memory timings manually, can be found in CPU-Z memory SPD tab.

Start with these voltages as a very simple guideline.

CPU Vcore 1.3 should be more than enough for 3.78 ghz
QPI/VTT 1.3 as well.
Memory voltage set to what ever is spec for the kit

The voltages will likely be able to run much lower, but that is a good starting point. will allow you to get a decent clock, and drop the voltages quite a bit.

Then you could play with higher base clocks.
test stability with prime 95 Large FFT's, fast to show errors.
watch your temps, keep it under 70°C


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Quick and dirty.
> In bios: multiplier 21
> bus speed 196
> memory x8
> ram timings 9-9-9-24 1t
> 
> Cpu vcore 1.30v
> Qpi/Vtt 1.27-1.30v
> 
> Run Intel Burn Test on very high 20 passes for stability and prime 4-8h.


This will bring her to almost 4.2. I would start a little smaller for a very first time over clocking


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hi Elizabeth,

I started learnig X58 overclocking with this guide:

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/

The nice thing about it is that it explains how to find your overclock step by step, narrowing the oveclocking down to one aspect of the system at a time. I recommend that you get familiar with the components and their relationships first, and then try to achieve a mild overclock by following one of the presets listed in the guide.


----------



## DRKreiger

I too read this guide many moons ago








Great read, set some time aside
Much to learn you have


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

In the meantime I've crossflashed the P6T SE with the P6T WS Pro BIOS to overcome turbo throttling, but, well, I'm getting slighhtly lower scores in Cinebench 15 at my favorite 186*22 preset. Maybe it's relaated to the 3400 vs 3000 MHz uncore speed difference. Not sure how fast thee uncore waas on the EVGA when I got 951 CB. To this moment I've only got 931 or so. Not a big deal but I'm definitely OCD when it comes to that kind of stuff









P.S. Should've bought that RIVG for $200 silly me!

DRKrieger, wasn't it, like, you, who said "don't run above 2000 MHz RAM on X58 for the IMC is fragile"? What's that speed in your sig, if I may ask?


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> This will bring her to almost 4.2. I would start a little smaller for a very first time over clocking


4.1 to be precise which is easy to do with a noctua cooler and moderate mb/cpu.180x21 is too moderate,i would go for at least 190x21 with the settings i gave,but that's just me time is precious to spend all day incrementaly increasing 0.5 and testing for an hour.She should start from 4ghz imo and 1.3v vcore and test with setting in bios posted.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> In the meantime I've crossflashed the P6T SE with the P6T WS Pro BIOS to overcome turbo throttling, but, well, I'm getting slighhtly lower scores in Cinebench 15 at my favorite 186*22 preset. Maybe it's relaated to the 3400 vs 3000 MHz uncore speed difference. Not sure how fast thee uncore waas on the EVGA when I got 951 CB. To this moment I've only got 931 or so. Not a big deal but I'm definitely OCD when it comes to that kind of stuff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Should've bought that RIVG for $200 silly me!
> 
> DRKrieger, wasn't it, like, you, who said "don't run above 2000 MHz RAM on X58 for the IMC is fragile"? What's that speed in your sig, if I may ask?


LOL.. Yes that is a 2000+ ram speed setting. I know I know!!! It was my X5670 that bit the dust. I am giving this speed a bit to bake in and see if it is a viable setting.

As for your cinebench score, the drop in uncore of that amount may cause a mild drop in score.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> 4.1 to be precise which is easy to do with a noctua cooler and moderate mb/cpu.180x21 is too moderate,i would go for at least 190x21 with the settings i gave,but that's just me time is precious to spend all day incrementaly increasing 0.5 and testing for an hour.She should start from 4ghz imo and 1.3v vcore and test with setting in bios posted.


Either way, both will get her started. Just don't want to get ahead yourself, and loose track of what may be unstable.

Step by step, and find some comfy voltages.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elisabeth Rehn*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> I'm new here and looking for instructions for overclocking my x5660. My rig:
> 
> Mobo: Asus p6x58d premium
> CPU: Intel Xeon x5660 & noctua cooler
> GPU: Asus R9 290 4gb
> RAM: Corsair Vengeance 12gb 2000mhz (3x4gb)
> PSU: Zalman ZM-850HP
> SSD: Samsung 830 240gb
> 
> Question is that I don't know nothing about overclocking so what should I do? I'm satisfied with 3.6ghz-4ghz and sticking with air cooling.
> 
> This community is so supportive that even I had courage to ask from you guys! Thanks from advance from your expertise!


Which Noctua cooler? I'd probably start off at around 3.6ghz and work your way up from there. Something I always like to do is set all of the voltages in the bios to Normal, this is shown on the right side when each voltage setting is selected. This will prevent the board from pushing voltages up when it isn't needed.

There are a few good guides for overclocking x58 the one posted above is a pretty good starting point, one thing I'd highly recommend is making sure you have a good backup of your system as overclocking can corrupt the system files when it crashes, it is rare but it happens. Overclocking x58 is not quite as easy as some of the newer platforms, so I'd recommend taking your time to learn what each setting does. You can try some of the settings above, but I'd highly recommend figuring out what is best for your system.

A few recommendations:
Vcore: max 1.35v
VTT/QPI Voltage: max 1.35v
Vram voltage: max 1.65v _(dependant on your memory, keep at 1.5v if that's what your memory is)_
PLL voltage: Usually no reason to go above 1.8v, so keep it there unless you have major trouble getting things stable. If you need to bump this up make sure to never go above 1.9v
Uncore: Keep this between 2800-3200mhz

Each chip will overclock differently, if you have a very good chip you may see as high as 4.4ghz at 1.3v, if you have a average chip you'll see around 4.1ghz at 1.3v, if you have a bad chip you may see as low as 3.4ghz at 1.3v. So just take your time to figure out what is best for your setup.

I can post a few screenshots of how my (P6T Deluxe v2) bios looks at say 4ghz for reference if needed.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> If you reduce the thread count on Intel burn Test to 6, instead of running it at 12.


reduced from 12 to 6 the result is 79 G / flops

the result is low?


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

From what I've seen here in a month, not low at all!


----------



## GENXLR

Again, the fact that I can run 12 threads and get 80gflops but if you run 12 you get less, you must have something wrong


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Again, the fact that I can run 12 threads and get 80gflops but if you run 12 you get less, you must have something wrong


Not anything wrong. A large number of people have this result. Including myself.

Anyone else want to chime in on their results.

HT on Gflops:
HT off Gflops:


----------



## gofasterstripes

Both with HT set on in BIOS: @ 4GHz /3200 /1600MHz 88824 - Problem size 1024MB

12 threads : 62+GF
6 threads : 80+GF
Time: 15 Seconds

HT OFF IN BIOS

12 threads : 82+GF
6 threads : 82+GF
Time: 10 Seconds

[a couple of passes, not really warmed up]

I think this shows it's a daft way to measure performance across machines.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I think you guys also need to specify the exact version of the benchmark software used, your Windows OS and its service packs and major updates, as well as the CPU model, motherboard, BIOS, heck maybe even the power plan used! And, it indeed looks like the software in focus isn't really adequate for system performance evaluation, sorry for the speak.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Both with HT set on in BIOS: @ 4GHz /3200 /1600MHz 88824 - Problem size 1024MB
> 
> 12 threads : 62+GF
> 6 threads : 80+GF
> Time: 15 Seconds
> 
> HT OFF IN BIOS
> 
> 12 threads : 82+GF
> 6 threads : 82+GF
> Time: 10 Seconds
> 
> [a couple of passes, not really warmed up]
> 
> I think this shows it's a daft way to measure performance across machines.


Yeah it doesn't mean anything to me. I get about 170 gflops on my 1660 but it's no where near that much faster than my x58 system in real world situations. Cinebench is much better for comparing systems, at least it shows the performance you'd get in Cinema 4D.


----------



## Punisher64

@DrKreiger @OCmember Here is what I'm running right now in BIOs:



http://imgur.com/ax8PE


If I change my VTT to +150mV instead of +200, then I bluescreen logging into Windows. Right now my VTT is showing 1.392V in HWMonitor. You see anything wrong with what I'm running? My RAM is Crucial Ballistix Tac Tracer 1866.


----------



## GENXLR

I had a cinebench result, I'll dig it up


----------



## Elisabeth Rehn

Hi!

Thanks guys for guidance and i'll start my overclocking journey next weekend. My weak spot might be my cooler and it's Noctua nh-c12p. It's tempting to go with that quick and dirty- method but i'll try to learn and move slowly forward. I'm sure I will have lots of questions and problems so i'll let you know whats happening. Cheers!


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> @DrKreiger @OCmember Here is what I'm running right now in BIOs:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/ax8PE
> 
> 
> If I change my VTT to +150mV instead of +200, then I bluescreen logging into Windows. Right now my VTT is showing 1.392V in HWMonitor. You see anything wrong with what I'm running? My RAM is Crucial Ballistix Tac Tracer 1866.


Man that is some really high VTT/QPI voltage. Have you measured this with a multi meter, if you have measuring points??

I would find the highest speed to run at 1.35 V's or below. I know that you can get away with a decent amount of voltage, if it is kept cool. But 1.4 basically is very high. You could get more performance at 3400 ish uncore, and 4.1 ghz core speed. Where is your Vcore at with these settings?


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Man that is some really high VTT/QPI voltage. Have you measured this with a multi meter, if you have measuring points??
> 
> I would find the highest speed to run at 1.35 V's or below. I know that you can get away with a decent amount of voltage, if it is kept cool. But 1.4 basically is very high. You could get more performance at 3400 ish uncore, and 4.1 ghz core speed. Where is your Vcore at with these settings?


VCore is 1.2625 or something. And I can't lower it at all without crashing on Windows login. All my settings are in the imgur album.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> VCore is 1.2625 or something. And I can't lower it at all without crashing on Windows login. All my settings are in the imgur album.


Drop the uncore SPEED to 3200-3400, and get that QPI down under 1.35V's. I have personally cooked an "X" series memory channel with excessive QPI/memory speed.

That vcore has tons of room. try to run 195 base clock, 1.3V;s Vcore. will be 4.116. that will likely give you the same performance you are chasing with that QPI speed


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Drop the uncore SPEED to 3200-3400, and get that QPI down under 1.35V's. I have personally cooked an "X" series memory channel with excessive QPI/memory speed.
> 
> That vcore has tons of room. try to run 195 base clock, 1.3V;s Vcore. will be 4.116. that will likely give you the same performance you are chasing with that QPI speed


To be 100% honest, I didn't OC this myself, had a buddy help that was supposedly an expert. So the higher QPI speed increases performance? And I thought that Uncore had to be (2*Ram Speed)? That's why I put it there.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> To be 100% honest, I didn't OC this myself, had a buddy help that was supposedly an expert. So the higher QPI speed increases performance? And I thought that Uncore had to be (2*Ram Speed)? That's why I put it there.


The 2x ram speed is only for Bloomfield Core i7 920-960. Westmere 32nm chips are able to go down to 1.5x ram speed. This also may give you some head room for the overclock on the core as well.


----------



## Punisher64

So looking at my settings in my Imgur, what should I change and try for my OC? Also, could the high VTT voltage be what's causing me to have high VRM temps at times?


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> So looking at my settings in my Imgur, what should I change and try for my OC? Also, could the high VTT voltage be what's causing me to have high VRM temps at times?


Yes, the added strain on the voltage regulation will add heat for sure.

I would set the base clock to 195-200, adjust the uncore and ram speeds accordingly.
drop the uncore to 1.32 as a starting point
set the CPU core voltage to 1.3-1.325V's. to start, and see how that does.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Yes, the added strain on the voltage regulation will add heat for sure.
> 
> I would set the base clock to 195-200, adjust the uncore and ram speeds accordingly.
> drop the uncore to 1.32 as a starting point
> set the CPU core voltage to 1.3-1.325V's. to start, and see how that does.


What would you say for Uncore and RAM speeds? I have 1866 RAM, but I'm not opposed to running it at 1600 if that's better.


----------



## DRKreiger

Where ever you feel comfortable to start with. Remember, if you isolate the components then you will no which one is unstable. Set the uncore to 3000 even. Then set the ram to 1600, with the same timings as 1866.

Start to find the max core clock. and lowest voltage for that speed


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Where ever you feel comfortable to start with. Remember, if you isolate the components then you will no which one is unstable. Set the uncore to 3000 even. Then set the ram to 1600, with the same timings as 1866.
> 
> Start to find the max core clock. and lowest voltage for that speed


Will try tonight. I'll backup my current settings just in case. So I haven't touched my ICH/IOH voltages. Do those need to change as well?


----------



## DRKreiger

Only if you are gonna run 2+ GPU's, or intend to run a 215+ base clock.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Only if you are gonna run 2+ GPU's, or intend to run a 215+ base clock.


I'm running SLI 770 4GB...should I have upped that a long time ago? Wonder if that's why my card keeps throttling....


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I'm running SLI 770 4GB...should I have upped that a long time ago? Wonder if that's why my card keeps throttling....


No reason to increase it with two cards, I'm running sli 780 Ti's without a hitch with the IOH & ICH @ 1.1V.
It's probably the bios' on your cards causing it, my 780 ti's did the same thing until I flashed them with skyn3t's bios. Now they don't throttle one bit.


----------



## Punisher64

Also just for refrence, looks like my default VTT is 1.2V. Found it in the manual. So with my +200mv, that brings it right to the 1.4V mark.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> No reason to increase it with two cards, I'm running sli 780 Ti's without a hitch with the IOH & ICH @ 1.1V.
> It's probably the bios' on your cards causing it, my 780 ti's did the same thing until I flashed them with skyn3t's bios. Now they don't throttle one bit.


Do they have Skynet bios for an EVGA 770 4gb SC and a Gigabyte WF3 SC 4GB? The down clocking does get quite annoying....


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Do they have Skynet bios for an EVGA 770 4gb SC and a Gigabyte WF3 SC 4GB? The down clocking does get quite annoying....


You can get them here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1396319/official-gtx-770-owners-club/0_100

I think the ones you want are the:

Gigabyte.GTX770.GV-N770OC-4GD.zip and EVGA.GTX770.4096.Dual SC.zip


----------



## OCmember

@punisher64 You'll have to manually set your QPI Frequency to the lowest multi first. The Speeds go like this according to their multiplier = 24, 22, 18. So with 186 x22 you are pushing 4GHz. 4GHz QPI Frequency is about the upper limit on X58 from what I've heard. You'll need to push the QPI PLL volts to about 1.325v and the IOH to about 1.25v That's IF you keep the 22 QPI Frequency multi. And you'll be lucky to have a stable system, if that. If it fails drop the QPI frequency to the 18x like I said from the start. You can compensate by lowering the BCLK frequency to lower it to around 3.9GHz. Use 180 BLCK, that'll give you 3.96GHz but you'll be losing core frequency speed. That's one of the limitations of a low multi.

3.7GHz Uncore will need +125mV

I'll give you more details later. Please use the @ symbol when referring to me. I didn't know you included me in the conversation a few posts ago. There is a tiny symbol in the reply window that will auto pop up then you just type the members name in and it will appear, then hit enter.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Punisher64 You'll have to manually set your QPI Frequency to the lowest multi first. The Speeds go like this according to their multiplier = 24, 22, 18. So with 186 x22 you are pushing 4GHz. 4GHz QPI Frequency is about the upper limit on X58 from what I've heard. You'll need to push the QPI PLL volts to about 1.325v and the IOH to about 1.25v That's IF you keep the 22 QPI Frequency multi. And you'll be lucky to have a stable system, if that. If it fails drop the QPI frequency to the 18x like I said from the start. You can compensate by lowering the BCLK frequency to lower it to around 3.9GHz. Use 180 BLCK, that'll give you 3.96GHz but you'll be losing core frequency speed. That's one of the limitations of a low multi.
> 
> 3.7GHz Uncore will need +125mV
> 
> I'll give you more details later. Please use the @ symbol when referring to me. I didn't know you included me in the conversation a few posts ago. There is a tiny symbol in the reply window that will auto pop up then you just type the members name in and it will appear, then hit enter.


@OCmember I'm going to lower QPI speeds down to 3200-3300 like DrKreiger suggests to get the voltage down and try for a higher OC on the CPU. What settings do I need to disable/enable on the CPU to get the highest multipliers unlocked? I think I need to disable turbo mode to get the 23x?


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> @OCmember I'm going to lower QPI speeds down to 3200-3300 like DrKreiger suggests to get the voltage down and try for a higher OC on the CPU. What settings do I need to disable/enable on the CPU to get the highest multipliers unlocked? I think I need to disable turbo mode to get the 23x?


Some boards won't allow you to use the turbo multis full time. I'm not sure about your EVGA, but some boards you just enable turbo and set the multi to auto and you'll get the max multi _(in the case of the x5670 that would be 24x on all six cores and 25x with one core)_.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> @OCmember I'm going to lower QPI speeds down to 3200-3300 like DrKreiger suggests to get the voltage down and try for a higher OC on the CPU. What settings do I need to disable/enable on the CPU to get the highest multipliers unlocked? I think I need to disable turbo mode to get the 23x?


Depends on the X58 revision. Mine doesn't allow Turbo. Or it's just broke. One or the other. Can't really help you there, sorry.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Depends on the X58 revision. Mine doesn't allow Turbo. Or it's just broke. One or the other. Can't really help you there, sorry.


The x58 Extreme should force the turbo for lower overclocks. I set up a machine with that board with a x5670 at 167x24 and it stayed at 24x under load. I think once it started getting into the 4200mhz range it would drop down to 22x, I believe it's a TDP limit built into the board.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Some boards won't allow you to use the turbo multis full time. I'm not sure about your EVGA, but some boards you just enable turbo and set the multi to auto and you'll get the max multi _(in the case of the x5670 that would be 24x on all six cores and 25x with one core)_.


EVGA doesn't appear to have a TDP turbo limit, whereas for example the ASUS P6T (SE) does, and the P6T WS Pro has a setting for that in BIOS. From what I understand, you need to have C6 enabled to get the x23 multiplier for the X5650, that is, the maximal, uneven multiplier for a single core or possibly two cores. With C3 and lower, you only get the highest even multiplier, that is, x22 for the X5650.

Actually I have to say that the EVGA X58 SLI3 is a superior board to the P6T SE, despite the lack of many BIOS options and being seemingly simpler overall. Gives me visibly better results in BF4, for example, and Cinebench is slightly lower as well. Though overclocking RAM is easier on the P6T SE. For instance, I'm running 2000 8-8-9-24-2N at 1.6V right now, though it's not perfectly stable yet. There has been one lockup in BF4 so far, and I've deduced that to be caused by a RAM misconfiguraiton.


----------



## Punisher64

@DRKreiger

Downed QPI from 3710 (20x) to 3339(18x) and dropped VTT to 1.3V. Should I keep the QPI speed down or do I gain performance upping it?


----------



## Punisher64

@DRKreiger @OCmember

So this is where I'm stuck at. When I try to enable turbo mode and get my 23x multi, I couldn't get it to even load into Windows (set it to 22x in BIOs and enable Turbo and it set it to 23x). I went as high as 1.35V on the VCore and it didn't want to boot. Anything I'm doing wrong? Here's where I'm at:



My QPI is now at ~3340 @ 1.3V VTT.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> @DRKreiger @OCmember
> 
> So this is where I'm stuck at. When I try to enable turbo mode and get my 23x multi, I couldn't get it to even load into Windows (set it to 22x in BIOs and enable Turbo and it set it to 23x). I went as high as 1.35V on the VCore and it didn't want to boot. Anything I'm doing wrong? Here's where I'm at:
> 
> 
> 
> My QPI is now at ~3340 @ 1.3V VTT.


QPI is good, Where did your ram end up?
Your voltages are good, as long as it is stable and has decent temps.

Try using the 21 multiplier. You may be having a black hole phenomenon. My x5670 did not like 22X
My current chip hates 32X, but will scream along at 31, or 29.
go 21X 195 base clock. adjust accordingly for ram and QPI if needed. should be 4.179 core and 3510 QPI (18x) 3315 (17x) Should be able to leave voltages where you have them.
Run Prime 95 Large FFT (quick to show errors) or Intel burn test "high" see if is stable, and check temps.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> QPI is good, Where did your ram end up?
> Your voltages are good, as long as it is stable and has decent temps.
> 
> Try using the 21 multiplier. You may be having a black hole phenomenon. My x5670 did not like 22X
> My current chip hates 32X, but will scream along at 31, or 29.
> go 21X 195 base clock. adjust accordingly for ram and QPI if needed. should be 4.179 core and 3510 QPI (18x) 3315 (17x) Should be able to leave voltages where you have them.
> Run Prime 95 Large FFT (quick to show errors) or Intel burn test "high" see if is stable, and check temps.


Right now my temps are in the low 50s on Max Intel Burn Test. I'm currently on the 21x...guess I can up the BCLK. Right now my RAM is still what it was at 1863. You think just up the Vcore a bit and then my BCLK or should I also down the QPI again to verify that VTT is enough? I can also up VTT by 25mV to ensure it stays good?


----------



## DRKreiger

post multiples of your CPU-z: CPU, Memory, SPD
list out the voltages you have currently.
We could try to get you higher, but i would try to find your max base clock. drop core, memory and QPI multipliers so they are very low. try to boot into windows at 205-210+ base clock. ?Doing this, we find out how high you may be able to go with the whole system. base clock determines everything now that we know your chip like 21x.

Then start to fine tune things like memory timings, QPI, and voltages. That memory you have is very capable.
Time to really start having fun.


----------



## Punisher64

@DRKreiger

here is imgur of what i'm using



http://imgur.com/MXPcn


The only thing that's changed from my BIOs shots from earlier is the VTT that's 1.3V now. I will try to boot with higher clocks here in a bit, but let me know what you think I should try!


----------



## OCmember

@punisher64 I think it's your ram screwing things up.. isolate the Cores - lower the memory, QPI, and Uncore.. there no way you should be failing at 3.9Ghz.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Guys, what do you think, if my X58 board is dead, and the only boards that I can get are all about $200; and then I also have a 3930K and the X79 boards are $200 as well.. should I sell the X5650 then and go X79? Or sell both and go X99, with a second-hand 5820K? My thoughts are that cheaper manycore Xeons may become available in the next few years, thus making the upgrade futureproof.


----------



## Punisher64

@OCmember
I don't fail at 3.9, that's what I'm running steady. When I turn on 22x multi and turbo mode (bringing it up to 23x) I can't get it to log into Windows with less than 1.35V and I didn't want to go over that to test.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Punisher64, that's almost 4.3 GHz and it may well take 1.35V or more. That's just your chip. If I recall correctly, there is a possibility that lower temps results in lower voltage, someone correct me on that if required.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> @OCmember
> I don't fail at 3.9, that's what I'm running steady. When I turn on 22x multi and turbo mode (bringing it up to 23x) I can't get it to log into Windows with less than 1.35V and I didn't want to go over that to test.


Multi on auto when you enable turbo as this is the reason screwing things up.Depending on board it may go up to 25 even if it says x24 for x5670.I put multi on x22 once,enabled turbo with bus 196 and cpuz was showing 4.860 or something crazy like that.It BSOD after that with 0000x50 if i remember.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Guys, what do you think, if my X58 board is dead, and the only boards that I can get are all about $200; and then I also have a 3930K and the X79 boards are $200 as well.. should I sell the X5650 then and go X79? Or sell both and go X99, with a second-hand 5820K? My thoughts are that cheaper manycore Xeons may become available in the next few years, thus making the upgrade futureproof.


looking for a used motherboard , there are often good offers

otherwise sell everything and go to x99 + 5820k


----------



## NguyenAdam

Might be looking for a Xenon chip soon. I have a P6T deluxe. Think I should upgrade my motherboard or am I good to go with it as is?


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NguyenAdam*
> 
> Might be looking for a Xenon chip soon. I have a P6T deluxe. Think I should upgrade my motherboard or am I good to go with it as is?


the P6T Deluxe is excellent stay with that


----------



## Ferro10

new cpu X5670 4.4ghz
Vcore 1.38


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> new cpu X5670 4.4ghz
> Vcore 1.38


Not bad but that vcore is a bit high for 24/7, it's normal though since qpi/link is high.What is your qpi/vtt in bios,i would recommend setting that to 1.315 and lower vcore as much as possible if you are going for 4.4ghz and with 210 bus speed.Personally i would drop to 4.3ghz since that is the sweet spot and stay within intel guidelines of 1.35v max for vcore and qpi/vtt.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> Not bad but that vcore is a bit high for 24/7, it's normal though since qpi/link is high.What is your qpi/vtt in bios,i would recommend setting that to 1.315 and lower vcore as much as possible if you are going for 4.4ghz and with 210 bus speed.Personally i would drop to 4.3ghz since that is the sweet spot and stay within intel guidelines of 1.35v max for vcore and qpi/vtt.


the QPI / vtt is set 1.31 so that's ok.
for now I will stop here.
then tomorrow I try the second X5670 and I hope to be more lucky

a question
why with the multiplier x22 are not stable? with a Vcore 1.38
these CPUs do not like even numbers


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> the QPI / vtt is set 1.31 so that's ok.
> for now I will stop here.
> then tomorrow I try the second X5670 and I hope to be more lucky
> 
> a question
> why with the multiplier x22 are not stable? with a Vcore 1.38
> these CPUs do not like even numbers


I thought that the even number, and weird black hole phenomenon thing was not too prevalent when i started on my Xeon. But it turns out to be just as much of a pain. Even number on my system requires more voltage, not matter how high or low. if I match the Base clock for the same clock speed, I can usually pull .02-.03 V's.


----------



## Ferro10

new result with the second CPU x5670

21x210
qpi\dram 1.31
Vcore 1.32


----------



## OCmember

@Kana-Maru Any latest developments on the 1080 GTX in your reviewings? Been thinking about jumping on one but am interested in unbiased reviews


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> new result with the second CPU x5670
> 
> 21x210
> qpi\dram 1.31
> Vcore 1.32


Wow! Alot better!


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wow! Alot better!


Tomorrow I try 21x215
with a 1.35 Vcore
I hope that the system is stable


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Kana-Maru Any latest developments on the 1080 GTX in your reviewings? Been thinking about jumping on one but am interested in unbiased reviews


I don't have a GTX 1080 to actually review, but it's a solid card with a fair share of issues. It's far from the 100% A++ the reviewers are giving it. Unfortunately it comes with the price of a arm and a leg at the moment due to Nvidia effectively paper launching the 1080 and the 1070, price gouging, Founders Edition being the available first and limited supplies.

I would love to give an unbiased review, but the prices are just to high for me to justify the GTX 1080\FE purchase. When I purchase things I'm using my own money with ZERO help. So that's no Patreon support or anything like that. I'm thinking about picking up a much cheaper 3rd party RX 480 overclocked for benchmarking. it's cost effective and I won't suffer a greater than $700 loss lol. In the future I'm thinking about building a i7-6700K rig for gaming benchmarking purposes. We need more unbiased reviews for sure. Hopefully by then I'll find away to get funding to help for future benchmarks.

From what I have been reading about the GTX 1080 it has it's fair share or problems like many GPUs:
https://forums.geforce.com/default/board/172/

Off the top of my head:
*Pros:*
-Great DX11 performance across all resolutions.
-DX12 improvements due to the massive increase in core clock.
-4K is very playable, but not quite 60fps which the requirement for many people.
-Memory Speed is very high out of the box [10Gbps!]
-Still overclocker friendly, even for novices.
-It is the best GPU in the market at the moment as far as FPS performance goes.

*Cons:*
-Only supports a 256-bit Memory Interface. That's the same as the GTX 980 from 2014
-DX12 still shows negative scaling. Little or no performance increases.
-Like Maxwell, Pascal Async Drivers are still nowhere to be found. [Drivers won't help it though]
-Heat is an issue and the card throttles as low as 40c. That's very low. Hopefully 3rd parties have a solution.
-Claims 1733Mhz, but doesn't average this number during actual gaming sessions [read below]
-After playing a game for more than 10-20 minutes the GPU only averages 1667Mhz or lower thanks to throttling heat issues. Core clock is 1607Mhz by the way.
-Founder Edition = Reference Card for a premium price = Enough Said
-Only supports 2-way SLI officially

Overall a solid card, but far from a 100% GPU. There's a lot of great things and bad things surrounding the GTX 1080.

In the meantime I'm still running 4K benchmarks with my Fury X. I'm going to be uploading some gameplay videos with the FPS showing to show people my 4K experience since I'm always talking about how smooth and great my 4K experience has been in several games. I'm guessing I'll have to record off-screen.


----------



## Ferro10

21x215
Vcore 1.35
qpi\dram 1.31
ram 1700mhz
uncore frequency 3100mhz
Vdram 1.64

not stable

I get the error Kernel-Power 41

I try to increase the Vcore?

PS: the only thing is that this CPU for the same Vcore is slightly warmer than the first 5670. on what may depend on this condition?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't have a GTX 1080 to actually review, but it's a solid card with a fair share of issues. It's far from the 100% A++ the reviewers are giving it. Unfortunately it comes with the price of a arm and a leg at the moment due to Nvidia effectively paper launching the 1080 and the 1070, price gouging, Founders Edition being the available first and limited supplies.


Not to mention that TWO 480's would still cost far below the 1080 and probably destroy it. I wonder if DX12/Vulkan and the newest drivers/games would really see a two card setup as one individual GPU? Two 480's sounds really nice so long games can actually use it like that.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Not to mention that TWO 480's would still cost far below the 1080 and probably destroy it.


Apparently it does match it very well according to these benchmarks:





In that review the dual RX 480 CFX actually manages to beat the 1070 & 1080 at an affordable price point @ 1440p. Rise of the Tomb Raider is clearly made for Nvidia products and that shows when you look at the comparisons across all AMD GPUs. GTA5 will also favor Nvidia as well, but the RX 480 CFX came wthin 10% of the more expensive GTX 1080. Yes that's a win for the RX 480 due to the price differences. Fallout 4 also pushes the RX 480 within 10% of the GTX 1080. There were some issues that could possibly be fixed by lower some settings in a few of the titles, but overall the experience appeared to be fine for most of the games running in CFX. AMD has stated that they will be focusing more on CFX now as well.

Quote:


> I wonder if DX12/Vulkan and the newest drivers/games would really see a two card setup as one individual GPU?


Well yes they will. DX12 already supports this and Vulkan will be getting a update soon. I'm not sure if Vulkan has been patched to include this yet, but if the title is programmed properly the developers can actually have the games easily scale to as many GPUs as possible. There's a pretty high limit so dual and triple GPU owners shouldn't worry once devs drop DX11. I have some mixed feelings about this, but I won't go into detail about it right now. The technology will also allow vRAM stacking. Which means if you are using two 4GBs GPUs the API will use all of the vRAM available as if it is one [8GBs will be accessible]. It will see both GPUs and spread the work accordingly. Superior hardware architecture will play a large role in this as well. AMD and Nvidia will only be able to do so much with the driver optimizations now.

Quote:


> Two 480's sounds really nice so long games can actually use it like that.


So far so good. As long as AMD can keep pushing out drivers in a timely manner, which they have over the past year or so, then we will have no problems. Once DX11 is dropped more AAA games will automatically take multiple GPUs into account. Now we will see which developers decide to get with the program and who will decide to keep using outdated and obsolete technology with modern hardware.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah precisely my point. Two 480's get you 1080 speeds for less money, but I somehow thought it would be a killing, but its just barely. However the 1080 is an Enthusiast card so it was never meant to go up against the 400 series. Now Vega and the 1080 would be an interesting match up. I want a Vega based Fury card myself but it's STILL not available dang it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Seeing were digressing into GPU's again:

Has anyone tried benching with Win 10 recently? Are the gaming/benchmark scores different to W7 yet?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Seeing were digressing into GPU's again:
> 
> Has anyone tried benching with Win 10 recently? Are the gaming/benchmark scores different to W7 yet?


Windows 10 is somewhat like Windows 8 and 8.1 when it comes to benching. 3dmark Firestrike does better in Windows 10 than 7.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> 21x215
> Vcore 1.35
> qpi\dram 1.31
> ram 1700mhz
> uncore frequency 3100mhz
> Vdram 1.64
> 
> not stable
> 
> I get the error Kernel-Power 41
> 
> I try to increase the Vcore?


I would just keep it at 4.4GHz You are lucky at 1.32v for 4.4GHz, IF you are stable.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I don't have a GTX 1080 to actually review, but it's a solid card with a fair share of issues. It's far from the 100% A++ the reviewers are giving it. Unfortunately it comes with the price of a arm and a leg at the moment due to Nvidia effectively paper launching the 1080 and the 1070, price gouging, Founders Edition being the available first and limited supplies.
> 
> I would love to give an unbiased review, but the prices are just to high for me to justify the GTX 1080\FE purchase. When I purchase things I'm using my own money with ZERO help. So that's no Patreon support or anything like that. I'm thinking about picking up a much cheaper 3rd party RX 480 overclocked for benchmarking. it's cost effective and I won't suffer a greater than $700 loss lol. In the future I'm thinking about building a i7-6700K rig for gaming benchmarking purposes. We need more unbiased reviews for sure. Hopefully by then I'll find away to get funding to help for future benchmarks.
> 
> From what I have been reading about the GTX 1080 it has it's fair share or problems like many GPUs:
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/board/172/
> 
> Off the top of my head:
> *Pros:*
> -Great DX11 performance across all resolutions.
> -DX12 improvements due to the massive increase in core clock.
> -4K is very playable, but not quite 60fps which the requirement for many people.
> -Memory Speed is very high out of the box [10Gbps!]
> -Still overclocker friendly, even for novices.
> -It is the best GPU in the market at the moment as far as FPS performance goes.
> 
> *Cons:*
> -Only supports a 256-bit Memory Interface. That's the same as the GTX 980 from 2014
> -DX12 still shows negative scaling. Little or no performance increases.
> -Like Maxwell, Pascal Async Drivers are still nowhere to be found. [Drivers won't help it though]
> -Heat is an issue and the card throttles as low as 40c. That's very low. Hopefully 3rd parties have a solution.
> -Claims 1733Mhz, but doesn't average this number during actual gaming sessions [read below]
> -After playing a game for more than 10-20 minutes the GPU only averages 1667Mhz or lower thanks to throttling heat issues. Core clock is 1607Mhz by the way.
> -Founder Edition = Reference Card for a premium price = Enough Said
> -Only supports 2-way SLI officially
> 
> Overall a solid card, but far from a 100% GPU. There's a lot of great things and bad things surrounding the GTX 1080.
> 
> In the meantime I'm still running 4K benchmarks with my Fury X. I'm going to be uploading some gameplay videos with the FPS showing to show people my 4K experience since I'm always talking about how smooth and great my 4K experience has been in several games. I'm guessing I'll have to record off-screen.


Thanks for the reply. That's interesting about the base GPU clock. My 670 boosts to 1205 but only when it's loaded. I rarely see it. I've got the memory clocked ~ 500MHz + over base - 7.2GHz It's actually a nice improvement. I've never overclocked any of my GPUs till a few days ago, lol.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Might as well always overclock the RAM, it's usually pretty easy to find the limit and if you don't touch the voltage then you won't blow it up.

Most GPUs benefit significantly from RAM overclocks.

Core...another story.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Thanks for the reply. That's interesting about the base GPU clock. My 670 boosts to 1205 but only when it's loaded. I rarely see it. I've got the memory clocked ~ 500MHz + over base - 7.2GHz It's actually a nice improvement. I've never overclocked any of my GPUs till a few days ago, lol.


No problem man. There are other issues surrounding the card like Nvidia showing the card hit a very high OC while staying relatively cool, but after reviews came out this was not the case. It made some people upset because some people just want to know the truth before spending $600 - $700 or more on a GPU.

I suppose overclocking isn't always necessary. I normally run my Fury X at stock and get great results. I retired my dual GTX 670s 2-way SLI. They were the reference 2GB versions and just couldn't stand up to the competition and gaming sessions after late 2014. Games started requiring more RAM and 2GBs just wasn't going to cut it for 1440p\4K. I can't remember the boost or anything like that, but it was a reference version so I'm sure it wasn't that high. I OC'd them a few times for benchmarking purposes.

I might overclock my Fury X again.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I would just keep it at 4.4GHz You are lucky at 1.32v for 4.4GHz, IF you are stable.


the system is free of errors after 2 hours of linx .
to 99 % it is stable


----------



## Ferro10

but the xeon w3680 is with the unlocked multiplier?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> but the xeon w3680 is with the unlocked multiplier?


The W3680 and W3690 are unlocked. Not every board model will see them as unlocked for whatever reason, probably because Xeons are not officially supported would be my guess.


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> The W3680 and W3690 are unlocked. Not every board model will see them as unlocked for whatever reason, probably because Xeons are not officially supported would be my guess.


you know someone who uses a series P6T motherboard with a w3680 cpu?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> you know someone who uses a series P6T motherboard with a w3680 cpu?


Not exactly... I do have a W3690 and a P6T SE, just not in the same rig. I have a X5660 in the P6T SE. I could try swapping the CPUs and seeing if its unlocked, if you'd like. The W3690 is sitting in a RIIIE.


----------



## GENXLR

So I'm debating just to keep up for a little bit moving from my single X5650 to a twin X5690 rig. My concerns surround the upcoming titles and is DX11 going to be dropped or legacy supported? The 900 series didn't appeal to me and now the 1080 series is doing just that too

Time to finally move to AMD? I just don't know anymore









I here DX12 has some massive jumps in perf for us with lots of cores


----------



## gofasterstripes

Woah there, you may want to rethink that:

"The big one though is the one most non-workstation users don't know about: non-uniform memory access (NUMA). In a 2P system, there is a communication link between the two processors, running through the QPI at 8.0 gigatransfers/sec. Unless the software you use knows how to deal with that, then memory required by a thread for one core could be on the DRAM on the other processor, which makes memory accesses (and thread stalls) very, very long. This is why when some users build a 2P system and they only see a slight speed up (or a speed decrease), rather than a 2x increase, they wonder why performance is not what they expected"

Example:


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> you know someone who uses a series P6T motherboard with a w3680 cpu?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Not exactly... I do have a W3690 and a P6T SE, just not in the same rig. I have a X5660 in the P6T SE. I could try swapping the CPUs and seeing if its unlocked, if you'd like. The W3690 is sitting in a RIIIE.


It appears that it will work. I put my W3690 in the P6T SE, BIOS 803...and the BIOS says max multiplier is 63. I set the multiplier to 27, BCLK 133, Vcore 1.35 to test. Settings stayed.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> It appears that it will work. I put my W3690 in the P6T SE, BIOS 803...and the BIOS says max multiplier is 63. I set the multiplier to 27, BCLK 133, Vcore 1.35 to test. Settings stayed.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Looks like you have some fun to hurry up and get to, lol


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> It appears that it will work. I put my W3690 in the P6T SE, BIOS 803...and the BIOS says max multiplier is 63. I set the multiplier to 27, BCLK 133, Vcore 1.35 to test. Settings stayed.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


very well. so even on motherboards P6T the w3680-90 are unlocked. thanks for testing


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> very well. so even on motherboards P6T the w3680-90 are unlocked. thanks for testing


I wouldn't be so sure of that. It's mainly the X58 revision that will dictate if the unlocked multi will work or not. The early X58 boards I would imagine don't have the updated X58 revision


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Looks like you have some fun to hurry up and get to, lol


Well I was just doing it for Ferro10's benifit. Not sure if I want to keep it this way. Low end board (it doesn't even support SLI, just X-fire) and probably has 4-phase CPU power instead of the 8 or 12 phase the R3E has. I'd have to figure out what GPU I want to use in this rig. Orginally had a HD7950, then got a R9 390, but its slightly too big...its a Strix model..I can sort of get it in here. Just put a 560 TI in here because its easy..short card. I am actually working on a 2P rig too, but for BOINCing... gaming on a 2P would be ... interesting... the last 2P I had was a old Dell PowerEdge with 2 P3-933s and 1GB of ECC DDR. Don't remember if I tried to game on it, but I used to game on a 2P P3-533. Built it because I thought it was cool...lol


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I wouldn't be so sure of that. It's mainly the X58 revision that will dictate if the unlocked multi will work or not. The early X58 boards I would imagine don't have the updated X58 revision


how to determine the revision of x58 chips ??


----------



## GENXLR

Realize I've used Multi CPU system before. My last one is a D5400XS, I understand but I have quite a few applications that can utilize such, also i hear DX12 likes it too?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I wouldn't be so sure of that. It's mainly the X58 revision that will dictate if the unlocked multi will work or not. The early X58 boards I would imagine don't have the updated X58 revision


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> how to determine the revision of x58 chips ??


My board is Rev 1.01G if that helps...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Realize I've used Multi CPU system before. My last one is a D5400XS, I understand but I have quite a few applications that can utilize such, also i hear DX12 likes it too?


Thats the famed SkullTrail, is it not? How was it?


----------



## GENXLR

How was it? It's still going, I haven't disassembled it yet.

Running Twin X5670's at 4Ghz, 4x4GB of Kingston FB-DDR2 Ram, with fun 4-4-4-12 Timmings(Very fast for DDR2), Has currently Twin Micron M500 120GB SSD's in RAID 0 for the OS, and 4x2TB Seagate Constelation storage Drives, has a Soundblaster Audigy 2 zs Platinum Soundacard, a PCI-E USB 3.0 Host card, and a Quadro K5000 strapped in. Usually only use it for rendering models and video and stuff. The goodies, it also has an IBM T221 As the monitor(with the twin Matrox boxes) so i have it at 55Hz at max res









Tbh, I've tried gaming on it, was meh, but playable for sure. Nothing insane, Just wanted a sperate workstation i could do my renders on and have my main rig open to game









Also one in the Office and one in the "Cave" hahahahahahahaha

Sorry for the thread jacking, but i think the photo's are justified






Kana-Maru probably remembers









The photo's are BEFORE i swapped the GPU's out, I haven't taken recent photo's of it because life kicked me from the server x.x


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yup I do remember.


----------



## GENXLR

Kana-Maru, can you give me some valuable input? My Laptop currently ha sa Core i7 960 D0 installed, what will the heat differences be with a W3690 installed. Theres no overclocking on these machines so stock clocks. both are 130W TDP but one is 32nm, the other 45nm, one is 4 core, the other 6

what am i looking at?


----------



## spdaimon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> How was it? It's still going, I haven't disassembled it yet.
> 
> Running Twin X5670's at 4Ghz, 4x4GB of Kingston FB-DDR2 Ram, with fun 4-4-4-12 Timmings(Very fast for DDR2), Has currently Twin Micron M500 120GB SSD's in RAID 0 for the OS, and 4x2TB Seagate Constelation storage Drives, has a Soundblaster Audigy 2 zs Platinum Soundacard, a PCI-E USB 3.0 Host card, and a Quadro K5000 strapped in. Usually only use it for rendering models and video and stuff. The goodies, it also has an IBM T221 As the monitor(with the twin Matrox boxes) so i have it at 55Hz at max res
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tbh, I've tried gaming on it, was meh, but playable for sure. Nothing insane, Just wanted a sperate workstation i could do my renders on and have my main rig open to game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also one in the Office and one in the "Cave" hahahahahahahaha


Oh, ok. Nice. I read that the RAM ran hot, I see the ram cooler below the CPU coolers. You meant X5*4*70, right? I decided there was easier ways to get 8 threads (or more) like a X5650 ..







though I did put a X5470 on a P45 board for ****z n gigglez.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spdaimon*
> 
> Oh, ok. Nice. I read that the RAM ran hot, I see the ram cooler below the CPU coolers. You meant X5*4*70, right? I decided there was easier ways to get 8 threads (or more) like a X5650 ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> though I did put a X5470 on a P45 board for ****z n gigglez.


Ram cooler is 3 Delta EFB0412VH's strapped to it, very high flow. Good temps, not as good as when it was 3 FFB0412SHN

Yes X5470, my bad haha.

I want to build a twin X5690 rig next. I guess I can say some spec but if I build it the way planned I will have near 400-700W of avalible cooling dissipation per CPU!!! 6Ghz anyone?


----------



## gofasterstripes

@GENXLR Maybe the thing to do is for someone here with a dual socket board to do a benchmark with one and two chips enabled?

Games are unlikely to be programmed for multi-socket environments. I wasn't trying to be rude, but that I don't want you to spend a lot of money and be disappointed


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @GENXLR Maybe the thing to do is for someone here with a dual socket board to do a benchmark with one and two chips enabled?
> 
> Games are unlikely to be programmed for multi-socket environments. I wasn't trying to be rude, but that I don't want you to spend a lot of money and be disappointed


I hear you, I was going to run a dual socket system regardless, either its an EVGA SR-2 1366 or an ASUS Z10PE-D8 2011v3


----------



## gofasterstripes

Totally OT - the archive of Ars Technica's site contains loads of now retro articles and writeups. This is where I learned most from....back in the day









http://archive.arstechnica.com/

Reminds me how much I still want to build in an Apple G5 case!

@GENXLR it's totally a guess, but perhaps a newer socket/arch will handle the thread/cache/memory mixup better (so I'd guess go 2011)?

EDIT - forgot how I found the old Ars site : http://archive.arstechnica.com/reviews/3q99/bp6/bp6-1.html Dual - Dual socket research


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Totally OT - the archive of Ars Technica's site contains loads of now retro articles and writeups. This is where I learned most from....back in the day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://archive.arstechnica.com/
> 
> Reminds me how much I still want to build in an Apple G5 case!
> 
> @GENXLR it's totally a guess, but perhaps a newer socket/arch will handle the thread/cache/memory mixup better (so I'd guess go 2011)?
> 
> EDIT - forgot how I found the old Ars site : http://archive.arstechnica.com/reviews/3q99/bp6/bp6-1.html Dual - Dual socket research


Ironically I have a G5 with my computers

Dual 2.7GHZ Watercooled


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I always loved those Apple G5 cases, they make great sturdy furniture.



j/k


----------



## GENXLR

Awwwwwwww, Image didn't show up in my email and I was so gonna make the joke of desks and filing cabinets


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

After I did a quick search for Apple G5 and immediately saw the furniture images I just couldn't resist. lol


----------



## OCmember

Push 1.35v for 4.5GHz HT off, or keep 1.34v for 4.33GHz HT off ?

EDIT: 1.375v Intel Max W3690

Passed IBT, 10, 64*c hottest core
Passed Real Bench
Does fine in gaming


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Push 1.35v for 4.5GHz HT off, or keep 1.34v for 4.33GHz HT off ?
> 
> EDIT: 1.375v Intel Max W3690
> 
> Passed IBT, 10, 64*c hottest core
> Passed Real Bench
> Does fine in gaming


that level of stress you have set to ibt?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> that level of stress you have set to ibt?


All cores
3072MB - custom, which is half of my total amount of ram
10 iterations
it pulled 97.6 GFlops


----------



## Ferro10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> All cores
> 3072MB - custom, which is half of my total amount of ram
> 10 iterations
> it pulled 97.6 GFlops


but how much ram you have in the pc ? 6gb or 12gb ?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ferro10*
> 
> but how much ram you have in the pc ? 6gb or 12gb ?


3072MB - custom, which is *half* of my total amount of ram


----------



## dagget3450

@Kana-Maru Can you do some benchmarking with Vulkan and your x58/Xeon? I could swear with my FuryX on my x5650 i am getting like almost double fps.. Something else i noticed was the intro screen with the embers flying around looks WAY smoother in Vulkan than openGL. I wonder if frametimes are even better.....


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> @Kana-Maru Can you do some benchmarking with Vulkan and your x58/Xeon? I could swear with my FuryX on my x5650 i am getting like almost double fps.. Something else i noticed was the intro screen with the embers flying around looks WAY smoother in Vulkan than openGL. I wonder if frametimes are even better.....


Dude I didn't benchmark yet, but I did play the game very late last night and I was getting crazy high FPS! No overclocks and I was over 60fps @ 4K 100% Max settings on Ultra with maxed AA = [TSAAA 8x]. My fps average with Open GL 4.3 [4.3 on AMD GPUs for some reason] was 35.44fps. So yeah it looks like it's double FPS for free. Well not free, but a much better API. The Fury X has a long life ahead of it if devs can continue what I've seen in Hitman [DX12] and Doom [Vulkan].

My FPS average 83fps @ 1440p. When playing with the Vulkan drivers I well into the 120s - 140s! WOW! I'll have to record some off screen footage for comparisons or something. This was using Ultra Settings as well with TSAAA 8x.

This is what I have been expecting from Vulkan and DX12 for sometime now. When properly implemented the X58 should last many more years as far as gaming goes. It's time to drop the old APIs and use modern APIs.


----------



## OCmember

Wow, very interesting


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wow, very interesting


Not so much got Nvidia users. The RX 480 is within only 10% slower than the 980 Ti, yes 980 *Ti*, and the GTX 1070 with the high core clock. Talk about bang for your buck with the architecture.

The R9 390 is only 13% slower than the 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.

The Fury X Is nearly 20% higher than the GTX 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.

Some websites aren't showing a big increase for Nvidia, but AMD seems to be doing well.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Not so much got Nvidia users. The RX 480 is within only 10% slower than the 980 Ti, yes 980 *Ti*, and the GTX 1070 with the high core clock. Talk about bang for your buck with the architecture.
> 
> The R9 390 is only 13% slower than the 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.
> 
> The Fury X Is nearly 20% higher than the GTX 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.
> 
> Some websites aren't showing a big increase for Nvidia, but AMD seems to be doing well.


Not to hijack this thread, but what do you think AMD's long term benefits with extending and increasing performance on old gpus? It looks pretty fair to say Nvidia is doing more of a quick upgrade and obsolescence strategy? How does AMD profit on this strategy thry seem to be using.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> Not to hijack this thread, but what do you think AMD's long term benefits with extending and increasing performance on old gpus? It looks pretty fair to say Nvidia is doing more of a quick upgrade and obsolescence strategy? How does AMD profit on this strategy thry seem to be using.


You aren't hijacking anything so don't worry.

I think AMD profits by showing how well their GCN architecture ages and this shows in the GPU charts. As far as spending a ton of money on a high end GPU, it appears you'll get more bang for your buck with AMD. That's a strong selling point IMO. The 290X is still relevant midway through 2016. Then there's the 7970\7970Ghz which has aged fairly well. Nvidia simply has the brand name. There's always a brand name that stronger than others in every genre. CPU = Intel, GPU = Nvidia. When it comes to motherboards there are many brands which is healthy for the consumers and competition. When it comes to GPUs and CPUs you only get two obviously choices and AMD has to battle both Intel and Nvidia.

AMD issue is that Nvidia is the "main" brand or "go to" brand that is usually recommended across the net. Nvidia also has a ton of money which can be used to strong arm the market. I didn't really pay attention to Nvidia's marketing strong arm outside of a few websites until I actually looked at how many Nvidia TWIMTBP titles I owned. Consumers have been conditioned. Day 1 benchmarks are what most people go by and live by. Unfortunately this way of thinking has hurt AMD over the years since AMD usually age better. Thankfully AMD has been updating their drivers in record time. Some updates are happening in 1 business day now.

So what I'm saying is that AMD has been on top of their drivers on or near Day 1 release. Which means benchmarking websites, Youtube Personalities and other bloggers can't ignore AMD performance on Day 1. In the past it could be a week or two [or longer] before drivers released for new games. By then gamers had moved on to the next best thing and stop caring. Games are releasing more rapidly now than ever before. Not everyone moved on after Day 1 benchmarks, but most people did.

Nvidia knows that some people will run out and spend a TON of cash on their GPUs year after year. There's no reason for Nvidia to really change or fix anything since they still have a large part of the market and their company is doing fine. The consumers aren't demanding Nvidia to change anything and this is sad. The only real way to demand Nvidia to focus more on their tech\architecture is to vote with your dollars. This isn't going to happen in most cases since some people adore Nvidia.

AMD\ATI has usually always been ahead of the game when it comes to CPU, GPUs and pushing technology. The same can't be said about Nvidia. However Nvidia brand name is so strong that it doesn't matter. Maxwell and Pascal lacks some features of DX12 and Vulkan, or shall I say the Maxwell\Pascal architecture isn't going to solve Nvidia's problems with the newer APIs. IMO Nvidia is simply making people go "wow" with paper launches and high core clocks while completely disregarding the architecture. This is great, but the "wow" factor comes at a price and Nvidia is ensuring they will get every penny -hence the Founder Edition.

AMD has already capitalized on this by reclaiming small share of the market. AMD clawed back to regain some market share from Nvidia which stood at 23% as of Q1 2016. AMD also had a pretty good Q4 2015 which showed that their GPU sales increased by 7%. Not only that, but their stocks are rising as well. If the RX 480\470\460 are successful and AMD can reclaim more market share and increase GPU sales then their strategy would have paid off. Nvidia is clearly trying to supply as many 1080\1070 GPUs as possible and they clearly paper launched the 1080\1070. Now they are rushing the 1060 to the market since AMD GPUs are selling out all over the place. AIBs are coming which should also sell well with decent overclocks.

So if AMD can pull this off and it appears they are on the correct track with Polaris, they could really make Nvidia worry. Going after the mainstream is very smart on AMDs part. Nvidia is clearly or was clearly focused on $400+ GPUs. Vulkan and DX12 will ensure that AMD architecture is better utilized. DX11 is old and outdated at this point. The ultimately helps people with older builds like X58\PCie 2.0 users or people with budget builds.

If you want to read more of what I think about AMD strategy you can go to my blog and read. Unfortunately I can't post the link to the site here since the mods hit me with a warning. The title of the article is "Analyzing AMD Mainstream Strategy". I'm sure no one will have a problem finding it. There is also a comment section [disqus] and people are talking. I've written other articles some might find interesting as well.

Edit:
Sorry for the long post.


----------



## tbob22

^^ What he said. But seriously, look at the 7950/7970 and how they perform in newer games versus Nvidia's comparable cards from the same generation.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Not so much got Nvidia users. The RX 480 is within only 10% slower than the 980 Ti, yes 980 *Ti*, and the GTX 1070 with the high core clock. Talk about bang for your buck with the architecture.
> 
> The R9 390 is only 13% slower than the 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.
> 
> The Fury X Is nearly 20% higher than the GTX 980 Ti and the GTX 1070.
> 
> Some websites aren't showing a big increase for Nvidia, but AMD seems to be doing well.


Wait, the Fury X is 20% higher, while the RX 480 is 10% slower? These are figures from games with the new API?

My main game I'm interested in is UT4 at the moment. I think I might wait for benches with early versions/updates of the game first, before I go buy a new GPU.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wait, the Fury X is 20% higher, while the RX 480 is 10% slower? These are figures from games with the new API?
> 
> My main game I'm interested in is UT4 at the moment. I think I might wait for benches with early versions/updates of the game first, before I go buy a new GPU.


These results are from Doom using Vulkan drivers. I was reading a charts from across the web and it showed that the Fury X was on top with the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 beneath it.

From Computerbase results. Using the Vulkan API yes @ 1080p, the Fury X was nearly 20% faster than the GTX 1070 and GTX 980 Ti.
The Fury X was 31% faster than the RX 480 and the R9 390.

The RX 480 was roughly 10% slower than the GTX 1070 and GTX 980 Ti. The R9 390 was 13% slower than the 1070\980Ti.

I know I was above 60fps while running 4K + Ultra Settings with TSSAA 8x. That's enough for me literally stare at my monitor and









I don't think it's going to be hard to run UT4 at all honestly. Most fast paced FPS doesn't require a lot of horsepower and the Unreal Engine is already optimized pretty well. The newer APIs will just make things even better.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> These results are from Doom using Vulkan drivers. I was reading a charts from across the web and it showed that the Fury X was on top with the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 beneath it.
> 
> From Computerbase results. Using the Vulkan API yes @ 1080p, the Fury X was nearly 20% faster than the GTX 1070 and GTX 980 Ti.
> The Fury X was 31% faster than the RX 480 and the R9 390.
> 
> The RX 480 was roughly 10% slower than the GTX 1070 and GTX 980 Ti. The R9 390 was 13% slower than the 1070\980Ti.
> 
> I know I was above 60fps while running 4K + Ultra Settings with TSSAA 8x. That's enough for me literally stare at my monitor and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it's going to be hard to run UT4 at all honestly. Most fast paced FPS doesn't require a lot of horsepower and the Unreal Engine is already optimized pretty well. The newer APIs will just make things even better.


DX12 is like a derivative of the Vulkan API, right?

I haven't seen these results, hmmm. I need to look!

That damn card is still a bundle of money, lol. No wonder why they haven't come down in price yet, lol. They knew.. they knew! lol

UT4 is having a little trouble with DX12. I hope they work things out for Vulkan also! It might be best to buy an AMD card. My last AMD card was a 5870.. had two of them in this system years ago, lol


----------



## OCmember

The FuryX has HBM memory clocked at 1000MHz? Am I reading that right? Then the FX480 uses DDR5 @ 8000MHz?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> DX12 is like a derivative of the Vulkan API, right?
> 
> I haven't seen these results, hmmm. I need to look!
> 
> That damn card is still a bundle of money, lol. No wonder why they haven't come down in price yet, lol. They knew.. they knew! lol
> 
> UT4 is having a little trouble with DX12. I hope they work things out for Vulkan also! It might be best to buy an AMD card. My last AMD card was a 5870.. had two of them in this system years ago, lol


Which one is expensive? What card are you talking about? 980 Ti or the Fury X?

The Doom Vulkan drivers released literally 48 hours ago I believe. I have DX12 results for Rise of the Tomb Raider and Hitman. Hitman shows to most improvements, especially at 4K 100% max settings including SSAA. Rise of the Tomb Raider DX12 was garbage until the most recent patch which improves the DX12 performance.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The FuryX has HBM memory clocked at 1000MHz? Am I reading that right? Then the FX480 uses DDR5 @ 8000MHz?


The Fury X uses HBM @ 500Mhz. It's much faster than GDDR5.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> DX12 is like a derivative of the Vulkan API, right?
> 
> I haven't seen these results, hmmm. I need to look!
> 
> That damn card is still a bundle of money, lol. No wonder why they haven't come down in price yet, lol. They knew.. they knew! lol
> 
> UT4 is having a little trouble with DX12. I hope they work things out for Vulkan also! It might be best to buy an AMD card. My last AMD card was a 5870.. had two of them in this system years ago, lol


Fury X? $399 is actually very good for the performance if more games start looking like Doom, I would be a little worried about the VRAM as some games are already over 4gb even at 1080p _(Mirrors Edge comes to mind)._ But for now it doesn't seem to be too much of an issue.

Would still be out of my price range though, $300 hard limit since my first Voodoo 2.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Fury X? $399 is actually very good for the performance if more games start looking like Doom, I would be a little worried about the VRAM as some games are already over 4gb even at 1080p _(Mirrors Edge comes to mind)._ But for now it doesn't seem to be too much of an issue.
> 
> Would still be out of my price range though, $300 hard limit since my first Voodoo 2.


I've been saying this since last year......4GB HBM has kept up with 6GB & 12 GB GDDR5 when comes to higher resolutions. I didn't think it would, but AMD has done something special with it. Obviously more is better, but I can't complain from the results I've been seeing in several benchmarks from several different websites. I also have my own benchmarks as well.

Also the Fury X has always been a really good GPU so far. Doom and Vulkan didn't just make the Fury X "worth it" now. The cheaper Fury X prices does help. I'm sure they are just clearing the shelves for Vega.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I've been saying this since last year......4GB HBM has kept up with 6GB & 12 GB GDDR5 when comes to higher resolutions. I didn't think it would, but AMD has done something special with it.
> 
> Also the Fury X has always been a really good GPU so far. Doom and Vulkan didn't just make the Fury X "worth it" now. The cheaper Fury X prices does help. I'm sure they are just clearing the shelves for Vega.


Yep, it's a solid card. Actually, all of AMD's current line are pretty solid. I'm impressed with the RX480 at the price, and now that 4gb cards are being unlocked to 8gb it makes for an even sweeter deal.

Other than a few games like Skyrim with some mods or Mirrors Edge on Hyper settings 4gb is still plenty for the time being. Hopefully we'll see a bit more effort put into optimization in the future.









Edit for the edit









I think the Fury X is a great card, it's just the value wasn't as good as the mid range cards _(for example, it was about twice the price of the 390 but delivered only ~25-30% more performance on average)_.

At $399 the price/performance is quite good, even when compared to the new 1070 in DX11 for example. Certain games are simply not optimized for AMD though, like Project Cars.

But as we know, AMD cards will keep getting small optimizations and will likely slowly take over the other currently comparable cards while Nvidia cards will be probably be abandoned as far as optimizing goes.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yep, it's a solid card. Actually, all of AMD's current line are pretty solid. I'm impressed with the RX480 at the price, and now that 4gb cards are being unlocked to 8gb it makes for an even sweeter deal.
> 
> Other than a few games like Skyrim with some mods or Mirrors Edge on Hyper settings 4gb is still plenty for the time being. Hopefully we'll see a bit more effort put into optimization in the future.


Yeah Nvidia sponsored titles usually run worse on AMD hardware, but that's usually due to Nvidia closed tech [Gameworks]. I have noticed that a ton of the games I benchmark are Nvidia TWIMTBP titles. There's no need for optimizations since that will come normally. AMD has done a great job improving their DX11 issues, but it's time to move on. We need to drop the archaic APIs for sure and start using newer modern APIs. I'll prefer Vulkan over DX12 any day since Vulkan can be ran on just about anything unlike DX12. DX12 definitely needs to replace DX11 though.

Quote:


> Edit for the edit smile.gif
> 
> I think the Fury X is a great card, it's just the value wasn't as good as the mid range cards (for example, it was about twice the price of the 390 but delivered only ~25-30% more performance on average).


Yes the Fury X is pretty much 30% faster than the 390 [possibly more in 2016]. 30% is pretty substantial, but a better comparison would be the 390X. The Fury X was a 1440p max and 4K max card faced against the Titan X and the 980 Ti. The 390 competition was the 970 and targeting 1080p and 1440p with mixed settings. The 390 and 390X was great in their respected areas. Apparently price isn't a issues since people are dumping their GTX 980 Ti and 980 Ti SLI in favor of a GTX 1080. Ebay was flooded for a few weeks.

The Fury X selling point was the 1440p Maxed settings and the 4K gameplay. It did deliver and did what it was suppose to do. If people missed out on the Fury X due to the 390 price, then that's just their miss. They probably never had 1440p max or 4K max gaming in mind anyways.

Quote:


> At $399 the price/performance is quite good, even when compared to the new 1070 in DX11 for example. Certain games are simply not optimized for AMD though, like Project Cars.
> 
> But as we know, AMD cards will keep getting small optimizations and will likely slowly take over the other currently comparable cards while Nvidia cards will be probably be abandoned as far as optimizing goes.


Well if we go by history then yes AMD should age better than Nvidia older architectures. I think more people are starting to notice more than ever now. Projects Cars was an abomination for AMD GPUs and heavily favored Nvidia GPUs. Of course this didn't stop all of the benchmarking sites from using the results in a overall fps chart.

Then again all websites continued to use Rise of the Tomb Raider DX12 implementation that was nothing less than garbage on AMD GPUs. Now that the DX12 has been updated and contains Async Compute I wonder if any websites will dedicate an article to the patch. Or will they at the very least update their charts. I doubt it. I updated my charts and added the DX12 Async to my RotTR article.

When it comes to Gameworks there's really nothing AMD can do except keep releasing those drivers. Doom drivers were released one business day later. AMD jumped on the Gears of War: UE pretty fast as well. Hopefully they can keep it going.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> ...
> The Fury X selling point was the 1440p Maxed settings and the 4K gameplay. It did deliver and did what it was suppose to do. If people missed out on the Fury X due to the 390 price, then that's just their miss. They probably never had 1440p max or 4K max gaming in mind anyways.
> ...


I don't think it was really a miss for those that were more interested in getting the most performance for the price. The 390 is actually very capable for 1440p at max settings in many games as long as you don't mind an occasional dip down to 50fps in more demanding games, but if you want that solid 60fps with no dips on max settings it is still limited to 1080p in most newer games.

Gotta draw the line somewhere I guess, for me it was the 390 as it seemed to be a good compromise at the time.


----------



## OCmember

Wow, all across New Egg none of them (FuryX) are below 599$ (BNIB)

ohp, my bad, the XFX is 399 but the rest all look quite expensive


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Wow, all across New Egg none of them (FuryX) are below 599$ (BNIB)
> 
> ohp, my bad, the XFX is 399 but the rest all look quite expensive


That's not a bad price at all. For the performance you would be getting that price is a steal. I just hate it takes a price drop for people to notice a good GPU.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> That's not a bad price at all. For the performance you would be getting that price is a steal. I just hate it takes a price drop for people to notice a good GPU.


I'm not sure I'd call it a steal. 480's in crossfire would give much better performance for the same price, but it is nice to have a single card which is one reason the 980ti was so popular.


----------



## Qiko

I am thinking about expanding my memory to 48GB.

I saw the Ballistix Tactical Low Profile 16GB Kit 8GBx2 DDR3-1600 1.35V UDIMM 240-Pin Memory Modules BLT2K8G3D1608ET3LX0

anyone every tried a similar setup with the x56xx xeon ? Will a size like this lower memory overclock?

Thanks,


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I'm not sure I'd call it a steal. 480's in crossfire would give much better performance for the same price, but it is nice to have a single card which is one reason the 980ti was so popular.


The Fury X was popular for the same reason. It was a single card that could handle anything you threw at it. The Fury X has been trading blows with the 980 Ti since Day 1 and actually beat the 980 Ti in most 4K situations, but as usual people found "something" to complain about. I'm' not surprised since it was AMD getting the complaints and that's the cool thing to do nowadays. I actually remember reading an article about how the Fury X was faster than the 980 Ti in games after a driver release. It was a few months after the 980 Ti and Fury X dropped.

The RX480 CFX is looking great in several benchmarks, but it doesn't compare to the Fury X Crossfire. The Fury X is a steal at that price for those who are looking for a SINGLE card that will get them 1440p max and 4K max results with great frame rates. Obviously lowering unnecessary settings like AA will get you more FPS. If you already have a Fury X or looking for a single card solution then that price is indeed a steal. AMD has stated that they are planning to keep up their CFX profiles for games and I'm hoping they do continue to support CFX users. A single is usually better as far as the actual n game performance goes. It seems that CFX is running smooth in games at the moment though which is a good thing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Qiko*
> 
> I am thinking about expanding my memory to 48GB.
> 
> I saw the Ballistix Tactical Low Profile 16GB Kit 8GBx2 DDR3-1600 1.35V UDIMM 240-Pin Memory Modules BLT2K8G3D1608ET3LX0
> 
> anyone every tried a similar setup with the x56xx xeon ? Will a size like this lower memory overclock?
> 
> Thanks,


I'm running 24GBs ECC Registered RAM in Triple Channel. I have no problems hitting 2000Mhz - 2100Mhz on all 6 modules [stable]. It's not quite 48GBs, but I am using low voltage RAM. The voltage is rated at 1.35v. I think you'll be fine.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> The Fury X was popular for the same reason. It was a single card that could handle anything you threw at it. The Fury X has been trading blows with the 980 Ti since Day 1 and actually beat the 980 Ti in most 4K situations, but as usual people found "something" to complain about. I'm' not surprised since it was AMD getting the complaints and that's the cool thing to do nowadays. I actually remember reading an article about how the Fury X was faster than the 980 Ti in games after a driver release. It was a few months after the 980 Ti and Fury X dropped.
> 
> The RX480 CFX is looking great in several benchmarks, but it doesn't compare to the Fury X Crossfire. The Fury X is a steal at that price for those who are looking for a SINGLE card that will get them 1440p max and 4K max results with great frame rates. Obviously lowering unnecessary settings like AA will get you more FPS. If you already have a Fury X or looking for a single card solution then that price is indeed a steal. AMD has stated that they are planning to keep up their CFX profiles for games and I'm hoping they do continue to support CFX users. A single is usually better as far as the actual n game performance goes. It seems that CFX is running smooth in games at the moment though which is a good thing. .


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Qiko*
> 
> I am thinking about expanding my memory to 48GB.
> 
> I saw the Ballistix Tactical Low Profile 16GB Kit 8GBx2 DDR3-1600 1.35V UDIMM 240-Pin Memory Modules BLT2K8G3D1608ET3LX0
> 
> anyone every tried a similar setup with the x56xx xeon ? Will a size like this lower memory overclock?
> 
> Thanks,


The amount of memory populated was much less detrimental to the performance of the Xeon. The Bloomfield would **** the bed with all dimms filled (at least mine did)

The tactical LP is great memory. will clock like crazy!!


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey guys, I've noticed the strangest thing: when I play slither.io in 64 bit Chrome, I get serious slowdowns and high CPU usage - with a 4GHz CPU and a GeForce 970 [SLI isn't used]









Is it only me?

PS can anyone beat 45500?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Oh alright then...

DX12 Time Spy Benches - any takers?



www.3dmark.com/spy/95110

5650 @ 4GHz
1600/8/8/8/24/1T
3200MHz Uncore
SLI 970's @ <= 1426MHz Core / 7430MHz RAM
Drivers a month old, might also be able to squeeze some more out of the GPU's but I lost my settings so this is it for now









How's everyone else faring?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Oh alright then...
> 
> DX12 Time Spy Benches - any takers?
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com/spy/95110
> 
> 5650 @ 4GHz
> 1600/8/8/8/24/1T
> 3200MHz Uncore
> SLI 970's @ <= 1426MHz Core / 7430MHz RAM
> Drivers a month old, might also be able to squeeze some more out of the GPU's but I lost my settings so this is it for now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How's everyone else faring?


Nice score. I'm getting some weird results in DX12. I'm writing an article on my issues and findings. At the moment I'm analyzing a lot of data, but it appears Futuremark is having a PR meltdown on Steam and Reddit. I won't say to much about it at the moment because I want to make sure I go through all of the data I've captured.


----------



## OCmember

What download do I need for Time Spy ? I seen it goes back as far as a GTX 680.. wonder if it means Maxwell.. and a GTX 670


----------



## gofasterstripes

@OCmember Pretty sure Time Spy is W10/DX12 only.

Here's another link to a comparison:

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/95110/spy/20055/spy/9649

VS a top-end CPU and a slightly higher GPU overclock [4930K/+100MHzGPU] I'm down 16% on total score. That's only -10-14% in the Graphics tests, but circa 46% on CPU alone.

VS another modern CPU [5820K] but with the same GPU clocks, we're looking at dropping only 4/4.7% in FPS in GPU benches, so a delta of *1.9FPS* in GPU workloads, and a total delta of 11% for the total score, despite being again around -44% down on the CPU test.

TL;DR - lagging 40% in the CPU tests vs modern 6 core socket 2011's is costing x58 around only 11% in the combined tests.

That's 48 vs 53FPS at 1440p - no biggiesmalls









*x58 again kicks ass*


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What download do I need for Time Spy ? I seen it goes back as far as a GTX 680.. wonder if it means Maxwell.. and a GTX 670


You can just got to Futuremark website and download the program "3DMark" which contains FireStrike. There's a new update that contains the most recent GUI and the Time Spy DX12 benchmark. Unless you buy the 3Dmark + Time Spy Benchmark you'll have to sit through the Demo and all of the benchmarks. The benchmarks runs at 1440p at default and you can't change anything.

if you purchased the Advanced Edition on the Futuremark website or Steam, you'll get a DLC download. Here's the kicker, unlike other "Advanced Edition features", you do NOT get those features with Time Spy DX12. You get the basic free edition that's locked. You can't disable the demo or change anything as far as the settings go [Demo + 1440p only]. So basically if you've already paid for the Advanced Edition, possibly Professional Edition as well, you'll have to spend more for all features to the Time Spy benchmark. it's basically in "free basic" mode for people who have already paid for a higher tier in 3Dmark.


----------



## gofasterstripes

UL have bought 3DMark.

*sigh*


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @OCmember Pretty sure Time Spy is W10/DX12 only.
> 
> Here's another link to a comparison:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/95110/spy/20055/spy/9649
> 
> VS a top-end CPU and a slightly higher GPU overclock [4930K/+100MHzGPU] I'm down 16% on total score. That's only -10-14% in the Graphics tests, but circa 46% on CPU alone.
> 
> VS another modern CPU [5820K] but with the same GPU clocks, we're looking at dropping only 4/4.7% in FPS in GPU benches, so a delta of *1.9FPS* in GPU workloads, and a total delta of 11% for the total score, despite being again around -44% down on the CPU test.
> 
> TL;DR - lagging 40% in the CPU tests vs modern 6 core socket 2011's is costing x58 around only 11% in the combined tests.
> 
> That's 48 vs 53FPS at 1440p - no biggiesmalls
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *x58 again kicks ass*


Keep in mind that 4930k is at 4.7ghz and the 5820k is at 4.5ghz, if you were running at the same clocks it would be even closer.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Oh alright then...
> 
> DX12 Time Spy Benches - any takers?
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com/spy/95110
> 
> 5650 @ 4GHz
> 1600/8/8/8/24/1T
> 3200MHz Uncore
> SLI 970's @ <= 1426MHz Core / 7430MHz RAM
> Drivers a month old, might also be able to squeeze some more out of the GPU's but I lost my settings so this is it for now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How's everyone else faring?


I ran some runs on my SR2 with Fury x gpus. They did okay, but i am pretty sure Timespy still has some sort of cpu overhead on AMD still.
4x furyx stock
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/9112

1x furyx
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/8199

i didn't spend much time on this as i was gunning for HOF scores on my 5960x







- but its something to go by


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> I ran some runs on my SR2 with Fury x gpus. They did okay, but i am pretty sure Timespy still has some sort of cpu overhead on AMD still.
> 4x furyx stock
> http://www.3dmark.com/spy/9112
> 
> 1x furyx
> http://www.3dmark.com/spy/8199
> 
> i didn't spend much time on this as i was gunning for HOF scores on my 5960x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - but its something to go by


I'm going to be writing an article on this Time Spy benchmark for sure now. I've been a bit busy this evening, but I've been looking at a ton of data. There is some highly suspect "stuff" going on behind the scenes. Apparently my Fury X is starving for data. Not only starving for data, but it appears to be happening on purposes based on the information the Time Spy benchmark\program is sending to the CPU and GPU. I've also noticed some different or weird behavior while running this benchmark. I'll explain more once I verify every piece of code compared to other DX12 or Vulkan benchmarks.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm going to be writing an article on this Time Spy benchmark for sure now. I've been a bit busy this evening, but I've been looking at a ton of data. There is some highly suspect "stuff" going on behind the scenes. Apparently my Fury X is starving for data. Not only starving for data, but it appears to be happening on purposes based on the information the Time Spy benchmark\program is sending to the CPU and GPU. I've also noticed some different or weird behavior while running this benchmark. I'll explain more once I verify every piece of code compared to other DX12 or Vulkan benchmarks.


Yes, it is not working very well on my furies either. The same issues i have in dx11 with overhead almost seems like its in this timespy benchmark. I get alot of what looks like load bouncing just like i do in dx11, not only that my wattage is way low on the bench compared to dx11, and temps are lower at load in timespy. Its definitely fishy on performance. However that said i am still benching it as it is. I am used to this now, and i almost feel like its never going to change for AMD. The bench threads are getting boring because its all nvidia vs nvidia...

Even overclocking furyx in this bench seem flatter than before. This makes me think thats related to light loads on it during timespy. I thought the whole purpose of dx12 was to remove cpu/single thread limit. The load bouncing in quadfire was horrendus on my SR2. Also there is supposedly bugs with more than 2 gpus in fullscreen vs borderless window in timespy.

See herehttp://www.overclock.net/t/1606006/3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-top-30/190#post_25356302


----------



## dagget3450

Sorry double post


----------



## gofasterstripes

To be fair, it's only been out a few days...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> To be fair, it's only been out a few days...


To be fair everyone is going to be using this benchmark in reviews and articles. There's just so much wrong Futuremark and this benchmark at the moment. They had 18 months to work on this and implement a pipeline for both GPU manufacturers.


----------



## gofasterstripes




----------



## OCmember

Well looks like I'll pass on the Time Spy, bleargh


----------



## GENXLR

They shoulda just released 3D Pong instead


----------



## 99belle99

This is my timespy score. X5660 @ 4.2Ghz and a r9 290 @ 1200MHz and 1500MHz.

http://s1214.photobucket.com/user/Kelticwarrior00/media/Test.jpg.html


----------



## Vihsadas

First post! Trying so hard not to upgrade and this thread looks just like mah people.

Bah! I was running an x58 SLI3 with a xeon x5650 and my board died!!! Anyone got an FTW3 evga x58 they don't need anymore? I really don't want to have to upgarde to x79 or 99 right now.


----------



## 14600

+Kana-Maru Hello, how do you could get with the X5660 @ 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 v and 4,8 GHZ with only 1,43-1,46 v? Now I bought a Xeon X5660 and it is not even possible to boot with 209x23 = 4,8 GHZ and 1,43 v set in BIOS (with Loadline-Calibration ON which increases the voltage +50 mV under load cpu-z so actually it's 1,48 v in real)? It's not the BCKL because even 214+ is stable with much lower frequency. My Motherboard is an Asus Rampage 2 Extreme.

For 4,4 GHZ my it needs 1,48 v sometimes 1,5 Volts at heavy load (in CPU-Z), 1,425 v in BIOS LLC on to pass Cinebench 2 h cpu time in Task-Manager and AIDA64 stability test (FPU off) 12 h cpu time but not even Prime95. What is the cause the CPU voltage needs be that high for me or is this just a bad chip that I have? What is/was the batch number of this CPU you could get 4,8 GHz with only 1,43 v stable? My batch number is 3042A446 is this bad? Are the newer cpus made in 2011, with B or C in here and lower last digits better for OC with low voltage? I would be happy about your answer what is your opinion.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> +Kana-Maru Hello, how do you could get with the X5660 @ 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 v and 4,8 GHZ with only 1,43-1,46 v? Now I bought a Xeon X5660 and it is not even possible to boot with 209x23 = 4,8 GHZ and 1,43 v set in BIOS (with Loadline-Calibration ON which increases the voltage +50 mV under load cpu-z so actually it's 1,48 v in real)? It's not the BCKL because even 214+ is stable with much lower frequency. My Motherboard is an Asus Rampage 2 Extreme.
> 
> For 4,4 GHZ my it needs 1,48 v sometimes 1,5 Volts at heavy load (in CPU-Z), 1,425 v in BIOS LLC on to pass Cinebench 2 h cpu time in Task-Manager and AIDA64 stability test (FPU off) 12 h cpu time but not even Prime95. What is the cause the CPU voltage needs be that high for me or is this just a bad chip that I have? What is/was the batch number of this CPU you could get 4,8 GHz with only 1,43 v stable? My batch number is 3042A446 is this bad? Are the newer cpus made in 2011, with B or C in here and lower last digits better for OC with low voltage? I would be happy about your answer what is your opinion.


It's a combination of having a good chip, a good board, a good PSU, decent cooling, and knowing how each setting works _(higher is not always better)._









I think batches have been discussed here pretty extensively so you can find the info you need using the search. Typically B batches will clock a bit better and will be cooler, lower last three numbers are typically better _(especially the last two)_ but this is not always true. It's really up to luck to get a good chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> +Kana-Maru Hello, how do you could get with the X5660 @ 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 v and 4,8 GHZ with only 1,43-1,46 v?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Now I bought a Xeon X5660 and it is not even possible to boot with 209x23 = 4,8 GHZ and 1,43 v set in BIOS (with Loadline-Calibration ON which increases the voltage +50 mV under load cpu-z so actually it's 1,48 v in real)? It's not the BCKL because even 214+ is stable with much lower frequency. My Motherboard is an Asus Rampage 2 Extreme.
> 
> For 4,4 GHZ my it needs 1,48 v sometimes 1,5 Volts at heavy load (in CPU-Z), 1,425 v in BIOS LLC on to pass Cinebench 2 h cpu time in Task-Manager and AIDA64 stability test (FPU off) 12 h cpu time but not even Prime95. What is the cause the CPU voltage needs be that high for me or is this just a bad chip that I have? What is/was the batch number of this CPU you could get 4,8 GHz with only 1,43 v stable? My batch number is 3042A446 is this bad? Are the newer cpus made in 2011, with B or C in here and lower last digits better for OC with low voltage? I would be happy about your answer what is your opinion.


@tbob22 answer is pretty much on point. Higher isn't always better. You'll need a good setup for starters and from that point you'll definitely want a good CPU or at least a CPU that hasn't been cherry picked or beaten into the ground.

For 4.6Ghz I'm only using 200 BCLK, I'm not sure what my max is for the X5660, but my max BCLK for my L5639 was 229-230BCLK IIRC. The CPU voltage will vary from CPU to CPU and you'll want some decent cooling if you plan to run 4.4Ghz - 4.8Ghz+. 1.48v and 1.5v is really high just for 4.4Ghz. You might have to settle for a lower clock and maximize your performance from there. I haven't spoken about the batch numbers in a long time so I couldn't tell you. There's plenty of info here though.


----------



## 14600

+Kana-Maru Thank you for the fast answer







What I've read It looks like the newer CPUs made 2011 are really better for overclocking with low voltages and unfortunately I've a model from 2010









I've also found a short review of the Xeon X5650 on PC Games Hardware Extreme (which is the same cpu with a lower multiplier) and he was able to get 4,5 GHZ with only 1,3 volts cpu voltage. The Batch of the cpu was L105B379 so it is a B batch model and was made in 2011 like the Core i7-990X. http://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/prozessoren/337698-review-hat-der-uralt-sockel-1366-eine-chance-gegen-skylake-westmere-als-cpu-geheimtipp.html

I also made tests with lower frequencies like 3,8, 4, 4,2 and 4,3 GHZ always with HyperThreading on (12 Threads). The stability tests wasn't insane like 24 hours Prime95 or something like that, but 2 hours cpu time in task manger Cinebench 15, 11.5 and 12 hours cpu time in task manager of ADIDA64 Stability test without FPU load. I think it is enough for everyday life usage.

This CPU voltage (the real one cpu-z shows with LLC on) was needed to avoid crash (if it crashed with Bluescreen 124 QPI/DRAM was increased in steps but if it didn't help to gain stability then put QPI Voltage back and increases Vcore instead):

3,8 GHZ = 1,22 v
4 GHZ = 1,306 v
4,2 GHZ = 1,375 - 1,38 v
4,3 GHZ = 1,41 - 1,422 v
4,4 GHZ = 1,475 - 1,48 v Cinebench (1,467 v avg. in AIDA64 stability test no FPU)
4,5 GHZ = no realistic because of too high temperature but I think definitely above 1,52 volts because Cinebench 15 crashed "Cinebench stopped working" with 1,52 - 1,53 v cpu voltage in CPU-Z.


----------



## Kana-Maru

No problem and it's looking good. You'll definitely want to be close to 1.35vCore so 4Ghz - 4.2Ghz looks more realistic for you. I only run 4Ghz + DDR3-1400Mhz daily on my gaming rig. I have no problems running games or using all of my programs @ 4Ghz. It's more than enough for just about everything. So 3.8Ghz - 4.2Ghz is fine for daily usage and probably overkill in most situations. You won't have to worry about the CPU getting very hot as well.

The only time I run 4.6Ghz is when I'm benchmarking or need to crunch a lot of data. I almost never run 4.8Ghz when I benchmark games now since it doesn't improve the average fps and only changes the max and min values sometimes. I've already ran a ton of benchmarks so I'm sure I know where my rig stands at 4.8Ghz when compared to newer CPUs.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> +Kana-Maru Hello, how do you could get with the X5660 @ 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 v and 4,8 GHZ with only 1,43-1,46 v? Now I bought a Xeon X5660 and it is not even possible to boot with 209x23 = 4,8 GHZ and 1,43 v set in BIOS (with Loadline-Calibration ON which increases the voltage +50 mV under load cpu-z so actually it's 1,48 v in real)? It's not the BCKL because even 214+ is stable with much lower frequency. My Motherboard is an Asus Rampage 2 Extreme.
> 
> For 4,4 GHZ my it needs 1,48 v sometimes 1,5 Volts at heavy load (in CPU-Z), 1,425 v in BIOS LLC on to pass Cinebench 2 h cpu time in Task-Manager and AIDA64 stability test (FPU off) 12 h cpu time but not even Prime95. What is the cause the CPU voltage needs be that high for me or is this just a bad chip that I have? What is/was the batch number of this CPU you could get 4,8 GHz with only 1,43 v stable? My batch number is 3042A446 is this bad? Are the newer cpus made in 2011, with B or C in here and lower last digits better for OC with low voltage? I would be happy about your answer what is your opinion.


The rampage 2 extreme is a lower mosfet (regulator group), and the stability may not be the same. PSU also comes into play.

As for the batch no. Lower last 3 digits are generally better. I have a 091 "B" series, and am able to run 4.55 @ 1.33V's. memory capable of 2200mhz 9-9-9-24 @ 1.55V's. uncore 3800ish 1.347. Being a 446 A series, it will likely take more voltage, but run a tad cooler.


----------



## GENXLR

I should find the batch for my X5650









Also My W3690 is on the way for my laptop.

Does the W3690(and all westmere) support DDR3-1333 native? My i7 960 only supports 1066 and it's slow on the ram side of things, I want faster


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I should find the batch for my X5650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also My W3690 is on the way for my laptop.
> 
> Does the W3690(and all westmere) support DDR3-1333 native? My i7 960 only supports 1066 and it's slow on the ram side of things, I want faster


The Westmere does support 1333. Depending on how open th elaptop bios is. It also has a completely unlocked memory multi, along with the core ratio. Not sure how likely it is that your Lappy will allow it though.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I should find the batch for my X5650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also My W3690 is on the way for my laptop.
> 
> Does the W3690(and all westmere) support DDR3-1333 native? My i7 960 only supports 1066 and it's slow on the ram side of things, I want faster


The W3690 is the i7-990X and the W3680 is i7-980X. Actually all Xeons in this series made in 2010 have the same chips used in i7-980X and 2011 models i7-990X. The W models have also a free multiplier like the Extreme Editions for overclocking.

Of course they support DDR-1333 officially, but it is also possible to run >DDR3-2000 but in some cases it can be difficult to get such high ram clock to work. The only difference here is, you are only able to use the DDR3-1333 Ram-Ratio (6,8 and 10) as maximum otherwise it is not possible to boot (black screen) at least in my case.

What I have read, the Workstation models have a tendency for problems with high amount of no ECC Ram being used. The Problems are like only 12 GB of 24 GB are detected etc. and some ram slots doesn't work properly.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> The W3690 is the i7-990X and the W3680 is i7-980X. Actually all Xeons in this series made in 2010 have the same chips used in i7-980X and 2011 models i7-990X. The W models have also a free multiplier like the Extreme Editions for overclocking.
> 
> Of course they support DDR-1333 officially, but it is also possible to run >DDR3-2000 but in some cases it can be difficult to get such high ram clock to work. The only difference here is, you are only able to use the DDR3-1333 Ram-Ratio (6,8 and 10) as maximum otherwise it is not possible to boot (black screen) at least in my case.
> 
> What I have read, the Workstation models have a tendency for problems with high amount of no ECC Ram being used. The Problems are like only 12 GB of 24 GB are detected etc. and some ram slots doesn't work properly.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> The Westmere does support 1333. Depending on how open th elaptop bios is. It also has a completely unlocked memory multi, along with the core ratio. Not sure how likely it is that your Lappy will allow it though.


I know they were the same but my CPU database lists the 980/990x as 1066 only but W3680/90 as 1333 even though they are almost identical chips. My bios allows 1333 but I don't believe it allows multi access, I might be able to force it via throttlestop or similar but there's a good chance that because vcore is locked and such, crashy. Plus its a laptop, its already gonna get hot but will it be hotter than my old 960 is the question

Gonna try to post 3x8 GB of ram for 24gb


----------



## BossThis

MB: Asus Rampage II Extreme
BIOS: 2101
CPU: x5670

Hello,

Just got this CPU and everything seems to work fine except for overclocking. My multiplier is locked, bclk is locked. The only thing I can change is memory stuff. Am I missing something? Maybe a modded BIOS?

Thx,

Sorry If this has been addressed somewhere in this thread, I did search







.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BossThis*
> 
> MB: Asus Rampage II Extreme
> BIOS: 2101
> CPU: x5670
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Just got this CPU and everything seems to work fine except for overclocking. My multiplier is locked, bclk is locked. The only thing I can change is memory stuff. Am I missing something? Maybe a modded BIOS?
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Sorry If this has been addressed somewhere in this thread, I did search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


You only can change the blck, multi is locked


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I should find the batch for my X5650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also My W3690 is on the way for my laptop.
> 
> Does the W3690(and all westmere) support DDR3-1333 native? My i7 960 only supports 1066 and it's slow on the ram side of things, I want faster


Depending on what is open for adjustment in your laptop's bios. The W3690 is completely unlocked. Natively
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> You only can change the blck, multi is locked


Really??? the rampage II is locked like that with the Xeons??


----------



## BossThis

Quote:
Cant even change my bclk....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> You only can change the blck, multi is locked


Cant change my bclk..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Depending on what is open for adjustment in your laptop's bios. The W3690 is completely unlocked. Natively
> Really??? the rampage II is locked like that with the Xeons??


I know its odd because I have read about people on here "changing it".


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Depending on what is open for adjustment in your laptop's bios. The W3690 is completely unlocked. Natively
> Really??? the rampage II is locked like that with the Xeons??


He has an X5670, so yes it's locked multi
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BossThis*
> 
> Cant even change my bclk....
> Cant change my bclk..
> I know its odd because I have read about people on here "changing it".


I can change it on our rampage II. There's members in the club who have too. Are you running the last bios?


----------



## BossThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BossThis*
> 
> MB: Asus Rampage II Extreme
> BIOS: 2101
> CPU: x5670
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Just got this CPU and everything seems to work fine except for overclocking. My multiplier is locked, bclk is locked. The only thing I can change is memory stuff. Am I missing something? Maybe a modded BIOS?
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Sorry If this has been addressed somewhere in this thread, I did search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Yes ^^ 2101


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BossThis*
> 
> MB: Asus Rampage II Extreme
> BIOS: 2101
> CPU: x5670
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Just got this CPU and everything seems to work fine except for overclocking. My multiplier is locked, bclk is locked. The only thing I can change is memory stuff. Am I missing something? Maybe a modded BIOS?
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Sorry If this has been addressed somewhere in this thread, I did search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Yes, because somehow it is only possible to change these settings with the numpad + and - keys.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Really??? the rampage II is locked like that with the Xeons??


No.


----------



## BossThis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Yes, because somehow it is only possible to change these settings with the numpad + and - keys.
> No.


So you can change the multiplier? Mine it greyed out, I can't even move to it. I'll check the + and - thing.


----------



## BossThis

Everything is working like it should! Thank you 14600, I guess it didn't occur to me because I'm so used to using the enter and arrow keys.

Thank you!


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> No.


All x56xx's are locked _(and any multi QPI chip for that matter)_. The w3680/90 are unlocked.

But on x58 it doesn't really matter that they are locked as the BCLK can be pushed to 200mhz with relative ease.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Both with HT set on in BIOS: @ 4GHz /3200 /1600MHz 88824 - Problem size 1024MB
> 
> 12 threads : 62+GF
> 6 threads : 80+GF
> Time: 15 Seconds
> 
> HT OFF IN BIOS
> 
> 12 threads : 82+GF
> 6 threads : 82+GF
> Time: 10 Seconds
> 
> [a couple of passes, not really warmed up]
> 
> I think this shows it's a daft way to measure performance across machines.


LINPACK is highly memory subsystem limited and more threads than number cores just increases cache contention with it.

Seeing more performance with one thread per physical core is completely normal in LINPACK tests.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Yeah it doesn't mean anything to me. I get about 170 gflops on my 1660 but it's no where near that much faster than my x58 system in real world situations.


Your X58 system doesn't have AVX. AVX gives an enormous boost to LINPACK scores (my 5820k gives ~375 GFLOPS at 4.3GHz).

But yes, LINPACK is as synthetic as it gets...it's supposed to be, and it has to be to be a good stress test.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Your X58 system doesn't have AVX. AVX gives an enormous boost to LINPACK scores (my 5820k gives ~375 GFLOPS at 4.3GHz).
> 
> But yes, LINPACK is as synthetic as it gets...it's supposed to be, and it has to be to be a good stress test.


Yep, and AVX2 gives an even larger bump, as well as pretty significant bump in temperatures. Too bad we don't see more applications taking advantage of that extra processing power.


----------



## nederknievel

Amazing how active threads on X58 are in mid-2016!

I just picked up a 121-BL-E756-TR V2 for $90 delivered and to my surprise it supports an x5677 without mods!

Replaced a very crappy Dell desktop with C2D E4700 (yeah, I'm behind the times) and I'm very impressed with the performance I'm getting even though I've only pushed it to a tad over 4ghz so far.

I like to stay behind the curve but buy things for very cheap and I got lucky on the motherboard here (I see people selling X58 motherboards for insane prices) and of course the CPUs are cheap as hell.

Waiting on a water cooler before I try really pushing overclocking. Also considering picking up an X5650, and since I can get a Dell workstation with that CPU for about double the cost of the chip itself, probably going to pick that up to replace my second backup PC, and can swap between either chip in the EVGA board computer for overclocking.

These systems are a steal if you can get an overclocking capable board for cheap


----------



## kpforce1

I'm still rocking my x58 setups (all at 4.2+ GHz). X5650s in two of the and dual x5679s in the SR-2. I just haven't seen a reason to upgrade. With an overclocked Titan I scored over 4k in the new 3dmark Time spy demo. My physics score is still in the 80th+ percentile lol.


----------



## kpforce1

Double post


----------



## Ferro10

I would buy a w3680 using the serial no way to figure out if he's lucky in OC?


----------



## 99belle99

How does the X58 fair with AMD in crossfire as there is no SLI link on the cards and all done through the PCIe socket. As you all know we have the aging PCIe 2.0 and does it cause problems with crossfire?


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> How does the X58 fair with AMD in crossfire as there is no SLI link on the cards and all done through the PCIe socket. As you all know we have the aging PCIe 2.0 and does it cause problems with crossfire?


The biggest issues i have run into using x58 and crossfire is CPU overhead in dx11 and possibly in dx12 if timespy is anything to go by for dx12 future. You will find overhead more a threat than pcie bandwidth. When it works crossfire seems fine on x58 for me.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> The biggest issues i have run into using x58 and crossfire is CPU overhead in dx11 and possibly in dx12 if timespy is anything to go by for dx12 future. You will find overhead more a threat than pcie bandwidth. When it works crossfire seems fine on x58 for me.


What CPU and clock speed are you running? I have no CPU overhead issues with a single Titan at 1400 (1070 ftw inbound) with my x5650 @ 4.4 GHz. I score 4100 in time spy.

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/106183


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> What CPU and clock speed are you running? I have no CPU overhead issues with a single Titan at 1400 (1070 ftw inbound) with my x5650 @ 4.4 GHz. I score 4100 in time spy.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/spy/106183


The original question was crossfire so that means AMD only. My reply was based on AMD gpus mainly FuryX im my case. My cpus on x58 always ran at least 4ghz, typically 4.2-4.5
I also refer more to benchmarks over gaming, but at 1080p AMD fiji in crossfire can have poor scaling due to cpu overhead. I doubt nvidia will show any overhead issues since they have optimized better. I guess he was worried about multi gpu and pcie bandwidth. I would expect on a single gpu overhead wouldnt be a big issue if at all.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Double Post.......


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> How does the X58 fair with AMD in crossfire as there is no SLI link on the cards and all done through the PCIe socket. As you all know we have the aging PCIe 2.0 and does it cause problems with crossfire?


I'm thinking about getting another Fury X for SLI since the prices have dropped for a few brands recently. I might be able to tell you more soon.

Quote:


> The biggest issues i have run into using x58 and crossfire is CPU overhead in dx11 and possibly in dx12 if timespy is anything to go by for dx12 future. You will find overhead more a threat than pcie bandwidth. When it works crossfire seems fine on x58 for me.


I'm running a single Fury X DX11 overhead isn't that much of a problem for me at 1440p and 4K. I get roughly 50fps average @ 4K in Batman: Arkham Knight 100% maxed with Nvidia GW. I get 40fps average in Ryse: Son of Rome 4K 100% maxed and those are two great looking titles. I believe I got around 35 or 38fps average in the Witcher 3 @ 4K 100% maxed [no Nvidia gameworks].

DX12\Vulkan removes those limitations if programmed correctly judging by Hitman DX12 [4K: 44fps] and Doom Vulkan [4K: approx. 60fps+].

Time Spy shouldn't' be taken seriously until they get their stuff together with the rendering path.

Quote:


> but at 1080p AMD fiji in crossfire can have poor scaling due to cpu overhead.


Why in the world would you run a $650 GPU @ 1080p. There's a better way to spend money for 1080p lol. The card was marketed as a 1440p\4K GPU.

According to a benchmark I viewed the Fury X CFX scaled 94.50% in DX11-FireStrike 1080p Graphics Score.
At 1440p the Fury X scaled 97.74% DX11-FireStrike Graphics Score
At 4K the Fury X scaled 94.66 DX11-FireStrike Graphics Score

Ummm that's some really good scaling across the board for a synthetic benchmark.


----------



## GENXLR

I'm sitting pascal out. Its a bit of a trainwreck. Waiting on Volta now. My 780ti is fending off decently.

Crossfire using the PCI-E bus isn't super limited, PCI-E 2.0 x16 is 8GB/s vs PCI-E 3.0 x16 at 16GB/s(granted its WAY slower than the memory bus) but its still limited at some degree


----------



## OCmember

Yeah, same here but I am completely bypassing Nvidia for Vega. Interested to see how it does


----------



## GENXLR

Don't get me wrong, if Vega comes out decent, I'm jumping trains, for the first time in 10 years


----------



## OCmember

Last time I ran AMD was when the 5870 came out. I bought 2. Then out of curiosity I picked up a GTX 480 space heater, lol


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Last time I ran AMD was when the 5870 came out. I bought 2. Then out of curiosity I picked up a GTX 480 space heater, lol


My 480gtxs taught me what psu ocp is lol. I also melted my first atx cables with them. They also heated up my garage while i benched in winter lol


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm thinking about getting another Fury X for SLI since the prices have dropped for a few brands recently. I might be able to tell you more soon.
> I'm running a single Fury X DX11 overhead isn't that much of a problem for me at 1440p and 4K. I get roughly 50fps average @ 4K in Batman: Arkham Knight 100% maxed with Nvidia GW. I get 40fps average in Ryse: Son of Rome 4K 100% maxed and those are two great looking titles. I believe I got around 35 or 38fps average in the Witcher 3 @ 4K 100% maxed [no Nvidia gameworks].
> 
> DX12\Vulkan removes those limitations if programmed correctly judging by Hitman DX12 [4K: 44fps] and Doom Vulkan [4K: approx. 60fps+].
> 
> Time Spy shouldn't' be taken seriously until they get their stuff together with the rendering path.
> Why in the world would you run a $650 GPU @ 1080p. There's a better way to spend money for 1080p lol. The card was marketed as a 1440p\4K GPU.
> 
> According to a benchmark I viewed the Fury X CFX scaled 94.50% in DX11-FireStrike 1080p Graphics Score.
> At 1440p the Fury X scaled 97.74% DX11-FireStrike Graphics Score
> At 4K the Fury X scaled 94.66 DX11-FireStrike Graphics Score
> 
> Ummm that's some really good scaling across the board for a synthetic benchmark.


To be fair the person who asked the question didn't specify what AMD gpus to run in crossfire. As for 650$ for 1080p gpus was never my intent. I was aiming at 4k but i do benchmark at 1080 because thats what most nvidia benches are at. If it were up to me id never bench below 4k. Unfortunately hwbot and top30 threads here on ocn are all about low resolution mostly. I also refer to overhead with cpu when my crossfire cannot be fully pushed equally. Maybe i am not using cpu overhead correctly thefe. I do know that after testing furyx cf up to quadfire each platform had different results. Worst being my 9590 on 990fx gpu load bounced all over but never staying loaded across all gpus. Then my sr2 had to go up to 1440p

Maybe its related to ipc i dunno, but i go from a bench at 1080p that cannot fully load all gpus to loading all 4 maxxed on different newer cpu.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> My 480gtxs taught me what psu ocp is lol. I also melted my first atx cables with them. They also heated up my garage while i benched in winter lol


Ah those heater editions were awesome.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> To be fair the person who asked the question didn't specify what AMD gpus to run in crossfire. As for 650$ for 1080p gpus was never my intent. I was aiming at 4k but i do benchmark at 1080 because thats what most nvidia benches are at. If it were up to me id never bench below 4k. Unfortunately hwbot and top30 threads here on ocn are all about low resolution mostly..


Yeah it's sad to see that 1080p is still "a thing" so many years after mainstream cards have had no issues running games at 1080p. Heck my old 550 Ti has no issue running Crysis 2 @ 1440p. Well it COULD run it at decent frames with 1GB. So 1080p was not a big issue way back then. Yeah I can understand the low resolutions for the latest e-peen purchase justification . I mean unless you have a decent monitor to support the fps, I don't see the point. It's like getting 150fps+ @ 1080p on a 85hz monitor.
Quote:


> I also refer to overhead with cpu when my crossfire cannot be fully pushed equally. Maybe i am not using cpu overhead correctly thefe. I do know that after testing furyx cf up to quadfire each platform had different results. Worst being my 9590 on 990fx gpu load bounced all over but never staying loaded across all gpus. Then my sr2 had to go up to 1440p


I don't think all of the issues are with the CPUs or the platforms. DX11 was a limited API. You probably just hitting the limits which isn't difficultly to do with your setup. The GPU are probably starving for more work and one core just isn't feeding enough data. DX12 and Vulkan should offer more and are widely being adopted [especially Vulkan]. I do remember you saying that different platforms gave different results in the past. I'm sure newer platforms will give you the best performance over the much older platforms.

Quote:


> Maybe its related to ipc i dunno, but i go from a bench at 1080p that cannot fully load all gpus to loading all 4 maxxed on different newer cpu.


It could be IPC related since DX11 doesn't really utilize all of the CPU cores. The faster you can make the IPC will definitely allow more data to be processed. Thankfully modern APIs are going to take advantage of our modern hardware. Although IPC matters, using more cores efficiently will even the odds.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I dread to think how many watts I hit my 470 with. Several, and then some....


----------



## DRKreiger

Honestly probably somewhere around 255 to 325. I know. My 480's were probably getting my entire house three of them clocked over 800 will do that. Hence my previous power supply being 1600 Watts


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Honestly probably somewhere around 255 to 325. I know. My 480's were probably getting my entire house three of them clocked over 800 will do that. Hence my previous power supply being 1600 Watts


I ran 3 480s in SLI for testing power consumption...they were at 900 core and 2200 VRAM (I think) and I was kissing 1400 watts at the wall. Water cooled of course. The heat coming from my radiators was insane lol


----------



## OCmember

What GPU test seems to pull the most? With my single GTX 670, Mem @ 7200 no GPU oc, running Real Bench it was pulling 500w from the wall on my game rig, and idles at 200w.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Has anyone gone from 1366 to 1151 yet? I keep eyeing updated parts and talking myself out of it. I'm also considering going X99, but the cost of motherboards have me balking at that notion.


----------



## GENXLR

Oh my are we gonna talk about Fermi? I had so many 480' and 470's, I had twin 480's in SLI in my D5400XS rig at one point, all I remember was they produced so much it wasn't even funny. I had a flamethrower in my workstation, actual power draw at the wall was about 1200 watts. Granted I was folding with twin 480's and X5470 xeons at 4ghz(200w tpd per CPU). My god so much heat!

I was gonna elect Kana-maru to buy a rog xpander and go 4 way GTX 480 SLI but then I saw this...








Guess Asus beat us too the industrial heater


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Has anyone gone from 1366 to 1151 yet? I keep eyeing updated parts and talking myself out of it. I'm also considering going X99, but the cost of motherboards have me balking at that notion.


X99 would be a nice jump but 1151 isn't anything special over 1366 with a Xeon
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What GPU test seems to pull the most? With my single GTX 670, Mem @ 7200 no GPU oc, running Real Bench it was pulling 500w from the wall on my game rig, and idles at 200w.


Pull the most? By far... Furmark...


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I mean, I'm not really looking for anything special. I only went 1366 because I got an i7-930 for $216 when they retailed for $330. And I was lucky enough to get my Sabertooth X58 open box for $93. I guess I can wait for a more modern platform to drop to those kinds of prices, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. I pretty much use my computer to play games and watch streams so I'm kind of putting this hexacore to waste. That's also the reason I can't bring myself to go X99. I don't need that much processing power, but I wouldn't mind native support for newer technologies.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I mean, I'm not really looking for anything special. I only went 1366 because I got an i7-930 for $216 when they retailed for $330. And I was lucky enough to get my Sabertooth X58 open box for $93. I guess I can wait for a more modern platform to drop to those kinds of prices, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. I pretty much use my computer to play games and watch streams so I'm kind of putting this hexacore to waste. That's also the reason I can't bring myself to go X99. I don't need that much processing power, but I wouldn't mind native support for newer technologies.


You answered your own question. Streaming\web-surfing and gaming doesn't require an upgrade. Now that DX12 and Vulkan games are hitting the market your Hexa core isn't a waste for gaming. X99 will cost a premium price as you've seen. I don't think native support on the newer platforms are worth the price when you can get pretty much all of the features on the X58 for a decently cheap price. That's one of the reasons I still haven't upgraded. I simply do not see the need to upgrade just yet and spend tons of money. Yeah the e-peen might grow from synthetic benchmarks, but outside of benchmarks what's the real cost for the new performance you might not notice if you have a decent X58 machine [which most of us have].


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'll be building a new Z170 system for a friend next week. I'll get a feel for the performance first-hand and decide if I need to modernize my system. Benchmarks and reviews tell you only so much. It's similar to when I switched from an i7-930 to this X5670. Reading your review and analyzing your benchmarks didn't really compare to experiencing the difference first-hand.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What GPU test seems to pull the most?


OCCT or FurMark.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> X99 would be a nice jump but 1151 isn't anything special over 1366 with a Xeon


Depends on use.

Overall, a good Westmere hex core can keep up pretty well with a Skylake quad, but there are a few uses where the limits of the older architecture become apparent.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Pull the most? By far... Furmark...


Depending on card certain versions of OCCT can pull even more.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I'll be building a new Z170 system for a friend next week. I'll get a feel for the performance first-hand and decide if I need to modernize my system. Benchmarks and reviews tell you only so much. It's similar to when I switched from an i7-930 to this X5670. Reading your review and analyzing your benchmarks didn't really compare to experiencing the difference first-hand.


Good luck. My friend replaced his x58 Xeon with a Asus Z170 Deluxe and a 6700K, and then showed me his benches which all looked exactly like mine. I suspect the "feel" of the machine is all we will get in return. Better USB, better SSD, and quicker snappiness due to better single core performance etc. But for overall brute force I am seeing no worthwhile differences yet. I am surprised how little the market has given us the last 5 years or so. Thanks to AMD not bringing real competition, what were we to expect out of Intel? Nothing more than dressed up laziness is all I have seen.

EDIT: Oh and bring on 6 or 8 core Skylake or Kabylake. Those might finally show us up a tad. I'm betting on Hexa core Skylake/Kabylake to make me want to upgrade.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Thanks to AMD not bringing real competition, what were we to expect out of Intel? Nothing more than dressed up laziness is all I have seen.
> 
> EDIT: Oh and bring on 6 or 8 core Skylake or Kabylake. Those might finally show us up a tad. I'm betting on Hexa core Skylake/Kabylake to make me want to upgrade.


I'll be the first to call AMD out on lack of competition, but seriously what could AMD have done with all of the crap Intel did prior to 2008. How can you seriously make competitive products without the proper funding for R&D etc.. That's the truth of the matter and that's why Intel did what they did. Intel is worth around $50B to $54 BILLION dollars now. Paying AMD $1billion and the EU another $1billion is a drop in the bucket for Intel. Looking at it now it seems AMD has done all they could to stay competitive regardless of Intel shady practices. This ultimately caused the market to become stagnant while Intel continued to capitalize even well after the damage was done. AMD is getting their stock, funds and hopefully market share back up. Zen could be final deciding factor now that AMD is in a much better position that it has been post 2009 ruling against Intel. What has Intel really brought to the CPU performance other than high prices and 5%-10% IPC increases. For daily use, nothing worth noting. Gaming is still fine on PCie 2.0. Running BOINC or [email protected] doesn't pay any bills. I still know developers using X58 workstations getting the job done. Then again I can see the need for more from actual creators, who aren't the majority of the users.

Dressed up laziness that has a $200 AMD CPU matching Nvidia $1000 CPU in 2015 gaming sessions with GTX SLI.
http://www.technologyx.com/featured/amd-vs-intel-our-8-core-cpu-gaming-performance-showdown/

I promise if you took a AMD CPU and slapped Intel on it and let people use it for a month there would be zero complaints in the consumer market. The brand is so strong though.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I probably wouldn't be happy if every new generation of Intel processors was enough of a performance increase to justify an upgrade. That would mean my purchase would be obsolete so much sooner.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah that is kinda like how the GPU market is, all one sided. I would buy Zen and Vega just because I am tired of all the damn one sided markets. Even if Pascal beats Vega, even if Kabylake beats Zen, I will more than likely go AMD. I'm just saying the first offering from Intel that will finally turn me on after this Xeon is at least a 6 core Sky or Kaby, lake included. But after a decade of being on the Intel bandwagon I am eager to jump ship already.

Besides, what will I possibly lose going AMD? Chances are I will gain extra cash in the wallet.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> I probably wouldn't be happy if every new generation of Intel processors was enough of a performance increase to justify an upgrade. That would mean my purchase would be obsolete so much sooner.


That is wishful thinking, but Intel wouldn't be able to make that happen if they wanted to. They would rather it be like the past 5 years or so. Just because something is obsolete doesn't justify an spending more money on if there's nothing wrong with the "obsolete" hardware or software. Just like cars, if a 10 year old car runs well that doesn't mean you have to upgrade it. At that point it would solely be subjective, however, of course the marketing is so strong now that they can get tons of people to upgrade just about anything, A fool will part with his money soon. GPUs prove that yearly







.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah that is kinda like how the GPU market is, all one sided. I would buy Zen and Vega just because I am tired of all the damn one sided markets. Even if Pascal beats Vega, even if Kabylake beats Zen, I will more than likely go AMD. I'm just saying the first offering from Intel that will finally turn me on after this Xeon is at least a 6 core Sky or Kaby, lake included. But after a decade of being on the Intel bandwagon I am eager to jump ship already.
> 
> Besides, what will I possibly lose going AMD? Chances are I will gain extra cash in the wallet.


Well there's nothing to lose except a little e-peen online and that does absolutely nothing for anyone. I'm sure Pascal and Vega will go head to head. Intel has shown me what their plans are based on their current $1,700.00 price point for their flagship. Nvidia has also shown me their $1,200.00 price point for their flagship.

We just have to wait and see what Zen brings to the table. There's no reason to rush anything now regarding Zen or Vega. All of the people who are going to buy Intel and Nvidia won't change their mind and will probably find something to complain about when it comes to AMD as usual anyways. I just can't wait to see how reviews and YouTube Personalties treat AMD releases.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Come to think about it, ZEN sounds much more relaxing anyway. I can't swim so Kabylake sounds like something I would drown in, and jeez Skylake, I don't even own a parachute.... splat


----------



## chessmyantidrug

For my graphics card, I have been upgrading when developers were listing mine as the minimum requirement. The jump from the HD 4870 to 5870 was rather nice. Going from the 5870 to GTX 970 was even nicer. I've been tempted to grab a 1070, but there's no reason.

I don't really have any allegiances with my hardware. I'll buy whatever is worth the money. This is why I recommended the i7-6700K to my friend. She wants to stream and I considered going i5, but going i7 is safer and her budget allowed for it. I briefly toyed with the idea of going with an i7-5820K but didn't want to sacrifice in other areas like SSD capacity or computer case. She'll still be happy with her system. That's what ultimately matters.


----------



## mohiuddin

Can any body tell me. is the w3670 an unlocked processor?


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Can any body tell me. is the w3670 an unlocked processor?


No, just the W3680 & W3690


----------



## Gdourado

A friend of mine has a system that is used for gaming.
It has a Rampage II extreme, a 920 D0, 12gb of Corsair Dominator ram and a 280x.
Is it worth to upgrade to a X5660?
Or is it better to get a used z68 and 2500k bundle?
The usage is gaming.

Cheers!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gdourado*
> 
> A friend of mine has a system that is used for gaming.
> It has a Rampage II extreme, a 920 D0, 12gb of Corsair Dominator ram and a 280x.
> Is it worth to upgrade to a X5660?
> Or is it better to get a used z68 and 2500k bundle?
> The usage is gaming.
> 
> Cheers!


It makes a lot more sense to get a Xeon, doesn't necessarily have to be an X5660. It could be anything from an X5650 to X5690. They all tend to overclock to roughly the same area so you're pretty much paying for a multiplier. The Z68 and i5-2500K would more than likely be considerably more than the Xeon making it a less attractive option.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@Gdourado Do you plan to overclock?

WRT framerate

Clock for clock you should get <10% higher FPS with Sandy Bridge.

Falling to maybe -10/20% perhaps in the newest directx12/vulkan games which can use 6 cores.

You can probably also clock the SB higher, maybe 4.4GHz minimum, whereas you'd need a radiator and luck to get beyond that with x58.

Red Pill, Blue Pill


----------



## Gdourado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @Gdourado Do you plan to overclock?
> 
> WRT framerate
> 
> Clock for clock you should get <10% higher FPS with Sandy Bridge.
> 
> Falling to maybe -10/20% perhaps in the newest directx12/vulkan games which can use 6 cores.
> 
> You can probably also clock the SB higher, maybe 4.4GHz minimum, whereas you'd need a radiator and luck to get beyond that with x58.
> 
> Red Pill, Blue Pill


So the x5660 is the way to go to play games from 2016 and 2017?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I'd say 2017 or 2018 might be the time to replace Westmere Xeons. It's impossible to know until we see what hardware comes out.


----------



## Gdourado

So Sandy bridge i5 might last less because of only 4 threads despite having higher per core performance?
Is this because games will only become more multi threaded going forward?


----------



## hokk

No way i would take a westmere over a sandybridge chip these days

if you already had the platform its good to catch a nice little jump from 4>6 core as it is cheap

but don't kid yourself thinking that they are remotely as quick as a Sandybridge based i7.

Probably clock for clock about 40% slower.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Nehalem to Sandy Bridge was the biggest jump since Intel integrated the memory controller. Selling an X58-based system for Z68 is just silly. You might as well go with Z170 unless you're getting a good deal on the older tech. If you have Sandy Bridge, there's no reason to opt for an X58-based system. The price of motherboards makes building a system based on older technology quite prohibitive.


----------



## Gdourado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> No way i would take a westmere over a sandybridge chip these days
> 
> if you already had the platform its good to catch a nice little jump from 4>6 core as it is cheap
> 
> but don't kid yourself thinking that they are remotely as quick as a Sandybridge based i7.
> 
> Probably clock for clock about 40% slower.


I was comparing 2500k with 4 cores and 4 threads against a 920 d0 with 4 cores and 8 threads and a x5660 with 6 cores and 12 threads.
I am looking which gives the better gaming performance today against the pic they cost second hand.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Probably clock for clock about 40% slower.


OOh, that's a bit pessimistic.

I was just looking at benchmarks that show a smaller differential.


----------



## gofasterstripes

As you have the board, best VFM is the X56x0.

I think that's why we're all in this thread, TBH


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> but don't kid yourself thinking that they are remotely as quick as a Sandybridge based i7.
> Probably clock for clock about 40% slower.


This is just wrong. 40% slower lol. No it's more like 8% - 10% clock for clock or even less depending on the benchmarks you compare it with. Nahalem\Westermere actually beats Sandy-E and Ivy-E in a few benchmarks. I compared my CPU against several of Intel High end CPUs clock for clock @ 4.8Ghz
. It just all depends. The difference is negligible. If you can find a cheaper X79 + Hexa core then of course go with that, but the X58 strongest selling point was it's price and performance. The fact that a lot of people were still running their X58 rigs helped as well when it came to making a jump from a Quad to Hexa core.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gdourado*
> 
> I was comparing 2500k with 4 cores and 4 threads against a 920 d0 with 4 cores and 8 threads and a x5660 with 6 cores and 12 threads.
> I am looking which gives the better gaming performance today against the pic they cost second hand.


If you already have your X58 build up and running just swap the your Quad i7-920 for a Hexa-core Westmere, oveclock it to around 3.8Ghz to 4.4Ghz and enjoy life.

DX12 and Vulkan will ensure that your all 12 logical cores are active during gaming sessions. I'm sure X58 has plenty of life left in it. I'm actually surprised that it made it this far and still going strong.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

If video cards are ever bottlenecked by PCI-e 2.0, then Westmere will be dead.

I just built a Z170 system for a friend last night. The video card hasn't come in yet so I decided to test the iGPU by playing League of Legends. I was surprised to average around 85 fps with settings maxed out. Pretty good knowledge to know for friends who only ever play League. I can't wait to install the GTX 1060 tomorrow and compare against that.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gdourado*
> 
> I was comparing 2500k with 4 cores and 4 threads against a 920 d0 with 4 cores and 8 threads and a x5660 with 6 cores and 12 threads.
> I am looking which gives the better gaming performance today against the pic they cost second hand.


Pure gaming performance today is so close it's not going to really matter, but do any multi-tasking and the Westmere is the obvious choice.

Problem is the cost of good X58 boards. I have one _good_ X58 board left and I wouldn't sell it for less than what I paid for it new in 2010, if that. If you do find an inexpensive X58 board, it's often a major gamble. Either some cheap piece of garbage, an OEM pull with minimal options, or a heavily worn sample that could fail in short order.

Westmere hex-cores are still an awesome CPUs, but I don't recommend them to people building new systems unless they already have an X58 board laying around.

As an upgrade from a quad core LGA-1366 processor, they are a no brainer.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> Probably clock for clock about 40% slower.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> This is just wrong. 40% slower lol. No it's more like 8% - 10% clock for clock or even less depending on the benchmarks you compare it with.


40% is a ludicrous figure. The only apps that are that much faster from Westmere to Sandy are both AVX and memory bandwidth heavy...mostly synthetic ones. Real world apps that get anywhere near that are phenomenally rare.

10% is pretty typical, but since Sandy does have a slew of modest architectural improvements, a much faster uncore (especially when OCed), a better memory controller, and AVX, some apps can be a decent bit faster, clock for clock.


----------



## DRKreiger

sandy 40% over westmere is one of the most blindly spewed pile of brain diarrhea i've seen here to date. I have come in next to and above 25-2600k.

even most ivy chips can be only 8-12% over in total throughput. I mean my 4700 mhz westmere with one 780 was putting out some crazy high realbench numbers. beating almost everything pre 4790k.some 30 pages back or so.


----------



## DRKreiger

hell.. i'm gonna run it again and post results. I be fustrated now!!!!! OOOOOOHHHH NOO HEEEE DIIIIIDN"T


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

For sheer gaming, I think what ever the cheapest route is would be the best option, UNLESS all games in the chosen genre are expected to become multi threaded. If any decent money is being spent, I would most definitely recommend a Z170 though just for its sheer IPC strength and overall lower power bill. At 4ghz already you don't even need to bother overclocking the gaming rig.

Like others said, if you already have x58, its a no brainer, but if not, then you need to get out the calculator and start calculating. For me though, I always look to the future and how far my system will be good for. Unfortunately I might be seeing the end of my x58 in early 2017, but maybe not. I am blown away about how good this new USB 3.1 card is, so I don't think I need anything else but a new GPU and much better SSD.


----------



## DRKreiger

here you go folks!!

Image Editing
183041
Time:27.797

Encoding
173046
Time:55.407

OpenCL
44255
KSamples/sec: 960

Heavy Multitasking
181551
Time:53.869

System Score
136622

and where it falls in the rankings.

http://www.asus.com/campaign/Realbench/RealBench.php?page=9


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gdourado*
> 
> A friend of mine has a system that is used for gaming.
> It has a Rampage II extreme, a 920 D0, 12gb of Corsair Dominator ram and a 280x.
> Is it worth to upgrade to a X5660?
> Or is it better to get a used z68 and 2500k bundle?
> The usage is gaming.
> 
> Cheers!


It's hard to beat the performance of an x5650 at 4.2-4.4Ghz for $50.

Here is mine at 4.5Ghz (4.6 on one core) in Firestrike:
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2615047


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> It's hard to beat the performance of an x5650 at 4.2-4.4Ghz for $50.


Oooh I don't know
















http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851835

That was at 4GHz


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Oooh I don't know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6851835
> 
> That was at 4GHz


That's a solid physics score for 4ghz. I only got a slightly higher score at 4.5ghz.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5596340

Edit: Oh.


----------



## gofasterstripes

RE: "Oh"

I didn't cheat, the error message is because I alt+tabb'd out of the demo. The results were always the same if I let it all run, it just took longer.

That was with overclocked GPU's, and 3200 Uncore, RAM @ 88824 1T


----------



## xsotrasp

I'm so glad I found this thread. I bought an X5670 today for $100.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> RE: "Oh"
> 
> I didn't cheat, the error message is because I alt+tabb'd out of the demo. The results were always the same if I let it all run, it just took longer.
> 
> That was with overclocked GPU's, and 3200 Uncore, RAM @ 88824 1T


I saw a different link in my notification. That's what the "Oh" was about.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Aaah yes I changed it.

Actually, what I found was that over 4GHz, overclocking the GPU's netted me more Firestrike marks than pushing the CPU to 4.6

And a good cach/mem setup helps.


----------



## OCmember

CxE state question.

How much does this save on your watt drawl from the wall? I didn't check it on my old PSU with it set to Auto but with it disabled Real Bench was pulling 500w from the wall. With the new PSU and CxE on Auto I am pulling 425w max from the wall. Idle went from 200w to 150w. Not sure if it's the new PSU or CxE state. The PSUs are worlds apart in efficiency, ripple suppression, and regulation.

Old PSU: Enermax 1050w mine is the 950w
New PSU: Evga Supernova T2 1000w


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> CxE state question.
> 
> How much does this save on your watt drawl from the wall? I didn't check it on my old PSU with it set to Auto but with it disabled Real Bench was pulling 500w from the wall. With the new PSU and CxE on Auto I am pulling 425w max from the wall. Idle went from 200w to 150w. Not sure if it's the new PSU or CxE state. The PSUs are worlds apart in efficiency, ripple suppression, and regulation.
> 
> Old PSU: Enermax 1050w mine is the 950w
> New PSU: Evga Supernova T2 1000w


The supernova is a seasonic I believe. My v1200 by cooler master is as well.

I know my temps,voltages, and current draw dropped quite a bit from old pay. Similar to your results. C states can save quite a bit. Even more with offset capabilities


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> The supernova is a seasonic I believe.


Where did you hear that from? I had a link one time that stated who made who's power supply.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I know my temps,voltages, and current draw dropped quite a bit from old pay. Similar to your results. C states can save quite a bit. Even more with offset capabilities


"old pay" What's that?

Actually the vcore and dimm volts went up, according to my multimeter.

CPU VCORE
Enermax: cpu vcore 1.360v under IBT load
EVGA: cpu vcore 1.363-4v under IBT load. Oddly it starts out at 1.362v

DIMM
Enermax: dimm 1.668v under IBT load
EVGA: dimm 1.674v under IBT load

Those were the two that had largest differences. The rest were very minimal, e.g. vtt on Enermax 1.268v vs 1.269v on the EVGA

I'm assuming the regulation is doing this. It also has great ripple suppression, and efficiency... Until I marked down the load & idle balances between the two I was having a difficult time understanding the new PSU and how a better PSU would react with my board. Luckily those terminals were there and provided a more accurate reading. I guess I'll just have to disable CxE to see what's what.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> The supernova is a seasonic I believe. My v1200 by cooler master is as well.
> 
> I know my temps,voltages, and current draw dropped quite a bit from old pay. Similar to your results. C states can save quite a bit. Even more with offset capabilities


It's a rebranded Super Flower Leadex Titanium 1000W, which is an excellent unit.

A new psu can definitely reduce power usage from the wall especially since it is a much higher efficiency unit.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> It's a rebranded Super Flower Leadex Titanium 1000W, which is an excellent unit.
> 
> A new psu can definitely reduce power usage from the wall especially since it is a much higher efficiency unit.


Yeah, I was blown away by the review on JohnnyGuru. I'd been saving money for a GPU and fell out and picked up a new PSU, lol

The system was idling at 200w (gotta check with CxE) with my old Enermax, it's down to 150w now, & Real Bench use to pull 500w now it's down to 425w, according to my cheap wattage reader, hah.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Where did you hear that from? I had a link one time that stated who made who's power supply.
> "old pay" What's that?
> 
> Actually the vcore and dimm volts went up, according to my multimeter.
> 
> CPU VCORE
> Enermax: cpu vcore 1.360v under IBT load
> EVGA: cpu vcore 1.363-4v under IBT load. Oddly it starts out at 1.362v
> 
> DIMM
> Enermax: dimm 1.668v under IBT load
> EVGA: dimm 1.674v under IBT load
> 
> Those were the two that had largest differences. The rest were very minimal, e.g. vtt on Enermax 1.268v vs 1.269v on the EVGA
> 
> I'm assuming the regulation is doing this. It also has great ripple suppression, and efficiency... Until I marked down the load & idle balances between the two I was having a difficult time understanding the new PSU and how a better PSU would react with my board. Luckily those terminals were there and provided a more accurate reading. I guess I'll just have to disable CxE to see what's what.


It was supposed to say "PSU". was typing off of a tablet. autocorrect bane of my existence


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> It was supposed to say "PSU". was typing off of a tablet. autocorrect bane of my existence


Hey don't bash autocorrect, its the only thing that allows us to get a lil too wasted at the pub and still text our wives apperantly sober o-o

In all seriousness, my power supply change massively yielded more stability with my 12V rails. A VOM doesn't make it fun to check voltages, try a digital(or analogue, yolo) scope like my HP 54111D. Tells a much bigger story







my old PSU left ripples everywhere you could look, under load, might as well have been music(wonder where could whine comes from????)


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hey don't bash autocorrect, its the only thing that allows us to get a lil too wasted at the pub and still text our wives apperantly sober o-o
> 
> In all seriousness, my power supply change massively yielded more stability with my 12V rails. A VOM doesn't make it fun to check voltages, try a digital(or analogue, yolo) scope like my HP 54111D. Tells a much bigger story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my old PSU left ripples everywhere you could look, under load, might as well have been music(wonder where could whine comes from????)


What PSU do you have now? Makes me curious about my recent PSU purchase.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hey don't bash autocorrect, its the only thing that allows us to get a lil too wasted at the pub and still text our wives apperantly sober o-o
> 
> In all seriousness, my power supply change massively yielded more stability with my 12V rails. A VOM doesn't make it fun to check voltages, try a digital(or analogue, yolo) scope like my HP 54111D. Tells a much bigger story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my old PSU left ripples everywhere you could look, under load, might as well have been music(wonder where could whine comes from????)


I remember when I switched from a BFG 1200W to my ST1500W.... I could lower voltages across the board on my x58 classified setup lol. I couldn't believe the difference in stability. I know they are not very efficient by today's standards but I have two of them powering my SR-2 rig now.


----------



## OCmember

I recently have been talking Kana's ears off about my recent PSU purchase and the stability issues I've been going through. My old PSU doesn't have as good of regulation as my new one. My main concern is the 12v. This actually threw me for a loop as I was thinking I would be able to lower my cpu vcore for my 4.51GHz overclock. The other half of the story is that I didn't stability test enough with my old PSU. I thought I was able to lower my CPU Vcore in bios from 1.356v to 1.350v Simple, right? But when you check the voltage terminals for various load levels that goes out the window. Idle, IBT & P95, Real Bench, & gaming all produce different cpu vcore loads on my rig. 3 days in on stability testing I realized the difference between the PSUs. I'm still not convinced on the stability of it right now with it's current bios settings but I have until the 20th to test it out and see. What I did find after comparing the two with the same tests was that the new PSU did indeed have better regulation, especially on the 12v (not a scientific examination, only via digital multi-meter on the vcore terminal) I didn't like how IBT was pulling 1.364v while running IBT VS 1.360v on the old PSU. That's what indeed threw me. Plus the fact that I didn't have the same dimm voltages, which were lower so this produced some stability test failing across all tests (IBT, P95, RB) After going back and stability checking the old PSU I jotted down the volts under idle, various stability tests, and gaming. It became apparent that 1.350v in bios wasn't cutting it and that I had to settle with 1.356v in bios and the 1.364v IBT load. Correct me if I am wrong but I've concluded that the 1.364v IBT load is because of better regulation. The 12v ripple suppression is 9mV while the regulation on the cold and hot is 3% then 2% respectively. This might explain why when starting IBT the vcore goes from 1.362v to 1.364v, again correct me if I am wrong.

So far things have been stable @ 4.51GHz, 3.25GHz QPI & Uncore, 1800MHz memory speed. What's different is I was previously pushing 4GHz QPI, and 3.7-8GHz Uncore. So that still leaves some questions out in the open because it was understandably stable with my old PSU.


----------



## gofasterstripes

These volts measured also will vary depending on how your DMM actually reads the voltage - there is always noise, even with DC measurements, so the DMM must decide what to actually display from the data - differing amounts of noise may change the value displayed...


----------



## OCmember

Heat also plays a part. The hotter a core will get the more volts it will pull. (according to Idontcare, on the anandtech forums..)


----------



## gofasterstripes

That is true, and true of LED's or other semiconductor devices too.

Well, actually what happens is the power consumption will increase, so if you have an offset voltage function then the applied voltage will rise. Otherwise, with no offset or VDroop compensation then the voltage will fall, as the current drawn increases the VRM's output will begin to droop.

Anyway, yes it matters


----------



## Gdourado

For the same price at 200 euros:
Bundle 1
- Rampage II extreme
- i7 920 D0
- 12 gb (3x4) Corsair Dominator 1600 cl8

Bundle 2
- P8Z68-V/gen3
- i5 2500k
- 8 gb (2x4) gskill Ripjaws X 2133

What bundle gives the best gaming performance now and for the next Year?

Z68 has USB 3 and Sata 3.
Has better slot spacing for crossfire
2500k overclocks higher.
Z68 can take 3770k in the future.

i7 920 has hyper threading.
X58 can be upgraded to xeon x56** for 6 cores and 12 threads.
X58 runs triple channel memory.

2500k has better cores and higher IPC.
3770k even more.
Z68 only runs dual channel memory but clocks it higher.

With all these arguments, it a tie and a hard decision.
Anyone care to input?

Usage is gaming.
Monitor is 1080p.
Gpu is 280x.

Cheers!


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

For gaming it looks like a coin toss to me. For general computing I would want the SATA 3 and USB 3.0 ports with better IPC per core and faster Mhz RAM. But if threads matter, then the x58 with a Xeon will kill it. VERY difficult choice there bud, but I would lean towards the newer gen myself.


----------



## gofasterstripes

With 12GB and a 5650 the X58 ($250) would be better for work, in this case.

As before - 5650 is better value as up upgrade, 2500k better from scratch.

IMHO


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> What PSU do you have now? Makes me curious about my recent PSU purchase.


My PSU is Dated but I want from some coolmax 750w to a SuperFlower Leadex Platinum 1000w and man oh man the difference
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> I remember when I switched from a BFG 1200W to my ST1500W.... I could lower voltages across the board on my x58 classified setup lol. I couldn't believe the difference in stability. I know they are not very efficient by today's standards but I have two of them powering my SR-2 rig now.


...3000watts.... Did you really need it?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> These volts measured also will vary depending on how your DMM actually reads the voltage - there is always noise, even with DC measurements, so the DMM must decide what to actually display from the data - differing amounts of noise may change the value displayed...


Hence use a scope to view that stuff, not a VOM


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> ...3000watts.... Did you really need it?


Three OG Titans at 1400+Mhz, two cpus at 4.4+ Ghz, a gtx 670, 3 pumps, many drives, etc...yes...yes I did unfortunately.


----------



## 14600

Hello, if you remember I was wondering why I need such a high voltage (1,5 volts) to stabilize 4,4 GHZ and how it is possible to reach 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 volts.

Now I could test another X5660 CPU a B-Batch model this time. The problem is that nothing has changed, the needed voltage is exactly the same and just too high. For 4,2 GHZ 1,4 volts are needed. How is this possible I mean is this also a bad CPU for overclocking, common oc results for the X5660 or is this a mainboard or power supply problem?


----------



## gofasterstripes

It seems unusually high. Can you upload more of the figures you're using? BIOS photo or something.

NB I only use Gigabyte MoBo's.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> It seems unusually high. Can you upload more of the figures you're using? BIOS photo or something.
> 
> NB I only use Gigabyte MoBo's.


This is the stability test I ran with 4,2 GHZ and 1,4 volts. If I chose a lower cpu voltage then it crash with Bluescreen (124, 101, 3B etc.). To be honest because of the high voltage of 1,5 volts, it is not really possible to run this test long at 4,4 GHZ with 12 Threads, because logical the temperature is also too high with that high voltage.

Also it is a problem for the PSU I've, because it isn't a high-end one unfortunately. It has 500 watts and 34 A two 12 v 18A rails. There's no 80 plus, with the 4,4 GHZ and >1,5 volts the power draw rises to near 500 watts in prime 95 at full cpu load only.

Because of this it can crash with a instantly shut down like if you would pull the cable. I really need to buy a better power supply, but I'm not sure if the stability (how much voltage you need for overclocking) depends much on it therefore I ask.

Interesting might be that something could be wrong with my motherboard (Asus Rampage 2 Extreme), because at high voltages it sounds weird (constant high frequency sounds at load).


----------



## Gdourado

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> With 12GB and a 5650 the X58 ($250) would be better for work, in this case.
> 
> As before - 5650 is better value as up upgrade, 2500k better from scratch.
> 
> IMHO


When I read reviews on the net about the i7 920 vs the 2500k, almost all reviews state the 2500k to be the better gaming CPU.

But those are reviews from 2011, when the 2500k launched.

Games are different know.

Are they more multi-threaded in 2016 that Hyper Threading makes a big difference know?

How will CPU performance change with vulkan and DX12?

Will the 4 threads of the 2500k limit the performance and introduce stutter before the 920?

Is the X58 platform a better bet? Besides beeing older, it can take 6 core cpus. Will that make a difference in longevity for games this year and early 2017?

I know the 2500k has faster cores and better IPC. But I am afraid the CPU will come to 100% usage and start to stutter with future games that can use more than 4 cores.

Cheers!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Hello, if you remember I was wondering why I need such a high voltage (1,5 volts) to stabilize 4,4 GHZ and how it is possible to reach 4,6 GHZ with only 1,36 volts.
> 
> Now I could test another X5660 CPU a B-Batch model this time. The problem is that nothing has changed, the needed voltage is exactly the same and just too high. For 4,2 GHZ 1,4 volts are needed. How is this possible I mean is this also a bad CPU for overclocking, common oc results for the X5660 or is this a mainboard or power supply problem?


Sounds like a PSU problem to me, but I could be wrong. What are you using for a PSU and Motherboard?

Plus 3.6GHz QPI is getting a little out of stability range for normal volts. I'd push a little more volts into the QPI & IOH core. Try running them at the same volts e.g. 1.30v for both.

Your uncore looks like it isn't being pushed too hard at 3.2GHz but for the heck of it try 1.25v

EDIT: Wait a minute. You are running 32GB with HT on? try running 8GB with HT off. Sounds like it's too much memory controller pressure for the chip and the board.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@14600 : I agree entirely with @OCmember's post above. Try those tweaks and et back to us, but you may need a better PSU.

@Gdourado Dude, there are just too many varibles, price differences and API uncertainties for me to TELL you the 100% CORRECT answer. If you have $200, then I suggest the 2500k route. Personally I would say that, and I would also say that if you were going SLI and with a budget for a good X58 MoBo and enough money for trying a couple of 5650's to find the best one and also watercooling the whole thing at 4.6GHz or something [as some of the more high-end builds on this thread] - THAT would 100% be the best move. It's just going to cost a lot more than $200.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That is true, and true of LED's or other semiconductor devices too.
> 
> Well, actually what happens is the power consumption will increase, so if you have an offset voltage function then the applied voltage will rise. Otherwise, with no offset or VDroop compensation then the voltage will fall, as the current drawn increases the VRM's output will begin to droop.
> 
> Anyway, yes it matters


Hmm. That sounds a little different than what's happening with my system. Correct me if I am wrong. I don't use Vdroop or any off-set with the cpu vcore (actually there isn't an option for that), but like I said when running ibt the vcore reads 1.362-3 at the start then later on in the test it's pegged at 1.364v during the load. Does that sound like there is an issue with the PSU? Thankfully games only need 1.349v


----------



## gofasterstripes

That difference is so small it could be changes in the conductivity of the surface of the solder you're probing!

Nae worry lad


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That difference is so small it could be changes in the conductivity of the surface of the solder you're probing!
> 
> Nae worry lad


Ok, ok. Just a little worried with this new PSU. It's the paranoia of buying new products, lol

Thanks


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sounds like a PSU problem to me, but I could be wrong. What are you using for a PSU and Motherboard?
> 
> Plus 3.6GHz QPI is getting a little out of stability range for normal volts. I'd push a little more volts into the QPI & IOH core. Try running them at the same volts e.g. 1.30v for both.
> 
> Your uncore looks like it isn't being pushed too hard at 3.2GHz but for the heck of it try 1.25v
> 
> EDIT: Wait a minute. You are running 32GB with HT on? try running 8GB with HT off. Sounds like it's too much memory controller pressure for the chip and the board.


Now I tried it with only 1 module 8 GB and the 4,4 GHZ (191x23) seems to need less CPU voltage to be stable but not much. I didn't test is intensively because after all it doesn't make sense, I think at 1,46-1,47 volts or something like that it could pass 15 minutes of prime95 but I'm not 100% sure. It definitely crashed at 1,43 volts with 3B Bluescreen and 1,45 volts with freeze. The QPI/DRAM Voltage was 1,25 v the IOH at 1,3 volts. The Temperatures and power draw were a lot lower here with the less ram.

As sad why I should test something when it doesn't make any sense, I want to use my full RAM and also want to upgrade to 48 GB soon. Also only Single-Chanel is bad. So it must be stable under full configuration. Turning HyperThreading off is not a good idea, because it cost a lot performance, but yes I know you need less voltage if it's off.

I don't know if it's important but with the CPU I had before (i7 920 C0) it was not possible to reach more then 3,7 GHZ at 1,38 Volts. Everything above this was not only too hot, no it always crashed with Bluescreen regardless of voltages and I tried it so many times with no sucess. The same bad overcklocking results with the both X5660 the secound one I use now is a B-Batch modell and should need lower voltages then the A-Batch first one but it isn't so.

Somehow my system have a tendency to crash whatever you change in the BIOS and it is really sucks with time


----------



## gofasterstripes

Try setting the voltages as said above, with all or half the RAM in.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Now I tried it with only 1 module 8 GB and the 4,4 GHZ (191x23) seems to need less CPU voltage to be stable but not much. I didn't test is intensively because after all it doesn't make sense, I think at 1,46-1,47 volts or something like that it could pass 15 minutes of prime95 but I'm not 100% sure. It definitely crashed at 1,43 volts with 3B Bluescreen and 1,45 volts with freeze. The QPI/DRAM Voltage was 1,25 v the IOH at 1,3 volts. The Temperatures and power draw were a lot lower here with the less ram.
> 
> As sad why I should test something when it doesn't make any sense, I want to use my full RAM and also want to upgrade to 48 GB soon. Also only Single-Chanel is bad. So it must be stable under full configuration. Turning HyperThreading off is not a good idea, because it cost a lot performance, but yes I know you need less voltage if it's off.
> 
> I don't know if it's important but with the CPU I had before (i7 920 C0) it was not possible to reach more then 3,7 GHZ at 1,38 Volts. Everything above this was not only too hot, no it always crashed with Bluescreen regardless of voltages and I tried it so many times with no sucess. The same bad overcklocking results with the both X5660 the secound one I use now is a B-Batch modell and should need lower voltages then the A-Batch first one but it isn't so.
> 
> Somehow my system have a tendency to crash whatever you change in the BIOS and it is really sucks with time


So what he was trying to do is process of elimination to figure out what you could change to help. Not get the best performance. Find the issue causing the need for so much voltage, and then work out the tweaks for best performance. X58 takes some real trial and error to get it right. It's actually one of the reasons why it was loved so much (and still is), the hunt for the best config intrigues only the best of overclockers!!

pull most of the memory, and things get better, your memory controller is being stressed too much. Turn off HT, and things get better, the cores/motherboard voltage regulator working too hard. But, the biggest factor is, what are all the components in your system??

Fill out the rig builder as complete as possible. so many variables can attribute stability problems. low quality PSU, will require more Vcore. High voltage, average ram can make the memory controller work harder, especially at 32 gigs. A mediocre motherboard will definitely be a huge factor in all of this. What are the complete batch numbers for the chips you have been testing?? I have seen some wildly different results due to batch numbers too.


----------



## OCmember

With 32GB of ram it's gotta be the VTT and Dimm volts. I would push 1.325v cpu VTT, and 1.666v dimm.

EDIT: the bad part is if you don't have voltage terminals (or know where to place the meter probes) you could be getting bad software readings. e.g. HWmonitor says I am pushing 1.4v VTT when in reality I've set the bios to 1.30, and on the terminal it's reading 1.305v


----------



## 14600

Maybe I should accept somehow it not possible to overclock it more/better then 4,2 GHZ with 1,4 Volts. I mean is it really worth to spent again hours maybe for nothing. I already spent so much time on it and unfortunately nothing changed the high cpu voltage is nedded to avoid crash, it didn't help to change other voltages like VTT/QPI, IOH and RAM. Remove RAM to stabilize doesn't make sense for me because I need it.

Always if I reduce vcore Bluescreens 3B, 1E, 101, 124 appears and overall as said the tendency to crash is somehow very high with this setup.

Now I've 66,7 % more multi thread Performance and 12,5 % single thread as with the i7 920 3,7 GHZ 1,38 v (more/better was not possible). It is a good result I'm happy with it. With 4,4 GHZ it would be only 5 % more.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Maybe I should accept somehow it not possible to overclock it more/better then 4,2 GHZ with 1,4 Volts. I mean is it really worth to spent again hours maybe for nothing. I already spent so much time on it and unfortunately nothing changed the high cpu voltage is nedded to avoid crash, it didn't help to change other voltages like VTT/QPI, IOH and RAM. Remove RAM to stabilize doesn't make sense for me because I need it.
> 
> Always if I reduce vcore Bluescreens 3B, 1E, 101, 124 appears and overall as said the tendency to crash is somehow very high with this setup.
> 
> Now I've 66,7 % more multi thread Performance and 12,5 % single thread as with the i7 920 3,7 GHZ 1,38 v (more/better was not possible). It is a good result I'm happy with it. With 4,4 GHZ it would be only 5 % more.


you probably bought those (xeons) from a private user?


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> you probably bought those (xeons) from a private user?


No, they're used from commercial seller.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> No, they're used from commercial seller.


I had a X5660 that wouldn't do 4.4GHz under 1.4v er something.. really disappointed with the chip..


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I had a X5660 that wouldn't do 4.4GHz under 1.4v er something.. really disappointed with the chip..


Me too but not sure if they're so bad or if it's rather MB or PSU Problem. I think it is both. Unfortunately I don't have money to buy 10 chips and test it to see. How much voltage do you need with the W3690 for 4,47 GHZ? Do you have a B Batch? There're also C and D Batches, not sure if they are good for overclocking.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Me too but not sure if they're so bad or if it's rather MB or PSU Problem. I think it is both. Unfortunately I don't have money to buy 10 chips and test it to see. How much voltage do you need with the W3690 for 4,47 GHZ? Do you have a B Batch? There're also C and D Batches, not sure if they are good for overclocking.


The chip will do 4.5GHz It pulls 1.363v under IBT load. At idle it sits at 1.346v. Gaming it pulls 1.349v. My bios is set to 1.356v no vdroop.

Yes, it's a B batch. I wouldn't get too hung up on the batches.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> The chip will do 4.5GHz It pulls 1.363v under IBT load. At idle it sits at 1.346v. Gaming it pulls 1.349v. My bios is set to 1.356v no vdroop.
> 
> Yes, it's a B batch. I wouldn't get too hung up on the batches.


I use the Offset Voltage Setting because at idle it sits at only 1,2 volts and it is better for long life time. Also with this if the load if not so heavy (like only 2 cores used), the voltage is not that high as it would be with 100% load. I'm not sure but I think I set it to +0,2375 v now (200x21).

You measure the voltage values with multimeter? This is a very good overclocking result you get. The Software voltage readings are maybe wrong, because if I set vcore to 1,356 v in BIOS with Load-Calibration on, CPU-Z and other shows 1,4 Volts under Prime95 or Cinebench, this is what I need for 4,2 GHZ I'm running now and it's also a B batch


----------



## OCmember

@14600 Yeah, I don't think there is one software reading that is the same as the readings from the multi-meter. CPU VTT say 1.402v when the mm says 1.311v It's set to 1.30v in bios (+100mV) Voltage read points are one of my main selling points when I buy a board.


----------



## 14600

@OCmember







My Motherboard has also extra points to measure the voltage it is a OC board. The problem is I don't have a multimeter have to buy one. Interesting this could mean that I'm actually running a lower cpu voltage (the same like you) and the software readings are just imagination.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> @OCmember
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My Motherboard has also extra points to measure the voltage it is a OC board. The problem is I don't have a multimeter have to buy one. Interesting this could mean that I'm actually running a lower cpu voltage (the same like you) and the software readings are just imagination.


You have a Gigabyte OC board? The orange and black board?


----------



## 14600

@OCmember No







I have the ASUS Rampage 2 Extreme. To be honest I guess Gigabyte boards are better for overclocking, but it will be very hard to find a new board for that old 1366 platform, doesn't make sense to pay a lot money for it better upgrade to modern one.


----------



## OCmember

That's great! All you have to do is buy a 20$ multi meter from your local hardware store and you are set!


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Me too but not sure if they're so bad or if it's rather MB or PSU Problem. I think it is both. Unfortunately I don't have money to buy 10 chips and test it to see. How much voltage do you need with the W3690 for 4,47 GHZ? Do you have a B Batch? There're also C and D Batches, not sure if they are good for overclocking.


What is the motherboard and PSU??


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> What is the motherboard and PSU??


He has the ASUS Rampage 2 Extreme, not sure about the PSU, though


----------



## gofasterstripes

That doesn't sound good really, does it? It could easily cause all the other problems.

Maybe he should get a good PSU on sale or return, try it with settings that were just beyond the edge of stability and then if the new PSU is going to help then it should be easy to find-out?


----------



## OCmember

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/02/27/how_does_my_power_supply_impact_overclocking/#.V6N_h1GLe1E


----------



## OCmember

What's good is he has voltage terminals on his board to get a better reading of his voltages.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Heat also plays a part. The hotter a core will get the more volts it will pull. (according to Idontcare, on the anandtech forums..)


More current, not volts.

More heat means more resistance and more resistance generally means a greater _droop_ in voltage and more wasted current.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> As before - 5650 is better value as up upgrade, 2500k better from scratch.


Agreed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gdourado*
> 
> I know the 2500k has faster cores and better IPC. But I am afraid the CPU will come to 100% usage and start to stutter with future games that can use more than 4 cores.


There are some games that will do this already.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Hmm. That sounds a little different than what's happening with my system. Correct me if I am wrong. I don't use Vdroop or any off-set with the cpu vcore (actually there isn't an option for that), but like I said when running ibt the vcore reads 1.362-3 at the start then later on in the test it's pegged at 1.364v during the load. Does that sound like there is an issue with the PSU? Thankfully games only need 1.349v


You are running some level of LLC that results in a negative vdroop. Many X58 boards only have one LLC option (sometimes explicitly labled as vdroop control, or just vdroop enabled/disabled) and if enabling it results in a higher load voltage than idle, you are almost certainly better off leaving LCC disabled and vdroop intact, then raising voltage to compensate.

If you have multiple LLC settings, choose one that results in load voltage being modestly less than idle (assuming full clock speed).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> That difference is so small it could be changes in the conductivity of the surface of the solder you're probing!


Ten to one he's got a setting that says "vdroop" and he turned it off, which made the board apply an excessive LLC slope. The pattern he's seeing, were IBT's period of peak load shows higher voltage than it's initial, much lower, current demand is exactly what one would see with a slightly negative resistance load line.

This is exactly what the "ASRock VDrop Control" and "EVGA VDroop coontrol" do when set to "Without VDrop/VDroop".


----------



## OCmember

@Blameless

Well both PSUs have an idle in the 1.345v (on the terminal) range when set to 1.356v in bios. e.g. At 1.350v in bios it idles at 1.340v (on the terminal) The 1.363v reading is from the voltage terminal on the board, from my multi meter. I have absolutely not vdroop llc whatever enabled on my board. I think it's strange that is does this but am not concerned. All the bios offers is "without vdroop" or "with vdroop"


----------



## OCmember

I'm just curious about the difference between the PSUs. I know it's very minimal but I'm just trying to ensure myself that there isn't an issue. If I knew where to stick the probes at on the PSU for the 12v I'd try it out. I know absolutely nothing about what I'm investigating but that article i posted from HARDOCP seems to be helping me get a better understanding.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @Blameless
> 
> Well both PSUs have an idle in the 1.345v (on the terminal) range when set to 1.356v in bios. e.g. At 1.350v in bios it idles at 1.340v (on the terminal) The 1.363v reading is from the voltage terminal on the board, from my multi meter.


This is likely voffset/vdrop, though it could also be down to differences from the source and the measuring point, as gofasterstripes has implied.

There is no reason to worry about the voltage set in BIOS being slightly higher than what you measure at the readout points. However, load voltage not decreasing as current demand increases, assuming no EIST or other power saving features confusing things, is a sign of a negative load line.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I have absolutely not vdroop llc whatever enabled on my board. I think it's strange that is does this but am not concerned. All the bios offers is "without vdroop" or "with vdroop"


With vdroop = stock loadline or LLC disabled.

Without vdroop = LLC enabled.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> I'm just curious about the difference between the PSUs. I know it's very minimal but I'm just trying to ensure myself that there isn't an issue. If I knew where to stick the probes at on the PSU for the 12v I'd try it out.


Unless the PSU is garbage or defective, it's not going to be an issue.

You can measure the +12v output on any of the yellow wires, though the ones on te 8-pin EPS 12v connector are the ones that specifically feed the CPU VRM.

Do note that you aren't going to be able to measure anything like ripple or transients without a scope...a multimeter is just an average and will only reveal the most major problems.


----------



## OCmember

Thanks @Blameless I'm trying to get a better understanding of things and that is helping out also.


----------



## gofasterstripes

He's laid it out..... there it all is, there, laid out


----------



## 14600

My maximum overclock I was able to reach adequate is 4,3 GHZ now. I've no idea about the CPU voltage, because as OCMember said the software voltage readings are wrong and I have to measure it with a multimeter to tell you. I have made a 40 minutes gameplay test of GTA 5.

I think here it's definitely lower then 1,4 volts in real because HWInfo says it was 1,4 v average and for example if I set the CPU voltage in BIOS to 1,425 volts, software like CPU-Z, HWInfo etc. says it is 1,5 volts under load (Load-Calibration Enabled, there's only Auto-Disable-Enable).

At this test the cpu voltage was set to an offset of +0,28 v, QPI/VTT to 1,3 v, CPU PLL to 1,81 v, IOH to 1,298 v, ICH to 1,2 v and DRAM to 1,67 v in BIOS. CPU Differential Amplitude to 1000 mV and PCIE Clock to 103, C1E, Speedstep and C-State are enabled.

This setting seems to be stable and looks like it is no necessary to make hours long stability tests if you want be stable with your overclock at last in games. The only thing I did to test if it is stable was 2 hours (cpu time / threads = real time 10 minutes) cpu time in task manager of Cinebench 15 and 11.5 as you can see in the screenshot and then increased vcore by one step 10 mv in BIOS.

My average "measured" power consumption while this gameplay test was 386,4 watts, maximum 459 watts and minimum 191 watts. This is a bad result and this PSU is really crap I need to change it as fast as possible to a high-end efficient one







Also it might be a little too much for it now, because it has only 34 A/408 watts total two 18A 12 volts rails and modern pcs use almost only 12 volt.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> My maximum overclock I was able to reach adequate is 4,3 GHZ now. I've no idea about the CPU voltage, because as OCMember said the software voltage readings are wrong and I have to measure it with a multimeter to tell you. I have made a 40 minutes gameplay test of GTA 5.
> 
> I think here it's definitely lower then 1,4 volts in real because HWInfo says it was 1,4 v average and for example if I set the CPU voltage in BIOS to 1,425 volts, software like CPU-Z, HWInfo etc. says it is 1,5 volts under load (Load-Calibration Enabled, there's only Auto-Disable-Enable).
> 
> At this test the cpu voltage was set to an offset of +0,28 v, QPI/VTT to 1,3 v, CPU PLL to 1,81 v, IOH to 1,298 v, ICH to 1,2 v and DRAM to 1,67 v in BIOS. CPU Differential Amplitude to 1000 mV and PCIE Clock to 103, C1E, Speedstep and C-State are enabled.
> 
> This setting seems to be stable and looks like it is no necessary to make hours long stability tests if you want be stable with your overclock at last in games. The only thing I did to test if it is stable was 2 hours (cpu time / threads = real time 10 minutes) cpu time in task manager of Cinebench 15 and 11.5 as you can see in the screenshot and then increased vcore by one step 10 mv in BIOS.
> 
> My average "measured" power consumption while this gameplay test was 386,4 watts, maximum 459 watts and minimum 191 watts. This is a bad result and this PSU is really crap I need to change it as fast as possible to a high-end efficient one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it might be a little too much for it now, because it has only 34 A/408 watts total two 18A 12 volts rails and modern pcs use almost only 12 volt.


If I was referring to volts being wrong I was only talking in my own experience. Not anyone else. I hope you weren't reading into my experience and taking it upon your own experience with your board. All motherboards don't act the same. Some people have software readings that are spot on with their voltage terminal. Understand you are going about this at your own risk.


----------



## mohiuddin

so many debate on 2500k and x56xx ...
i will show comparison between 4930k and x5650...
Tests done: Cinebench R15 and Firestrike physics Test.
1. 3DMark Firestrike :
x5650 @4.4


4930k @4.38


2. Cinebench R15




Both on same TT Frio OCK Cooler. fann full speed. same crappy thermal paste with same paste applying skill.
Practical day to day oc for both i think 4.2-4.3GHZ


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I had to go to 200% on the zoom just to be able to read the blurry numbers. Is that right, 15k or abouts that for the 5650 and 16k or abouts for the 2500k? Not bad at all.

So roughly the same score really, or at least nothing to write home about. X58 shows once again how well it is keeping up


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I had to go to 200% on the zoom just to be able to read the blurry numbers. Is that right, 15k or abouts that for the 5650 and 16k or abouts for the 2500k? Not bad at all.
> 
> So roughly the same score really, or at least nothing to write home about. X58 shows once again how well it is keeping up


4930k not 2500k.








2500k would have no chance against either cpu in a multithreaded benchmark of course.


----------



## gofasterstripes

What about the overall score on Firestrike? 'Cos the FS physics test is pretty much the same type of test as Cinebench anyway....


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> What about the overall score on Firestrike? 'Cos the FS physics test is pretty much the same type of test as Cinebench anyway....


Here is three runs with three of my x58 setups:

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/9660821/fs/2615047/fs/2580230


----------



## gofasterstripes

holy shizzle that's fast


----------



## tbob22

There's a nice deal on a Lepa Aquachanger 240 at Frys if anyone needs a better cooler. In store only.

Anyone here have any experience with the fan control on a Asrock X58 Extreme? Controlling the CPU fan doesn't seem to work very well, when the temps jump up it literally takes a minute or so for the fan to adjust to full speed.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> So what he was trying to do is process of elimination to figure out what you could change to help. Not get the best performance. Find the issue causing the need for so much voltage, and then work out the tweaks for best performance. X58 takes some real trial and error to get it right. It's actually one of the reasons why it was loved so much (and still is), the hunt for the best config intrigues only the best of overclockers!!
> 
> pull most of the memory, and things get better, your memory controller is being stressed too much. Turn off HT, and things get better, the cores/motherboard voltage regulator working too hard. But, the biggest factor is, what are all the components in your system??
> 
> Fill out the rig builder as complete as possible. so many variables can attribute stability problems. low quality PSU, will require more Vcore. High voltage, average ram can make the memory controller work harder, especially at 32 gigs. A mediocre motherboard will definitely be a huge factor in all of this. What are the complete batch numbers for the chips you have been testing?? I have seen some wildly different results due to batch numbers too.


I use DDR3-1600 three 2GB CL8 1,65 v Ram modules from Corsair Dominator and three 8GB CL9 1,5 v from Crucial. The batch numbers of the cpus (X5660) are 3042A446 and L049B150.Could it be also a too high temperature that is cause this high voltage need? To be honest if I run these cpu burners like Prime95 8k or Core Damage, it is unfortunately very high then with 4,3 GHZ 92°C. I tried undervoltig (good cpus for oc need lower voltage for the same frequency). Both of them need 0,99 volt for stock clock 2,8 GHZ to be stable otherwise they crash with Bluescreen 3B or 124 and as said +0,28 v for 4,3 GHZ (cpu-z shows 1,45-1,47v under heavy load no idea if it's true have to measure it with a multimeter). What do you need is this a good uv result?


----------



## gofasterstripes

If you push 1.45v at 92C you will degrade the CPUs very quickly. Looks like you will have to settle for 3.8-4GHz, maybe<1.35v fully loaded. Try to stay under 80C unless for short stress testing, and even then it's not good!

EDIT - It will make things easier on the IMC if you only use the 3x8GB cards. If you can get that running then you might be able to find the right settings to support them all afterwards.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> If you push 1.45v at 92C you will degrade the CPUs very quickly. Looks like you will have to settle for 3.8-4GHz, maybe<1.35v fully loaded. Try to stay under 80C unless for short stress testing, and even then it's not good!
> 
> EDIT - It will make things easier on the IMC if you only use the 3x8GB cards. If you can get that running then you might be able to find the right settings to support them all afterwards.


For 3,6 GHZ and 3,8 GHZ they need 1,18 v and 1,24 volts average (HWInfo software read no measure) to be stable (QPI 1,26 v in BIOS) otherwise they crash with Bluescreen or Freeze. The maximum Temperature is 81 °C for these settings (after 40 minutes stress test) but for me software temperature readings are not accurate. In my opinion the really important thing to see if the cpu is too hot is throttling or even emergency shutdown. There is no throttling only with the 4,3 GHZ at heavy load (HWInfo says yes)







No wonder way to high voltage.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Yeah I used to think Intel chips could self-protect, but then I blew a 5660 with 1.4QPI/IMC and a 5650 with 1.45V core...


----------



## gofasterstripes

If I were you I'd get 3.8GHz dialed then optimise the memory and cache.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah I used to think Intel chips could self-protect, but then I blew a 5660 with 1.4QPI/IMC and a 5650 with 1.45V core...










Really how could this happen? I am sorry.


----------



## gofasterstripes

They just degraded -no longer able to hold the clocks. the 5660 was done-in by VTT overshot, and I pushed the 5650 to 4.6GHz 1.45v and that blew it!


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> They just degraded -no longer able to hold the clocks. the 5660 was done-in by VTT overshot, and I pushed the 5650 to 4.6GHz 1.45v and that blew it!


1,45 v vcore / 1,4 v QPI/VTT/IMC is enough to blow these chips, was your temperature also too high or just voltage? To be honest the fist A Batch chip I have somehow it is degraded already a little bit I guess after I did the 1,55 volts test unfortunaley, because after this somehow it need a little higher voltage for the undervoltig tests I did before







The saved uv BIOS profiles were no stable anymore they crash after 7 Minutes.


----------



## gofasterstripes

All of the above are potentially damaging.

<1.35v <81c are the maximum design values.

Temps and volts both went over.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> All of the above are potentially damaging.
> 
> <1.35v <81c are the maximum design values.
> 
> Temps and volts both went over.


Effects of ruthless overclocking







Thank you, you woke me up to be very careful now to avoid that what happened to you














If you are within the specs It is normal you have to give more voltage if you overcklock to be stable with time (degradetion, elecktromigration) or even just if the cpu was always at stock but if it's old. What is your experience?


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> Effects of ruthless overclocking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, you woke me up to be very careful now to avoid that what happened to you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are within the specs It is normal you have to give more voltage if you overcklock to be stable with time (degradetion, elecktromigration) or even just if the cpu was always at stock but if it's old. What is your experience?


The answer is water cooling and a good psu







. I've exceeded max recommend volts on qpi, vtt, and cpu for years on these with oC sessions into ungodly territories lol


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> The answer is water cooling and a good psu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I've exceeded max recommend volts on qpi, vtt, and cpu for years on these with oC sessions into ungodly territories lol


I've heard disable cores (like only 1 core is enabled) and hypertheading in BIOS will kill the cpu at least the Core i7 980X. The W36xx and X56xx use the same chips as i7 980X. Is this really true?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I can only say ive not heard that. Maybe they were using one core for max clocks and overvolted it to death?


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Yeah I used to think Intel chips could self-protect, but then I blew a 5660 with 1.4QPI/IMC and a 5650 with 1.45V core...


Essentially nothing "self-protects".

Push enough power through a part at high enough temperatures (more of the former reduces the later and vice versa) and you will damage/degrade it.

Personally, I won't put more than 1.375 load vcore, or 1.35vtt through any Gulftown/Westmere, for any significant period of time without subambient cooling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *14600*
> 
> I've heard disable cores (like only 1 core is enabled) and hypertheading in BIOS will kill the cpu at least the Core i7 980X. The W36xx and X56xx use the same chips as i7 980X. Is this really true?


No, not directly.

Using only one core can give people a false sense of security/headroom because even lethal levels of voltage and/or current can be pushed through a single core without reaching temperatures that would normally be dangerous. Problem is that when you have ~75w going through one core, "safe" temperatures will be exceeded well below zero C.

Just disabling five cores and HT, without any overvolting/OCing won't hurt anything.

Running one core with 1.5v at 4.8GHz because you think 70C is always safe will leave you with a dead chip pretty quickly.


----------



## mak1skav

Hey guys, with the prices being so low for the used X56xx these days I am thinking to replace my i7 930 with one to improve my x264/x265 encoding times. Can any of you guys post some x265 HD BENCHMARK 0.1.4 scores so I can get a rough idea of what kind of improvement I can expect?

With my CPU now clocked to 4.1 I am getting around to 12.2 fps in that benchmark.


----------



## 14600

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mak1skav*
> 
> Hey guys, with the prices being so low for the used X56xx these days I am thinking to replace my i7 930 with one to improve my x264/x265 encoding times. Can any of you guys post some x265 HD BENCHMARK 0.1.4 scores so I can get a rough idea of what kind of improvement I can expect?
> 
> With my CPU now clocked to 4.1 I am getting around to 12.2 fps in that benchmark.


----------



## Riktar54

fwiw:



x265_1080p-riktar.rtf 2k .rtf file


----------



## DRKreiger

This is at 4.4 GHz

x265 HD BENCHMARK 0.1.4 RESULTS

Please do NOT compare it with older versions of the benchmark!
Please copy/paste everything below the line to to report your
data to http://x265.ru/x265-hd-benchmark/.html

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Results for x265.exe build 1.4+5
x265 Benchmark: 64-bit
==========================

CRF-20 preset-"fast"

encoded 1128 frames in 65.33s (17.27 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
encoded 1128 frames in 64.80s (17.41 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
encoded 1128 frames in 65.02s (17.35 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
encoded 1128 frames in 64.92s (17.38 fps), 2266.68 kb/s

System Details

Name Intel Xeon W3680
Codename Westmere-WS
Specification Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU W3680 @ 3.33GHz
Core Stepping B1
Technology 32 nm
Stock frequency 3333 MHz
Core Speed 3687.6 MHz

Northbridge Intel X58 rev. 13
Southbridge Intel 82801JR (ICH10R) rev. 00

CAS# latency (CL) 8.0
RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 8
RAS# Precharge (tRP) 8
Cycle Time (tRAS) 24
Command Rate (CR) 1T
Memory Frequency 885.0 MHz (2:12)
Memory Type DDR3
Memory Size 24568 MBytes
Channels Triple

Windows Version Microsoft Windows NT10.0 (Build 10240)

Number of processors 1
Number of threads 12
Number of threads 12 (max 32)
L2 cache 6 x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, VT-x, AES
Package (platform ID) Socket 1366 LGA (0x0)

Temperature 0 34°C (93°F) [0x22] (SYSTIN)
Temperature 1 28°C (81°F) [0x37] (CPUTIN)
Temperature 2 39°C (102°F) [0x4E] (AUXTIN)


----------



## Blameless

Encoders are one of the areas where the advantages of newer instruction sets are readily apparent.

As a comparison with the above Westmere tests, this is a 4.3GHz 5820k:
Quote:


> x265 HD BENCHMARK 0.1.4 RESULTS
> 
> Please do NOT compare it with older versions of the benchmark!
> Please copy/paste everything below the line to to report your
> data to http://x265.ru/x265-hd-benchmark/
> 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Results for x265.exe build 1.4+5
> x265 Benchmark: 64-bit
> ==========================
> 
> CRF-20 preset-"fast"
> 
> encoded 1128 frames in 45.90s (24.58 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
> encoded 1128 frames in 45.86s (24.59 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
> encoded 1128 frames in 45.91s (24.57 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
> encoded 1128 frames in 45.83s (24.61 fps), 2266.68 kb/s
> 
> System Details
> 
> Name Intel Core i7 5820K
> Name Intel Raid 0 Volume
> Name Intel Raid 0 Volume
> Codename Haswell-E/EP
> Specification Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-5820K CPU @ 3.30GHz
> Core Stepping M0
> Technology 22 nm
> Stock frequency 3300 MHz
> Core Speed 4300.2 MHz
> 
> Northbridge Intel Haswell-E rev. 02
> Southbridge Intel X99 rev. 05
> 
> CAS# latency (CL) 12.0
> RAS# to CAS# delay (tRCD) 11
> RAS# Precharge (tRP) 12
> Cycle Time (tRAS) 26
> Command Rate (CR) 1T
> Memory Frequency 1333.4 MHz (1:20)
> Memory Type DDR4
> Memory Size 16222 MBytes
> Channels Quad
> 
> Windows Version Microsoft Windows 7 (6.1) Professional 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
> 
> Number of processors 1
> Number of threads 12
> Number of threads 12 (max 16)
> L2 cache 6 x 256 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
> Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, VT-x, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3
> Package (platform ID) Socket 2011 LGA (0x2)


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Encoders are one of the areas where the advantages of newer instruction sets are readily apparent.
> 
> As a comparison with the above Westmere tests, this is a 4.3GHz 5820k:


Honestly, I think that is more of an IPC advantage. We all know that in full multithreaded applications Haswell-E is somewhere around 25-30% faster than Westmere clock to clock, AVX may help some but if you drop that 5820k to stock speed that would probably be pretty close to a x56xx/w36xx at 4.4-4.6ghz or so.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Honestly, I think that is more of an IPC advantage. We all know that in full multithreaded applications Haswell-E is somewhere around 25-30% faster than Westmere clock to clock, AVX may help some but if you drop that 5820k to stock speed that would probably be pretty close to a x56xx/w36xx at 4.4-4.6ghz or so.


A significant part of the IPC advantage is from the new instruction sets in software that makes decent use of the new instruction sets.

There are plenty of tests where the clock for clock gap is much smaller than what we see in x265.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> A significant part of the IPC advantage is from the new instruction sets in software that makes decent use of the new instruction sets.
> 
> There are plenty of tests where the clock for clock gap is much smaller than what we see in x265.


Well, you can test with something like Cinebench which will use all the threads, it doesn't use AVX and there will still be a ~25% gap at the same clockspeed.

But, yes in many real world applications the gap will be much smaller, and maybe even nonexistent.


----------



## Blameless

I just stuck --asm SSE,SSE2,SSE3,SSSE3,SSE4,SSE4.1,SSE4.2 into the batch file for the test loops in order to disable x265's AVX, AVX2, and FMA instructions.

Came back with just over 22fps this time vs. ~24.6 with them enabled.

Looks like about a 70/30 split with regard to core architecture (wider execution, more buffers, more cache, faster memory, etc) vs. instruction set (AVX/FMA) advantages when looking at the differential between Westmere and Haswell-E/EP IPC.

Will need to run it again on my X5670 with the same command line arguments to double check scores.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Please do!


----------



## 14600

Now I'm running 3,9 GHZ. The temperatures are high especially at very high loads like Prime 95 1344k







, but under normal usage they're "far" under 80°C. Important is there's no throttling in my opinion the only sure sight of too hot cpu because the software sensor readings are not accurate.

For this overclock I need a vcore of 1,26 v HWInfo average (+0.14 v in BIOS LLC ON), 1.31 v QPI/IMC, 1.34 v IOH, 1.2 v ICH and 1.65 v RAM set in BIOS. To be honest I'm not so sure if everything is 100% stable maybe I've to increase/decrease some voltages a little bit, the only thing I did was 5 minutes of Prime95 1344k test and then I increased vcore by one step. It should be enough for normal usage and games I hope normally I never have such heavy loads as in these stress tests. Running stress tests for too long damage degrade the cpu right and my cooling is not optimum.

At this point I've reached my overclocking limit for now because my temperature is too high to overclock further. The next step for me is to change this cheap crap inefficient PSU and improve cooling.

I've a good idea what is possible to do if the temperature is too high at very long maximum cpu usage. Go to windows energy settings, in the energy profile balance for example you can set a lower maximum cpu ratio (0-100% performance). If you set 99% turbo mode is disabled (highest cpu ratio).

Somehow this highest cpu ratio is special and the 22 is not selectable in BIOS at least in my case. Normally the cpu only use this 23 turbo ratio (with X5670 it's 24) it if the cpu usage if high enough or many cores are used not sure.

This is not a good idea if you play old games for example or for programs that are single thread/core only. They does not generate high enough usage to activate this turbo ratio and your overclock is not always being used properly. The 21 ratio is instantly active if the cpu is used even a little bit regardless how high the usage is and this is good.


----------



## mak1skav

Thank you guys for the x265 benchmarks, for the low price that I will have to pay for a X56.. still I will get a nice improvement I think.

Also I am aware of the 5820K and 5930K scores but they are too expensive for my budget right now.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mak1skav*
> 
> Thank you guys for the x265 benchmarks, for the low price that I will have to pay for a X56.. still I will get a nice improvement I think.
> 
> Also I am aware of the 5820K and 5930K scores but they are too expensive for my budget right now.


Yep, you'll see a pretty large improvement over the 930 for sure.

The new instructions/ipc of haswell does give quite a boost though. On my [email protected] I only get around 20fps.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Guys, I've posted the question a while ago but it apparently got lost. Anyone ever come across a partial de-solder of the X58 chip? Because what we have here with an EVGA X58 SLI3 board looks exactly like that, where it will post one time out of a few hundreds maybe, and the conclusion so far has been that heating the board and the chip up may be what causes it to post. Other than that, I blame the BIOS chip, but not sure about that - why would it after all post once if the BIOS chip is faulty?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Uncommon, but possible. The introduction of lead-free solder led to many problems like that. I'd consider an oven or hot-spot reflow. Nothing to lose...


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Yeah, true, nothing to lose







What kind of temperature do I need to apply? I have a BOSCH heat gun that can do up to 500 C, apparently it takes an order of magnitude less than that.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I'd try pressing down on the chipset, see if pressure helps, would point to cracked solder. Youll need to research the method, i considered it with a laptop, but just worked around the missing SATA bus another way.


----------



## 99belle99

Hey I have a Gigabyte X58A-UD7 with the marvel chip for sata III. I have two connections but it is recommended to use only one. So I have my boot SSD connected there. The board also has a 2 usb 3.0 connections. Is it possible to connect a USAP USB 3.0 SSD and get the same speeds as if it was connected to a sata III chipset?


----------



## DRKreiger

Not likely. The x58 USB 3 is less then native capable. And the marvel controller is a tad slower than the native Intel controller. I would use the Intel controller and test the USB 3.0. Windows 10 is also awful with USB transfer speedss


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I would use the Intel controller and test the USB 3.0. Windows 10 is also awful with USB transfer speedss


I'm still getting the same USB 3.0 speeds with Windows 10 that I was getting with Windows 7. I only have a single 3TB HDD that came with a USB 3.0 capable enclosure. USB 2.0 vs 3.0 is a big difference on my PC. I did notice that in Windows 10 USB 3.0 just "happens" when you install the drivers and enable 3.0 in the BIOS. With Windows 7 you'll get messages about the USB 3.0 connection. I checked the speed and Win 10 is performing just as well.

Currently I'm using only a single drive as a backup. It can push anywhere from 100MB\s to 130MB\s while the RAID 0 setups & fast M.2 SSD keeps the backup drive moving along with plenty of data. I will be converting over to a USB 3.0 RAID 5 very soon. So hopefully I can increase the bandwidth to make my "entire" [all drives] backup less than an 1hr 30mins. My RAID 0 setups are getting converted to SATA III as well via the PCIe slot.


----------



## kvothe-bard

Hi there,

I have a gigabyte ga-x58a ud5 xeon x5660 and gskill pi 1600MHz cl6 2x3G

I want to upgrade the memos, so i think in buy 2x8 dual channel, cause is not a great penalty.

I asked to gigabyte suport about that and they told me the mobo does not support 8g modules and that the modules should be of this type:

Check with the memory manufacturer´s support, if the meory modules are doublesided
( 2Rx8 memory module, based on sixteen 256M x 8-bit DDR3-1333 FBGA DRAM chips)

Im a litle bit confused, any suggestions?

I could buy 4x4, so i solve 4+g modules limit, but asking to gskill about other features, they only sent me to memory suport (or some crap like that) webpage. There, they only show tri channel memos. Despite the fact that might i cant use these memos at other pc, here in europe (spain) could be difficult to buy trichanel memos.

My english is garbage, i know, sorry 

Thank.


----------



## jvidia

Are you going to use only dual channel on a x58 board?


----------



## kvothe-bard

Maybe. 3ch is not a big deal, i think. In real uses, at least. Im wrong?


----------



## OCmember

@kvothe-bard Do you have a link to the place you bought the ram kit? What is the total specs on that kit


----------



## DRKreiger

you will likely not see much of a difference from triple down to dual in day to day. If you are using a memory intensive application, you may notice a bit of a boost.

Running multiple dual, or a set of quad channel plus one, will not hinder the performance much at all. We X58 guys are just kind of stuck that way. Not much to choose from with triple channel out there. at least at a decent price, and enough capacity to make it worth while.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I'm still getting the same USB 3.0 speeds with Windows 10 that I was getting with Windows 7. I only have a single 3TB HDD that came with a USB 3.0 capable enclosure. USB 2.0 vs 3.0 is a big difference on my PC. I did notice that in Windows 10 USB 3.0 just "happens" when you install the drivers and enable 3.0 in the BIOS. With Windows 7 you'll get messages about the USB 3.0 connection. I checked the speed and Win 10 is performing just as well.
> 
> Currently I'm using only a single drive as a backup. It can push anywhere from 100MB\s to 130MB\s while the RAID 0 setups & fast M.2 SSD keeps the backup drive moving along with plenty of data. I will be converting over to a USB 3.0 RAID 5 very soon. So hopefully I can increase the bandwidth to make my "entire" [all drives] backup less than an 1hr 30mins. My RAID 0 setups are getting converted to SATA III as well via the PCIe slot.


I would like to see if i could get my USB transfer speeds up a bit. What drivers are you referring to?


----------



## kvothe-bard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> @kvothe-bard Do you have a link to the place you bought the ram kit? What is the total specs on that kit


Gskill pi? ... 1600 6-8-6_(24?) 2t
These memos are neither gskill official web pge nor pccomponentes where i bough 6 years ago.

My problem is not to buy dual or tri (it is not dual or single, memos are ddr3), the problem is to know if the new memos are double o single sided and if it is important that memos were 256 8bits, 128 8bits ir so. I cant find datasheet. I would need to know the chip (micron, samsung) and see them.


----------



## Punisher64

Anyone here running a GTX 9xx card with x58? Unloading my SLI 770s today for a nice shiny 980Ti...used off Reddit or here of course.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kvothe-bard*
> 
> Gskill pi? ... 1600 6-8-6_(24?) 2t
> These memos are neither gskill official web pge nor pccomponentes where i bough 6 years ago.
> 
> My problem is not to buy dual or tri (it is not dual or single, memos are ddr3), the problem is to know if the new memos are double o single sided and if it is important that memos were 256 8bits, 128 8bits ir so. I cant find datasheet. I would need to know the chip (micron, samsung) and see them.


There is pretty good DDR3 IC database

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?285767-DDR3-IC-thread

Sift through it and see what you can match up. maybe you will get lucky.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I would like to see if i could get my USB transfer speeds up a bit. What drivers are you referring to?


There is a specific Windows 7-64-bit driver for the Sabertooth X58 that uses the Renesas controller driver. It only works when the USB 3.0 is enabled in the BIOS, otherwise you get crappy speed. So if you have Renesas hardware on your motherboard it "might" work. USB 3.0 is definitely worth the boost, especially for a single HDD+USB3.0.

Believe it or not, but the Sabertooth X58 page has been getting updates in 2015 and now 2016. There's some specific updates for Windows 10 64 bit that I just downloaded and installed. This is nice







.

I am also conducting a test. I've always ran my Quad and Hexa cores overclocked for many years. Now after running my Hexa-Core @ 4Ghz+DDR3-1400Mhz [stable] for nearly 3 years straight. 4.6Ghz+DDR3-1600Mhz or 4.8Ghz+DDR3- for benchmarking purposes, I've been running my gaming rig at 100% STOCK settings across the BIOS to see if I can notice a difference in everyday performance. So that means no OSD during gaming sessions or no Frame Per Second being displayed, no benchmarking etc. Just straight up programming, working, developing, surfing the web, multitasking, watching and\or listening while working to online video services such as Netflix and gaming.

So far I'm noticing little to no difference for daily work and gaming @ 1080p\1440p. 4K gaming does require 3.8Ghz+ or 4.6Ghz for the best experience. I haven't been gaming @ 4K so this hasn't been an issue. This is really making me re-think about the upgrading process and if I REALLY need to upgrade. PCIe 2.0 is still plenty at the moment for my Fury X. Newer GPU have released and more will be releasing later this year and next year, but I don't think that will be a problem for PCIe 2.0 just yet. I'm just not experiencing problems while running stock settings. DDR-1333Mhz is doing pretty well actually. Video editing has slowed down so I haven't needed to worry about needed performance for that now. I'm also enjoying the much lower northbridge temperature and I'm talking up to 8c - 10c difference on the same HOT days.

I thought maybe the PC would feel a bit sluggish when it came to loading and performing a lot of tasks at once. Compile times are still very low, loading times are quick and gaming doesn't feel any different than before. Obviously with gaming for the best experience and frame rate you'll want to overclock to at least 3.8Ghz+. I can spare a few frames that I can't see since I'm not looking at them or for them.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Anyone here running a GTX 9xx card with x58? Unloading my SLI 770s today for a nice shiny 980Ti...used off Reddit or here of course.


Several people are running 900 series cards in these systems. If you're worried about PCI-e 2.0 being a bottleneck, it's not.


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Several people are running 900 series cards in these systems. If you're worried about PCI-e 2.0 being a bottleneck, it's not.


More worried about it not working at all (I had heard some issues of 9xx series in x58) as well as my x5670 bottle-necking say a 980Ti.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> More worried about it not working at all (I had heard some issues of 9xx series in x58) as well as my x5670 bottle-necking say a 980Ti.


Pci-e 2.0 is still not a noticeable bottleneck i know that.
X5670 is a bottleneck on modern graphics card? Are you sure?


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> Pci-e 2.0 is still not a noticeable bottleneck i know that.
> X5670 is a bottleneck on modern graphics card? Are you sure?


I was asking not stating?


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I was asking not stating?


?

I think not.
12 cores still do the job.
Soon i will buy a gtx 1070 and hope it will do fine with my x5675.

Are you with OC?


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> I was asking not stating?


It's not bottlenecking an oced 980ti as long as you are in the 4.1-4.4ghz range even at 1080p.I am getting 120+ fps on ROTR same as other online benchmarks and dirt rally same 115-120fps.Worry more about whether 980ti is enough for 60fps on 1080p the way things are going with the ****ty optimization of console ports http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/deus_ex_mankind_divided_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,6.html


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> It's not bottlenecking an oced 980ti as long as you are in the 4.1-4.4ghz range even at 1080p.I am getting 120+ fps on ROTR same as other online benchmarks and dirt rally same 115-120fps.Worry more about whether 980ti is enough for 60fps on 1080p the way things are going with the ****ty optimization of console ports http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/deus_ex_mankind_divided_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,6.html


Great!
My x5675 will be at least at 4.2ghz ?


----------



## Punisher64

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> It's not bottlenecking an oced 980ti as long as you are in the 4.1-4.4ghz range even at 1080p.I am getting 120+ fps on ROTR same as other online benchmarks and dirt rally same 115-120fps.Worry more about whether 980ti is enough for 60fps on 1080p the way things are going with the ****ty optimization of console ports http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/deus_ex_mankind_divided_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,6.html


I'm running 3.9GHz and 1440p (Overlord Tempest x270OC)


----------



## NguyenAdam

Is it still worth upgrading to a Xeon for my rig or would it be better if I just upgraded my motherboard/cpu to newer gen?


----------



## DRKreiger

If you're aiming for gaming then not worth a system upgrade.

If you're going to do video editing/encoding you will see a jump from added instructions and faster cache speeds. This is only a big jump if you are thinking x99


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> More worried about it not working at all (I had heard some issues of 9xx series in x58) as well as my x5670 bottle-necking say a 980Ti.


I'm running an overclocked 1070 in one of my x58 rigs and it's only a few % less than a newer setups scores.


----------



## OCmember

I think I've found them.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NguyenAdam*
> 
> Is it still worth upgrading to a Xeon for my rig or would it be better if I just upgraded my motherboard/cpu to newer gen?


It is, but AMD's Zen is soon to be here. I don't think they would sabotage themselves and pull something risky with their benchmark between a 6900K and their 8 core 16 thread chip. You never know though. I personally am waiting for Zen, and Vega, benchmarks.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10585/unpacking-amds-zen-benchmark-is-zen-actually-2-faster-than-broadwell


----------



## Xeonicfront

So this thread convinced me that my X58 rig needed to be bumped up from a I7 950 with a very mild 500mhz OC to an X5660 rather than upgrading my x79 Xeon workstation(sidegrading?) from an E5 2670 Octcore junker to an E5 1650 unlocked hex core(admittedly, this upgrade will probably still happen at a later date).

The E5 2670 does all the productivity tasks I want it to well, but it's single thread performance is just a tad weak for some games.

I haven't had time for more than a basic functionality test and very cursory tune of the X5660, but all indications seem to be that my 950 was a much better overclocker all around(the 500mhz OC on it is without any voltage bump), but I think overall performance will be significantly better once I can get a good tune in place. It also runs significantly cooler, which is a plus.

X58 build is on an Evga X58 SLI3(micro atx), cooled by a Zalman CNPS10X Optima, paired with three random 4gb sticks of mismatched ram from the parts bin(it hasn't exploded yet!) and a Sapphire Nitro Rx470 4gb. Win10 pro.
I won't get into the other parts but there's a lot of *it came from the parts bin*

The sole and single issue I've had is that Ashes of the Singularity refuses to launch in dx12 mode for me. It runs, benchmarks, and plays just fine in dx11 though.

Anyway, just wanted to toss out a big thanks to Kana-Maru and everyone else for the great information in this thread.


----------



## kpforce1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeonicfront*
> 
> So this thread convinced me that my X58 rig needed to be bumped up from a I7 950 with a very mild 500mhz OC to an X5660 rather than upgrading my x79 Xeon workstation(sidegrading?) from an E5 2670 Octcore junker to an E5 1650 unlocked hex core(admittedly, this upgrade will probably still happen at a later date).
> 
> The E5 2670 does all the productivity tasks I want it to well, but it's single thread performance is just a tad weak for some games.
> 
> I haven't had time for more than a basic functionality test and very cursory tune of the X5660, but all indications seem to be that my 950 was a much better overclocker all around(the 500mhz OC on it is without any voltage bump), but I think overall performance will be significantly better once I can get a good tune in place. It also runs significantly cooler, which is a plus.
> 
> X58 build is on an Evga X58 SLI3(micro atx), cooled by a Zalman CNPS10X Optima, paired with three random 4gb sticks of mismatched ram from the parts bin(it hasn't exploded yet!) and a Sapphire Nitro Rx470 4gb. Win10 pro.
> I won't get into the other parts but there's a lot of *it came from the parts bin*
> 
> The sole and single issue I've had is that Ashes of the Singularity refuses to launch in dx12 mode for me. It runs, benchmarks, and plays just fine in dx11 though.
> 
> Anyway, just wanted to toss out a big thanks to Kana-Maru and everyone else for the great information in this thread.


Did you have to mod the x58 micro for the Xeon to work? I had to do the solder mod on mine for it to work.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kvothe-bard*
> 
> Maybe. 3ch is not a big deal, i think. In real uses, at least. Im wrong?


You are generally correct.


----------



## Xeonicfront

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kpforce1*
> 
> Did you have to mod the x58 micro for the Xeon to work? I had to do the solder mod on mine for it to work.


It was a drop-in replacement for me, I may have a later board revision.

I only stress-tested for a couple hours, but it seems to work fine.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeonicfront*
> 
> So this thread convinced me that my X58 rig needed to be bumped up from a I7 950 with a very mild 500mhz OC to an X5660 rather than upgrading my x79 Xeon workstation(sidegrading?) from an E5 2670 Octcore junker to an E5 1650 unlocked hex core*(admittedly, this upgrade will probably still happen at a later date).*
> 
> The E5 2670 does all the productivity tasks I want it to well, but it's single thread performance is just a tad weak for some games.
> 
> I haven't had time for more than a basic functionality test and very cursory tune of the X5660, but all indications seem to be that my 950 was a much better overclocker all around(the 500mhz OC on it is without any voltage bump), but I think overall performance will be significantly better once I can get a good tune in place. It also runs significantly cooler, which is a plus.
> 
> X58 build is on an Evga X58 SLI3(micro atx), cooled by a Zalman CNPS10X Optima, paired with three random 4gb sticks of mismatched ram from the parts bin(it hasn't exploded yet!) and a Sapphire Nitro Rx470 4gb. Win10 pro.
> I won't get into the other parts but there's a lot of *it came from the parts bin*
> 
> The sole and single issue I've had is that Ashes of the Singularity refuses to launch in dx12 mode for me. It runs, benchmarks, and plays just fine in dx11 though.
> 
> Anyway, just wanted to toss out a *big thanks to Kana-Maru* and everyone else for the great information in this thread.


No problem man. I'm glad my review was able to help you. The guys in this topic have been extremely helpful over the years and it appears that will never stop









As far as going X79 + unlocked [Xeon] Hexa Core, honestly at this point I'm looking towards the future [Zen and Intel affordable offerings]. PCIe 4.0 is in the works and there's a lot of new tech to look forward to now. If the X79 + Unlocked Hexa Core was a side grade for me back in 2011 though 2013, it's still going to be a sidegrade to me in 2016 and so on. Therefore I think I'll be fine with the X58 until my next upgrade. I know that the X79 prices have came down as well as the CPUs, but I'm sure everyone understands were I'm going with this personally.

Hopefully Zen delivers and can give consumers competitive prices from Intel. Intel is still the brand and it's a good chance that they will still charge a premium for the "brand name" even if Zen CPUs and the new architecture competes heavily with Intel.

As far as overclocking goes I've had my X5660 overclocked since the first day I bought it nearly 3 years ago. I'm doing something a bit difference now. Basically I'm running everything at stock to see if I can really "feel" a different between 3 years at 4Ghz 24/7 and occasionally 4.6Ghz for daily usage and programming, developement etc. You can read more here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/7410


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> There is a specific Windows 7-64-bit driver for the Sabertooth X58 that uses the Renesas controller driver. It only works when the USB 3.0 is enabled in the BIOS, otherwise you get crappy speed. So if you have Renesas hardware on your motherboard it "might" work. USB 3.0 is definitely worth the boost, especially for a single HDD+USB3.0.
> 
> Believe it or not, but the Sabertooth X58 page has been getting updates in 2015 and now 2016. There's some specific updates for Windows 10 64 bit that I just downloaded and installed. This is nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> I am also conducting a test. I've always ran my Quad and Hexa cores overclocked for many years. Now after running my Hexa-Core @ 4Ghz+DDR3-1400Mhz [stable] for nearly 3 years straight. 4.6Ghz+DDR3-1600Mhz or 4.8Ghz+DDR3- for benchmarking purposes, I've been running my gaming rig at 100% STOCK settings across the BIOS to see if I can notice a difference in everyday performance. So that means no OSD during gaming sessions or no Frame Per Second being displayed, no benchmarking etc. Just straight up programming, working, developing, surfing the web, multitasking, watching and\or listening while working to online video services such as Netflix and gaming.
> 
> So far I'm noticing little to no difference for daily work and gaming @ 1080p\1440p. 4K gaming does require 3.8Ghz+ or 4.6Ghz for the best experience. I haven't been gaming @ 4K so this hasn't been an issue. This is really making me re-think about the upgrading process and if I REALLY need to upgrade. PCIe 2.0 is still plenty at the moment for my Fury X. Newer GPU have released and more will be releasing later this year and next year, but I don't think that will be a problem for PCIe 2.0 just yet. I'm just not experiencing problems while running stock settings. DDR-1333Mhz is doing pretty well actually. Video editing has slowed down so I haven't needed to worry about needed performance for that now. I'm also enjoying the much lower northbridge temperature and I'm talking up to 8c - 10c difference on the same HOT days.
> 
> I thought maybe the PC would feel a bit sluggish when it came to loading and performing a lot of tasks at once. Compile times are still very low, loading times are quick and gaming doesn't feel any different than before. Obviously with gaming for the best experience and frame rate you'll want to overclock to at least 3.8Ghz+. I can spare a few frames that I can't see since I'm not looking at them or for them.


I just found a nec USB controller driver for my r3e. Went from 30-60mbps to 270 with my os ssd to my ssd external 3.0. Bit it still drops drastically half way through the transfer. Stupid.


----------



## OCmember

@DRKreiger Is your USB 3.0 in MSI mode?

Also do USB 3.0 add in cards run in MSI mode?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> I just found a nec USB controller driver for my r3e. Went from 30-60mbps to 270 with my os ssd to my ssd external 3.0. Bit it still drops drastically half way through the transfer. Stupid.


It could be the size of the files you are trying to transfer. Sometimes smaller files can be a issue opposed to larger files. When I'm backing up from my OS SSD to my USB 3.0 HDD the SSD constantly stays around 200 MB\s and that's only because it's matching the SINGLE HDD write speed of around 100 MB\s to 150 MB\s. My OS SSD can send up to 1400MB\s. The HDD is constantly being feed data.

You could always try the PCIe USB 3.0 cards for more throughput. At the moment a PCIe USB 3.0 card wouldn't do anything for me since I'm using a single 3TB HDD for backups. I'm trying to limit myself to how much data I have. I have a tendency to hold on to junk for years.


----------



## NguyenAdam

Do you think I should upgrade my motherboard also, or would I be okay with slapping a new chip in there with some mild OCs and call it a day?


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> No problem man. I'm glad my review was able to help you. The guys in this topic have been extremely helpful over the years and it appears that will never stop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as going X79 + unlocked [Xeon] Hexa Core, honestly at this point I'm looking towards the future [Zen and Intel affordable offerings]. PCIe 4.0 is in the works and there's a lot of new tech to look forward to now. If the X79 + Unlocked Hexa Core was a side grade for me back in 2011 though 2013, it's still going to be a sidegrade to me in 2016 and so on. Therefore I think I'll be fine with the X58 until my next upgrade. I know that the X79 prices have came down as well as the CPUs, but I'm sure everyone understands were I'm going with this personally.
> 
> Hopefully Zen delivers and can give consumers competitive prices from Intel. Intel is still the brand and it's a good chance that they will still charge a premium for the "brand name" even if Zen CPUs and the new architecture competes heavily with Intel.
> 
> As far as overclocking goes I've had my X5660 overclocked since the first day I bought it nearly 3 years ago. I'm doing something a bit difference now. Basically I'm running everything at stock to see if I can really "feel" a different between 3 years at 4Ghz 24/7 and occasionally 4.6Ghz for daily usage and programming, developement etc. You can read more here:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/official-xeon-x5660-x58-review-discussion-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside/7410


Kana-Maru, I changed from a i7-950 to the x5650 after reading this thread 2 years ago, and i am still using it today








Recently, I just changed my old GTX690 to the MSI GTX1080 Gaming X, and i think i can still use this x58 system for at least another 1 or 2 years, most likely to change to another Hexa core system like the X99, but need to wait and see if the new directX 12 will be benefited by more than 4 cores


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> Kana-Maru, I changed from a i7-950 to the x5650 after reading this thread 2 years ago, and i am still using it today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Recently, I just changed my old GTX690 to the MSI GTX1080 Gaming X,


Nice. I had so much fun writing that article years ago [L5639]. The games played so much better than the Quad core Bloomfield. Felt like a true upgrade solely for gaming. Obviously everything else performed better as well.

I'm in the same boat. Until PCIe 2.0 x16 or x16\x16 SLI\CFX is being saturated I'm staying on the platform as far as gaming goes.

Quote:


> and i think i can still use this x58 system for at least another 1 or 2 years, most likely to change to another Hexa core system like the X99, but need to wait and see if the new directX 12 will be benefited by more than 4 cores


DX12 and Vulkan already benefits from using more than 4 cores. I've tested this personally in my Hitman DX12 benchmark. Hitman was an early DX12 title and it performs well with my Hexa core. I cannot post the "direct link: to my article since OCN mods have already hit me with a warning or possible ban for advertising.....smh really. Anyways you'll have to Google my blog or my "Hitman DirectX 12 Fury X Benchmarks". It shouldn't be hard to find.

*[Edit]*
The important pages are Page 2 [Day 1 benchmarks with a CPU chart] and Page 5 which allowed me to use the same graphical settings in DX12. I tested both with a 4Ghz OC and a 4.8Ghz OC.

*[Edit]*
*DX12* CPU 4Ghz Average was 99.11fps Average
*DX12* CPU 4.8Ghz Average was 126.02fps Average

All fo the cores were fed in DX12. As you can see above once the CPU was highly overclocked I was able to squeeze more frame per second out of my 12 logical cores. Nearly 30% more fps.

Now when comparing Apples to Apples from the Day 1 benchmark to the first Patch "1.1.0 [Fix]", my Average frame rate @ 4K 100% maxed out went from 36.02fps to 43.82fps. That was a 22% increase with a patch and newer AMD drivers. Yes that's 100% maxed [including SSAA] setting @ 4K averaging nearly 44fps. On Page 6 I actually played the newest Episode at the time "Sapienza" and you can review my Real Time Benchmarks™ there.

Then when it comes to Doom 2016 + 4K + Vulkan API + 100% Maxed out settings [Ultra] with TSSAA-8TX Enabled, I was above 60fps during most of my playthrough @ 4K! With OpenGL my average was 45fps 100% maxed out with TSSAA-8TX Enabled. That wasn't bad, but Doom is fast paced game that basically requires 55-60fps+ Average or more for the best experience. So going from 45fps to getting above 60fps at 4K was amazing. I actually hit 70 something fps from what I can remember. Now the cores, all 12 logical cores were being utilized and that showed in the inspector and the gameplay. The OpenGL limitations were no longer there and 4GB HBM memory has been awesome so far in DX11, DX12 and now Vulkan. I guess haters going to hate, but once you include the CPU and allow the GPU to be fed parallel data the GCN architecture holds up well. Obviously this requires programmers who know what the heck they are doing. So far I think Hexa core users have a bright future to look towards.

You have some games like Rise of Tomb Raider which had HORRIBLE DX12 implementations. They finally have the game working properly, but it took them a very long time there is still only a path for Nvidia GPUs. At the moment appears that there is no path for AMD GPUs due to the fact that the DX12 finally performs the same as DX11. For a very long time DX12 performed much worse than DX11. DX12 was a tacked on feature anyways. Yet this didn't stop reviews and Youtube Personalities to stop using a obviously broken DX12 implementation.


----------



## justinyou

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Nice. I had so much fun writing that article years ago [L5639]. The games played so much better than the Quad core Bloomfield. Felt like a true upgrade solely for gaming. Obviously everything else performed better as well.
> 
> I'm in the same boat. Until PCIe 2.0 x16 or x16\x16 SLI\CFX is being saturated I'm staying on the platform as far as gaming goes.
> DX12 and Vulkan already benefits from using more than 4 cores. I've tested this personally in my Hitman DX12 benchmark. Hitman was an early DX12 title and it performs well with my Hexa core. I cannot post the "direct link: to my article since OCN mods have already hit me with a warning or possible ban for advertising.....smh really. Anyways you'll have to Google my blog or my "Hitman DirectX 12 Fury X Benchmarks". It shouldn't be hard to find.
> 
> The important pages are Page 2 [Day 1 benchmarks with a CPU chart] and Page 5 which allowed me to use the same graphical settings in DX11 and DX12.
> 
> *DX11* CPU 4Ghz Average was 99.11fps Average
> *DX12* CPU 4.8Ghz Average was 126.02fps Average
> 
> All fo the cores were fed in DX12. As you can see above once the CPU was highly overclocked I was able to squeeze more frame per second out of my 12 logical cores. Nearly 30% more fps.
> 
> Now when comparing Apples to Apples from the Day 1 benchmark to the first Patch "1.1.0 [Fix]", my Average frame rate @ 4K 100% maxed out went from 36.02fps to 43.82fps. That was a 22% increase with a patch and newer AMD drivers. Yes that's 100% maxed [including SSAA] setting @ 4K averaging nearly 44fps. On Page 6 I actually played the newest Episode at the time "Sapienza" and you can review my Real Time Benchmarks™ there.
> 
> Then when it comes to Doom 2016 + 4K + Vulkan API + 100% Maxed out settings [Ultra] with TSSAA-8TX Enabled, I was above 60fps during most of my playthrough @ 4K! With OpenGL my average was 45fps 100% maxed out with TSSAA-8TX Enabled. That wasn't bad, but Doom is fast paced game that basically requires 55-60fps+ Average or more for the best experience. So going from 45fps to getting above 60fps at 4K was amazing. I actually hit 70 something fps from what I can remember. Now the cores, all 12 logical cores were being utilized and that showed in the inspector and the gameplay. The OpenGL limitations were no longer there and 4GB HBM memory has been awesome so far in DX11, DX12 and now Vulkan. I guess haters going to hate, but once you include the CPU and allow the GPU to be fed parallel data the GCN architecture holds up well. Obviously this requires programmers who know what the heck they are doing. So far I think Hexa core users have a bright future to look towards.
> 
> You have some games like Rise of Tomb Raider which had HORRIBLE DX12 implementations. They finally have the game working properly, but it took them a very long time there is still only a path for Nvidia GPUs. At the moment appears that there is no path for AMD GPUs due to the fact that the DX12 finally performs the same as DX11. For a very long time DX12 performed much worse than DX11. DX12 was a tacked on feature anyways. Yet this didn't stop reviews and Youtube Personalities to stop using a obviously broken DX12 implementation.


I managed to find your blog and spent some time reading it, and have to admit you have done a fantastic job of reviewing the game, there aren't too many reviewers doing this to Hitman.
Just too bad Hitman is not my type of game genre, I was really hoping The Rise of the Tomb Raider will be a good DX12 game, but that has disappointed me.
Now, we just need to wait for more DX12 games to come out to the market, also i hope the Battlefield1 will not end up like the ROTR DX12 failure.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinyou*
> 
> I managed to find your blog and spent some time reading it, and have to admit you have done a fantastic job of reviewing the game, there aren't too many reviewers doing this to Hitman.
> Just too bad Hitman is not my type of game genre, I was really hoping The Rise of the Tomb Raider will be a good DX12 game, but that has disappointed me.


Just to let you know I made an edit to my post. I meant to state that I ran DX12 using 4Ghz and 4.8Ghz. I got nearly 30% more performance in Average frame rate. So DX12 does appear to be utilizing Hexa cores and overclocking only makes things much better. I spoke about the chart as well that shows the usage.

Yeah Hitman has always catered to a specific fanbase. Thankfully the game hasn't strayed far away from what it is and haven't went through phases like the CoD phase. That was when a ton of companies were adding fast paced TDM like multiplayer modes to their titles. There was other reasons for this, but Hitman has stayed true so far.

Now Rise of the Tomb Raider DX12 has been patched and patched again. Thankfully the last patch puts it on par with the DX11 performance, but is actually better now since it improves the minimum fps. It took them nearly 3 months to fix it though. By then the damage was done to AMD since all of the reviewers benchmarked a WELL KNOW BUGGY DX12 implementation which made AMD cards look like garbage and Nvidia actually saw increases. The Async Compute update improved the game. You can read it in my "Rise Of The Tomb Raider DirectX 11 & 12 Benchmarks" on Page 6. The DX12 performance is now roughly the same as DX11, but now with better frame pacing and better minimum fps. I was hoping to see Hitman like increases, especially at 4K.

Quote:


> Now, we just need to wait for more DX12 games to come out to the market, also i hope the Battlefield1 will not end up like the ROTR DX12 failure.


There's plenty of games out there already. I think we need to see more games built from the ground up using the newer APIs [Vulkan+DX12]. I'm personally voting for Vulkan since MS has been making dumb decisions like limiting DX12 to Windows 10 and trying to force updates. Plus Vulkan can be used on many devices and not just MS\Window devices or devices MS choses.

*Total War WARHAMMER DX12:*
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/total_war_warhammer_directx_12_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,6.html

Look at that Fury X compete with the GTX 1080 in DX12.

*Gears of War 3: UE DX12* [tacked on]
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/gear_of_war_ultimate_edition_performance_retest_-_the_game_has_been_fixed/5

*Rise of the Tomb Raider & Hitman* = You can read those on my blog.

You have others like Quantum Break, Ashes of the Singularity and with Vulkan Doom. There's more titles on the way like Battlefield 1, Forza, Civilization VI, Watch Dogs 2 I believe, Gears of War 4.
I don't think EA DICE will manage to screw up the DX12 implementation in BF1. DICE actually have seasoned developers who know what they are doing and EA was one of the first companies to embrace "closer to the metal" programming with AMDs Mantle before it became Vulkan and DX12. There's some issues with DX12 and Nvidia that I won't get into at the moment, but I thought about writing an article about this. Hopefully PC gaming can continue to move forward, but now developers are faced with unfortunate decisions to make.


----------



## OCmember

Yay, 1800MHz cl 7.8.7.21 tRFC 60 1T, boo 1.7v though, cpu VTT or QPI VTT 1.325v

I think it should be ok as long as i'm under .50v delta


----------



## Konkistadori

Hello to all Westmere-EP Lovers, Im back after almost 2 years







... Some might remember me, anyway..
Snagged Rampage III Gene and X5650 + Corator DS + 8Gb Ripjawz for 100€uros, just for overclocking fun 

It had to straighten 2 pins from that Mobo tough..

First Im going to test how far this goes with stock voltage, results later









I might start build thread called "Pr0ject BuDGeT"









My Last Westmere combo was X5650 + MSI Big Bang + NH D15 `
Now = X5650 + RIII GENE + Corator DS


----------



## oMANK

Anyone got any benchmarks of this chip or similar ones with a gtx 1060 or a RX 480 in games like The Witcher 3?


----------



## Punisher64

Well guize...tomorrow is the big day. Dropping my 770 4GB SLI setup for a nice shiny...used...Asus 980Ti Strix. Gaming at 1440p is about to get a LOT more interesting I hope.


----------



## Konkistadori

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Punisher64*
> 
> Well guize...tomorrow is the big day. Dropping my 770 4GB SLI setup for a nice shiny...used...Asus 980Ti Strix. Gaming at 1440p is about to get a LOT more interesting I hope.


Nice one








I upgraded my Rampage III Gene Mobo To Rampage III Formula, moar settings moar phases moar everything.. And got also Noctua NH-D14









What do you usually play?


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## Punisher64

So on first impression...980Ti w/ x5670 @ 4.0Ghz on Overwatch...CPU bound. Here we go!


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Symix*
> 
> I retired my x5670 to a server. Downclocked to 133x25 @ 1.208v in hopes of some power savings.
> 
> Anyone have any idea what the power usage is at idle/load? I don't have a meter to test.


What motherboard? If you have one that supports offset cpu vcore then the savings at idle will be significant - my 5675 OC'd 4.4 (25 X 176) in a Sabertooth idles at 1.01V (2.1Ghz) and probably draws less than 15W from the socket.

But, at idle if your board keeps it at 1.208V, then expect more juice to fall victim to the 2nd law of thermal dynamics while your server sits around doing nothing important.

At load, you're so close to stock clocks it won't pull much more than 95W - Like an old incandescent light bulb, but smarter. ;-)

HWINFO can give you rough idea of power usage and has logging capabilities so you can determine when your new (old) server was slacking off and give it a good scolding.


----------



## Sueramb6753

-snip-


----------



## AcidSnow

Hi everyone!
I realized yesterday that my Asus *P6T Deluxe V2* motherboard (bios version 1202) can use these 6 core Xeon chips! ...I'm currently rocking an OC'd i7 920 @ 3.7GHz, and want to upgrade to the X5670! I hope this upgrade improves my gaming ability, because my i7 920 struggles in some open-world games with lots of geometry.

I know this upgrade isn't really necessary, as 99% of my games run just fine, but I feel this upgrade will "just be better." Am I correct in assuming this 6-core X5670 will run better in Vulkan/DX12 enabled games versus my 4-core 920? I haven't found a single gaming review for the X5670; I'm using an R9 290X.


----------



## MicroCat

No, you're not wrong. The 5670 can easily hit 4.2-4.4 and will be faster than the 920 in everything from gaming to OCN posting - all with less heat. Not saying it's a miracle chip, but it's the next best thing on X58.









Check @Kana-Maru's GPU benchmarks here


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> Hi everyone!
> I realized yesterday that my Asus *P6T Deluxe V2* motherboard (bios version 1202) can use these 6 core Xeon chips! ...I'm currently rocking an OC'd i7 920 @ 3.7GHz, and want to upgrade to the X5670! I hope this upgrade improves my gaming ability, because my i7 920 struggles in some open-world games with lots of geometry.
> 
> I know this upgrade isn't really necessary, as 99% of my games run just fine, but I feel this upgrade will "just be better." Am I correct in assuming this 6-core X5670 will run better in Vulkan/DX12 enabled games versus my 4-core 920? I haven't found a single gaming review for the X5670; I'm using an R9 290X.


I'm in the same path as you.

I'm going from an i7-930 @4.2Ghz to an X5675 on my Deluxe v2.
Hope to get it at a minimum of 4.2Ghz too for daily use.

Its a great chip from a still great platform


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jvidia*
> 
> I'm in the same path as you.
> 
> I'm going from an i7-930 @4.2Ghz to an X5675 on my Deluxe v2.
> Hope to get it at a minimum of 4.2Ghz too for daily use.
> 
> Its a great chip from a still great platform


With your X5675 which generally overclocks better than x5670 and your cooler/mb you should aim at 4.4ghz at around 1.35v or slightly below that unless you're really unlucky.You will achieve around 1000p in R15,sweet spot for these xeons and will last easily 2-3 more years,unless something breaks out of order.


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> No, you're not wrong. The 5670 can easily hit 4.2-4.4 and will be faster than the 920 in everything from gaming to OCN posting - all with less heat. Not saying it's a miracle chip, but it's the next best thing on X58.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check @Kana-Maru's GPU benchmarks here


I just bought the X5670 via EBay for *$66*







. I'll need some thermal paste (Arctic Silver 5 AS5), a new CMOS battery (CR2032 3V), and a can of compressed air because my PC needs a blowjob real bad.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> Hi everyone!
> I realized yesterday that my Asus *P6T Deluxe V2* motherboard (bios version 1202) can use these 6 core Xeon chips! ...I'm currently rocking an OC'd i7 920 @ 3.7GHz, and want to upgrade to the X5670! I hope this upgrade improves my gaming ability, because my i7 920 struggles in some open-world games with lots of geometry.
> 
> I know this upgrade isn't really necessary, as 99% of my games run just fine, but I feel this upgrade will "just be better." Am I correct in assuming this 6-core X5670 will run better in Vulkan/DX12 enabled games versus my 4-core 920? I haven't found a single gaming review for the X5670; I'm using an R9 290X.


you are from guru3d?


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> you are from guru3d?


Yes, I'm on Guru 3D. ...I rarely post in any forums these days: I tend to lurk more often now, since I haven't needed to upgrade my PC stuff due to having an overpowered i7-920 (and an R9 290X).

I do try to help post about info related to GPUs, but I don't really know much about modern motherboards, and I'm also sorta out of the loop with regards to CPUs.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> ... I don't really know much about modern motherboards, and I'm also sorta out of the loop with regards to CPUs.


x2 ?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> Yes, I'm on Guru 3D. ...I rarely post in any forums these days: I tend to lurk more often now, since I haven't needed to upgrade my PC stuff due to having an overpowered i7-920 (and an R9 290X).
> 
> I do try to help post about info related to GPUs, but I don't really know much about modern motherboards, and I'm also sorta out of the loop with regards to CPUs.


your xeon arrived?
About game benchmark I can give a little idea about Gta 5. Give me sometime. Will compare with xeon E5 2670 and i7 4930k.


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> your xeon arrived?
> About game benchmark I can give a little idea about Gta 5. Give me sometime. Will compare with xeon E5 2670 and i7 4930k.


I'm excited to try boosting GTA5's scaling-distance a lot more, I hope it takes advantage of more cores (I kinda doubt it does). I actually beat GTA5 an hour ago! It'll be fun to run around and test it anyways.

My X5670, and thermal paste don't arrive until sometime next week. I just hope I can find some "easy overclocking" guide for my P6T Delux V2, because I don't super wanna do that myself.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> I'm excited to try boosting GTA5's scaling-distance a lot more, I hope it takes advantage of more cores (I kinda doubt it does). I actually beat GTA5 an hour ago! It'll be fun to run around and test it anyways.
> 
> My X5670, and thermal paste don't arrive until sometime next week. I just hope I can find some "easy overclocking" guide for my P6T Delux V2, because I don't super wanna do that myself.


Actually I did tinker a lot with Gta 5 graphics settings. The most demanding setting is the distance scaling on cpu. Specially when you look at a distance where many things happening in real time. And sadly Gta 5 can't take advantage of more than 8 threads.


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Actually I did tinker a lot with Gta 5 graphics settings. The most demanding setting is the distance scaling on cpu. Specially when you look at a distance where many things happening in real time. And sadly Gta 5 can't take advantage of more than 8 threads.


would 6 cores instead of 8 threads maybe render this better?


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> would 6 cores instead of 8 threads maybe render this better?


Probably. Cores are like threads, but stronger, like rope.


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MicroCat*
> 
> Probably. Cores are like threads, but stronger, like rope.


This would be my assumption too. ...But I feel kinda silly not knowing the real answer: because _PC Master Race_ and all...


----------



## DRKreiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> This would be my assumption too. ...But I feel kinda silly not knowing the real answer: because _PC Master Race_ and all...


Just gotta try them both


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DRKreiger*
> 
> Just gotta try them both


I'll be sure to benchmark _The Division_ and _GTA 5_ with my current i7 920 (OC'd at 3.7GHz) before installing the new X5670.


----------



## jvidia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> I'll be sure to benchmark _The Division_ and _GTA 5_ with my current i7 920 (OC'd at 3.7GHz) before installing the new X5670.


Thanks.


----------



## OCNewbie87

Hey guys - I am the new one.

On friday I got my x5670 for ~75€

I am currently running it at

200x21 1.36V idle (1.344V Load) LLC on (offset feature is buggy on my board, doesnt work)
VTT 1.355V (my BIOS only offers 1.335 or 1.355 Volts values, no even 1.35)
RAM 1.5V
Uncore Frq: 16x8=3200MHz
PLL 1.840V

Board: GA-EX58-UD5 f13
PSU: Seasonic X-Series 760W
GPU: Amd R9-290
RAM: 4x4GB 1600MHz CL9 9 9 24 Crucial

I got a BEAST Watercoolingloop and run about 50-55°C on IBT and AIDA64 stable. (20 Loops on Very high)

I discovered, that i get only 902 points @Cinebench R15 with 12x8 uncore (1.5x RAM Multi) and 950points with 16x8 uncore (2xRam Multi) like i used to feed my i7 950.

I only ran it on 1.355V VTT for 2hrs, then i read, that max is 1.35. IS 1.355 still considered okay? 1.335 seems to be too low for 3200MHz uncore... and i waste singlecore performance as well compared to my 4.2GHz i7950 :/

thanks for the help!


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCNewbie87*
> 
> Hey guys - I am the new one.
> 
> On friday I got my x5670 for ~75€
> 
> I am currently running it at
> 
> 200x21 1.36V idle (1.344V Load) LLC on (offset feature is buggy on my board, doesnt work)
> VTT 1.355V (my BIOS only offers 1.335 or 1.355 Volts values, no even 1.35)
> RAM 1.5V
> Uncore Frq: 16x8=3200MHz
> PLL 1.840V
> 
> Board: GA-EX58-UD5 f13
> PSU: Seasonic X-Series 760W
> GPU: Amd R9-290
> RAM: 4x4GB 1600MHz CL9 9 9 24 Crucial
> 
> I got a BEAST Watercoolingloop and run about 50-55°C on IBT and AIDA64 stable. (20 Loops on Very high)
> 
> I discovered, that i get only 902 points @Cinebench R15 with 12x8 uncore (1.5x RAM Multi) and 950points with 16x8 uncore (2xRam Multi) like i used to feed my i7 950.
> 
> I only ran it on 1.355V VTT for 2hrs, then i read, that max is 1.35. IS 1.355 still considered okay? 1.335 seems to be too low for 3200MHz uncore... and i waste singlecore performance as well compared to my 4.2GHz i7950 :/
> 
> thanks for the help!


From my experience with x5650,
3200mhz uncore is pretty achievable with even 1.22volt vtt.
And 1.35v for 4.2ghz seems alittle high. And not so sure,but llc causes more Voltage spikes than usual.
And about cinebench r15 score, it gets 1026 point @4.4ghz 3.8-3.9ghz uncore with 2000mhz ram.


----------



## OCNewbie87

Hello again









I changed my settings:

21x200 CPU: 4200MHz
15x200 Uncore: 3000MHz

Vcore: 1.375V (Bios Setting), Windows Idle 1.344/1.360, Load 1.328/1.344V (less than 1.328 at IBT Very High Load wouldnt be stable)
QPI/VTT: 1.315V
CPU PLL: 1.80
RAM 1.64V
LLC on (Offset Feature is buggy with my MoBo. It changes the base Voltage EVERY Boot (sometimes 1.1V, sometimes 1.2V)

BENCHES.png 568k .png file


Does this look good for you?

CB15 Multi ~ 935 to 944 points
CB15 Single ~ 124 points


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCNewbie87*
> 
> Hello again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I changed my settings:
> 
> 21x200 CPU: 4200MHz
> 15x200 Uncore: 3000MHz
> 
> Vcore: 1.375V (Bios Setting), Windows Idle 1.344/1.360, Load 1.328/1.344V (less than 1.328 at IBT Very High Load wouldnt be stable)
> QPI/VTT: 1.315V
> CPU PLL: 1.80
> RAM 1.64V
> LLC on (Offset Feature is buggy with my MoBo. It changes the base Voltage EVERY Boot (sometimes 1.1V, sometimes 1.2V)
> 
> BENCHES.png 568k .png file
> 
> 
> Does this look good for you?
> 
> CB15 Multi ~ 935 to 944 points
> CB15 Single ~ 124 points


Do you have The Division, or GTA 5 that you could benchmark? ...Because I too am about to upgrade to the X5670! But I don't have a water cooler; I'm currently on an OC'd i7 920. I'm curious about the CPU improvements if you could find something to test. If you are a gamer, lets remove the GPU part of the test by lower the in-game graphics settings, so we can get a better reading of just the X5670 CPU. I'm gonna be benching my setup here in a few days to see what the 6core does vs my 4core.


----------



## OCNewbie87

Post me a Screenshot of the settings you want to get benched


----------



## AcidSnow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCNewbie87*
> 
> Post me a Screenshot of the settings you want to get benched


I ran a benchmark in GTA 5 on my OC'd i7 920 @ 3.7GHz on air, with minimum-GPU settings involved (DX11, 1080p & no AA)!

1st: under the "Graphics" tab: Shadows are set to Softest, everything else is either Off or Normal, with ALL three of the following sliders set to max -> "Population Density, Population Variety, and Distance Scaling."

2nd: if you look at the "Advanced Graphics" tab, I have the "Extended Graphics Scaling" set to max as well (everything else in that tab is off or minimum).

I have a stock 4GB R9 290X, 12GB of 1333MHz RAM, and here are the results of my minimum-GPU benchmark using my 4core/8thread i7 920!

Frames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 23, 68, 56
Pass 1, 30, 85, 63
Pass 2, 32, 136, 66
Pass 3, 25, 109, 83
Pass 4, 14, 138, 69

Time in milliseconds(ms). (Lower is better). Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 14, 41, 17
Pass 1, 11, 32, 15
Pass 2, 7, 30, 14
Pass 3, 9, 38, 12
Pass 4, 7, 68, 14

Mirror my settings, and lets see what your water-cooled X5670's CPU can get OCNewbie87









EDIT: I'll benchmark The Division if you have that game too.


----------



## AcidSnow

My X5670 arrived in the mail, so that means it's time to benchmark _The Division_ and every other game that has a FPS-test before I install this new CPU... I'll probably get around to replacing my i7 920 in the next 5 days, which I'm actually hesitant about, because my 920 is & has been such a wonderful CPU


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> My X5670 arrived in the mail, so that means it's time to benchmark _The Division_ and every other game that has a FPS-test before I install this new CPU... I'll probably get around to replacing my i7 920 in the next 5 days, which I'm actually hesitant about, because my 920 is & has been such a wonderful CPU


Give overclocking results. Specially Vcore needed at 4ghz, 4.4ghz. And don't worry I also came from i7 920 d0 stepping. The xeon will surprise you more. So cool yet powerful and more overclocking potential.
But be a little more careful than when you oc'ed your 920. These Xeons are little bit less forgiving towards major mistakes while ocing.
A general idea for starting overclocking >>
An x5650 and sabertooth x58 user here.
For optimal 4ghz oc, (llc off) Vcore @1.21v (on load). Uncore (important) 3200MHz I think. [email protected] Ram @10x. 1734mhz I guess.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AcidSnow*
> 
> My X5670 arrived in the mail, so that means it's time to benchmark _The Division_ and every other game that has a FPS-test before I install this new CPU... I'll probably get around to replacing my i7 920 in the next 5 days, which I'm actually hesitant about, because my 920 is & has been such a wonderful CPU


I made the switch from an i7-930. Next to installing a SSD, it's the best upgrade I've made thus far. That includes going from an HD 5870 to GTX 970. Your X5670 should reach higher frequencies at the same voltage and run cooler. Be mindful of your VTT as this voltage can easily kill a processor if you go beyond 1.35V.

I don't remember my voltage settings, but my maximum overclock with my i7-930 was 4.0 GHz and I settled at 3.8 GHz because it gets hot in Texas. I can comfortably run 4.2 GHz all year with my X5670.


----------



## the matty

after several months away from X58 im returning to it, last system was a rampage 2 gene with an E5640 (4.2GHz 210x20) i've managed to nab a rampage 2 extreme, 24gb ram (3x8gb) and an X5650 capable of 4.4GHz (220x20) and the board has more than that in it, the chip however does not, though the person im getting off hasn't tried more voltage so here's hoping i can get some more out of it







should be fun to play with, X58 is by far my favourite chipset where overclocking is concerned, no fun just changing multi and voltage


----------



## phosphene

Great thread Kana-Maru and everyone else!

I've done a lot of digging around and haven't been able to find a clear answer about a compatible mobo BIOS. Hoping someone here might have some info.

I'm using a Gigabyte EX58-UD3R-SLI rev 1.0 with Award BIOS version F9 . I have a x5650 on the way. Has anyone here had any luck with this config? I've seen enough to lead me to believe that it should work, but any input would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## antivir

@phosphene It should work, I have the Gigabyte EX58-UD5 v. 1.0 bought in 2008, and with the latest bios it worked just fine with my x5660







.

If you can I would make a bios update just to be sure, but it should work just fine.


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> @phosphene It should work, I have the Gigabyte EX58-UD5 v. 1.0 bought in 2008, and with the latest bios it worked just fine with my x5660
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> If you can I would make a bios update just to be sure, but it should work just fine.


Thanks for the reply. That sounds like a good idea, I'll go ahead and give it an update. It looks like the CPU support list for the UD5/UD3R is nearly identical, so fingers crossed that this x5650 fires up!

I'll post back with results in case anyone out there is thinking of grabbing a Xeon with the same mobo.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

What do you guys think, can a Westmere at 4.4 push a GTX 1060 fully? To be honest I don't fully understand what "push a GPU" means given that PCI-E 2.0 x16 and the bandwidth of the QPI link on the X58 platform are enough, but obviously there is something else to this, probably the raw computational power of the CPU in GFLOPS, especially in a single-threaded workload. I'm thinking whether I should stick to the X58 and get a 1060 with good cooling or get the R IV Gene that's on sale here along with a 4930K and maybe a 1070 for the build to be futureproof.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Pretty sure it's a fine match.

CPUs can limit FPS like anything else - the image cannot be displayed 'till everything is calculated, both by the GPU and the CPU.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Does that mean that when say "CPU A can't handle GPU B", it actually means "in title X, A can't calculate the CPU part of the frame at the same rate as the GPU can calculate its part" right? I'm not really a "gamer" but have been playing different Battlefields quite well for a long time, the current ones being bc2 and bf4, and mostly care that those work at a high frame rate and the GPU isn't wasting its power with a weaker CPU. Other than that, I'd use the GPU for 3D modelling in the viewport and hopefully for GPGPU rendering, but those two tasks obviously aren't CPU-intensive.


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> What do you guys think, can a Westmere at 4.4 push a GTX 1060 fully? To be honest I don't fully understand what "push a GPU" means given that PCI-E 2.0 x16 and the bandwidth of the QPI link on the X58 platform are enough, but obviously there is something else to this, probably the raw computational power of the CPU in GFLOPS, especially in a single-threaded workload. I'm thinking whether I should stick to the X58 and get a 1060 with good cooling or get the R IV Gene that's on sale here along with a 4930K and maybe a 1070 for the build to be futureproof.


[email protected] with zotac 1070 amp extreme here. My unigine heaven scores were only 100 below the average from an i7 6700 with 1070. My game benchmarks are +/-5% more or less compared to reviews with the cpu above. As for the pcie 2.0 vs 3.0 discussion, many research has been done that proves as long as 8x lanes and above, the performance difference was negligible.

So even with skylake and pascal, upgrading to a non 6 core is still a sidegrade.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Great input! How good were your game scores, if any?

Edit: "CPU above" == 4930K right? Wonder if a 6700K scored more than that. Nevermind, read carefully now. Still not a 6700K that people overclock to 5 GHz


----------



## lowbudgethero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shadowrain*
> 
> [email protected] with zotac 1070 amp extreme here. My unigine heaven scores were only 100 below the average from an i7 6700 with 1070. My game benchmarks are +/-5% more or less compared to reviews with the cpu above. As for the pcie 2.0 vs 3.0 discussion, many research has been done that proves as long as 8x lanes and above, the performance difference was negligible.
> 
> So even with skylake and pascal, upgrading to a non 6 core is still a sidegrade.


There is no reason to upgrade from x58 for gaming if you're willing to overclock xeon processors or really want 144hz gaming. While my main rig is now socket 1150, it was mostly to just get a more powerful processor at single threaded processes and i see no difference in game ([email protected]). Literally all of my other computers are x58 with a hexacore xeon because they are just that good for the money.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

I don't have a motherboard you see, this one right now is my parents', have to return it soon. Got a spare 3930K and a deal on a Rampage IV Gene, while also considering a 10 core haswell xeon but afraid it won't be able to push a 1060 let alone a 1070 at 3.2 GHz. The rig is not for gaming, it's mostly for programming but I play some battlefield from time to time and want to have the highest frame rate possible with a given GPU. 60 FPS is not enough for goos hitreg, need 120 or more. I don't quite believe there is no difference with a GTX 1070, to be honest, when some people even attribute CPU bottleneck to a 4930K with Pascal GPU's.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shadowrain*
> 
> My unigine heaven scores were only 100 below the average from an i7 6700 with 1070. My game benchmarks are +/-5% more or less compared to reviews with the cpu above.


Minimum FPS might have been lower than with a newer CPU, did you check that as well? In near-competitive gaming, minimum FPS matters more than average.


----------



## lowbudgethero

I'm seriously skeptical a 4930K would bottle neck anything. I wouldn't hesitate to put my titan x in a 3930k rig. A 10 core xeon I'd want to push to something close to 4ghz, which would need some pretty intense cooling.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Frequency isn't the be-all-end-all for processors. Ten Haswell cores at 3.2 GHz each wouldn't have a problem "pushing" a GTX 1060 or 1070. Frame rates certainly would certainly be better with a higher frequency, but then why would you want so many cores? If you're looking for the best balance between cores and frequency, get a hexacore.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Yep, Ive been considering pretty much everything here but it looks like I'll be getting the R IV Gene since it's sort of my dream board and then maybe swapping for a 4930K, and adding a Pascal GPU on top of that.


----------



## lowbudgethero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> Frequency isn't the be-all-end-all for processors. Ten Haswell cores at 3.2 GHz each wouldn't have a problem "pushing" a GTX 1060 or 1070. Frame rates certainly would certainly be better with a higher frequency, but then why would you want so many cores? If you're looking for the best balance between cores and frequency, get a hexacore.


I guess i should have clarified. I'd want to push 4.0ghz, but it's not necessary.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Yep, Ive been considering pretty much everything here but it looks like I'll be getting the R IV Gene since it's sort of my dream board and then maybe swapping for a 4930K, and adding a Pascal GPU on top of that.


I've loved all of the Gene motherboards so far, I don't think you can go wrong


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> I don't have a motherboard you see, this one right now is my parents', have to return it soon. Got a spare 3930K and a deal on a Rampage IV Gene, while also considering a 10 core haswell xeon but afraid it won't be able to push a 1060 let alone a 1070 at 3.2 GHz. The rig is not for gaming, it's mostly for programming but I play some battlefield from time to time and want to have the highest frame rate possible with a given GPU. 60 FPS is not enough for goos hitreg, need 120 or more. I don't quite believe there is no difference with a GTX 1070, to be honest, when some people even attribute CPU bottleneck to a 4930K with Pascal GPU's.


In that case, since you already have a 3930k, just get the mobo for that as x58 mobos are still on the high side coz of the westmere surplus.

The pcie 3.0 should futureproof you if or when the pcie 2.0 bottlenecks on gpus happen. 5 years of pcie 3.0 and recent tests on gpus still dont net any huge difference in frames vs pcie 2.0. Only time pcie 2.0 shows its bandwidth bottleneck is when using a pcie 3.0 nvme drive.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/pci_express_scaling_game_performance_analysis_review

I can't find a 1070 tested with your cpu but I found this i7 930 oced to 3.8 that doesn't have any bottlenecks.

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/4oiba9/gigabyte_gtx_1070_g1_benchmarked_on_6_year_old_pc

What game/s did you see a 4930k bottleneck with pascal? Was it oced?

As for 1080p 120fps, the 1060 won't be able to reach that, even with skylake/broadwell-e. It was built with 1080p60 in mind. Ive personally reached 1080p144 ultra 8xaa, 1440p75 dsr ultra 8xaa and 4k60 dsr ultra 2xAA with my 1070 in nba 2k16.


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hmm, well, with my GTX 460 right now at 1080p it's more or less 60 FPS on all lows in BF4, at 720p it can do 90 steady, 120 with a few dips here and there, so seeing how the 1060 is roughly 4x as powerful as the 460, shouldn't be a prob unless all highs? Other than that, yeah, I recall people in the game chat bragging they had 300 FPS with 1070 on highs. But you know, I also pay attention to the GPGPU capability, and it looks like the 1070 stomps on the 1060 in that regard.

On topic, you know, I've been suspicious about X58 and high-end GPU's ever since I saw in the PassMark database that 4790K owners had higher 3D graphics scores than X58 hexacore owners with NVIDIA 9** series. Got me wondering if their overclock wasn't complete (e.g. QPI or uncore were at stock) or X58 had reached its limit.

One more reason why I prefer X79 to X58 is the real SATA III and the ability to build an array of two cheap SATA III drives, e.g. Crucial MX200's. Of course a decent NVMe drive will outperform that but at twice the cost!


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyNightOwl*
> 
> Hmm, well, with my GTX 460 right now at 1080p it's more or less 60 FPS on all lows in BF4, at 720p it can do 90 steady, 120 with a few dips here and there, so seeing how the 1060 is roughly 4x as powerful as the 460, shouldn't be a prob unless all highs? Other than that, yeah, I recall people in the game chat bragging they had 300 FPS with 1070 on highs. But you know, I also pay attention to the GPGPU capability, and it looks like the 1070 stomps on the 1060 in that regard.
> 
> On topic, you know, I've been suspicious about X58 and high-end GPU's ever since I saw in the PassMark database that 4790K owners had higher 3D graphics scores than X58 hexacore owners with NVIDIA 9** series. Got me wondering if their overclock wasn't complete (e.g. QPI or uncore were at stock) or X58 had reached its limit.
> 
> One more reason why I prefer X79 to X58 is the real SATA III and the ability to build an array of two cheap SATA III drives, e.g. Crucial MX200's. Of course a decent NVMe drive will outperform that but at twice the cost!


Oh you meant BF4. Yeah the 1060 may be able to go 100+fps @ultra there, as my 680 was at 60-70fps Ultra when I last played that game. The 1060 for 60fps ultra I mentioned is for current gen games, like the upcoming BF1.

Yes 4790k's on some games and benchmarks will be faster than the Westmeres. During my Intel Burn Tests, the stock 4790K has a 5 Gflops advantage vs my [email protected] Still the difference in framerates in games is still minimal.

As for the Westmeres being at the limit with high end GPU's, IMO it's still far from it. I managed to dig up my best userbenchmark score with my X5660 @4.3 and with the Zotac 1070 Amp Extreme with only +100 core and +300 vram OC, still far from it's max OC. Still Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1543459


----------



## CrazyNightOwl

Hmm interesting data, gotta run that bench too if it's free! See I cant install 3DMark here, for some unknown reason  But screw that, will run Heaven instead once the GPU is here.

Well to be honest there's a bunch of users running around screaming "bottleneck!!!1111" at anything other than Skylake and that's really confusing. Heck in another thread right here at OCN a person encountered a CPU bottleneck in Overwatch at 1080p with a Westmere and a 1080 or 1070! But on the other hand how is 85 GFLOPS not enough to run a game? Improper parallel implementation seems to be all there is to it. Or is a game engine inherently sequential?

Beware of AVX and AVX2 when comparing Westmeres with Sandy and above, it can easily get confusing taking into account the core count difference as well as the varying frequency. Need to make sure the bench is pure SSE first! And even then, I can tell that SAndy e.g. is going to have an advantage, because its FPU will happily run the SSE instructions in parallel to a certain extent.


----------



## lowbudgethero

With a high OC the westmere is nipping at the heels of a lot of higher end processors with single core performance, the bottleneck might be old motherboard tech and PCIe 2.0 or something.


----------



## phosphene

Overclocking this x5650 is a breeze compared to my i7-920 C0!

Initial results (under 100% load):

http://valid.x86.fr/18lzqd

So, I'd like to confirm that the x5650 works on a Gigabyte X58-UD3R-SLI rev 1.0 with BIOS version F10N.

The only thing I'm having trouble with is getting it to stick on a 21x multiplier. It's either 20x or 22x. C-states enabled, turbo enabled. I'll have to keep testing.

Also, I'm seeing higher voltages at idle than load (1.28v vs 1.23v). I remember seeing something about that previously in the thread but can't find it.


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phosphene*
> 
> Also, I'm seeing higher voltages at idle than load (1.28v vs 1.23v). I remember seeing something about that previously in the thread but can't find it.


That's normal called vdroop or voltage drop on load. If you have LLC or load line calibration, it makes the voltage on load drop less or none at all.


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shadowrain*
> 
> That's normal called vdroop or voltage drop on load. If you have LLC or load line calibration, it makes the voltage on load drop less or none at all.


Ok, good to know. Thanks! I think it was dropping it too much on load as I've been seeing benchmark scores below what I've expected.

After enabling LLC, and setting the vcore to 1.2875 and QPI/VTT to 1.2. BCLK 193 x 22 multi. I'm seeing some improvement. Still only seeing 61 GFlops with IBT v2.54 though.


----------



## lowbudgethero

Just keep going


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lowbudgethero*
> 
> 
> 
> Just keep going


1.38 for 4.4Ghz? lol Then again i wouldn't trust software readings


----------



## mohiuddin

See this guys. It is an HP OEM board. can this be BClk overclocked? Any mod? any how? such an awesome pricing.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-PAVILION-SERIES-MOTHERBOARD-IPMTB-TK-TRUCKEE-594415-001-594415-002-517194-001-/251395974715

I heard it has pretty bad VRM management . but If it can handle i7 920 , it should be able to handle a moderately oc'ed x56xx xeon right?


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> See this guys. It is an HP OEM board. can this be BClk overclocked? Any mod? any how? such an awesome pricing.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-PAVILION-SERIES-MOTHERBOARD-IPMTB-TK-TRUCKEE-594415-001-594415-002-517194-001-/251395974715
> 
> I heard it has pretty bad VRM management . but If it can handle i7 920 , it should be able to handle a moderately oc'ed x56xx xeon right?


I wouldn't risk it. After a quick search, it looks like any support for the Truckee has dried up. Couldn't even find the manual for that board.

If I had to guess, it doesn't feature the options in its BIOS to OC anything. It might run the Xeon stock, if at all, since it appears to support the i7 980x.

One article about the board, http://www.zdnet.com/article/hordes-of-owners-complain-of-problems-with-hp-elite-pavilion-pcs-using-core-i7/


----------



## lowbudgethero

it
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> 1.38 for 4.4Ghz? lol Then again i wouldn't trust software readings


it's set to 1.4 in bios


----------



## letard

Picked up a EVGA Classified E760 SLI off my workmate. Got it home to realise its a rev 1.0 that i will have to do the motherboard mod if i want to use my spare x5650 on it.

My P6DX58D-E is brilliant except only ram dims 1,5 and 6 are working. Glad to see alot of people still using these boards, ill probally be running this system till well after pcie 4.0 comes out.


----------



## Titanox

Hey guys. I'm trying to run an x5650 on a gigabyte GA-eX58-UD5 with the F13 bios (latest). It posts and logs into windows but becomes unresponsive in a few seconds. I can move my cursor but i can't do much else. Did i get a bad cpu? I switched back to my 920 and everything is peachy.


----------



## OCmember

Sounds like someone killed it or severely degraded it and then sold it and you were the unfortunate buyer.


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sounds like someone killed it or severely degraded it and then sold it and you were the unfortunate buyer.


Could it be a bios setting or an incompatible motherboard (Ex58 UD5 Rev 1)? I just want to make sure before i ask for a replacement.


----------



## bill1024

When you installed the new CPU did you reset the BIOS?
I would unplug the PSU from the wall, hit the start button to discharge any stored electric and pull the battery and then hit the clear cmos button or short the pins, for 30 seconds.
Put the battery back in, plug in the PSU and see if that helps.

Don't forget to reset you BIOS settings, settings for your SSD. And see if it works at stock speeds first.


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> When you installed the new CPU did you reset the BIOS?
> I would unplug the PSU from the wall, hit the start button to discharge any stored electric and pull the battery and then hit the clear cmos button or short the pins, for 30 seconds.
> Put the battery back in, plug in the PSU and see if that helps.
> 
> Don't forget to reset you BIOS settings, settings for your SSD. And see if it works at stock speeds first.


I reset the bios AND dismantled the most of the PC (had to install a new cooler and backplate was blocked).

What settings for the SSD should i reset in Bios? I just changed the boot order each time i reset. I have tried different RAM slots. I have switched between the 920 and the 5650 5-6 times now. Everytime the 920 works perfectly but the x5650 gives a problem, mostly immediately after logging into Windows. Working cursor which can move, but i'm unable to select anything or register a click.


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *OCmember*
> 
> Sounds like someone killed it or severely degraded it and then sold it and you were the unfortunate buyer.
> 
> 
> 
> Could it be a bios setting or an incompatible motherboard (Ex58 UD5 Rev 1)? I just want to make sure before i ask for a replacement.
Click to expand...

Only way to know for sure is with a different motherboard. I did hear stories about some Gigabyte UD5 boards.. I have no issue with my W3690 in my UD7 but if I had a choice I would use my EVGA and I might just drop it back in. 4GHz QPI vs 3.6GHz is noticeable.


----------



## bill1024

If the SSD was installed as ACHI, and cmos is cleared, it may default to ide.
Sometimes people forget that and wonder why it is not working after a BIOS reset.


----------



## Titanox

It's set to AHCI mode. What else can i try?


----------



## bill1024

You install the new CPU and you can explore around the BIOS ok with no problems, and it shows the new CPU correctly right? Model and number of cores and CPU temp.....

A couple things to try, unplug the PSU and pull the battery and let it sit overnight and see if that does the trick.

Another thing to try is do you have a bootable linux disk?
If I am not sure if I have a OS or a hardware problem I have a Linux disk I boot to and do some web browsing and run a BOINC work unit just to see if the computer works like it should.

Do you know anyone with a x58 board you can try your CPU in? Are you any where NY I have a couple x58 boards ?

Do you have an extra hard drive laying around? You could install the new CPU and reset the bios with the battery pulled out, put battery back in and install windows 7 or 10 on the hard drive and see if that works. No need to put the win key in since it is just a test installation.


----------



## bill1024

Also after I reset the bios with the battery out, when I start it back up I go in the bios and have it set to optimum default settings, then I reboot and go back in the bios and change what I need to.
Sometimes if you reset the bios and do not pull the battery, some settings reset, but if the time and date did not go back to default, it did not fully clear the bios.


----------



## Titanox

Yes, the bios reads the processor and details correctly.
It just logs into windows and immediately becomes incapable of executing the simplest of tasks. Even dragging a selection square on the desktop makes it freeze when I release the button. Meanwhile I can't open the taskbar menu because of the swirly working cursor. I've never experienced a software problem like this.

No I don't have any extra x58 mobos. And I'm 12000 kilometers from NY. Thank you for the offer, I appreciate it.

This is my main desktop and I thought I would extend its life a few months rather than discard the parts for scrap. I don't want the poor seller to send me a replacement and experience the same issue.


----------



## Titanox

In safe mode I can navigate folders provided resolution is 1024. And cpuz doesn't display name correcly, just generic Core i3/i5/i7 in name. No codename, voltage,multiplier, bus speed and FSB.


----------



## OCmember

@Titanox

Try manually setting the voltages.. Start with the VTT @ 1.24v and the ICH @ 1.2v Also there is a mV setting for the CPU & PCIe try those both at 1000mV


----------



## gofasterstripes

Not CPU PLL at 1000mV!


----------



## OCmember

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Not CPU PLL at 1000mV!


No, Clock Drive. There is also an Express Clock Drive. Both of mine are set to 1000mV


----------



## Titanox

No change. It seems every task execution with the xeon becomes onerous and complex with each activity taking ages to complete, if it ever does complete. Even shutting down from the login screen takes longer than my patience can tolerate.


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> No change. It seems every task execution with the xeon becomes onerous and complex with each activity taking ages to complete, if it ever does complete. Even shutting down from the login screen takes longer than my patience can tolerate.


Sorry to hear about the trouble that Xeon is giving you. I have a few ideas if you're still trying to get it to work.

-Try re-flashing the BIOS with F12 or F13. The ideal process for Gigabyte boards is this: flash with q-flash in BIOS, reboot immediately back into BIOS, 'Load Optimized defaults' at the main page then reboot again.

-As far as the slow Windows behavior goes, I saw something similar while overclocking my x5650. It was also unusually slow to POST. The QPI/VTT setting directly affected this. It might be worth trying a slightly higher voltage (below 1.35). Also, ensure that your QPI clock ratio is at its lowest option (but not slow mode or auto). Mine is set at x36.

-Finally, booting into safe mode with CMD prompt and running 'sfc /scannow' wouldn't hurt. I'm not sure if you've crashed at any point in this process while booting, if you have this could fix something.

edit: thought I read you had reinstalled Windows. My mistake.


----------



## antivir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> No change. It seems every task execution with the xeon becomes onerous and complex with each activity taking ages to complete, if it ever does complete. Even shutting down from the login screen takes longer than my patience can tolerate.


I have a similar setup to yours, same mobo (EX58-UD5 rev 1) but a 5660. My guess would be something with the CPU if your old 920 runs peachy. I realise every mobo is different, but I had no trouble switching my 920 for the 5660.

I simply updated the bios to F13 while running the 920, switched the CPU-s and it booted the5660 without any errors whatsoever with the default BIOS settings. I had the 5660 running at 4.2 by the end of the day - with some help from the guys here







.

My advise - request a replacement CPU.


----------



## Titanox

Thank you for all the replies. I have decided to initiate a replacement/refund. Fingers crossed.


----------



## deadsmiley

I just bought a setup off eBay that will be here next week.

i7-920
Asus Rampage II Extreme
6GB RAM
256GB SSD
GTX 275
DVD-RW
Corsair case with the side panel missing
Unknown power supply...

I also bought the X5660 as a replacement CPU. I already have a GTX 690 waiting to go in it.

I will test 16 GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3-2400 (2x 8GB) since I already have that.

I paid:
$215 for the box o' stuff including shipping
$54 for the X5660
$150 for the GTX 690

$419 total

I have been doing a LOT of reading! =D

Edit: fixed typos


----------



## antivir

Welcome to the Club







. I really hope you'll be able to get out at least 4Ghz out of that beast, keep us posted.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> Welcome to the Club
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I really hope you'll be able to get out at least 4Ghz out of that beast, keep us posted.


This is the eBay auction.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/282223003201

It already has a working CPU which should be good if I have to flash the BIOS, which seems very likely since 1104 is pretty old.

I have read that dual channel vs. triple channel makes no difference if speeds so I am going dual channel because it is much cheaper and has greater availability.

The first task after a power on test is to take the system apart and clean it!


----------



## antivir

The bios update is a good thing, you should do that to avoid any issues with the Xeon.

As for dual vs triple, I'd say use triple if you can, as it give far greater memory bandwidth. DDR3 is really not that hard to buy, you simply have to buy 3 sticks of ram. I'd say make a triple-channel if you can.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *antivir*
> 
> The bios update is a good thing, you should do that to avoid any issues with the Xeon.
> 
> As for dual vs triple, I'd say use triple if you can, as it give far greater memory bandwidth. DDR3 is really not that hard to buy, you simply have to buy 3 sticks of ram. I'd say make a triple-channel if you can.


Hrrmmm... I have been reading some more on this. It seems some of the conclusions were made on bad test data. I will look around. This board will take 4x DIMMs and still be triple channel... which seems funky to me.

I would like more than 6GB. 12GB would probably be good. Ideally I don't want to fill all the slots so I will most likely just go with 3x 4GB for 12GB and be done with it.


----------



## Blameless

You don't need to use a triple-channel kit to get triple channel either.

My remaining X58 setup is using two sticks of Samsung wonder ram, each from a different kit, and a stick of Crucial Ballistix purchased years later with entirely different ICs. They work flawlessly together at 1600 CL8 or 2000 CL10 with manual timings.

Triple channel does increase bandwidth, but it also tends to increase memory latency somewhat, on this platform.

Four DIMMs is also technically triple channel, but in the case where you have more memory in one channel than the rest, that extra memory can only be accessed as single channel. So, four 4GiB DIMMs will be functionally triple channel for the first 12GiB of memory accesses then single channel for anything that overflows into the last 4GiB.

If you are using 2GiB DIMMs now, you can get 12GiB triple channel most inexpensively by just adding a pair of 4GiB DIMMs and running two of the 2GiBs in the same channel.


----------



## deadsmiley

I am not sure what memory type or configuration is in this setup. It is a full system in a case. 6GB will be enough to play with to make sure everything is OK before I spend any more money on it.

Thanks for the info!

I looked again at the manual. NOW I understand what you are saying.

Put 2x 2GB in one channel and 1x 4GB in each of the other two channels. This will work properly because each channel is balanced.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Something just occurred to me and I wondered your thoughts on it's accuracy:

If Maxwell is tile-based and Kepler isn't, could this be the reason that the drivers for Kepler aren't getting so much love? Because the fundamental rendering method is so different, optimizations for Maxwell aren't able to be carried across to the older Arch? Would this mean we really can forgive Nvidia somewhat?

On the topic of forgiving nvidia, anyone else noticed a drop in max stable frequency over the last 6 months or so of drivers with 900-series GPUs? I'm hoping* it's down to utilization increasing, as my scores are similar at the slightly lower frequencies in which case it seems normal to drop a few Hz in max OC [I'm down from 1450 to 1400MHz in SLI]

*Either that or the time I accidentally benched with the fans set to manual-30% did do some damage







(I was assuming not, as when the core hit 90 the fans overrode the profile and shot straight to 100%, I figured that if that was programmed in, it would occur before damage....just. It lasted about a couple of minutes anyway, just a standard TimeSpy runtime and the fans spun up for maybe 10 seconds twice.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Something just occurred to me and I wondered your thoughts on it's accuracy:
> 
> If Maxwell is tile-based and Kepler isn't, could this be the reason that the drivers for Kepler aren't getting so much love? Because the fundamental rendering method is so different, optimizations for Maxwell aren't able to be carried across to the older Arch? Would this mean we really can forgive Nvidia somewhat?
> 
> On the topic of forgiving nvidia, anyone else noticed a drop in max stable frequency over the last 6 months or so of drivers with 900-series GPUs? I'm hoping* it's down to utilization increasing, as my scores are similar at the slightly lower frequencies in which case it seems normal to drop a few Hz in max OC [I'm down from 1450 to 1400MHz in SLI]
> 
> *Either that or the time I accidentally benched with the fans set to manual-30% did do some damage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I was assuming not, as when the core hit 90 the fans overrode the profile and shot straight to 100%, I figured that if that was programmed in, it would occur before damage....just. It lasted about a couple of minutes anyway, just a standard TimeSpy runtime and the fans spun up for maybe 10 seconds twice.


Nah, you didn't harm anything. The GPU will throttle before it will destroy itself.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That's good to know


----------



## gofasterstripes

Right, so I enjoyed the Doom demo and it was 100% stable at 60FPS Ultra/4xAA 1080p on my system.

I'll let you know how the rest of the game plays, once I install.....



wait, WAT?

Oh well at least with this many cores I can even play a bit of Crysis without it stuttering from the D/L in the background


----------



## deadsmiley

Holy downloads Batman!


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Right, so I enjoyed the Doom demo and it was 100% stable at 60FPS Ultra/4xAA 1080p on my system.
> 
> I'll let you know how the rest of the game plays, once I install.....
> 
> 
> 
> wait, WAT?
> 
> Oh well at least with this many cores I can even play a bit of Crysis without it stuttering from the D/L in the background


I know the feeling I live out in the sticks and takes me a few days and nights to download modern games.


----------



## deadsmiley

So I got my X5660 today. I did not realise how big and heavy this thing is. I am going to carry this thing around to thwart car jackers.


----------



## NBrock

Any of you guys have experience with the 1366 dell servers? I have a Poweredge T410 and I stuck dual x5650s in it but while folding the stock coolers can't keep up. All the other heatsinks I have around that are 1366 compatible won't fit. It seems dell has their own 1366 specs...

Any suggestions on alternatives?


----------



## TLCH723

I t
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NBrock*
> 
> Any of you guys have experience with the 1366 dell servers? I have a Poweredge T410 and I stuck dual x5650s in it but while folding the stock coolers can't keep up. All the other heatsinks I have around that are 1366 compatible won't fit. It seems dell has their own 1366 specs...
> 
> Any suggestions on alternatives?


Drill a fan hole directly above the cpu on the side panel and put some delta??


----------



## gofasterstripes

I don't have specific experience with Dell servers - but I do have a suggestion.

Passing freshly drawn, therefore colder air over the HSs will drop the temp [assuming they draw air from the inside of the case] - can you duct fresh air to them and/or use an extraction fan at the end of the duct to help the outflow. IE - Hole in case > ducting > HSs > ducting > powerful exhaust fan

Soil pipes and a good 140mm exhaust? You could prototype it with a cardboard side panel, card roll ducting and a fan [you might have to pony up for a decent exhaust fan just to test it]


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NBrock*
> 
> Any of you guys have experience with the 1366 dell servers? I have a Poweredge T410 and I stuck dual x5650s in it but while folding the stock coolers can't keep up. All the other heatsinks I have around that are 1366 compatible won't fit. It seems dell has their own 1366 specs...
> 
> Any suggestions on alternatives?


With old units like that I always cut 120mm holes in the side of them Dell cases and install a 120mm fan. It may take a wee bit of tweaking/modding but it ALWAYS takes care of overheating for me, well after a good TIM replacement too that is... I even managed to take a Dell Optiplex 755 SFF (yes small form factor) and installed a 120mm fan in the side panel. Dropped the CPU temps a FULL 10C just from a single old 120mm fan. The only side effect I dislike from doing this is it now causes more dust to adhere to internal components, but so what, I now blow it out twice a year instead of once


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> With old units like that I always cut 120mm holes in the side of them Dell cases and install a 120mm fan. It may take a wee bit of tweaking/modding but it ALWAYS takes care of overheating for me, well after a good TIM replacement too that is... I even managed to take a Dell Optiplex 755 SFF (yes small form factor) and installed a 120mm fan in the side panel. Dropped the CPU temps a FULL 10C just from a single old 120mm fan. The only side effect I dislike from doing this is it now causes more dust to adhere to internal components, but so what, I now blow it out twice a year instead of once


You need some pantyhose.


----------



## deadsmiley

Yep, pantyhose works well as a filter.


----------



## deadsmiley

I haven't received either of the two motherboards that I bought and I am buying different Xeon processors to try in them. Most of the gaming benchmarks I see show that 90% of the games tested do not benefit from 6 cores. Many times the performance in gaming is flat, neither helping nor hindering game performance. Sometimes have more than 4 cores hinders game performance, which I confess I do not completely understand. With that said I have a theory that I might see a higher overclock running 4 cores vs. 6 cores. Perhaps at anything north of 4.2 GHz is doesn't matter?

So far I have these CPUs either here or on the way.

1st Gen i7 Specs
8MB L3 cache, 24GB Max Memory

i7-920 - 45nm, xx multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 2.667GHz (2.933GHz boost), 130w
i7-950 - 45nm, xx multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 3.067GHz (3.333GHz boost), 130w

Xeon 56xx Specs
12MB L3 cache, 288GB Max Memory

X5660 - 32nm, 21x multi, 6 cores, 12 threads, 2.8GHz (3.26GHz boost), 95w
X5672 - 32nm, 24x multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 3.2GHz (3.6GHz boost). 95w


----------



## gofasterstripes

My 2cents - check page 1 - Kana's shown some useful gains on these 6-cores. Also - newer games and especially ones written for DX12/Vulkan do show bigger gains than older ones. I've been playing Crysis again, it's almost entirely running on one core! Meanwhile, Doom was using all "12" cores quire heavily, and certainly roughly equally.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> You need some pantyhose.


But I'm not a cross-dresser.... lol

Kidding aside I have fan filters, but I don't like the slow down in air movement. The air compressor works just fine.


----------



## NBrock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> I haven't received either of the two motherboards that I bought and I am buying different Xeon processors to try in them. Most of the gaming benchmarks I see show that 90% of the games tested do not benefit from 6 cores. Many times the performance in gaming is flat, neither helping nor hindering game performance. Sometimes have more than 4 cores hinders game performance, which I confess I do not completely understand. With that said I have a theory that I might see a higher overclock running 4 cores vs. 6 cores. Perhaps at anything north of 4.2 GHz is doesn't matter?
> 
> So far I have these CPUs either here or on the way.
> 
> 1st Gen i7 Specs
> 8MB L3 cache, 24GB Max Memory
> 
> i7-920 - 45nm, xx multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 2.667GHz (2.933GHz boost), 130w
> i7-950 - 45nm, xx multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 3.067GHz (3.333GHz boost), 130w
> 
> Xeon 56xx Specs
> 12MB L3 cache, 288GB Max Memory
> 
> X5660 - 32nm, 21x multi, 6 cores, 12 threads, 2.8GHz (3.26GHz boost), 95w
> X5672 - 32nm, 24x multi, 4 cores, 8 threads, 3.2GHz (3.6GHz boost). 95w


As said above newer games will benefite from more than 4 cores/threads, especially DX12/Vulcan games. Doom and BF1 are two that benefit from more cores/threads. There are others, but those are two that I play.


----------



## deadsmiley

Great!

I have Doom and have been thinking about BF1 (as it looks very cool). The only thing is I don't want the bottleneck to be the GPU so I may have to pony up for a new card. Right now I am repairing a GTX 760 that will probably go to a friend and I have a GTX 690. My PSU is a new EVGA EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2.

OK, have an issue. I would like to go with the best air cooling I can because I am not sure I want to mess with a custom loop or even an AIO water setup. I have really like the Noctua NH-D15 but... it doesn't fit. Thoughts on an air cooler with max performance?

Edit:
To answer my own question... it turns out I can still buy a mounting kit for the NH-D15 for about $9.


----------



## NguyenAdam

I'm gonna be upgrading soon. My motherboard is slowly dying on me. Lol. Would anyone recommend me a motherboard and a Xeon CPU to get?


----------



## NBrock

I am using an EVGA x58 Sli 3 and an x5650 and was able to get 4GHz on an Evo 212 air cooler (I know this chip has more in it but I am limited by cooling atm). This board seems pretty solid. I would get the usual ASUS boards are good as well (Sabertooth and ROG).

Here are some pics of results after overclocking.

This first one is Valley Benchmark @ stock speeds with an Asus Strixx 390x also at stock speeds



This second one is the result of a single core performance benchmark (@4GHz). I think it was from the one CPUZ does.



This 3rd one is the Valley results of just ocing the CPU.



Last is CineBench R15 multi thread score.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NguyenAdam*
> 
> I'm gonna be upgrading soon. My motherboard is slowly dying on me. Lol. Would anyone recommend me a motherboard and a Xeon CPU to get?


I'd recommend you get something a bit newer. I'm not sure how much I'd trust an old motherboard on its second or third owner, especially for the price X58 boards are going.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

I agree to a certain extent. I wouldn't pay over $150 for a x58 board today, but I would be willing to sell mine for double that, LOL. Start saving for something newer, even Skylake would make for a nice 4Ghz replacement in a pinch. This x58 Xeon niche we have going here is for people who already have a decent healthy x58 board from days past. The reason we would retire x58 is if our x58 actually dies on us (or the upgrade itch is very strong), or something really worth upgrading to is released such as Ice Lake. I'm waiting for Ice Lake myself I think. Skylake was going to be my next upgrade but it didn't do what I expected it to do. Now I have to wait to see what AMD pulls off next with Zen, and how Intel responds to it. Hopefully Ice Lake with Optane support will entice me to see my x58 as a hindrance, or AMD will surprise me with Zen.

If you just want as cheap as possible Xeon setup id get a Intel DX58SO and a X5650. The Intel DX58SO is the only x58 you are going to find brand new still (maybe some others unknown brands).

Also I see plenty of units that look trust worthy to me. I got a Intel Smackover DX58SO for my friend brand new for only $89.99 last year. He loves it and hasn't turned it off since last September 2015...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-X58-LGA-1366-Socket-B-ATX-Motherboard-Mainboard-with-Crossfire-SLI-/131982793428 (I dont know what it is but its listed as new)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Evga-X58-SLI-LGA-1366-Intel-132-BL-E758-Motherboard-w-6gb-ram-/232127468432 (evga board already populated with everything you need, pop in a Xeon and VGA card and start gaming)


----------



## deadsmiley

From my standpoint, this is all about the experience. I have several old Tech setups and1st Gen stuff has interested me since I stumbled upon the Alienware M15x laptop. I have bought 4 of these machines and put i7 920XM/940XM in them, 8 to 16GB RAM, SSDs and various graphics cards from AMD 6000M, 8970M, GTX 970M and finally a Quadro M4000M.

The stupid 970M and Quadro costs $400 each.

The default Multi for 940XM is 15 +boost. I run it at 26x multi. I can play WoW at max settings are 1080p and still not drop below 40 fps. Impressive for a 6 year old laptop.

So... this is what lead me here. I can afford a new system but I find things like these X56xx Xeons very interesting.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

If you want a tinker toy for these Xeons, then definitely avoid a cheap consumer level board and seek the Enthusiast level stuff, like a Sabertooth x58 or Rampage III Extreme or Black Edition, EVGA X58 Classified3 or even a Gigabyte GA-X58A-OC. Something aimed more at the overclockers crowd as you will have more fun playing with these Xeons. I'm sure there are many more really good Xeon overclocking boards though, including some consumer level items. Look at the x58 Xeon Club thread. On post #1 there is a drop down list of members and what boards they are using with their Xeons.

If I had to buy a X58 board today and money wasn't an object or concern, I think I would get a Sabertooth, but not exactly sure why haha. I think I like the looks of it and the results I have seen people get with them.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> If you want a tinker toy for these Xeons, then definitely avoid a cheap consumer level board and seek the Enthusiast level stuff, like a Sabertooth x58 or Rampage III Extreme or Black Edition, EVGA X58 Classified3 or even a Gigabyte GA-X58A-OC. Something aimed more at the overclockers crowd as you will have more fun playing with these Xeons. I'm sure there are many more really good Xeon overclocking boards though, including some consumer level items. Look at the x58 Xeon Club thread. On post #1 there is a drop down list of members and what boards they are using with their Xeons.
> 
> If I had to buy a X58 board today and money wasn't an object or concern, I think I would get a Sabertooth, but not exactly sure why haha. I think I like the looks of it and the results I have seen people get with them.


Yesterday one of my eBay snipes was delivered: $215 including shipping

Asus Rampage II Extreme (yeah, no USB 3 or SATA 2)
6GB RAM (3x 2GB Corsair XMS DDR-1600)
i7-920 (will be replaced with a Xeon)
Micron 256GB SSD
DVD-RW
750w Power PC and Cooling Silencer Power Supply (non-modular)
GTX 275
Cooler Master Case, side panel missing.

Man, is this thing dirty! I even found a small twig in it.

The RAM is in the not installed properly to enable triple channel. This board is so dirty I am going to dismantle the machine and clean it before I do anything else. Ah... projects....


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Man, is this thing dirty! I even found a small twig in it.
> 
> The RAM is in the not installed properly to enable triple channel. This board is so dirty I am going to dismantle the machine and clean it before I do anything else. Ah... projects....


Give a screenshot before and AFTER your cleaning project...


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Yesterday one of my eBay snipes was delivered: $215 including shipping
> 
> Asus Rampage II Extreme (yeah, no USB 3 or SATA 2)
> 6GB RAM (3x 2GB Corsair XMS DDR-1600)
> i7-920 (will be replaced with a Xeon)
> Micron 256GB SSD
> DVD-RW
> 750w Power PC and Cooling Silencer Power Supply (non-modular)
> GTX 275
> Cooler Master Case, side panel missing.
> 
> Man, is this thing dirty! I even found a small twig in it.
> 
> The RAM is in the not installed properly to enable triple channel. This board is so dirty I am going to dismantle the machine and clean it before I do anything else. Ah... projects....


It could be sparkling clean enough to eat off of and I would still dismantle it and put it back together, just because. lol

Nice sniping find... By the way, that RIIE has been confirmed to boot from Samsung 950 Pro's, if your interested in super fast SSD's.


----------



## brootalperry

I picked up an X5675 a couple days ago on whim and I have to say it's quite an improvement over my X5650. The higher multiplier allows me to break the 4.0Ghz barrier from the 5650 and stay within the safezone of 1.35v. I had to disable hyperthreading to do it though. It will do 4.5Ghz (23*196) but it needs about 1.34-.35 volts to do it. With hyperthreading turned on then I get a BSOD a few seconds after logging into Windows. I don't want to run it at a constant 1.35v so I've decided to keep it at a modest 4.0Ghz at 1.25v (this time with HT turned on). I'm happy knowing I could always get more out of it later on if I need to but even at stock this badboy doesn't even bottleneck a Titan X in the latest games. Amazing!


----------



## deadsmiley

I have seen YouTube videos of people putting computer parts in the dishwasher. Is this for real???


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Give a screenshot before and AFTER your cleaning project...


I have already taken some dirty pictures. LOL


----------



## deadsmiley

Well, I am playing with a Gigabyte X58A-UD7 ver. 1. Looks like this one does not support Xeons without soldering a resistor, or is this old news? Right now I have an i7-950 in it trying to install Win 7 Pro.

It's being a bit finicky at the moment. After Windows is done loading files it sits for a few minutes before it asks if I want to upgrade or install Windows. What is up with that?

Edit:
Got it! WIn 7 Pro SP1 has almost all the drivers included for the GA-X58A-UD7, so heck yeah. Just had to do some SATA stuff, USB 3.0 and of course the GTX 690 drivers.


----------



## alancsalt

Certainly is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> I have seen YouTube videos of people putting computer parts in the dishwasher. Is this for real???


Yep, some of the sub-zero guys clean their boards like that. Must be totally dry before use but.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Well, I am playing with a Gigabyte X58A-UD7 ver. 1. Looks like this one does not support Xeons without soldering a resistor, or is this old news? Right now I have an i7-950 in it trying to install Win 7 Pro.
> 
> It's being a bit finicky at the moment. After Windows is done loading files it sits for a few minutes before it asks if I want to upgrade or install Windows. What is up with that?
> 
> Edit:
> Got it! WIn 7 Pro SP1 has almost all the drivers included for the GA-X58A-UD7, so heck yeah. Just had to do some SATA stuff, USB 3.0 and of course the GTX 690 drivers.


I have a X58A-UD7 ver 1 and it does not need a resistor soldered in to work with Xeon's. All you need to do is update to the newest bios which is on the Gigabyte website.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> I have a X58A-UD7 ver 1 and it does not need a resistor soldered in to work with Xeon's. All you need to do is update to the newest bios which is on the Gigabyte website.


I have the latest beta BIOS installed as of last night. I got the i7-950 to 4.2 GHz. I recorded my settings and then reverted to fail-safe defaults. I installed the X5660 and it indeed booted fine. I played with the BIOS a bit, but so far the most I can get out of it is 3.3 GHz and it is running very cool... in the low 30's.

Then again I am diving into the dark on this. I have read some, but not enough to know what I am really doing. The Gigabyte BIOS has a lot of settings, that is for sure. BTW, I got this GA-X58X-UD7 Ver 1 for $60 shipped. It was listed on eBay as "untested". Well it certainly works. I have not been able to find a manual for it, just and installation guide which is pretty generic.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> It could be sparkling clean enough to eat off of and I would still dismantle it and put it back together, just because. lol
> 
> Nice sniping find... By the way, that RIIE has been confirmed to boot from Samsung 950 Pro's, if your interested in super fast SSD's.


The RIIE is one of the older ones I have now. No USB 3.0 and no SATA III.

I have played with the Gigabyte GA-X58X-UD7 Ver. 1 so far. Last night I got the i7-950 to 4.2GHz just by putzing around in the BIOS. Today I read this guide http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/ , and realize now that it was by sheer, dumb luck. No wonder I had issues with the X5600.









I still have the RIIE to play with along with an Intel DX58XO2 (where the i7-950 and 12GB RAM came from). The RIIE has an i7-920 and 6GB RAM. I bought the Gigabyte as a bare board.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> The RIIE is one of the older ones I have now. No USB 3.0 and no SATA III.
> 
> I have played with the Gigabyte GA-X58X-UD7 Ver. 1 so far. Last night I got the i7-950 to 4.2GHz just by putzing around in the BIOS. Today I read this guide http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/ , and realize now that it was by sheer, dumb luck. No wonder I had issues with the X5600.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still have the RIIE to play with along with an Intel DX58XO2 (where the i7-950 and 12GB RAM came from). The RIIE has an i7-920 and 6GB RAM. I bought the Gigabyte as a bare board.


As soon as your ready to validate your Xeon head on over to the X58 Xeon Club please. It would be nice to have a fresh injection of knowledge. All the info I learned years ago is starting to fade, lol.

Re the USB, I recently got a Gigabyte GC-USB 3.1 PCIe x4 card from ebay ($17 bucks) and couldn't be any happier with it. I disabled my built in 3.0 chip and combined the new card with the HooToo HT-UH010 7-Port USB 3.0 HUB. I don't have USB 3.1 devices yet so I am waiting for HUBs to mature before I get one. The HooToo has easily been one of the best HUBs I have ever owned. Nearly doubled my USB 3.0 speeds and the stability feels more like a SSD. My USB 3.0 read speeds on flash drives now such as the Sandisk Extreme is 255 to 260 MB/s which is well over advertised, and writes also are about 10% faster. I couldn't be happier with this combo.

I never heard of the DX58XO2 before.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> As soon as your ready to validate your Xeon head on over to the X58 Xeon Club please. It would be nice to have a fresh injection of knowledge. All the info I learned years ago is starting to fade, lol.
> 
> Re the USB, I recently got a Gigabyte GC-USB 3.1 PCIe x4 card from ebay ($17 bucks) and couldn't be any happier with it. I disabled my built in 3.0 chip and combined the new card with the HooToo HT-UH010 7-Port USB 3.0 HUB. I don't have USB 3.1 devices yet so I am waiting for HUBs to mature before I get one. The HooToo has easily been one of the best HUBs I have ever owned. Nearly doubled my USB 3.0 speeds and the stability feels more like a SSD. My USB 3.0 read speeds on flash drives now such as the Sandisk Extreme is 255 to 260 MB/s which is well over advertised, and writes also are about 10% faster. I couldn't be happier with this combo.
> 
> I never heard of the DX58XO2 before.


Thanks for the info on the USB 3.0. I am not overly concerned about the lack of SATA III as I have SATA II with a new SSD in my M15x and I really cannot tell a difference.

The Intel DX58SO2 looks like this: (I misspelled it)



It probably isn't the best board on the planet, but I intend to see what it will do as well.
Here is a review:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/03/28/intel_dx58so2_lga_1366_x58_motherboard_review/7

What are your opinions on the RIIE vs. the GA-X58A-UD7 Ver 1.?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Yeah I also am never concerned about SATAIII, as I keep that chip disabled. Its a crappy Marvel anyway.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Thanks for the info on the USB 3.0. I am not overly concerned about the lack of SATA III as I have SATA II in my M15x and I really cannot tell a difference.
> 
> The Intel DX58XO2 looks like this:
> 
> http://i1019.photobucket.com/albums/af313/krslow64/1st%20Gen%20i7%20and%20Xeon/20161029_090022_zpshzg76fyc.jpg
> 
> It probably isn't the best board on the planet, but I intend to see what it will do as well.
> 
> What are your opinions on the RIIE vs. the GA-X58A-UD7 Ver 1.?


I have no opinion on comparing the two. I'm a ROG fan but one of my best friends is a UD fan, and as far as my experience goes both have been great board series. Lots of terminology differences within the BIOS too.

I can't even find that Intel board using Google, its not even listed at Intel. But I think I've seen it at ebay before. I wonder if its an OEM board and if so, from which manufacturer. It would be interesting to see if it even has an overclocking section in its BIOS. The DX58SO does but its rudimentary at best, so I didn't even try it. I just used it as a gaming build for a friend of mine who only plays decade old games.

I can't remember why now, but there was a reason I passed on the RIIE. I was on the 755 Formula back then and it was working just fine at the time though. When the RIIIE hit the shelves is when I finally jumped onto the X58 (I'm on my second RIIIE though). I also waited for the 930 to be released as I didn't quite like the reports on the 920. Both USB 3.0 and SATA III on the RIIIE was not a purchasing factor. I didn't even use USB 3.0 until early 2015, and I eventually used the Marvel for its RAID0 with Linux, but not for long lol. Both the Marvel and Renesas chips are useless I think. I wish I had waited for the RIIIBE (Rampage III Black Edition), but that had even less BIOS support then the RIIIE. Besides I just liked its looks, lol.

I would get two Xeons and see which one works best for you, then sell the other, lol.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yeah I also am never concerned about SATAIII, as I keep that chip disabled. Its a crappy Marvel anyway.
> I have no opinion on comparing the two. I'm a ROG fan but one of my best friends is a UD fan, and as far as my experience goes both have been great board series. Lots of terminology differences within the BIOS too.
> 
> I can't even find that Intel board using Google, its not even listed at Intel. But I think I've seen it at ebay before. I wonder if its an OEM board and if so, from which manufacturer. It would be interesting to see if it even has an overclocking section in its BIOS. The DX58SO does but its rudimentary at best, so I didn't even try it. I just used it as a gaming build for a friend of mine who only plays decade old games.
> 
> I can't remember why now, but there was a reason I passed on the RIIE. I was on the 755 Formula back then and it was working just fine at the time though. When the RIIIE hit the shelves is when I finally jumped onto the X58 (I'm on my second RIIIE though). I also waited for the 930 to be released as I didn't quite like the reports on the 920. Both USB 3.0 and SATA III on the RIIIE was not a purchasing factor. I didn't even use USB 3.0 until early 2015, and I eventually used the Marvel for its RAID0 with Linux, but not for long lol. Both the Marvel and Renesas chips are useless I think. I wish I had waited for the RIIIBE (Rampage III Black Edition), but that had even less BIOS support then the RIIIE. Besides I just liked its looks, lol.
> 
> I would get two Xeons and see which one works best for you, then sell the other, lol.


I updated my post with the *correct* part number for that Intel board and linked a review. Looks OKish. I have an X5660 here, which I need to revisit. I also have a couple of quad Xeons (X5672, X5687) coming and another 6 core (X5680) just for fun.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> I updated my post with the *correct* part number for that Intel board and linked a review. Looks OKish. I have an X5660 here, which I need to revisit. I also have a couple of quad Xeons (X5672, X5687) coming and another 6 core (X5680) just for fun.


Oh its a version 2 of the one I built last year? Hmm looks interesting. VERY hard to find, but I found one at Amazon for $158. Does it really have a UEFI BIOS? That is hard to believe, lol.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> I have the latest beta BIOS installed as of last night. I got the i7-950 to 4.2 GHz. I recorded my settings and then reverted to fail-safe defaults. I installed the X5660 and it indeed booted fine. I played with the BIOS a bit, but so far the most I can get out of it is 3.3 GHz and it is running very cool... in the low 30's.
> 
> Then again I am diving into the dark on this. I have read some, but not enough to know what I am really doing. The Gigabyte BIOS has a lot of settings, that is for sure. BTW, I got this GA-X58X-UD7 Ver 1 for $60 shipped. It was listed on eBay as "untested". Well it certainly works. I have not been able to find a manual for it, just and installation guide which is pretty generic.


Are you sure you are on the F9A bios as I was on the F7 and couldn't get the Xeon to overclock properly.

http://www.gigabyte.ie/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3251#bios


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Oh its a version 2 of the one I built last year? Hmm looks interesting. VERY hard to find, but I found one at Amazon for $158. Does it really have a UEFI BIOS? That is hard to believe, lol.


I haven't fired it up yet. Been playing with the Gigabyte.

It came with a i7 950 and 12GB Mushikin Blackline for $220 shipped.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Are you sure you are on the F9A bios as I was on the F7 and couldn't get the Xeon to overclock properly.
> 
> http://www.gigabyte.ie/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3251#bios


Yes I am sure. Here is a photo. ?


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> I haven't fired it up yet. Been playing with the Gigabyte.
> 
> It came with a i7 950 and 12GB Mushikin Blackline for $220 shipped.


Jeez what a good deal. The one I found came with a 920 and the IO plate only, but for $89.99 which was a steal I think. I installed 12GB of ram, a 256gb 850 EVO and a 960 4GB Graphics card, and one USB 3.0 card for his external backup drives. I don't think my friend has turned it off since I delivered it, lol. He doesn't have any internet where he lives so he just plays video games on it, mostly submarine and Flying games and creates new models and textures for the games. And he is a retired old man, lol. He says he hasn't had a single problem with it. Once every few Months he tethers his phone to check for game updates, but hasn't had any because they are older games. He uses Windows 7 and I fully locked it down so that nothing breaks software wise. The drive is 200 miles to his home so I can't be arsed to fix stuff if he breaks it. I don't plan to update him to Windows 10 any time soon either, not until 7 loses all support from Microsoft. 10 would not have worked with several of his games anyway (XP games) from what I can tell. lol, but because of that he takes FULL advantage of his 120hz Asus display which that 960 easily does at 1080p with 10 year or older games.

I thought about getting one of them Intel boards for my home server, only because at the time I found them cheaper then all other x58 boards.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Jeez what a good deal. The one I found came with a 920 and the IO plate only, but for $89.99 which was a steal I think. I installed 12GB of ram, a 256gb 850 EVO and a 960 4GB Graphics card, and one USB 3.0 card for his external backup drives. I don't think my friend has turned it off since I delivered it, lol. He doesn't have any internet where he lives so he just plays video games on it, mostly submarine and Flying games and creates new models and textures for the games. And he is a retired old man, lol. He says he hasn't had a single problem with it. Once every few Months he tethers his phone to check for game updates, but hasn't had any because they are older games. He uses Windows 7 and I fully locked it down so that nothing breaks software wise. The drive is 200 miles to his home so I can't be arsed to fix stuff if he breaks it. I don't plan to update him to Windows 10 any time soon either, not until 7 loses all support from Microsoft. 10 would not have worked with several of his games anyway (XP games) from what I can tell. lol, but because of that he takes FULL advantage of his 120hz Asus display which that 960 easily does at 1080p with 10 year or older games.
> 
> I thought about getting one of them Intel boards for my home server, only because at the time I found them cheaper then all other x58 boards.


Yeah, you did get a good deal on that Intel board. Very cool story behind it too.









I realize I am 7 years late to the party. Don't care. My last desktop build was AMD 3800+ X2 (dual core), so over 10 years ago. I do have some kick-butt laptops but I just wanted a desktop.

I think I have too many boards to play with. Ha!


----------



## boombastik

I read a lot of pages.
1)If i run a stock x5650 can i run uncore double the memory ram?
Or i must put it at x15 and ram at x10? (1,5 ratio)
now i have it uncore x20 ram x10 qpi/vtt 1.20 ram voltage 1.5 all stocks.

2)Also i read about a slow mode if your xeon dont take a lot of voltage.
my gigabyte x58 ud5 has load line calibration disabled and cpu core voltage on auto.
If i put load line calibration to enabled and cpu vcore voltage to normal i take in intel burn test 6 more gb/s at stock settings.

3) gigabytes motherboard have a memory perfomance enchance:
*if i put it in standard in witcher 3 game all full with a gtx 970 at stock i have 98-99 usage in a gameplay of two hours.
*if i put in turbo in wicher 3 i have only 99 usage but i have desync in bf4 (for example a helicopter blown its like 3 fps in the backround,or for example smoke in the sky )
*if i put on extreme witcher 3 have only 99 usage and i have no desync in bf4.

4) every time i start my machine my mouse have different feeling for example smothing is different. Any clue of this? ( i have tried c1e, c3 c6 disable enabled all the same,i tried overvoltage northbridge, southbridge, i disable and i enable usab legacy, i changed memory, grafik card psu , i chnaged mouse and keyboard every time is the same) Also the feeling changes if i quit from a game. Maybe it is a nvidia driver bug with maxwell?

5)And my final statement question. IS this normal? Plz see this video in youtube. This is not my video but i have same results. If anyone have 3d mark vanage can make a cpu run?
Why the aeroplanes stutter?


----------



## gofasterstripes

I read a lot of pages.
1)If i run a stock x5650 can i run uncore double the memory ram?_*Yeah I think so. I use 3200/1600 [200BCLK @ x16/x8]*_
Or i must put it at x15 and ram at x10? (1,5 ratio)
now i have it uncore x20 ram x10 qpi/vtt 1.20 ram voltage 1.5 all stocks.

2)Also i read about a slow mode if your xeon dont take a lot of voltage. _*Use this only for CPU benchmarks/validation - not for actually gaming/using the machine generally*_
my gigabyte x58 ud5 has load line calibration disabled and cpu core voltage on auto. *Make sure you don't fry your CPU*
If i put load line calibration to enabled and cpu vcore voltage to normal i take in intel burn test 6 more gb/s at stock settings. *Sorry, what?*

3) gigabytes motherboard have a memory perfomance enchance: *If your machine is overclocked, set this to Standard and enter your primary timings manually*
*if i put it in standard in witcher 3 game all full with a gtx 970 at stock i have 98-99 usage in a gameplay of two hours.
*if i put in turbo in wicher 3 i have only 99 usage but i have desync in bf4 (for example a helicopter blown its like 3 fps in the backround,or for example smoke in the sky )
*if i put on extreme witcher 3 have only 99 usage and i have no desync in bf4.

4) every time i start my machine my mouse have different feeling for example smothing is different. Any clue of this? ( i have tried c1e, c3 c6 disable enabled all the same,i tried overvoltage northbridge, southbridge, i disable and i enable usab legacy, i changed memory, grafik card psu , i chnaged mouse and keyboard every time is the same) Also the feeling changes if i quit from a game. Maybe it is a nvidia driver bug with maxwell? *Somebody's trolling you by changing it when you sleep. Seriously: I have no idea*

5)And my final statement question. IS this normal? Plz see this video in youtube. This is not my video but i have same results. If anyone have 3d mark vanage can make a cpu run?
Why the aeroplanes stutter? *I wouldn't worry about it. Test the machine in other ways - if this is the only problem you have, it's nothing to worry about. How old is vantage anyway? It might just be a compatibility problem.*


----------



## boombastik

1) basically i dont any overclock so the maximum i can set is is uncore 2667 and ram 1333. in stock seetting max clock ram speed is 1333.

2) the voltage in my bios is auto at 1.2150 if i change the auto to normal (you can put a static number or auto or normal) and enable loadline calibration i take 58 gb/sec in burn test when i check for stability. 6 more gb /sec . if i disable load line calibration i take 52gb/sec . From cpu z with auto cpu voltage at full load i take 1.16 voltage and turbo boost throttle at 2.66 when i run IBT , if i change cpu v core from auto to normal and run IBT i take 54 gb/sec and turbo boost not throttle(speed stays at 2930 and voltage 1.16).

Now if i change voltage cpu vcore from auto to normal and enable load line calibration i take in ibt 58 gb/sec.(speed stays at 2,930 and voltage at 1.20)

I dont overclock so the more v core tha load line calibration gives at stock i dont think that it is dangerous!

Basically i think that voltage to normal removes tdp throttling so all cores staying at same maximum speed.


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> I can't even find that Intel board using Google, its not even listed at Intel. But I think I've seen it at ebay before. I wonder if its an OEM board and if so, from which manufacturer. It would be interesting to see if it even has an overclocking section in its BIOS. The DX58SO does but its rudimentary at best, so I didn't even try it. I just used it as a gaming build for a friend of mine who only plays decade old games.


It's the board I'm currently running with, has my X5660 holding solid at 4.0 GHz, not the easiest of boards I have overclocked with but usable. Not something I'd recommend to anyone looking to overclock, but nonetheless a solid board over all.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> It's the board I'm currently running with, has my X5660 holding solid at 4.0 GHz, not the easiest of boards I have overclocked with but usable. Not something I'd recommend to anyone looking to overclock, but nonetheless a solid board over all.


This is good to know. I am thinking about giving this Intel board to a friend of mine. He is currently running a P4 3.0 GHz if I am not mistaken.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> It's the board I'm currently running with, has my X5660 holding solid at 4.0 GHz, not the easiest of boards I have overclocked with but usable. Not something I'd recommend to anyone looking to overclock, but nonetheless a solid board over all.


Yeah I was thinking I should have set the BCLK to 160 and the RAM to 1600 at least, that board should have done that easy enough. However, next year or 2018 he plans on upgrading it to the same X5650 I have (or if I upgrade mine), so and that means I have to visit him way way back in the middle of the rocky mountains near Angel Fire NM. The last time I went I stayed 3 weeks, just to make sure there was no problem with his setup and to work on getting the system playing those damn retro games of his. He is VERY sensitive to lag and low fps and not all games can play on newer hardware just because its newer. Some games actually play much worse, so I had to work on that a bit. For example his Nascar 2003 game I had to work on using a guide to get it to run, and also his Microsoft flight sim had to be babied for a few weeks before I figured out how to get it working perfectly, especially after he discovered graphics mods for it that made the game even more realistic, and the same for his submarine war sims. It gave me the opportunity to do some much needed mountain hiking and artifact hunting though, lol.

Back on topic, I should have overclocked the bclk a bit damn it just in order to run the ram at its advertised rating. I assume his 920 would handle that at least...


----------



## deadsmiley

So... last night I used this guide to help me overclock my X5660 in the GA-X58A-UD7 ver 1.
http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/

This guide was a great help to me in understanding how the different settings work. I got up to BCLK of 212 but the QPI/VTT had to go to 1.395v to get there. At BCLK 200 it was stable at 1.295v

RAM is DDR-1600 so hitting BCLK 200 is important to me in order to run it at stock speeds. I know that BCLK 160 would do the same thing but it would limit my CPU speed. I am guessing it's more important to run the CPU as fast as possible vs. maxing out the RAM speed?

Long story short I fell just short of 4.2G GHz so I settled on 4.0 GHz at around 1.25 Vcore for my everyday overclock. The difference between the i7-950 and this CPU is huge even though the i7 hit 4.2 GHz with sloppy overclocking methods. Temperatures are around 80C while running Intel Burn Test and hit a high of 60c while gaming. Cooling is handled by a Hyper 212+ with an unknown 120mm x 25mm fan running at 1,100 RPM.

I have an X5680 that should be here tomorrow that I will try out. My GTX 690 that I bought for $150 is doing quite well. I may sell it and put that money towards a GTX 1070.









3dMark11
P14898
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/11706325

Firestrike
11558
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10654404


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> 3dMark11
> P14898
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/11706325
> 
> Firestrike
> 11558
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10654404


My Firestrick score same motherboard as you.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9410006


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> My Firestrick score same motherboard as you.
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9410006


We are running very close together with these. ?


----------



## brootalperry

It seems really hard or just downright impossible to run my X5675 at 4.5GHz with HT under 1.35. Actually I'm not even sure how stable it is without HT other than Windows doesn't BSOD a few seconds after logging in.

I read a thread over on Anandtech where people have pushed these things over 1.5 volts for 4.6+ GHz and that's just insane. I noticed also that Uncore plays a pivotal role to performance (numbers) in Cinebench.


----------



## boombastik

the strange mouse filling goes away when i change qpi/vtt from auto 1.20 to manual 1.10. My ram voltage manual is 1.5. It is possible that the default qpi/vtt by intel was back then 1.10 but motherboards put is 1,20 for safe ?


----------



## shadowrain

Hi all,

I got my 950 pro 256gb and an Asus Hyper m.2 mini adapter from a friend for the price of a bnew 850 pro. Nice deal. So I installed it to my Xeon X58 system([email protected], 2050 ram, P6X58D Premium, gtx 1070) and WOW, even if the speeds are only pcie v2.0, it is amazing coming from a regular ssd. Won't be upgrading for a while then.

For those who wanna know how I made it work...
1. Put the drive on pcie adapter to my bottom pcie slot.
2. Must have intel raid disabled in bios to be able to detect the 950 pro.
3. Used macrium reflect loaded in a usb, booted on that and cloned my ssd to the nvme easy.
4. Unplugged ssd to test nvme solo boot, worked. Replugged the ssd and used windows 10 boot usb to delete the partitions to clean the old drive.
5. Installed samsung nvme drivers and samsung magician.
6. Enjoy 1k or so sequential read and writes.

Pics for eyecandy






PS: I love saying "Do you NVMe?"
Edit: added userbencmark link.
http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1996015


----------



## gofasterstripes

@boombastik yes if going from 1.2 to 1.1vtt fixes your problem I would surely keep it there


----------



## 4everAnoob

So after a long absence from X58, due to my main rig being upgraded to Skylake, I managed to get two X58 boards for next to nothing.
I sold the first, an ASrock, for a big profit. The second one is an ASUS P6T SE. It works really well, and I crossflashed it to P6T WS Pro BIOS which gives SLI support + High TDP mode which allows X56XX xeons to use their highest multiplier for all cores instead of just two. So I expect it to give good overclocking results.

Currently, the only CPU I have left is a i7 930, kind of mediocre overclocker I think. I also have 2x 4GB DDR3 1333. And one stick of 4GB DDR3L 1600.

My second rig is currently a low end B75M-D3V + i3 3225 but I don't use it much, it is used also by my parents.
I am unsure if I should sell this P6T SE or the B75M-D3V and use the P6T SE. So I can have fun with this platform again.
But that means I would have to get a X5650, plus maybe look at getting some nicer RAM.

Would do you guys think?


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> So after a long absence from X58, due to my main rig being upgraded to Skylake, I managed to get two X58 boards for next to nothing.
> I sold the first, an ASrock, for a big profit. The second one is an ASUS P6T SE. It works really well, and I crossflashed it to P6T WS Pro BIOS which gives SLI support + High TDP mode which allows X56XX xeons to use their highest multiplier for all cores instead of just two. So I expect it to give good overclocking results.
> 
> Currently, the only CPU I have left is a i7 930, kind of mediocre overclocker I think. I also have 2x 4GB DDR3 1333. And one stick of 4GB DDR3L 1600.
> 
> My second rig is currently a low end B75M-D3V + i3 3225 but I don't use it much, it is used also by my parents.
> I am unsure if I should sell this P6T SE or the B75M-D3V and use the P6T SE. So I can have fun with this platform again.
> But that means I would have to get a X5650, plus maybe look at getting some nicer RAM.
> 
> Would do you guys think?


Ebay has x5650 for around 40$ now and x5660 for around 50 to 55 and e5640 for 29$ x5675 for 70$ w3680 for 100$ Prices are low at the moment.


----------



## 4everAnoob

Yes in particular there is a "scratched" X5650 up on eBay that is cheap....
But this time I want a good piece of silicon, something that overclocks above average lol.
So far I have always had mediocre chips, which couldn't really go beyond 4.2 GHz without using unsafe voltages.
I always wonder though, how does someone scratch up their CPU so much? Looks like it has been dragged along tarmac or something on these listings.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

There's the possibility your motherboard could be the limiting factor in your overclocking ventures.


----------



## NBrock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4everAnoob*
> 
> Yes in particular there is a "scratched" X5650 up on eBay that is cheap....
> But this time I want a good piece of silicon, something that overclocks above average lol.
> So far I have always had mediocre chips, which couldn't really go beyond 4.2 GHz without using unsafe voltages.
> I always wonder though, how does someone scratch up their CPU so much? Looks like it has been dragged along tarmac or something on these listings.


The x5650 I picked up on ebay for $47 is hitting 4.2 on an H80i in an EVGA x58 SLI 3


----------



## gofasterstripes

Well Jelly









Anyone tried a Mac Pro lidless Xeon? I'm seeing 5670 lidless for 80 Euro!

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5570-4x-2-93-GHz-SLBF3-Quad-Core-2-93-Lidless-for-Mac-Pro/161513994631?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D39832%26meid%3Da6d6b7cc4edf4520a34b6333316666fa%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D6%26mehot%3Dag%26sd%3D361772687803

Could be cooler?


----------



## theister

not that much cause intel used solder back in the days and not thermalpaste like today to connect the heatspreader.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> not that much cause intel used solder back in the days and not thermalpaste like today to connect the heatspreader.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shadowrain*
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I got my 950 pro 256gb and an Asus Hyper m.2 mini adapter from a friend for the price of a bnew 850 pro. Nice deal. So I installed it to my Xeon X58 system([email protected], 2050 ram, P6X58D Premium, gtx 1070) and WOW, even if the speeds are only pcie v2.0, it is amazing coming from a regular ssd. Won't be upgrading for a while then.
> 
> For those who wanna know how I made it work...
> 1. Put the drive on pcie adapter to my bottom pcie slot.
> 2. Must have intel raid disabled in bios to be able to detect the 950 pro.
> 3. Used macrium reflect loaded in a usb, booted on that and cloned my ssd to the nvme easy.
> 4. Unplugged ssd to test nvme solo boot, worked. Replugged the ssd and used windows 10 boot usb to delete the partitions to clean the old drive.
> 5. Installed samsung nvme drivers and samsung magician.
> 6. Enjoy 1k or so sequential read and writes.
> 
> Pics for eyecandy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: I love saying "Do you NVMe?"
> Edit: added userbencmark link.
> http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/1996015


Very nice! What motherboard do you have?


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> It could be sparkling clean enough to eat off of and I would still dismantle it and put it back together, just because. lol
> 
> Nice sniping find... By the way, that RIIE has been confirmed to boot from Samsung 950 Pro's, if your interested in super fast SSD's.


Well the R2E has an issue. It does not recognize any memory in the 3rd channel. Bummer. But I am donating this to a friend that is currently using a P4 3.06 GHz machine. I will include the DVD drive, 256GB SSD and 8GB RAM and the GTX 275. It's a huge upgrade for him.


----------



## boombastik

I want to ask something that i cannot find anywhere.
I have a x5650 whitch have uncore x20=2667

If i use 1066 ddr3 triple chanell ram x8=1066mhz the maximum uncore i can use is x16=2167?

I read there that the maximum uncore is 2x memory multyplier <1.35 voltage if i run all at stock with 1066 ram i must put uncore 2167 or i cun put it on the default 2667?


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> I want to ask something that i cannot find anywhere.
> I have a x5650 whitch have uncore x20=2667
> 
> If i use 1066 ddr3 triple chanell ram x8=1066mhz the maximum uncore i can use is x16=2167?
> 
> I read there that the maximum uncore is 2x memory multyplier <1.35 voltage if i run all at stock with 1066 ram i must put uncore 2167 or i cun put it on the default 2667?


Uncore speed should be at *least* 1.5x for memory speed for Xeon X56xx CPUs. These are minimums.

"Bloomfield require the uncore frequency to be, at a minimum, double that of the DDR speed. So if you are trying to get your memory to run at DDR3-2000, you'll need to have your uncore running at 4000MHz minimum.

With Gulftown based CPU's the requirement is only x1.5 the DDR speed. For instance, if you want to run your memory at DDR3-2000, then you'll need to have your uncore running at 3000MHz minimum."

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/2/


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Very nice! What motherboard do you have?


ASUS P6X58D Premium


----------



## Dale-C

Hey guys



What's the max voltage on these before they die do you think?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Realistically >85c+/>1.35Vtt+/1.4Vcc should kill it in a few hours.

Let us know your progress


----------



## Dale-C

I ran a X5650 with 1.356v on VTT for quite a long time. Never got over 73 unless stress testing or on a hot day. I'm running 1.35 now. Should I lower it?


----------



## gofasterstripes

You should be OK, especially if it stays <75c.

But it's a little close!


----------



## boombastik

this are good ram results for a stock x5650?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

You should be able to tighten up those timings a little bit.


----------



## deadsmiley

Ok, I have been playing with my Xeons for a few days now and with a couple of different motherboards. I like the Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD7 (ver 1) quite a bit.

The X5660 that I have will go 4.0GHz stable and that's about it. So I was thinking that since my primary reason for getting this old tech tuned up is for gaming, wouldn't a 4 core CPU clock higher than the 6 core ones? I don't know.

I bought a X5672 with 4 cores at 3.2 GHz base clock and 3.6 GHz boost. The R2E has a dead third channel so this one is being donated to a friend in need. I put 12GB in it anyway. 2x 4GB and 2x 2GB.

As I said before, I purchased an entire box for $215 shipped.
Rampage II Extreme motherboard
750w power supply
6GB RAM (3x 2GB)
i7-920
GTX 275
Micron 256GB SSD
DVD-RW
Case with missing side panel

Pictures before cleanup. Yes, they builder used ELECTRICAL TAPE for cable management.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_170423_zpsnyhcwpoj.jpg.html

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_170432_zps81q9nq9v.jpg.html

And... rubber bands hold the fan to the CPU heatsink!

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_170828_zpsx31sf7iz.jpg.html

This blower was right next to the graphics card. It had zero chance of sucking out hot air.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_171101_zps0fpphjdn.jpg.html

General filth...

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_165841_zpsnspfzalr.jpg.html

Unraveling the electrical tape.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_171419_zpsjt5b5sjq.jpg.html

Getting there...

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_172220_zpskhmxnvc9.jpg.html

If you look closely... yes, that is a twig stuck in the vanes of the heatsink. The heatsink was clogged with dirt, corrosion and mold.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_172341_zpsjfbphj5r.jpg.html

I have no idea what paste this is. It was pretty hardened.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_172343_zpsasu2y6q0.jpg.html

The standoffs came off with screws. The screws were too long and bottomed out in the standoffs. The board wasn't really secured.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_174603_zpsyx5okgsl.jpg.html

All the things...

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161102_181530_zpsmxamsjbf.jpg.html

The GPU was running a bit warm during my testing, so I took it apart. The radiator fins are completely blocked by ages of dirt buildup.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161107_182613_zpsnpbtb5dh.jpg.html

Testing on my ghetto bench.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161107_231737_zpshmceml4l.jpg.html

Overall, it runs WoW really well. The new ower is going to purchase a GTX 1060, so my son's friend will get the GTX 275 which is an upgrade from his GTX 260.









http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161107_231713_zpslymquzgi.jpg.html

All cleaned up and back together with a used Hyper 212. Cable management is what it is. This is a non-modular PSU.

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161109_220435_zpsnfcugbw7.jpg.html

http://s1019.photobucket.com/user/k...y snipes/20161109_220450_zpsh7i63ef9.jpg.html


----------



## NBrock

@deadsmiley

Depends on what kind of games you want to play. A good number of newer ones will take advantage of more than 4 cores. Might be worth turning off HT and see if you can go higher...but I would leave the 6 real threads active.

I just gave my x5650 rig to my dad for gaming/Adobe Creative Suite. I did some benches where i tried a higher clock and less cores and in the games I tested it didn't help out (actually got worse). I tested BF1, Fallout 4, World of Warships and Valley Benchmark. Originally I was going to keep just the 6 threads since it was keeping temps down a bit more but then I got an H80i and it dropped temps a ton si I turned the 12 threads back on. For gaming it didn't really impact it at all...a very very tiny drop with HT enabled...but multi thread performance went way up.
The setup and final clocks were;
Board is EVGA X58 Sli 3
X5650 @ 4GHz (no turbo). Got this just from running the max multiplier. and 200b
It took 1.33v to get there CPU VTT was +125mV CPU PLL VCore was 1.9 QPI PLL VCore was 1.4 IOH VCore was 1.4
Uncore was 15x for a total of 3005Mhz
Ram was 3 sticks of 4GB Crucial ram (1600) running at 11/11/11/24/T1
I had power states disabled.
I enabled HPET Mode and manually set it to 64-bit Mode.

Graphics card is a stock R9 390x Asus Strix

It plays BF1 @ 2560x1440 @ 60fps with v sync on settings were on Ultra

Unfortunately I didn't save much of the benchmark stuff other than on that machine.
Here are two pics I snapped with my phone.


----------



## OCmember

What's a better X58 board, the Asus Rampage III Extreme, or the Gigabyte UD7 ???


----------



## deadsmiley

@NBrock

Thanks for this post. I have been wondering about it!


----------



## deadsmiley

Firestrike w/ GTX 690 Quad SLI 17 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/10790856


----------



## gofasterstripes

Is that 2x690's or 4x690's - must be 2x2GPU 690's, Shirly?


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Is that 2x690's or 4x690's - must be 2x2GPU 690's, Shirly?


Yes, it is two physical cards with 2 GPUs per card. It is impossible to run four of these cards in SLI as there is only one SLI bridge connector on the card. I had a 3 way bridge and could not use it so I bought a 2 way bridge.









Unfortunately, the performance increase in games is spotty. WoW runs slightly better. Mechwarrior Online runs MUCH better. I am thinking I will sell these two cards and get a single card solution. Leaning towards a GTX 1070... not sure at the moment.


----------



## deadsmiley

In my testing my X5680 did not overclock well. About 155 BCLK is all I could get out of it where the X5660 did much better. So... the higher spec X5680 isn't necessarily a better overclocker. I should have known this.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> In my testing my X5680 did not overclock well. About 155 BCLK is all I could get out of it where the X5660 did much better. So... the higher spec X5680 isn't necessarily a better overclocker. I should have known this.


I also had a thought like this. Seeing it finally true.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> I also had a thought like this. Seeing it finally true.


Of course this doesn't mean a different X5680 won't overclock well. It just means mine does not. Still subject to silicon lottery...


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Jeez what a good deal. The one I found came with a 920 and the IO plate only, but for $89.99 which was a steal I think. I installed 12GB of ram, a 256gb 850 EVO and a 960 4GB Graphics card, and one USB 3.0 card for his external backup drives. I don't think my friend has turned it off since I delivered it, lol. He doesn't have any internet where he lives so he just plays video games on it, mostly submarine and Flying games and creates new models and textures for the games. And he is a retired old man, lol. He says he hasn't had a single problem with it. Once every few Months he tethers his phone to check for game updates, but hasn't had any because they are older games. He uses Windows 7 and I fully locked it down so that nothing breaks software wise. The drive is 200 miles to his home so I can't be arsed to fix stuff if he breaks it. I don't plan to update him to Windows 10 any time soon either, not until 7 loses all support from Microsoft. 10 would not have worked with several of his games anyway (XP games) from what I can tell. lol, but because of that he takes FULL advantage of his 120hz Asus display which that 960 easily does at 1080p with 10 year or older games.
> 
> I thought about getting one of them Intel boards for my home server, only because at the time I found them cheaper then all other x58 boards.


A Sabertooth X58 arrived yesterday. It's going to be Monday before I can mess with it.









My X5680 did not do as well as I had hoped. I can get to 4GHz and that's it. Sticking to my X5660 @ 4.37GHz for now.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Apparently I lied about that DX58SO that I got my friend. When looking through the purchase history on ebay I noticed it was $134.95 with the IO plate and a 920. I purchased new ram 12gb, a 960 video card and a USB 3.0 card for it before delivering it to him. He likes USB external storage so thats why I got the USB 3.0 card, just in case he ever buys a USb 3.0 or higher storage device. His 960 should last until he finally starts messing with newer games, assuming his genre gets newer games, lol.

Yeah stick with that X5660, sounds like its the best chip you found so far.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Of course this doesn't mean a different X5680 won't overclock well. It just means mine does not. Still subject to silicon lottery...


I need a survey.. Lol. But in general I'm seeing x5660 doing slightly better oc overall. All of them passing 4.3ghz within 1.35vcore barrier


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Apparently I lied about that DX58SO that I got my friend. When looking through the purchase history on ebay I noticed it was $134.95 with the IO plate and a 920. I purchased new ram 12gb, a 960 video card and a USB 3.0 card for it before delivering it to him. He likes USB external storage so thats why I got the USB 3.0 card, just in case he ever buys a USb 3.0 or higher storage device. His 960 should last until he finally starts messing with newer games, assuming his genre gets newer games, lol.
> 
> Yeah stick with that X5660, sounds like its the best chip you found so far.


Not a lie. Just been too long.









Here is my validation.

http://valid.x86.fr/gjrvyt


----------



## boombastik

Whys memory read and memory write is so slow?
Is a platform limitation?


----------



## 8ax

I think my L5639 has started degrading









I had been using it for a year and a half or so at 222BCLK (3.97GHz) and 1.375v on air, and recently it started rebooting in stressful situations.

I first attributed it to my ram being run at 1.5v for some reason (6x4GB ECC 1333MHz CL6) so I upped it to 1.66v and everything was fine for a few days.

Now it's happening again and increasing the vcore to 1.4v, pll voltage or uncore voltage doesn't help... But it works fine on stock settings.


----------



## gofasterstripes

That sucks. Maybe just get another chip, even the x5650 should hit 4.0 easy and they're cheaper than ever!


----------



## 8ax

Yeah they're cheap if you're buying from the US or China (I pay 25% VAT + customs fees on items over €20 if order from outside the EU), but in the EU they're around twice as expensive.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> Whys memory read and memory write is so slow?
> Is a platform limitation?


Different platforms for starters. Not necessarily a limitation since the X58 still performs well when compared to newer PCIe results, just older tech.

If I had to a wild guess I'd say it's the architectural differences. The PCIe lanes\GPU is connected directly to the 4930K unlike the X58\X5650. There are no extra lanes or hubs to go through, meaning less latency and better throughput on the X79. The X79 platforms itself allows better use of memory and higher memory timings to be used. The i7-4930K appears to be clocked higher than your X5650 and both GPUs are using different drivers. For a true "apples to apples" comparison try loading the older driver to match the other 970 driver, then check the results. Even then it probably won't matter since the X79 is more up to date and has less restrictions than the older X58 platform.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> I think my L5639 has started degrading
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had been using it for a year and a half or so at 222BCLK (3.97GHz) and 1.375v on air, and recently it started rebooting in stressful situations.
> I first attributed it to my ram being run at 1.5v for some reason (6x4GB ECC 1333MHz CL6) so I upped it to 1.66v and everything was fine for a few days.
> Now it's happening again and increasing the vcore to 1.4v, pll voltage or uncore voltage doesn't help... But it works fine on stock settings.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *8ax*
> 
> Yeah they're cheap if you're buying from the US or China (I pay 25% VAT + customs fees on items over €20 if order from outside the EU), but in the EU they're around twice as expensive.


That sucks. It definitely sounds like something isn't right, but you never know what going to happen once you go above 1.35vCore. There is no need to keep increasing the voltages if it's not stable. Maybe you can use a lower setting if possible.


----------



## gofasterstripes

@8ax I'm in NL - try ebay.de:

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-Hexa-Core-LGA-1366-2-66-GHz-bis-3-06-GHz-PC-und-Server-CPU-/252627768351?hash=item3ad1c9d41f:g:fRkAAOSwBLlVKCog
http://www.ebay.de/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-SLBV8-Hexa-Core-LGA-1366-Prozessor-/201718941975?hash=item2ef762c917:g:YIQAAOSwHMJYKtyJ

What's your chipset temp - it's not the motherboard is it? That's a hell of a BCLK!

NB : B-stepping is cooler and less leaky.


----------



## 8ax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> @8ax I'm in NL - try ebay.de:
> 
> http://www.ebay.de/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-Hexa-Core-LGA-1366-2-66-GHz-bis-3-06-GHz-PC-und-Server-CPU-/252627768351?hash=item3ad1c9d41f:g:fRkAAOSwBLlVKCog
> http://www.ebay.de/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5650-SLBV8-Hexa-Core-LGA-1366-Prozessor-/201718941975?hash=item2ef762c917:g:YIQAAOSwHMJYKtyJ
> 
> What's your chipset temp - it's not the motherboard is it? That's a hell of a BCLK!
> 
> NB : B-stepping is cooler and less leaky.


I think crossflashing the BIOS was very important for the board's OC potential, especially the High TDP Turbo mode - I flashed the P6T WS Professional BIOS onto my P6T SE - it now supports SLI as well.
I can actually use 227 24/7, but it involves raising the PCIE to ~103, which then results in high DPC latency and the following sound crackling and popping.

Well, after the PC continuously crashing during the Windows splash screen, I decided to reseat everything (as this was the solution to pretty much every problem back when I had an i7-920) and it is now working perfectly fine.

However, I impulse bought an X5650 for ~60€ just before reseating...


----------



## 99belle99

Am I mad to buy a R9 Fury X? Considering I can buy a GTX 1070 for the same price. I know the 1070 is more powerful.


----------



## NBrock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Am I mad to buy a R9 Fury X? Considering I can buy a GTX 1070 for the same price. I know the 1070 is more powerful.


It depends. I have been seeing some great prices on Fury X lately.

I really enjoy my Fury X pared with my freesync monitor. The Fury X is not nearly as bad as people let on when it first came out. Sure it won't keep up with a 980ti that's clocked to the moon but it does just fine for me @ 4k.

Unfortunately I don't have a similar CPU but I'd still be willing to do a few benchmarks if you want to see what it can do.


----------



## boombastik

I found something.
in gigabyte x58 ud5 all defaults with perfomance enchance to extreme.

If i enable isocrounous support every time i start the machine in every chanell the round trip latencty changes.

If i disabled it in every startup the round trip latency in A is 56 in B is 58 And in C is 60.
This is totally normal bacause the channel next to cpu has smaller round trip latency.

But with isocrounous support enabled every times gives very bad numbers for round trip latency.
for example A:57 B:58 C:58

How it is possble to have b and c same round trip latency.

My memory test is ok in both cases but defenitely the smothness change with isochrounous support disabled.
My gaming perfomance is better.

My manual writes isochrounous support enables specific streams from southbridge to northbridge.

In internet i found this :
Isochronous refers to time-bound processes, such as synchronizing audio and video in a multimedia stream or ensuring that data is transferred across a network or data bus (like a northbridge or southbridge on a motherboard) with similar constraints. It prioritizes threads or calculations between the IOH and ICH. So basically, the more important tasks will be determined and executed in Isochronous Mode.

So if it's enabled, it means time bound processes are given priority first while if it is off FIFO rule applies. I think all these "features' on the board are just marketing crap and don't really show any real world advantage or disadvantage. If you're OCing, best to keep it disabled!

Anyone have a clue about this feature?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Actually, I was thinking about iso support the other day - i remember it being in the BIOS but for the life of me I can't find it now - maybe it was on the UD3 and not on this UD7...hmmm

Where is it in the BIOS for you @boombastik?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Calling all Gigabyte board owners - anyone else having cracking on youtube videos? Suddenly I have cracking on the lefthand channel, but not when I play from VLC or the DVD drive, so I don't think it's my amp or speakers.

Board - UD7 r2 on W10, setup/drivers: see pic:



Suggestions or similar, anyone?

Also - anyone know how to enable the software crossover feature, I could really do with piping stereo > 2.1 at 50Hz x-over


----------



## boombastik

It is under M.I.B. Miscallaneus settings.

ANd they have it all gigabyte motherboards, all models.










Now i have it disabled and the cpu and gpu line in bf4 is smooth.
If i enable it i have cpu spikes.
So definitely this option is incobatible with gtx 970.

i tried also crysis warhead with this option when i move the mouse i have stutter if i disable it is defenitelly better. The same was with a gtx 570 old days.
I found in internet that old gigabyte x58 servers with phoinix bios have by default Qpi ISoc mode to disabled .

.


----------



## theister

hey.

someone of you uses 8GB sticks (1333 or higher) with a Gigabyte X58A OC?

3x8 GB of Geil Black Dragon 1333 mhz sticks giving me bsods related to ram issues, even with lowest settings.
the sticks are ok (tested), cpu and board ran 6x4 GB without any kind of problem before.

is it just a comp. problem with the sticks or is no 8GB stick running fine on this board? am i missing something?


----------



## boombastik

i use 3x8 Corsair Vengeance CMZ8GX3M1A1600C10 =24gb ram (version 5.21) with a x58 ud5.
At default ram speed of 1333.


----------



## theister

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> hey.
> 
> someone of you uses 8GB sticks (1333 or higher) with a Gigabyte X58A OC?
> 
> 3x8 GB of Geil Black Dragon 1333 mhz sticks giving me bsods related to ram issues, even with lowest settings.
> the sticks are ok (tested), cpu and board ran 6x4 GB without any kind of problem before.
> 
> is it just a comp. problem with the sticks or is no 8GB stick running fine on this board? am i missing something?


just realise that memtest86 (latest version) is showing that ecc is enabled with my non ecc ram. bug or the reason for my issues? will switch ram to see if this is shown with them too.
if its not a bug, the only way to disable ecc is to tape the 2nd qpi link, right?

edit :cpu-z report is telling me ecc is not enabled/working under windows, so i think it will be just a bug, so maybe the board does not like the rams.


----------



## 8ax

My X5650 arrived today, fiddled with it just a bit and got [email protected] and [email protected] which is great compared to [email protected] of the L5639.

Also managed to validate at [email protected]

Settings: 200x22, 1.3475v (MBO vdroops when not stressed), 1.66v vdimm, 1.325v VTT, 1200MHz RAM CL6 1T, 3000MHz uncore, everything else on stock... Gotta keep the VTT high cause I'm running 6x4GB.

I lucked out with the RAM, 24GB ECC 1333MHz CL9 1.5v for $80 - and it runs flawlessly at 1333MHz CL6 1.66v or 1650MHz CL8 1.66v.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Apparently I lied about that DX58SO that I got my friend. When looking through the purchase history on ebay I noticed it was $134.95 with the IO plate and a 920. I purchased new ram 12gb, a 960 video card and a USB 3.0 card for it before delivering it to him. He likes USB external storage so thats why I got the USB 3.0 card, just in case he ever buys a USb 3.0 or higher storage device. His 960 should last until he finally starts messing with newer games, assuming his genre gets newer games, lol.
> 
> Yeah stick with that X5660, sounds like its the best chip you found so far.


Well, I have been playing around with these 1366 motherboards. The Intel DX58SO2 works with Xeons, but does not overclock well and will not take 2x GTX 690's. The Sabertooth X58 I bought that is "Untested" has both the CPU and DRAM red LEDs on. Removing the battery and clearing the RTC did nothing. I know the PSU, CPU and RAM are all good. Dead board, so it looks like my luck finally ran out. Haha!

In other news, I have a Sabertooth X79 board that works. The CPU is an E5-1620 and it is very lackluster even at 4.3GHz it cannot feed GTX 690 in Quad SLI. Bummer.

So, I have some things to sell off on eBay now. I am hoping to break even on it so it will make my purchases worth it. Right now the Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD7 with X5660 has been my best setup. It runs GTX 690 Quad SLI very well.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Well, I have been playing around with these 1366 motherboards. The Intel DX58SO2 works with Xeons, but does not overclock well and will not take 2x GTX 690's. The Sabertooth X58 I bought that is "Untested" has both the CPU and DRAM red LEDs on. Removing the battery and clearing the RTC did nothing. I know the PSU, CPU and RAM are all good. Dead board, so it looks like my luck finally ran out. Haha!
> 
> In other news, I have a Sabertooth X77 board that works. The CPU is an E5-1620 and it is very lackluster even at 4.3GHz it cannot feed GTX 690 in Quad SLI. Bummer.
> 
> So, I have some things to sell off on eBay now. I am hoping to break even on it so it will make my purchases worth it. Right now the Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD7 with X5660 has been my best setup. It runs GTX 690 Quad SLI very well.


Do you mean the x79, not x77? The E5-1620 is a socket 2011 chip.
If it is a x79, 2011 there are xeon E1650 hexcores on ebay that OC to 4.3ghz or more, mine is at 4.3ghz 1.29v for 100$ or so. You may want to go that rout.
My X79 sabertooth and my EVGA x79 both are running the E5-1650 hexcore no problems at all.
The E5-1650 is multiplier unlocked and BCLK unlocked if you did not know.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> Do you mean the x79, not x77? The E5-1620 is a socket 2011 chip.
> If it is a x79, 2011 there are xeon E1650 hexcores on ebay that OC to 4.3ghz or more, mine is at 4.5ghz 1.29v for 100$ or so. You may want to go that rout.
> My X79 sabertooth and my EVGA x79 both are running the E5-1650 hexcore no problems at all.
> The E5-1650 is multiplier unlocked and BCLK unlocked if you did not know.


YES! X79, that was a typo. I did not know that the E5-1650 was multiplier unlocked. The Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 was $70 shipped, which I think is a good deal. Thanks for the information!


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> YES! X79, that was a typo. I did not know that the E5-1650 was multiplier unlocked. The Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 was $70 shipped, which I think is a good deal. Thanks for the information!


I have to make a correction. My E5-1650 are at 4.3ghz under 1.3v NOT 4.5ghz
I did have it at 4.5 1.35v and it seemed to do ok, but I was getting some bad work unit returns in BOING primegrid.
Not every subproject, but still I hate bad work units and that little bit more was not worth the extra heat and the chance of bad WUs.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> YES! X79, that was a typo. I did not know that the E5-1650 was multiplier unlocked. The Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 was $70 shipped, which I think is a good deal. Thanks for the information!


Yeah, you see anymore for that price let me know!!!
Please!


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Well, I have been playing around with these 1366 motherboards. The Intel DX58SO2 works with Xeons, but does not overclock well and will not take 2x GTX 690's. The Sabertooth X58 I bought that is "Untested" has both the CPU and DRAM red LEDs on. Removing the battery and clearing the RTC did nothing. I know the PSU, CPU and RAM are all good. Dead board, so it looks like my luck finally ran out. Haha!


Just wanted to point out the X58 Sabertooth has a 7 year warranty (for all Tuff series boards). Mine would only recognize 2 of the 3 memory channels, so I RMA'd for a replacement a few months ago. I highly recommend you try for an RMA!


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Just wanted to point out the X58 Sabertooth has a 7 year warranty (for all Tuff series boards). Mine would only recognize 2 of the 3 memory channels, so I RMA'd for a replacement a few months ago. I highly recommend you try for an RMA!


I did not know this. Thanks!


----------



## brettjv

So, decided to take the plunge & grabbed a x5675 off the Egg just now. $97 shipped, a little steep, but still way less than a new rig.

Board is the Asus Rampage3xtreme.

Any pointers on OC'ing this new beast when I get her? Been a long time since I did anything other than raising/lowering my OC for the seasons/temps dunno even know if I remember how to OC anymore.

Do I need to muck w/anything apart from just the main voltage level, clock/multi/uncore?

Any other R3E users out there with this same chip? What's your best OC on air (gonna be on my old trusty H50) and what's your settings? REALLY would be stoked if I can eek 4.4 (22x200) out of her ...


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericeod*
> 
> Just wanted to point out the X58 Sabertooth has a 7 year warranty (for all Tuff series boards). Mine would only recognize 2 of the 3 memory channels, so I RMA'd for a replacement a few months ago. I highly recommend you try for an RMA!


Did something change? I've only known of a 5 year warranty on the X58 Sabertooth board. That's what my packaging states [5 year TUF warranty]


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> Did something change? I've only known of a 5 year warranty on the X58 Sabertooth board. That's what my packaging states [5 year TUF warranty]


Yep, I just checked and you are correct. Sorry, I thought it was a 7 year. I RMA'd mine April 2016 and got it replaced. I pulled my email notification to verify. It wouldn't hurt to try RMAing it!

http://s83.photobucket.com/user/ericeod/media/ASUS RMA X58_zpsbafzjueu.jpg.html


----------



## gofasterstripes

They sent you a new unused board back?!


----------



## ericeod

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> They sent you a new unused board back?!


They sent me a like-new board back.


----------



## gofasterstripes

schweet


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have to make a correction. My E5-1650 are at 4.3ghz under 1.3v NOT 4.5ghz
> I did have it at 4.5 1.35v and it seemed to do ok, but I was getting some bad work unit returns in BOING primegrid.
> Not every subproject, but still I hate bad work units and that little bit more was not worth the extra heat and the chance of bad WUs.


OK, I just realized that I was running MWO on Very High. This exceeded the available 2GB VRAM. I lowered textures to medium and I see a huge increase in performance.


----------



## boombastik

I also found this in an x58 server motherboard:

*Enable/Disable the iscochronous mode to reduce/increase the credits available for memory traffic.* Workstation & HEDT require ISOC enabled for audio and media performance.
So it is better to be disabled?


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *boombastik*
> 
> I also found this in an x58 server motherboard:
> 
> *Enable/Disable the iscochronous mode to reduce/increase the credits available for memory traffic.* Workstation & HEDT require ISOC enabled for audio and media performance.
> So it is better to be disabled?


I would like to know the answer to this question as well.


----------



## boombastik

Also gigabyte back then maybe dont knew how turbo boost working.

Whatever proccecor i use in their motherboard it activates turbo boost for all cores.
But they forgot to remove the gad dammit current throttling.

So when we enable c1e and c3 c6 , in bf4 when one core goes at maximum the other go at lower multyplieer.(c6)
why ?
why it tries to run all cores to maximum but current goes hight and turbo boost goes crazy.

So we have a conclusion here.

C1e is broken because in aUto is disabled(they disable it because they didnt update the values to work with all the cores unlocked turbo boost). also c3 c6 is disabled by default.
So when u try to overclock with dvid u need to enable c3 c6 and c1e to work again broken bacuse turbo boost makes cpu spikes because with that bad implamation it changes multypliers like crazy in a cpu intensive game.

So we have only one option to disable turbo boost ,c1e and c3,c6 and overclock without it.

Bad i dont want to overclock so i must buy another motherboard.

So all u havent got any problems is because u overclock without turbo boost or u think that u are limited in game like bf4 when u see a cpu spike.

is so sad to have i7 990x whitch at 1080 with a nvidia 980 can play all the games but this motherboard ruins all the game fluidity from consant change in cpu multypliers.
All gigabyte x58 have the same problem.

If someone can undersand the problems with theese motherboards is ok.
Back then only one have found that turbo boost is not working as intended here:
*http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mainboards/display/ga-ex58ud5-ex58extreme_8.html#sect0
*
and back then after 10 years now understand why my 300 euro motherboard is a stuttery mess at default settings.

Do u want another options thar are bad?
pcie amplitude specification pcie 2 is 800 mv no they make it 900 without any reason
cpu amplitude specification is 612 mv no they make it 800 without any reason.
cpu pll specification is 1.80 no they make it 1.89 without any reason on ayto. if you put 1.80 again the same it overvolts 0.09.
And all that cost signal intergrity and signal overshoot.
And all that at optimized defaults bacuse they found stability how ? i dont know.

*Sorry for the long post and my english.*
But i am so sad that this socket in gigabyte x58 ud5 can give above 500 w alone in the socket and this so bad bios ruin it.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I have used a couple of Gigabyte boards, they've been rock solid and the only oddness I have found about multipliers is you can't select +1 multiplier on all cores - it's +2 or nothing.

Other than that pretty rock solid. They certainly seem not to break down, and if you take the stick-on covers off the chipset heatsinks, then they run very cool as well [UD 3,4,5]

Those voltages might not be to specifications, but compare that to the Intel X58 motherbords that can't overclock anywhere near as well as Gigabyte, EVGA Asus etc etc

*shrugs*

Idle volts the same as load volts don't matter - turn DVID off and set your voltage by hand to be the same as your all core 100% stable setting.

IE DVID 1v to 1.3v in bios [2400-4000MHz stable] in- just set 1.3v constant. Tweak after testing if necessary.

@boombastik Please provide photos of every overclock BIOS page and also your ram sticker frequency


----------



## 99belle99

I have a Gigabyte board UD7 and it has been perfect for I don't know how many years, since X58 first came out which I paired with a i7 920. Still running fine now after a few years with a X5660 clocked at 4.2 GHz.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> I have used a couple of Gigabyte boards, they've been rock solid and the only oddness I have found about multipliers is you can't select +1 multiplier on all cores - it's +2 or nothing.


Noticed this myself when I first put this X5670 in my UD5 2.0. Was also getting an occasional +3 multiplier turbo on my first two cores, which totally crapped things up.

Ended up disabling turbo entirely and just using 22*200.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> IE DVID 1v to 1.3v in bios [2400-4000MHz stable] in- just set 1.3v constant. Tweak after testing if necessary.


I'm very uneasy about removing vdroop entirely, especially on a VRM of this era.

LLC Level 1 should be sufficient for almost any OC.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> I have a Gigabyte board UD7 and it has been perfect for I don't know how many years, since X58 first came out which I paired with a i7 920. Still running fine now after a few years with a X5660 clocked at 4.2 GHz.


The whole line, except for some of the UD3s were very robust boards.


----------



## I_am_McLovin

What is mainly the cause of the machine check exception BSOD? My x5650 runs prime 95 18 hours stable with 70c max temps at 1.35v. Works in games and everything fine but sometimes i'll start up and get a random machine check exception blue screen.

I used pretty much every voltage setting in this thread and it still seems to happen. Do I really need to go over 1.35 on cpu volts? Seems a bit high

Running an Asus P6T and 16gb ram as well.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *I_am_McLovin*
> 
> What is mainly the cause of the machine check exception BSOD? My x5650 runs prime 95 18 hours stable with 70c max temps at 1.35v. Works in games and everything fine but sometimes i'll start up and get a random machine check exception blue screen.
> 
> I used pretty much every voltage setting in this thread and it still seems to happen. Do I really need to go over 1.35 on cpu volts? Seems a bit high
> 
> Running an Asus P6T and 16gb ram as well.


Could be RAM. I used to get blue screens and it was RAM.

But it was really my fault as I ran the RAM at the tightest timings which I got off the manufacturers website but I never changed from 1T to 2T which it what it is at now and I haven't had any blue screens in months.


----------



## I_am_McLovin

My ram is basically brand new. I haven't played with timings at all though. Would that help? I have no idea how to do them


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *I_am_McLovin*
> 
> My ram is basically brand new. I haven't played with timings at all though. Would that help? I have no idea how to do them


Maybe it could be a possibility. When you done the overclock did you overclock the RAM also. When I done my overclock I overclocked the RAM also. My RAM is 1333Mhz out of the box but can overclock to 1600Mhz and when at 1600MHz it can have really tight timings which I changed and I also have to increase the voltage to 1.65Volts. The timings and voltage settings I got off the manufacturers website.

I would recommend you google your RAM and find out all your settings. It could be RAM causing it but it could also be another reason you will just have to try and eliminate the different possibilities and RAM can be one of them.


----------



## shadowrain

Hope this helps.


----------



## Ferro10

hello guys
after having tried many settings here is the end result
X5670 21x215 4.51ghz Vcore 1.36 qpi/ram Voltage 1.32 hyper threading OFF


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by gofasterstripes View Post
> 
> IE DVID 1v to 1.3v in bios [2400-4000MHz stable] in- just set 1.3v constant. Tweak after testing if necessary.
> 
> >blameless:I'm very uneasy about removing vdroop entirely, especially on a VRM of this era.


Sorry I should have clarified I mean "fixed" as in just set in BIOS, no DVID.

I don't recommend LLC either.


----------



## DR4G00N

Just received this beauty this morning.












Was getting the dreaded f3-f6-68 boot loop at first if the two ram slots nearest to the cpu where used but I traced that down to a bent cpu pin.


After getting it straightened the board is working well with my E5540 ES chip. The only thing left to do before I install it into my main rig is to update the bios as it's currently running ver. 77 (which has no uncore adjustment available) and ver. 83 is needed for the X5600's to work.


----------



## johnnybob

I am gonna be really curious about your success with this board and also with the SATA 3 controller support, Ive personally thought about getting another socket 1366. Its a shame that Intel stopped making chips to support the 1366, I thought it was a really good go between


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *johnnybob*
> 
> I am gonna be really curious about your success with this board and also with the SATA 3 controller support, Ive personally thought about getting another socket 1366. Its a shame that Intel stopped making chips to support the 1366, I thought it was a really good go between


I updated the bios and my X5650 works just perfect which was expected since I already knew that it would.







(FTW3, SLI3 & Classified3 natively support these with the latest bios).


It seems the board also has the latest X58 chip, Rev. 22 or AKA C1, SLH3M stepping. It also runs very cool compared to my Classified 4-Way SLI since it doesn't have any fission reactor-esque NF200 chips.







Peaked @ 41C after 20 Runs of LinX vs the 4-Way's typical idle @ 45C & load @ 50-60C with CLU on the chips in open air with a powerful fan on the heatsink.

The SATA 3 sucks but that was also expected because it uses the Marvell 88SE9128 controller. I might end up getting a cheap LSI SAS PCI-E X8 HBA card to handle my SSD/s in the future.


----------



## Mong Grel

I really have not tried OCing my X5680 past 4.26 in my P6T7, but I might try tweaking it again soon.

This video I ran across looks interesting and might try it out, does just sound like hyper threading the bios to begin with, but I'm a Win10 guinea pig playing with things myself.

I have modified the bios much in the past of course, but have never played with the WIN settings very often.


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mong Grel*
> 
> This video I ran across looks interesting and might try it out, does just sound like hyper threading the bios to begin with, but I'm a Win10 guinea pig playing with things myself.


DESCRIPTION: ➤NOTE - This video is a joke, but I have switched to only making REAL tech videos, see some here ▶


----------



## dirkdigles

So I just joined the X5660 club...

Bought an x5660 + GA-X58A-UD3R Rev. 2.0 + 6x4gb DDR3-1333.

I'm going for a simple, stable overclock. Just tweaked this morning with these settings:

BCLK = 166 Mhz
CPU Multi = x23
VCore = 1.22V

Memory Multi = x8
Uncore = x16
QPI = x44

Everything else set to Auto.

Ran the intel burn test a few times and everything seem stable; Temps stable around 65C while running the burn test; idle temp 34C on my xigmatek s1283v cooler.

I noticed that when I ran stock, the cpu / voltage would automatically drop down when idle, and as a result my idle temps were like 24C or so. I'm curious if there's a way to re-enable this downclocking behavior (Speedstep?) when doing a simple overclock.

I tried setting EIST and C1 / etc. states to "Enabled" rather than "Auto," but if I do that, when I boot into Windows 10 I notice that my overclock is gone and I'm back to default chip speeds. If I set them back to auto, my overclock comes back. No instability though, no bsod or anything.

Is there a way to get my idle speeds to clock back down?

Thanks much,
-Dirk


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirkdigles*
> 
> I tried setting EIST and C1 / etc. states to "Enabled" rather than "Auto," but if I do that, when I boot into Windows 10 I notice that my overclock is gone and I'm back to default chip speeds. If I set them back to auto, my overclock comes back. No instability though, no bsod or anything.
> 
> Thanks much,
> -Dirk


Your OC isn't gone. Windows just shows stock clocks when EIST/speedstep and C-states are enabled, but if you use CPUZ, Coretemp or any other OC measuring tool, it will show you the correct speeds on load and downclocked speeds when idle.


----------



## dirkdigles

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shadowrain*
> 
> Your OC isn't gone. Windows just shows stock clocks when EIST/speedstep and C-states are enabled, but if you use CPUZ, Coretemp or any other OC measuring tool, it will show you the correct speeds on load and downclocked speeds when idle.


Thanks! I ended up loading up i7TurboGT (in the RealTemp package) and this allowed me to toggle/enable C-states and EIST within Windows. Now I can see my processor dynamically clocking down to 2.0ghz when idle and my temps have lowered to 31C or so when idling as well.

Now I'm tempted to try to get some more speed out of this thing.... eeek


----------



## GoatHunter

Hi all, just posting for tigs and giggles. Cpu - 1.375v qpi/dram- 1.2v IOH -1.2v everything else on Auto, Ram - 1.5v 9-9-9-24. Got it stable today after about 3 hours of toying with it. (was at 4.4ghz 1.368v) This x5680 gets HOT!


----------



## GoatHunter

Found this beast this morning
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Custom-4U-Rack-mountable-PC-EVGA-X58-3X-SLI-Intel-Ii7-975-3-33GHz-12GB-/232182950642?hash=item360f2eaaf2:g:BXcAAOSw-0xYW0id

Kinda wanna put a bid just for the motherboard alone lol.


----------



## RX7-2nr

It's gone


----------



## GoatHunter

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Custom-4U-Rack-mountable-PC-EVGA-X58-3X-SLI-Intel-Ii7-975-3-33GHz-12GB-/232182950642?hash=item360f2eaaf2:g:BXcAAOSw-0xYW0id

Try that link, It's still there lol


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Custom-4U-Rack-mountable-PC-EVGA-X58-3X-SLI-Intel-Ii7-975-3-33GHz-12GB-/232182950642?hash=item360f2eaaf2:g:BXcAAOSw-0xYW0id
> 
> Try that link, It's still there lol


That's real pricey though, for those specs at least. The only thing worth much money would be the mobo.

It's good to browse the local classifieds if your looking for a good deal. Near me, one person was selling their Asus P6X58D-E, i7 950 & 12GB's of ram for roughly $100 USD. I would've grabbed it myself but I had already bought this Evga X58 Classified 3 of mine for about $150 USD.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> That's real pricey though, for those specs at least. The only thing worth much money would be the mobo.
> 
> It's good to browse the local classifieds if your looking for a good deal. Near me, one person was selling their Asus P6X58D-E, i7 950 & 12GB's of ram for roughly $100 USD. I would've grabbed it myself but I had already bought this Evga X58 Classified 3 of mine for about $150 USD.


Nah I'm not looking (for now lol) I still have my P6T Deluxe V2 (using) and an EVGA X58 SLI LE (just sitting colleting dust at the moment but I have a 920 C0 and a D0 to pop into it), just appeared to be a good deal if you can offer like $250-$300 for the whole thing. You can sell that 975 proc for like 40-50 bucks to get some money back. All the other stuff you can sell for another 50-80 bucks, If I were going to buy it, I can use the board and buy another Xeon (looking at the W3680 since they down to 80 bucks) and use the rest to build another comp using the EVGA LE that I have for the kids to play on. But that Classy board would be quite a catch!!


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> Nah I'm not looking (for now lol) I still have my P6T Deluxe V2 (using) and an EVGA X58 SLI LE (just sitting colleting dust at the moment but I have a 920 C0 and a D0 to pop into it), just appeared to be a good deal if you can offer like $250-$300 for the whole thing. You can sell that 975 proc for like 40-50 bucks to get some money back. All the other stuff you can sell for another 50-80 bucks, If I were going to buy it, I can use the board and buy another Xeon (looking at the W3680 since they down to 80 bucks) and use the rest to build another comp using the EVGA LE that I have for the kids to play on. But that Classy board would be quite a catch!!


I have an X58 SLI LE as well, not a bad board at all. Got it for $75 USD with an i7 920 D0 in it a couple years ago locally. Currently it's chugging along in my parents system with an L5520 @ 3.2GHz which I got for $8, complete overkill though since it's only used for email or web browsing now.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> I have an X58 SLI LE as well, not a bad board at all. Got it for $75 USD with an i7 920 D0 in it a couple years ago locally. Currently it's chugging along in my parents system with an L5520 @ 3.2GHz which I got for $8, complete overkill though since it's only used for email or web browsing now.


Yah, I got the LE back in 2009 after I fried a P6T SE ( first time using water cooling... learned that you gotta use zip ties or clamps to hold the tube down no matter how tight it feels connected to the fitting lol )
Did you mod that board to take the xeon chip? or is your a rev 1.1/1.2? I have the sh!!ty one the 1.0 lol. So I gotta mod it to get the xeon to work in it. Or do I?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> Yah, I got the LE back in 2009 after I fried a P6T SE ( first time using water cooling... learned that you gotta use zip ties or clamps to hold the tube down no matter how tight it feels connected to the fitting lol )
> Did you mod that board to take the xeon chip? or is your a rev 1.1/1.2? I have the sh!!ty one the 1.0 lol. So I gotta mod it to get the xeon to work in it. Or do I?


It's a Rev. 1.0 so it does need the mod, I was going to mod it but I picked up a Classified 4-Way SLI to use instead (which also had to be modded).
The 5500's and 3500's work natively in the boards, the 5600's & 3600's are the one's you need to do the mod for.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> It's a Rev. 1.0 so it does need the mod, I was going to mod it but I picked up a Classified 4-Way SLI to use instead (which also had to be modded).
> The 5500's and 3500's work natively in the boards, the 5600's & 3600's are the one's you need to do the mod for.


aH! Sweet. I didn't know that! I thought this whole time it needed that soldering mod to get any xeon to work on it!. I'm still really debating if I should offer that dude on ebay like $250 to see if he bites lol! Would be a great buy! and I can use the rest of those parts to get this SLI LE board up and running lol!


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> aH! Sweet. I didn't know that! I thought this whole time it needed that soldering mod to get any xeon to work on it!. I'm still really debating if I should offer that dude on ebay like $250 to see if he bites lol! Would be a great buy! and I can use the rest of those parts to get this SLI LE board up and running lol!


Go for it, you might even offer less and work up. It's way overpriced for what it is. The MB is the selling point, everything else is kinda meh.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> Go for it, you might even offer less and work up. It's way overpriced for what it is. The MB is the selling point, everything else is kinda meh.


I asked him what revision the board is( waiting for response), cuz I know the 1.0 you need to do the mod on those EVGA boards, but on the 1.1 and higher they can take the x56xx and w36xx with out any mod, if it's a 1.1 or higher I'm gonna offer 250 lol ( somebody correct me if I'm wrong)


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> I asked him what revision the board is( waiting for response), cuz I know the 1.0 you need to do the mod on those EVGA boards, but on the 1.1 and higher they can take the x56xx and w36xx with out any mod, if it's a 1.1 or higher I'm gonna offer 250 lol ( somebody correct me if I'm wrong)


He replied!! It's a 1.0 =( hmmmmm..is the mod easy? I can go buy a soldering pen from harbor freight for like 5 bucks lol


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> He replied!! It's a 1.0 =( hmmmmm..is the mod easy? I can go buy a soldering pen from harbor freight for like 5 bucks lol


It is not too hard if your okay with solder gun. I dont see why a soldering pen wouldnt work. Its like two small resistor leads and two points on the board if i recall correctly. I believe somewhere in this thread are pictures.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> It is not too hard if your okay with solder gun. I dont see why a soldering pen wouldnt work. Its like two small resistor leads and two points on the board if i recall correctly. I believe somewhere in this thread are pictures.


Damn, I'm tempted lol, I'll search to find the schematics for the soldering, if it's easy as everyone says it is, I'm jumping on it, maybe experiment on my evga sli le board first?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> Damn, I'm tempted lol, I'll search to find the schematics for the soldering, if it's easy as everyone says it is, I'm jumping on it, maybe experiment on my evga sli le board first?


If you've never soldered before practice on something broken and worthless. And get a 40W soldering iron with interchangeable tips, they are much easier to use than 20W ones.


Spoiler: Mods for X58 SLI LE & Classified 759, 760, & 762 Rev. 1.0



Mod for the E757 X58 SLI LE Rev. 1.0:
Short the pads outlined in white with solder. The one above the cpu is a resistor so you can either just solder across it (or use conductive ink, your choice) or remove it and then short the pads.

Above cpu:


Top-right of northbridge:


///////////////////////

The mod for Classified E759, E760, & E762 Rev. 1.0

Above cpu socket:


Top-right of northbridge


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> If you've never soldered before practice on something broken and worthless. And get a 40W soldering iron with interchangeable tips, they are much easier to use than 20W ones.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Mods for X58 SLI LE & Classified 759, 760, & 762 Rev. 1.0
> 
> 
> 
> Mod for the E757 X58 SLI LE Rev. 1.0:
> Short the pads outlined in white with solder. The one above the cpu is a resistor so you can either just solder across it (or use conductive ink, your choice) or remove it and then short the pads.
> 
> Above cpu:
> 
> 
> Top-right of northbridge:
> 
> 
> ///////////////////////
> 
> The mod for Classified E759, E760, & E762 Rev. 1.0
> 
> Above cpu socket:
> 
> 
> Top-right of northbridge


That's it??? shoot, I'm gonna try that this weekend then on the SLI Le Board! Right on!!!!!! Pop my x5660 in there and take it off sale off ebay lol! Thanks for the schematics bro!


----------



## GoatHunter

Just being curious here, but If do that mod, will the board still work if I put back, lets say, a 920 back in it? or do I have to un-solder it again?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> That's it??? shoot, I'm gonna try that this weekend then on the SLI Le Board! Right on!!!!!! Pop my x5660 in there and take it off sale off ebay lol! Thanks for the schematics bro!


The SLI LE one is "Do at your own risk" because as I said, I never ended up doing this on mine. The one for the Classified's does indeed work as intended.

And regular chips (i7's) will still work as good as they did before.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The SLI LE one is "Do at your own risk" because as I said, I never ended up doing this on mine. The one for the Classified's does indeed work as intended.
> 
> And regular chips (i7's) will still work as good as they did before.


Got it!, I probably wont do it then since my hands aren't as steady as they use to be lol! I can see the resistors now, its freaking tiny, I'm pretty sure if I try, I'm gonna F it up haha. I'll just be on the lookout for another board that can take it natively. I think last time I soldered something it was a wiring harness for my friends deck in his 99 Honda Civic, that was ages ago! But, I'm gonna keep my eye out for another compatible board. Gotta keep the x58 ALIVE!!!


----------



## wonderbrah

For what it's worth, Evga just did the mod on my 1.1 revision board for free. Might have been because I sent it in a week before Christmas but it was a nice surprise!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

From what I've heard, they always do the mod for free.


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chessmyantidrug*
> 
> From what I've heard, they always do the mod for free.


But they do it more free at Xmas time.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Every account I've heard of Nvidia performing the mod has been free of charge. Christmas has nothing to do with it. If want to think they do the mod because of Christmas, go right ahead.


----------



## GoatHunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wonderbrah*
> 
> For what it's worth, Evga just did the mod on my 1.1 revision board for free. Might have been because I sent it in a week before Christmas but it was a nice surprise!


Did someone say Free?? how much was shipping and how long was the turn around? Shoot, that might be another route I can go!


----------



## wonderbrah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoatHunter*
> 
> Did someone say Free?? how much was shipping and how long was the turn around? Shoot, that might be another route I can go!


It was about a week(ups ground shipping) to and another week back(ups ground shipping). Took em two days I think between the time it arrived and departed. Whoever I spoke to at the support said it would be $50 via an email invoice they'd send me after completion but a few days after it was sent out I got a voicemail saying they were doing it free of charge-no explanation though.


----------



## hecatomb

What's the general consensus for HT for gaming with a 6 core Westmere? It seems that the added heat isn't really worth it, but as Vulcan and DX12 games start hitting it will be more beneficial?


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hecatomb*
> 
> What's the general consensus for HT for gaming with a 6 core Westmere? It seems that the added heat isn't really worth it, but as Vulcan and DX12 games start hitting it will be more beneficial?


I can't speak for the masses, but in my experience a Xeon 5650 (@4.2 GHz) 6C/12T has been great for gaming. Coming from an i7 920 C0 @3.4, the heat generated and power used has decreased while performance has gone up. Even with HT on. 65C max while gaming under a Corsair H50.

With Total War:Attila , the CPU turns (~25 AI faction movements) seem to make good use of the extra threads and don't slow down my PC as much as an i7 920. In first person shooters, I didn't see any FPS difference with the extra threads (Overwatch, CS:GO). So, it depends what type of games you're playing. RTS titles seem to benefit the most from HT in my experience. Total War, Men of War, Planetary Annihilation, Company of Heroes have all made good use of the 12 threads on my PC.


----------



## hecatomb

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Lately I've been playing the new Tomb Raider, Doom & GTA5 and I don't think they benefit too greatly from it. I'll do some benchmarks in the next few days to test it out.


----------



## Agonist

Personally, HT is worth it in newer games. Hands down. I have a X5670 @ 4ghz in my back up rig. With a H60 equivalent on it, It avgs 43c while in Rise of The Tomb Raider under DX12 @ 1080p.

Does not add more FPS but has a much better CPU load balance IMHO.

I keep HT on my 3930k @ 4.6ghz with an H100i. Battlefield games feel smoother with it on.


----------



## hecatomb

Yeah, I think I'll leave it on since my system is stable. It probably helps a lot with minimum fps and frame times as well.


----------



## Agonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hecatomb*
> 
> Yeah, I think I'll leave it on since my system is stable. It probably helps a lot with minimum fps and frame times as well.


Thats where I have noticed a difference. Was the min FPS was more stable.

When a 1st gen I7 920 @ 4ghz with 8 threads can beat a 4th gen i5 @ 3.4ghz with 4 threads in modern games even though the IPC difference is quite big, it shows its finally used correctly.


----------



## f00b4h

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hecatomb*
> 
> What's the general consensus for HT for gaming with a 6 core Westmere? It seems that the added heat isn't really worth it, but as Vulcan and DX12 games start hitting it will be more beneficial?


In a word - awesome. Not sure what your concern with heat is all about though. Check my gallery.


----------



## revamper

I have a couple questions that hopefully someone can help me with.

I'm currently at:
168 bclk
22 multi with turbo enabled
1.295 vcore in bios (windows value ranges from 1.152v to 1.232 during p95)
1.264v vtt
8x ram
12x uncore
1.15v north bridge

I was able to reach this while playing around today:
191 bclk
22 multi with turbo disabled
1.375 vcore in bios (windows value was not that high during prime95, i took a screenshot and it was at 1.232v)
1.328v vtt
8x ram
12x uncore
1.2v north bridge

Everywhere I have looked people have just said make the uncore multiplier 1.5x to 2x the ram multiplier. With bloomfield I just set it to 2x and forgot about it. What have you guys used as the most "stable" uncore multi to achieve the highest clocks? Do you recommend setting it to 1.5x and forgetting about it? Also, do these xeons prefer an odd cpu multiplier like the bloomfield i7s? Lastly, *should I trust the bios vcore or windows vcore?*


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revamper*
> 
> Everywhere I have looked people have just said make the uncore multiplier 1.5x to 2x the ram multiplier. With bloomfield I just set it to 2x and forgot about it. What have you guys used as the most "stable" uncore multi to achieve the highest clocks? Do you recommend setting it to 1.5x and forgetting about it? Also, do these xeons prefer an odd cpu multiplier like the bloomfield i7s? Lastly, *should I trust the bios vcore or windows vcore?*


I have x58 sabertooth + X5650 .
running @ 3.8ghz (x22 multi) Vcore 1.18v (full load prime 95) ,llc disabled. uncore 3.2ghz around. ram 1730~MHz cl9. vtt 1.23v.
The thing is ,Benches like cinebench r15 quite depends on uncore . And Uncore around 3.2ghz is ok for core clock being around 4Ghz. Besides , Above 3.5Ghz Uncore starts to need more and more vtt to stabilize uncore. So i think , for me Uncore 3.2Ghz would be the sweet spot for me for daily use.


----------



## asiki

Hi,
My CPU is L5638.
I spent ages testing various combinations, for me the sweet spot is 2x-1.
Here I was able to reach FSB=215 (it gives 3.44GHz) and the stopper to go further is NB temperature, CPU itself can go faster a bit I think.
I have funny small voltages as for such high OC (~1.3v, don't remember now), cheap air cooler and max 60*C at stress test and 46*C at gaming! For a year it works almost 24/7 with these settings, stable as a rock, I love this CPU
2x and 2x+1 required much higher voltage, what's funny 1.5x required even more. Otherwise (keeping the same voltage as I have now) I was able to get only FSB ~170.
Of course, many other settings also matter but this one was the most critical one.
One remark: uncore speed really matters for performance. I played a bit with my friend's X5690: I OC'ed it to the same CPU frequency in 2 ways: a) bigger cpu multiplier + smaller FSB, and b) smaller cpu multiplier + higher FSB. Despite result frequency was the same, option b) gave up to +5% higher results in benchmarks.
Cheers!


----------



## asiki

correction: my CPU runs on 1.216v


----------



## GENXLR

Now that I can lower my PLL below 1.8v, what's a good PLL voltage?


----------



## dagget3450

I used to try for 1.65 on pll if i recall correctly. I vaguely remember it being suggested 1.65 1.7 i think. Maybe someone else can chime in


----------



## gofasterstripes

1.5 Works for me between 4.2 and 4.6GHz, though it's not enough to keep it cool so I run 4.0 with 1.8 - that's how it passed the stress test so I leave it there


----------



## JRS017

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> 1.5 Works for me between 4.2 and 4.6GHz, though it's not enough to keep it cool so I run 4.0 with 1.8 - that's how it passed the stress test so I leave it there


That 3520 wanted something crazy man like mostly 1.45-1.47v...but was fine flying up to 80-85c I don't know if combination of running it that hot for as long as I did not cooling it enough? and I don't know they said to try to stabilize it with PLL and I put it high well into red danger zone 1.88++ and it was.

I just need a back up got me paranoid that this one is going to die. oh it's all messed up now got this intermittent pin thing again top pins on the socket kinda bent lifted up won't read half the time even 2nd slot now...so it's back slots in dual etc.


----------



## GENXLR

I'll see then, X5650 @ 4Ghz but probably swapping to an X5670 shortly


----------



## gofasterstripes

I don't think reduced CPU PLL stresses the system.

....I guess that the lower value works better because while it is (in theory) a square waveform signal, at these speeds it's going to appear to the chip as a curved wave of some sort. As we approach critical operating conditions (max OC at max v) the chip's more likely to toggle, or respond to the PLL signal at a lower value of the wave because of the higher "pressure" on the transistors. Think of a mousetrap, the harder the spring pushes against the release the more sensitive the release lever becomes. Thus at high frequencies or volts, the chip might begin to cycle before the PLL wave has passed the normal toggling voltage, and thus it has a case of "premature ejaculatie" and goes out of sync with BCLK or something else.

This could of course be complete cobblers, but as I said - low PLL doesn't seem to stress anything at all. Actually it may *slightly* reduce temps, so why not give it a go.


----------



## snowlulz

Well, sorry if this information is already said 1000x in the topic but i can't really find it..

Got myself a x58 board. Which CPU to choose? I was about to pick up a x5650 but see people reaching higher GHz's with x5670.. Will be using it with custom WC.

Thanks!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snowlulz*
> 
> Well, sorry if this information is already said 1000x in the topic but i can't really find it..
> 
> Got myself a x58 board. Which CPU to choose? I was about to pick up a x5650 but see people reaching higher GHz's with x5670.. Will be using it with custom WC.
> 
> Thanks!


Luck of the draw which cpu will clock better, but the x5670 is the best price/multi for the six core x56xx cpus on ebay.

So I'd atleast get the x5670 myself in case your board doesn't bclk clock as high as you want.


----------



## Zaor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snowlulz*
> 
> Well, sorry if this information is already said 1000x in the topic but i can't really find it..
> 
> Got myself a x58 board. Which CPU to choose? I was about to pick up a x5650 but see people reaching higher GHz's with x5670.. Will be using it with custom WC.
> 
> Thanks!


This one http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5675-3-06-GHz-6-Core-12M-Prozessor-SLBYL-Sockel-1366-CPU-/291817749146?hash=item43f1b17a9a:g:RGwAAOSwLF1X~y6d

They generally oc better with lower volt.


----------



## snowlulz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Luck of the draw which cpu will clock better, but the x5670 is the best price/multi for the six core x56xx cpus on ebay.
> 
> So I'd atleast get the x5670 myself in case your board doesn't bclk clock as high as you want.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zaor*
> 
> This one http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X5675-3-06-GHz-6-Core-12M-Prozessor-SLBYL-Sockel-1366-CPU-/291817749146?hash=item43f1b17a9a:g:RGwAAOSwLF1X~y6d
> 
> They generally oc better with lower volt.


Well, the board i'm getting is a x58A-UD3R. Seems to be a pretty nice overclocker board.
The problem with the CPU's is the fact i can't get them sent from China.. I live in Portugal and here the customs tend to tax all the products from China and non-europe country's really hard and at the end it's better to get all the stuff from UK or Germany.

Thanks for the help till now!


----------



## hecatomb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *f00b4h*
> 
> In a word - awesome. Not sure what your concern with heat is all about though. Check my gallery.


Thanks for the amazing benchmarking. I did test my most commonly played games and performance difference was mostly negligible, but significant enough in Tomb Raider that HT was warranted to keep on (not to mention all the other benefits). I overreacted with the heat generation, as that's only really relevant when all the threads are stressed 100% which games certainly will not be doing for a while.

I'm blown away at how well my [email protected] would perform vs. a i7 6700k according to your benches..


----------



## snowlulz

Well, here i am again.

Going to close-up the deal on a x58A-UD3R tomorrow for 60€ including a i7 920 (hope to get it sold for some change, at least) and if i get the board to work i will pick up a X5675. Anyways, the seller says that he haves too a semi-dead EVGA x58 SLI3.

Well, between those two which would be the best choice? It seems like UD3R haves more VRM phases..


----------



## GENXLR

Semi dead? Need I say more >.>


----------



## GENXLR

Got a WIP here








Still need to tune for efficency

That is a Hyper 212 EVO with Twin AFB1212SH-PWMs strapped to it


----------



## snowlulz

Well, i fix hardware as hobby, so xD Dead or semi-dead i can get the hand on it and fix it


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snowlulz*
> 
> Well, i fix hardware as hobby, so xD Dead or semi-dead i can get the hand on it and fix it


Would you be interested in reviving my Asus P6T? Needs a new socket and I have a P6T deluxe with a cracked ram slot that needs replacing. xD I've kept them for a rainy day since they both work still, but both of them have a dead ram channel as a result


----------



## snowlulz

well, sent you a PM








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Would you be interested in reviving my Asus P6T? Needs a new socket and I have a P6T deluxe with a cracked ram slot that needs replacing. xD I've kept them for a rainy day since they both work still, but both of them have a dead ram channel as a result


----------



## rinma

Hello, was just wondering if any of you guys are running X56xx Xeon on DFI X58 motherboards?
I have DFI LanParty JR X58 T3H6, and just got Xeon X5650. But the thing is it won't even POST. Actually it acts like there's no CPU installed - shows same error that I haven't seen before (L-state). Just to be sure i tried to start it without CPU and debug code was the same.

I updated CPU microcode manually (added 206C2 string) and flashed the motherboard but still same thing. Even left it unplugged and without the battery overnight to clear CMOS but nothing.

Motherboard is working, Core i7 920 works perfectly fine.

Any ideas?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Perhaps that motherboard can't support a Xeon. Not every X58 motherboard can.


----------



## rinma

I believe it's a matter of the manufacturing process. 45nm Xeon processors work just fine on those boards. The thing is X5650 is 32nm cpu.
That's why I'm curious if any of you guys ran 32nm Xeon CPU on DFI X58 MBO.


----------



## GENXLR

Hi, the DFI X58 doesn't support the CPU hardware wise, I can hard mod the board and it will post, but it doesn't last, every DFI I modded to post with the X5650 and then ran has exploded in the power phases. The new IMC must pull more than what the old IMC did

Edit: oh you have a Jr, it will post with L series Xeons though


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hi, the DFI X58 doesn't support the CPU hardware wise, I can hard mod the board and it will post, but it doesn't last, every DFI I modded to post with the X5650 and then ran has exploded in the power phases. The new IMC must pull more than what the old IMC did
> 
> Edit: oh you have a Jr, it will post with L series Xeons though


I would guess w3670/80/90 would work as it does seem to support the 980x (and 970 I'd guess).


----------



## rinma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Hi, the DFI X58 doesn't support the CPU hardware wise, I can hard mod the board and it will post, but it doesn't last, every DFI I modded to post with the X5650 and then ran has exploded in the power phases. The new IMC must pull more than what the old IMC did
> 
> Edit: oh you have a Jr, it will post with L series Xeons though


I saw this, but can't seem to find any other info.
What type of modification are you refering to? Something like the one on early eVGA X58 motherboards?


----------



## gofasterstripes

Quote:


> The new IMC must pull more than what the old IMC did


Interdasting. Dual QPI to blame?


----------



## GENXLR

Yes

The 990x does work BUT it will kill the board rather fast


----------



## zeroonea

I'm tending to build a dual x5660. Any recommend a mobo for dual x5660 and has overclocking feature? A cheap one will be the best









Thankyou


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zeroonea*
> 
> I'm tending to build a dual x5660. Any recommend a mobo for dual x5660 and has overclocking feature? A cheap one will be the best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thankyou


The Evga SR-2 is the only one but it is very expensive, around the $600 range.

What are you doing that needs that many cores?

If cores are what you need I would instead go for a dual E5-2670 build which can be done for a relatively cheap price nowadays. 16 Cores & 32 Threads @ 3.3GHz for around $400-450


----------



## GENXLR

Lol, they show up on eBay all the time for 300$, I'm about to snag one myself for fun


----------



## zeroonea

Tks for that info. I build for render and gaming, I want multi core for render and overclocking for gaming. Do dual cpu overclocked will gain more performance when run single thread?


----------



## zeroonea

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> The Evga SR-2 is the only one but it is very expensive, around the $600 range.
> 
> What are you doing that needs that many cores?
> 
> If cores are what you need I would instead go for a dual E5-2670 build which can be done for a relatively cheap price nowadays. 16 Cores & 32 Threads @ 3.3GHz for around $400-450


Can you guide me spec about dual 2670 please?


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zeroonea*
> 
> Can you guide me spec about dual 2670 please?


http://www.natex.us/category-s/1865.htm

I think this is what people usually recommend. Dont hold me to it.


----------



## zeroonea

After surf around, I will buy Asus P6X58D-E + x5660, is this mobo support ecc ram? (Samsung DDR3 1600 ECC REG 4G PC3-12800)


----------



## ruggercb

So I'm revisiting my OC on my 5650 on a Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3. When on bios F3 I can run it at 3.6-3.7 GHz 24/7. Ram multi at 10, voltages on auto but vcore which set to normal. Maxes out at around 1.212V.

Any higher than 170 ish bclock and Windows won't boot.

Sooooo, when I flash bios F5C I can do a quick and dirty OC of [email protected] voltages and it runs great!!!! Only problem is it won't restart. Gets stuck in a boot loop. I have to unplug the PSU for it to boot. To be clear, this is at stock speeds, slow speeds, OCed, whatever. I read about someone with a different Gigabyte board (UD3R maybe?) with a similar problem but with an i7 930 I think. Someone claimed it was a windows sleep state issue. Don't think there was a clear solution.

Does anyone here have experience with something like this? I asked about it a couple of years ago and kind of let my sleeping dog lie but got the itch to tinker again.

Thanks!


----------



## asiki

Don't go with auto voltages on such high FSB, mobo may set so high voltages that it may fry or degrade the CPU.
For boot loop - try to slow down the memory to ensure it's not OC'ed, I had similar issue when OC'ed memory of mixed types.


----------



## 8ax

So I'm replacing my X5650 with a 5820K soon and I've decided to find the highest 24/7 clock at an acceptable voltage since I've also got a new cheapo 360mm CLC.
So far I've got [email protected]4v with single core turbo up to 4.7GHz on a P6T SE, lol.

I've noticed that as I increase the coreclock I have to decrease my RAM latency so I don't lose it, with my old L5639 at 18x222 (So not BCLK related and yeah I ran 220+ 24/7) I could run ~1333MHz CL6, now I have to run ~1220MHz CL8 or else I either get 16, 8 or 4GB instead of 24GB.


----------



## ruggercb

I keep thinking it's a ram issue as well. It behaves the same whether the fsb is 133 or 200 though. This is crucial ballistix 1600 MHz ram. Maybe it's just a janky bios. I previously had a 920 in it that ran at 3.8 for 2 years on the bios that isn't playing nice with the Xeon.


----------



## GENXLR

Any normal bios won't auto the voltage higher than Intel max spec, in this case 1.35vcore and 1.3uncore, 1.8PLL, 1.65dram,(follows jedec spec), and some other defaults for westmere ep


----------



## Cal

nvm


----------



## Adhmuz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ruggercb*
> 
> So I'm revisiting my OC on my 5650 on a Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3. When on bios F3 I can run it at 3.6-3.7 GHz 24/7. Ram multi at 10, voltages on auto but vcore which set to normal. Maxes out at around 1.212V.
> 
> Any higher than 170 ish bclock and Windows won't boot.
> 
> Sooooo, when I flash bios F5C I can do a quick and dirty OC of [email protected] voltages and it runs great!!!! Only problem is it won't restart. Gets stuck in a boot loop. I have to unplug the PSU for it to boot. To be clear, this is at stock speeds, slow speeds, OCed, whatever. I read about someone with a different Gigabyte board (UD3R maybe?) with a similar problem but with an i7 930 I think. Someone claimed it was a windows sleep state issue. Don't think there was a clear solution.
> 
> Does anyone here have experience with something like this? I asked about it a couple of years ago and kind of let my sleeping dog lie but got the itch to tinker again.
> 
> Thanks!


I use to have a similar issue with an EVGA X58 SLI board, it would need to be hard reset every time I shut it down and the sleep function never worked right, eventually the problem went away with a BIOS revision. Have you tried disabling all the sleep functions in your BIOS, also any power saving features. Your RAM should be set at the voltage it requires, Crucial is so so RAM and requires the voltage recommended by the manufacturer to run at advertised speeds usually. Even your CPU voltage should be set at a specific voltage for such a high overclock, it's possible the auto voltages are being reduced after you shut down and only on a cold boot they get set high enough for the system to post.

What I'd recommend is after getting a post on auto to go in to the BIOS and set your voltage manually to the voltages being set automatically, see what happens, and from there you'll be able to start reducing voltages until you get instability and then increase said voltage by one or two increments as your permanent voltage.


----------



## ruggercb

It does the boot loop at stock settings. It does it with XMP on or off. I've disabled and enabled C states. only thing I haven't tried is changing from S3 to S1, which I may do tonight.

Pretty frustrating. On the boot loop bios I can push the chip like crazy, run 2133 MHz ram.

On the stable bios it won't go over 3700 MHz on CPU, won't boot on xmp.


----------



## gofasterstripes

'Twas the night before Ryzen, when all thro' the house
Not a reviewer was stirring, not even a mouse;
The stockings were hung by the chimney with care,
In hopes that St. Dr. Su soon would soon be there;
The gamers were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of AM4 Motherboards danced in their heads.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Anyone know where in these threads we can sell our Xeon and Asus Rampage at?


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Anyone know where in these threads we can sell our Xeon and Asus Rampage at?


Only in http://www.overclock.net/f/321/overclock-marketplace

Put an ad there, then u can put a link to your sale ad in your sig. That will show in every post you make. Remove once sold..

Also, you can mention your sale ad in threads relevant to what you are selling.

You have enough rep (>15) to do that.


----------



## }SkOrPn--'

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> Only in http://www.overclock.net/f/321/overclock-marketplace
> 
> Put an ad there, then u can put a link to your sale ad in your sig. That will show in every post you make. Remove once sold..
> 
> Also, you can mention your sale ad in threads relevant to what you are selling.
> 
> You have enough rep (>15) to do that.


Wow, thanks for the proper information on that, and so quickly too.


----------



## avp2306

Hi all - this thread has been a great resource, however I seem to be stuck with my OC and need some help pushing my X5670 on ASUS P6T Deluxe V2.

I'm having a hard time pushing it past 3.8 - 4Ghz. For 4Ghz IBT fails on Max setting after 3-4 passes. For 3.8Ghz IBT Failed after 16 passes. Prime95 doesn't detect any problems and runs fine 1-2 hrs at time.

My temperatures are pretty good 38C idle and 65C max under 100% load in IBT or Prime95. Using air cooling, Noctua + 2x fans.

Multiplier: 20x
BCLK: 200
DRAM: 1600 (stock spec)
DRAM Timings: 9-9-9-24 (stock spec)
UCLK: 2800 (1.75x)
CPU Voltage: 1.325
CPU PLL: 1.86
QPI/DRAM Voltage: 1.3
IOH Voltage: Auto
IOH PCIE Voltage: Auto
ICH Voltage: Auto
ICH PCIE Voltage: Auto
DRAM Voltage: 1.5 (stock spec)
LLC: Enabled
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled

What else should I tweak? Looking to get a 24/7 stable OC.

Is my CPU Voltage too low?

Also should I manually set IOH / ICH voltages? If so, what are the safe ranges?


----------



## dirkdigles

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *avp2306*
> 
> Hi all - this thread has been a great resource, however I seem to be stuck with my OC and need some help pushing my X5670 on ASUS P6T Deluxe V2.
> 
> I'm having a hard time pushing it past 3.8 - 4Ghz. For 4Ghz IBT fails on Max setting after 3-4 passes. For 3.8Ghz IBT Failed after 16 passes. Prime95 doesn't detect any problems and runs fine 1-2 hrs at time.
> 
> My temperatures are pretty good 38C idle and 65C max under 100% load in IBT or Prime95. Using air cooling, Noctua + 2x fans.
> 
> Multiplier: 20x
> BCLK: 200
> DRAM: 1600 (stock spec)
> DRAM Timings: 9-9-9-24 (stock spec)
> UCLK: 2800 (1.75x)
> CPU Voltage: 1.325
> CPU PLL: 1.86
> QPI/DRAM Voltage: 1.3
> IOH Voltage: Auto
> IOH PCIE Voltage: Auto
> ICH Voltage: Auto
> ICH PCIE Voltage: Auto
> DRAM Voltage: 1.5 (stock spec)
> LLC: Enabled
> CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
> 
> What else should I tweak? Looking to get a 24/7 stable OC.
> 
> Is my CPU Voltage too low?
> 
> Also should I manually set IOH / ICH voltages? If so, what are the safe ranges?


I'm in the process of learning this stuff as well as you... running an X5660 on a Gigabyte X58A-UD3R Rev 2 w/ 24gb of DDR3-1333 (6x4gb).

I would experiment with more volts to the ram and/or QPI (but keep within intel spec). I've read that you can run DDR3 at 1.65V with no issue (please correct me if I'm wrong); also you could run 1.35V on the QPI which I believe is the safe upper limit for the Westmere-EP xeons.

From reading various guides, it seems that if you run with all 6 memory slots full, particularly at 24gb, you're gonna need more voltage to get the ram stable.

On my X5660 at 4.0ghz, I've had good stability at 1.225V (Vcore), even with all the power saving features enabled (EIST etc.), and DVID (gigabyte's dynamic voltage). It's when I try to lower the voltage on the memory / QPI that I seem to be getting system instability. I've set my QPI voltage to Auto and I get good stability, however with the UD3R, there's no way of reading what the "Auto" voltage is for QPI, neither in the BIOS or in Windows 10, so I fear that it's overvolting it above safe spec and I'm risking shortening the chip's lifespan.

Anyway, if you haven't read them, these 2 guides are good:

http://www.techreaction.net/2010/09/07/3-step-overclocking-guide-bloomfield-and-gulftown/
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/overclocking-the-x58-a-practical-guide.108526/

Keep us posted on your progress and your settings when you achieve full stability.


----------



## ruggercb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adhmuz*
> 
> I use to have a similar issue with an EVGA X58 SLI board, it would need to be hard reset every time I shut it down and the sleep function never worked right, eventually the problem went away with a BIOS revision. Have you tried disabling all the sleep functions in your BIOS, also any power saving features. Your RAM should be set at the voltage it requires, Crucial is so so RAM and requires the voltage recommended by the manufacturer to run at advertised speeds usually. Even your CPU voltage should be set at a specific voltage for such a high overclock, it's possible the auto voltages are being reduced after you shut down and only on a cold boot they get set high enough for the system to post.
> 
> What I'd recommend is after getting a post on auto to go in to the BIOS and set your voltage manually to the voltages being set automatically, see what happens, and from there you'll be able to start reducing voltages until you get instability and then increase said voltage by one or two increments as your permanent voltage.


A big thanks to your line of thinking!

I set the ram voltage manually and it posts and loads windows now. According to gigabyte's ET6 it was giving the ram 1.65V and it's 1.5V ram. Once I set it manually to 1.5V I was able to go with 190x20 with turbo and all @ 1.21275 + voltage offset .138. It's not stable though. It should be equal to 1.35 vcore but ET6 and CPUZ say it's about 1.29-1.31. Should I trust these programs and bump it up further?


----------



## ms178

Good news, everyone! I have got an ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 with a Xeon E5645 up and running (crossflashed with a modified P6X58D-E BIOS). During the last two days I tried hard to find the newest possible microcode for this Westmere-EP CPU (206C2).

I used MCExtractor to successfully extract such a microcode from an Intel S55xx UEFI file (R0068) as well as one HP server board (look for SP75718) which both include the most recent version 1D (2015/08/04). The former latest available version 14 was from 2011.

After some pain with MMTool 3.26, the author of the MCExtractor tool lead us to the path of success.

You can grab the fixed *.bin file with the most recent 206C2 microcode over here at win-raid.com or see below to my second post. I got it to work with my AMI BIOS. Maybe someone can mod it into an Award BIOS as well.

For AMI: Just insert the fixed *.bin file with MMTool 3.26 (earlier versions do not work) in the CPU Patch section into the AMI BIOS of your board after deleting the old one which resides already in there and you should be good to go. It worked for me and I hope it fixed some C-State/Turbo Boost bugs with it, I still need to test that though. The changelog of the Intel S55xx UEFI file mentioned security fixes within the microcode.

I hope you guys would be interested in using it, too.









Special thanks to plutomav for authoring this useful extraction tool and drizzler for fixing the file.


----------



## GENXLR

I should make an X58 Modded bios thread! Thoughts?

i also need to edit a Phoneix SecureCore Bios microcode(how do i extract it anyways?)


----------



## Kana-Maru

Would a modded topic really be needed since most people already post and read in two X58 topics already?


----------



## ms178

My last posting got lost somehow, hence again a shorter version which will surely interest many of you nonetheless: There is a newer microcode for Westmere-EP CPUs (206C2) available which has the version 1D (2015/08/04). This is 4 years newer than the former widely available version 14 from 2011. I've managed to insert it into my AMI BIOS (P6X58D-E) for a crossflashed Asus P6T Deluxe V2 with MMTool 3.26 (earlier versions do not work) and verified that it is active. Just insert it in the CPU Patch section after deleting the older one first. Unfortunately there was no luck with an Award BIOS so far by another user. Special thanks to plutomav, the author of the Extraction Tool MCExtractor and drizzler from win-raid.com for fixing the extracted file for me.

*update*: Now it is reported to work with an AWARD BIOS as well with cbrom155.

206C2_v_1D_Microcode.zip 9k .zip file


----------



## alancsalt

Quote:


> i have noticed that mmtool 319mod extract correctly cpu patch (while 3.26 not or better can extract but can't reinsert)
> My problem is a little differt When I try to upgrade microcode (downloaded from download section) for my processor i Get:
> "This is not a Valid CPU MicroCode Patch file"


https://www.bios-mods.com/forum/archive/index.php?thread-12235.html

Could this be the issue?


----------



## theister

get it done with cbrom155 for award bios. i swear i tried it earlier and it did not work.

microcode.jpg 163k .jpg file


----------



## ms178

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> get it done with cbrom155 for award bios. i swear i tried it earlier and it did not work.
> 
> microcode.jpg 163k .jpg file


Great, now both AMI and AWARD BIOS users can enjoy this microcode update! My first testing shows enhanced stability on low voltages. I had trouble with C-States or Turbo-Mode before getting bluescreens and freezes while surfing with Chrome while it worked fine under load. Idle voltage is now 1.008 / 1.016 v @ 2.4 Ghz and under load 1.208 - 1.216 v @ 3.8 Ghz. I guess it spiked below a stable threshold when changing from the highest to a lower P-State.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alancsalt*
> 
> https://www.bios-mods.com/forum/archive/index.php?thread-12235.html
> 
> Could this be the issue?


I had the same problem, but see this discussion on Github where the author of the MCExtract tool with which I extracted the microcode out of another BIOS file gave me the hint to a solution. As I understand it, MMTool expects the *.bin file to come with an exact size and the extracted file was shorter than expected and had to be fixed with an HEX editor. Theister was so kind to fix that for me as I lack the skills to do that.


----------



## StockDC2

Great thread! I just purchased an EVGA X58 FTW3 that came with an Intel i7 960 but am planning on making the switch to Xeon. Between the X5670 and X5675, which one would you guys choose? The X5675 is about $25 more expensive but if it overclocks better, I guess that warrants the cost. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Oh, and are there any steppings that I should be looking for? Sorry if it's already been covered, I went over the last 10 pages and didn't find anything on the topic.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Best place to download MMTool? All I'm finding is shady looking sites.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StockDC2*
> 
> Great thread! I just purchased an EVGA X58 FTW3 that came with an Intel i7 960 but am planning on making the switch to Xeon. Between the X5670 and X5675, which one would you guys choose? The X5675 is about $25 more expensive but if it overclocks better, I guess that warrants the cost. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
> 
> Oh, and are there any steppings that I should be looking for? Sorry if it's already been covered, I went over the last 10 pages and didn't find anything on the topic.


Well, you have a good board so BCLK should go pretty high. I would take the cheaper of the two CPUs. I have an X5660 and it does better than my X5680 and my X5675. Your mileage my vary.

In regards to steppings, there aren't any. You either get a ES/QS or the regular CPU. I would shy away from the ES/QS models.


----------



## bill1024

I would get a x5660. 40$ on ebay right now. 23 x multiplier, mine do well overclocked on both my FTW3 boards..


----------



## StockDC2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Well, you have a good board so BCLK should go pretty high. I would take the cheaper of the two CPUs. I have an X5660 and it does better than my X5680 and my X5675. Your mileage my vary.
> 
> In regards to steppings, there aren't any. You either get a ES/QS or the regular CPU. I would shy away from the ES/QS models.


Awesome, thanks for the great info. I guess it's the X5650!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I would get a x5660. 40$ on ebay right now. 23 x multiplier, mine do well overclocked on both my FTW3 boards..


Thanks for the reply. Hmm for $40, I think I'd just add the $5 and get the X5670.


----------



## bill1024

I have had better luck with the odd multipliers and the x5660 is 23 and the x5670 is 24. Go for the x5675 and get the 25 multiplier.
Up to you, good luck with which ever one you get


----------



## Wishmaker

Still testing, have a ram stick that is busted, hence dual-channel, however this chip is amazing. Took me 10 minutes to find my settings. I originally had it at 4.3 GHz with 1.27V, however, it crashed after 1 hour of gaming. Was going well in cinebench and Linx. I had to make some changes again, and has been stable ever since. Will tweak more of course.


----------



## RX7-2nr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Chip jumps to 4450 at times due to the fact that I enabled every damn setting on the CPU to see how it will affect my overclock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> !


It's probably the 23x multiplier switching on. It only activates 23x at low load-mid and then only on 2 cores.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> I have had better luck with the odd multipliers and the x5660 is 23 and the x5670 is 24. Go for the x5675 and get the 25 multiplier.
> Up to you, good luck with which ever one you get


My X5660 clocks higher than my X5675. I think it really depends on the CPU and the board you put it in. Silicon lottery, etc...

I am going to replace my X5675 with the X5660 and sell the X5675.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RX7-2nr*
> 
> Best place to download MMTool? All I'm finding is shady looking sites.


I have a copy of the program if you are still looking for one and don't want to take a chance on a shady site.


----------



## 99belle99

Anyone else use passmark software benchmark with these Xeon's. I have been getting a much lower CPU score than I did previously(like last year or sometime) I did update the benchmark software though. Anyone else notice that?


----------



## legcramp

So I have been upping my overclock from 4.0ghz on my system lately just for fun.

I am able to get it stable running Realbench for 4 hours with the following settings:

X5650 @ 4.4Ghz
Gigabyte EX58-UD5
DDR3 1600 @ 8-9-8-24 1T (1.65v)
QPI: 7.2Ghz
Uncore: x13
1.392 Vcore
1.355 VTT

But when I am running the Uncore @ 16x, which gives me 3200mhz, Realbench will fail within 2 hours. What do you guys suggest I can do to keep the uncore running at the higher speed?


----------



## Bal3Wolf

try upping ich or ioh and qpi/vtt play with those 3 see if it helps any.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *legcramp*
> 
> So I have been upping my overclock from 4.0ghz on my system lately just for fun.
> 
> I am able to get it stable running Realbench for 4 hours with the following settings:
> 
> X5650 @ 4.4Ghz
> Gigabyte EX58-UD5
> DDR3 1600 @ 8-9-8-24 1T (1.65v)
> QPI: 7.2Ghz
> Uncore: x13
> 1.392 Vcore
> 1.355 VTT
> 
> But when I am running the Uncore @ 16x, which gives me 3200mhz, Realbench will fail within 2 hours. What do you guys suggest I can do to keep the uncore running at the higher speed?


Is 1.392 V worth the frequency?


----------



## legcramp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bal3Wolf*
> 
> try upping ich or ioh and qpi/vtt play with those 3 see if it helps any.


I'll give ich and ioh a try but VTT seems to be the max I should go though.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wishmaker*
> 
> Is 1.392 V worth the frequency?


Probably not but I am using a custom loop so temps are pretty cool. I might just end up going back to 4ghz and running a higher uncore if I can't get it stable at 3200mhz.


----------



## CompletelyLost

I'm just waiting to get my X5660 in the mail, but I went ahead and updated my BIOS and performed the mod to an EVGA X58 SLI LE (E757) board. Would anyone be interested in a video? I tried to keep it a reasonable length, but include as much info as I could come across. I've noticed the X58 SLI LE boards are so much cheaper and so much easier to find right now than any other X58 board. They run about half the price or less because it needed to be modded.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I think that would be of use to the community, so why not.


----------



## CompletelyLost

Tracking says my chip will be in tomorrow, so I'll put up a full rundown of it Monday-ish after I test it. Before I look like a fool because I missed something.


----------



## dimxr

Hello guys.
I need your help.
Yesterday I received my x5660 and I am new to overlocking. I have read a few things and have tried many with my previous 920 cpu.
My mobo is an Asus P6t Deluxe with BIOS 2209 (09/21/10).

I am not interested in extreme overclocking. I just need a stable fast system (3.5GHz is perfect) and I've managed it.

I have tried everything as it supposed to be done, but I got stuck on the last step.
The last step is supposed to be turning back on all the energy modes (c1e, c-state, EIST and TurboMode).
The problem I face though is that *I cannot find anywhere the TurboMode* .
The way I overclocked my 5660 was by driving the multiplier to 23 and then adjusting the BCLK to 153 taking care of my RAM, too.

If I leave the multiplier to auto, TurboMode appears again, but that means the the only overcking can be done through BCLK.
What would be the best way to approach this? Leave it as it is with the TurboMode disappeared and perfectly stable at 3.5GHz overclock or pursue the overclock by leaving the multiplier to auto and messing just with BCLK so that I will have TurboMode available?

Do you know also, what would be the most energy efficient way to overclock? Multiplier VS BCLK or just the perfect combination?

Thanks in advance.
Love the community.


----------



## autoshot

I'm currently running an X5650 @ 3.8GHz (1.21 VCore, DDR3-1524 CL9-9-9-24-2N, VTT something <1.3v, QPI 6.8GHz) on an ASUS P6T Deluxe. As of now the CPU is cooled by a Noctua U12P SE 1366; however, the latter is going to be replaced by a Noctua NH-D15 I came by recently, which is why I'm planning to try to increase my overclock in the near future (my target is 4.2 - 4.4 GHz, ). Because this most definitely requires significantly higher voltages under load I was thinking about equipping my P6T Deluxe with the P6X58D Premium BIOS to be able to define a voltage offset with the objective of not unnecessarily degrading my CPU due to high voltages in idle. I know the P6T Deluxe runs with the P6X58D Premium BIOS (Klick and Klick), but what I'm not sure about is if there are any negative long term effects (read: permanent hardware damage) caused by this BIOS. So the question is:
*Is it safe to run the P6T Deluxe with the P6X58D Premium BIOS for an extended period of time?*


----------



## theister

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dimxr*
> 
> Hello guys.
> I need your help.
> Yesterday I received my x5660 and I am new to overlocking. I have read a few things and have tried many with my previous 920 cpu.
> My mobo is an Asus P6t Deluxe with BIOS 2209 (09/21/10).
> 
> I am not interested in extreme overclocking. I just need a stable fast system (3.5GHz is perfect) and I've managed it.
> 
> I have tried everything as it supposed to be done, but I got stuck on the last step.
> The last step is supposed to be turning back on all the energy modes (c1e, c-state, EIST and TurboMode).
> The problem I face though is that *I cannot find anywhere the TurboMode* .
> The way I overclocked my 5660 was by driving the multiplier to 23 and then adjusting the BCLK to 153 taking care of my RAM, too.
> 
> If I leave the multiplier to auto, TurboMode appears again, but that means the the only overcking can be done through BCLK.
> What would be the best way to approach this? Leave it as it is with the TurboMode disappeared and perfectly stable at 3.5GHz overclock or pursue the overclock by leaving the multiplier to auto and messing just with BCLK so that I will have TurboMode available?
> 
> Do you know also, what would be the most energy efficient way to overclock? Multiplier VS BCLK or just the perfect combination?
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> Love the community.


Looks like your mobo just disables the turbo-mode option if you set the all-core turbo multi manualy.

For the x5660 the max non turbo multi is 21. with turbo and c-states enabled it can boost 1-2-3-4 cores with 22-24 multi. the max multiplier (here 24) can not be set manually, only usable with c-states.

so go set c-states enabled and have a look if the multi goes up to 24 while benching a SINGLE-Thread (the 24 just kicks in for 1 or 2 cores).

if so everything is fine. if it does not your board just disables the use of turbo while setting the 23 turbo multi manually

energywise the best oc is by multi, it also does not stress the whole system like a higher blck is doing.

edit: also have a look at stuff like cpu thermal monitoring (i had a look with amibcp into your bios and was not able to find) and disable it for testing if existing


----------



## dimxr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> Looks like your mobo just disables the turbo-mode option if you set the all-core turbo multi manualy.
> 
> For the x5660 the max non turbo multi is 21. with turbo and c-states enabled it can boost 1-2-3-4 cores with 22-24 multi. the max multiplier (here 24) can not be set manually, only usable with c-states.
> 
> so go set c-states enabled and have a look if the multi goes up to 24 while benching a SINGLE-Thread (the 24 just kicks in for 1 or 2 cores).
> 
> if so everything is fine. if it does not your board just disables the use of turbo while setting the 23 turbo multi manually
> 
> energywise the best oc is by multi, it also does not stress the whole system like a higher blck is doing.
> 
> edit: also have a look at stuff like cpu thermal monitoring (i had a look with amibcp into your bios and was not able to find) and disable it for testing if existing


Thank you very much for your answer.
Yes, you were right. Whenever I tweaked the multiplier, the Turbo Mode disappeared. In order to have this available I should leave the multipliers alone and tweak blck.
Yes, I can use x24 on single core without Turbo Boost but the overall performace drops without it.
What I noticed though if I enable Turbo Boost, the system hits higher frequencies when needed and generally it makes the system more efficient.

For example:
multiplier: x23, BCLK: 156 (3.5GHz), cinebench score: 826 (turbo off)
multiplier: auto, BCLK: 158 (3.3GHz), cinebench score: 835 (turbo on) with less power conumption from the system in general as it usually

The system without Turbo Boost hovers around 1.896GHz - 3.5 GHz, but with it enabled it's from 1.896GHz - 3.6Ghz.

I have a feeling that my best setup is with multipliers to auto, bclk to 158. Above that bclk the cpu starts consuming much more voltage.


----------



## ms178

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I'm currently running an X5650 @ 3.8GHz (1.21 VCore, DDR3-1524 CL9-9-9-24-2N, VTT something <1.3v, QPI 6.8GHz) on an ASUS P6T Deluxe. As of now the CPU is cooled by a Noctua U12P SE 1366; however, the latter is going to be replaced by a Noctua NH-D15 I came by recently, which is why I'm planning to try to increase my overclock in the near future (my target is 4.2 - 4.4 GHz, ). Because this most definitely requires significantly higher voltages under load I was thinking about equipping my P6T Deluxe with the P6X58D Premium BIOS to be able to define a voltage offset with the objective of not unnecessarily degrading my CPU due to high voltages in idle. I know the P6T Deluxe runs with the P6X58D Premium BIOS (Klick and Klick), but what I'm not sure about is if there are any negative long term effects (read: permanent hardware damage) caused by this BIOS. So the question is:
> *Is it safe to run the P6T Deluxe with the P6X58D Premium BIOS for an extended period of time?*


I am running an ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 with a P6X58D-E BIOS just fine for some months now which also provides the Offset function you are looking for (with very decent results on my Xeon E5645). This BIOS also has more room for newer Intel Option Roms if you were interested in using >2TB HDDs in RAID as I do. I haven't tried the Premium BIOS though. I have also tried the P6T WS BIOS which gave me bluescreen issues which I could not resolve. Albeit reported to work, I ended up having to buy a new BIOS chip after flashing the P6T6 WS BIOS which gave me a black screen after POST. So consider yourself warned that there is always a risk involved.









*Edit*: I forgot to mention that the only disadvantage to the Premium BIOS is that there is no HIGH TDP option, so if you are TDP bound the Turbo mode doesn't kick in under high load (e.g. with PRIME). Unfortunately I haven't found a BIOS yet which runs stable and provides me all the goodies (newer Intel Option ROMs, High TDP, Offset and active ECC).


----------



## autoshot

Thank you for your detailed reply!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> I haven't tried the Premium BIOS though. I have also tried the P6T WS BIOS which gave me bluescreen issues which I could not resolve. Albeit reported to work, I ended up having to buy a new BIOS chip after flashing the P6T6 WS BIOS which gave me a black screen after POST. So consider yourself warned that there is always a risk involved.


Oh, good to know that the P6T BIOS is actually not so compatible after all! Regarding the P6X58D Premium BIOS, I already flashed the P6T Deluxe in my spare PC and can actually confirm that it works* (so far). I just wanted to make sure this BIOS doesn't do any long term damage before using it on my main computer day in day out.

*Of course there are a couple of minor inconveniences, which include:
- the top PCIe x4 slot doesn't work anymore (any idea if it is possible to make it work afterall?)
- the "Legacy Diskette A"-option is gone (buhu







)
- ASUS Express Gate is recognized as a *HiSpeed* USB Mass Storage Device, which cannot be disabled (luckily it can be in Windows)
- the Marvel SAS-controller cannot be disabled either and the corresponding OptionROM shows up every time I start/ restart the computer, resulting in ~5-7sec slower boot times

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> I forgot to mention that the only disadvantage to the Premium BIOS is that there is no HIGH TDP option, so if you are TDP bound the Turbo mode doesn't kick in under high load (e.g. with PRIME). Unfortunately I haven't found a BIOS yet which runs stable and provides me all the goodies (newer Intel Option ROMs, High TDP, Offset and active ECC).


Does the P6T Deluxe have this HIGH TDP option? No it doesn't, but that's fine for me since I prefer OCing via BCLK anyway.


----------



## ms178

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> Thank you for your detailed reply!
> Oh, good to know that the P6T BIOS is actually not so compatible after all! Regarding the P6X58D Premium BIOS, I already flashed the P6T Deluxe in my spare PC and can actually confirm that it works* (so far). I just wanted to make sure this BIOS doesn't do any long term damage before using it on my main computer day in day out.
> 
> *Of course there are a couple of minor inconveniences, which include:
> - the top PCIe x4 slot doesn't work anymore (any idea if it is possible to make it work afterall?)
> - the "Legacy Diskette A"-option is gone (buhu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> - ASUS Express Gate is recognized as a *HiSpeed* USB Mass Storage Device, which cannot be disabled (luckily it can be in Windows)
> - the Marvel SAS-controller cannot be disabled either and the corresponding OptionROM shows up every time I start/ restart the computer, resulting in ~5-7sec slower boot times
> 
> Does the P6T Deluxe have this HIGH TDP option? No it doesn't, but that's fine for me since I prefer OCing via BCLK anyway.


Some of the described inconveniences also apply for the P6X58D-E BIOS (top PCIe x4 slot not working, Express Gate) but it serves me well and stable whereas I guess that the older Option Rom on the P6WS BIOS could be the culprit (I run 2 x 2 TB SSHDs in RAID-0) or it could have to do with the different IRQ routing or my unbuffered ECC -RAM.

By the way there was a BETA BIOS (0006) for the original P6T Deluxe V2 with the High TDP function, but I have read mixed results about it and it never made it into the official version.

All in all, the modified P6X58D-E BIOS is the best compromise for my needs (I updated the Microcode and the Intel Option Rom) and can run it with very low voltages (idle: 1.032 v and full load @ 3.8: 1.184 v thanks to the Offset). I haven't deeply explored the possibilities with a BCLK above 200 yet...


----------



## vudy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> All in all, the modified P6X58D-E BIOS is the best compromise for my needs (I updated the Microcode and the Intel Option Rom) and can run it with very low voltages (idle: 1.032 v and full load @ 3.8: 1.184 v thanks to the Offset). I haven't deeply explored the possibilities with a BCLK above 200 yet...


Very interesting...
I'm also on the x58 bandwagon now. X5660 on the way. My motherboard is the same as yours, P6T Deluxe V2.
Could you post your BIOS file with updated Microcode and Intel Option rom? I would very much like an offset option.
Do I flash it with Afudos or ASUS EZ flash ?

Thanks!


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> I updated the Microcode and the Intel Option Rom


So you manually updated the Microcode & Intel Option Rom or were those two just updated automatically because of the P6X58D-E BIOS?

@ vudy

Just follow the instructions HERE


----------



## vudy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> So you manually updated the Microcode & Intel Option Rom or were those two just updated automatically because of the P6X58D-E BIOS?


Thank you.

I believe he used MMTool to add the microcode into the BIOS.
As for the Intel Option Rom, I do not know.


----------



## autoshot

Is there any advantage of manually updating the microcode in the BIOS to a newer version?


----------



## ms178

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vudy*
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> I believe he used MMTool to add the microcode into the BIOS.
> As for the Intel Option Rom, I do not know.


Exactly. I did get errors integrating it before but with some Hex Editor adjustment to the microcode file MMTool would accept it. The newer Intel Option ROM which I have modded into the BIOS is twice the size of the older one and the PX58D-E provides enough room for it to load my RAID-0 array of 2 x 2 TB SSHDs. For the files and more details, see the Readme.txt in my project folder here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0Bx1_m8WSFFfeamt1b201Q1RQS00?usp=sharing

As for the changes, I can just speculate but the changelog of the BIOS where I extracted the new microcode from spoke about security fixes (https://downloadmirror.intel.com/25183/eng/ReleaseNotes_R0068.txt).

I have had several blue screens and lockups in low voltage, low-power situations with my Xeon E5645 before. One of them was memory related but I have double checked with MemTest that the memory was fine (since then I've upgraded to new RAM). It could have been BD123 which is described in the Intel Specification Update as: "Package C6 C-State Exit May Result in Uncorrectable Memory Errors". Newer microcode usually contains workarounds for critical issues like these, hence I wanted to use the latest possible microcode version. As you see with AMD Ryzen now, new microcode can have some impact.

For the full list, see the Intel Errata here: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/xeon-5600-specification-update.pdf


----------



## autoshot

Ok so I replaced my Noctua U12P SE1366 CPU cooler with a Noctua NH-D15 lately in order to squeeze a little more performance out of my X5650 before upgrading to Skylake-X/ Ryzen Pro later this year, but no matter what I do I just cannot get beyond 3.8GHz (which is what the Xeon has been running on for more than two years now). I tried to play with all kinds of settings (like PCIe clock, CPU clock skew, load line calibration etc.) and voltages (like IOH, PLL, QPI/DRAM...) without any success







Core temperatures do not exceed 70°C as long as the core voltage is <=1.3v. Is there a good Xeon X56** OC-guide I could follow by any chance?


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> Ok so I replaced my Noctua U12P SE1366 CPU cooler with a Noctua NH-D15 lately in order to squeeze a little more performance out of my X5650 before upgrading to Skylake-X/ Ryzen Pro later this year, but no matter what I do I just cannot get beyond 3.8GHz (which is what the Xeon has been running on for more than two years now). I tried to play with all kinds of settings (like PCIe clock, CPU clock skew, load line calibration etc.) and voltages (like IOH, PLL, QPI/DRAM...) without any success
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Core temperatures do not exceed 70°C as long as the core voltage is <=1.3v. Is there a good Xeon X56** OC-guide I could follow by any chance?


Maybe your broad limited you and I think you need more than 1.3v for 3.8GHz+


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> I think you need more than 1.3v for 3.8GHz+


I need 1.2150v for 3.8Ghz, is the voltage increase required for 4Ghz+ really that large?


----------



## dirkdigles

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I need 1.2150v for 3.8Ghz, is the voltage increase required for 4Ghz+ really that large?


I'm at like 1.248 for 4ghz, 6x4gb ram


----------



## agentx007

@autoshot
UnCore Frequency/QPI Frequency (Values you tried) ?
QPI/DRAM Voltage (what settings did you use for it and at what UnCore Frequency) ?


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *autoshot*
> 
> I need 1.2150v for 3.8Ghz, is the voltage increase required for 4Ghz+ really that large?


Can you fill out the rig builder so we know what your system spec is??
And post all the voltages.
Is really depend on your system config.


----------



## autoshot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> Can you fill out the rig builder so we know what your system spec is??


Done
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TLCH723*
> 
> And post all the voltages.


Here they come:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



*Ai Overclock Tuner:*
Manual
*CPU Ratio Setting:*
Auto
*Intel SpeedStep Tech:*
Enabled
*Intel TurboMode Tech:*
Disabled
*BCLK Frequency:*
I tried 200-211
*PCIE Frequency:*
100 - 103
*DRAM Frequency:*
DDR3-1603 - DDR3-1691 and DDR3-1203 - DDR3-1269
*UCLK Frequency:*
3206 - 3382MHz and 2406 - 2538MHz
*QPI Link Data Rate:*
7218 - 7615MT/s (lowest possible setting)

*DRAM Timing Control:*
9-9-9-24-2N, rest "Auto"

*CPU Voltage:*
1.2435 - 1.3125
*CPU PLL Voltage:*
1.82 - 1.86
*QPI/DRAM Core Voltage:*
1.25000 - 1.30000
*IOH Voltage:*
1.18v
*IOH PCIE Voltage:*
1.58
*ICH Voltage:*
Auto
*ICH PCIE Voltage:*
1.58
*DRAM Bus Voltage:*
1.52 - 1.60
*DRAM DATA REF Voltages:*
all Auto

*Load-Line Calibration:*
I tried both Enabled and Disabled
*CPU Differential Amplitude:*
800mV
*CPU Clock Skew:*
200ps
*CPU Spread Spectrum:*
Auto
*IOH Clock Skew:*
100ps
*PCIE Spread Spectrum:*
Auto



Did I do anything wrong there?


----------



## DRKreiger

cpu and ioh skew should be the same.

CPU voltage 1.335

try PLL voltage at 1.7.

turn off speed step.

set cpu ratio to manual: highest odd number

1.325 VTT/QPI voltage

PCIE freq. leave at 100mhz

LLC all the way up: most stable voltage, may allow lower overall core voltage


----------



## chessmyantidrug

CPU multiplier issues don't real exist with Westmere. I've used an even multiplier pretty much the entire time I've had my X5660 and there's no discernable difference in stability compared to odd multipliers.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey guys,

I'm gonna give the ol' girl a strip-down and rebuild.

CPU, IOH and PCH (perhaps MOSFETS) GPU's etc

I'm on air, what thermal paste should I use?


----------



## MicroCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm on air, what thermal paste should I use?


I like TG kryonaut. Warm it up before application tho - it's thick - like many of its users. ;-)

GC Extreme is almost as good and easier to apply. Noctua NT-H1 is great too.

Are you putting new pads on the MB sinks? FujiPoly extreme are my favs.


----------



## gofasterstripes

top tips


----------



## Badmojo24

finally got around to my x5660 install build for my friends very first pc. He has been a console fan for most his life and finally decided to dive into PC, which was great as i had a lot of these components sitting in the closet.

First images with blue are the x58 asus p6x58d-e that couldn't hold a stable overclock. Matter of fact it couldn't even hold a non overclock. Likely culprit could potentially be some bent pins that i tried to straighten but not 100% sure it worked.

Replaced that motherboard with a Gigabyte g1 guerrilla which easily hit 4.2ghz. As this build was for a friend i didn't push it any further just to maintain good temperatures and stable overclock. Pictures dont show but i added another 12gigs of corsair vengeance ram for a total of 24gb @ 1600mhz and a GTX 1080 reference.


----------



## phosphene

Great looking build Badmojo24! I'm sure your friend was happy with how it turned out. What kind of temps are you seeing on the x5660 with a 240mm rad?


----------



## Badmojo24

55c full load. typically dont see the 60c+ unless its really hot in the house. that radiator is setup with 4 fans (push+pull)


----------



## phosphene

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badmojo24*
> 
> 55c full load. typically dont see the 60c+ unless its really hot in the house. that radiator is setup with 4 fans (push+pull)


Great temps, you hooked him up!

It's tempting me to move up to a 240 that I could also use in my next build. I'm seeing around 70C full load IBT, under a h50 with scythe push/pull with a x5650 4.2 @ 1.3v.

Next on the list is a 1070/1080, since prices have been dipping lately. Were you happy with the performance of the x5660 + 1080?


----------



## Badmojo24

i compared this 5660 @ 4.2ghz with a 1080 to my overclocked haswell 4770k at 4.2ghz with a 1080.

The 5660 scored 4100 in the new superposition benchmark @ 1080p extreme where as my 4770 score 4500.
gta v @ 4k resolution scored 5fps lower than my 4770k with same video card. I could go on with benchmarks but in the end the xeon scored +5 to -5% of my haswel in both synthetic and gaming benchmarks.

overall i was very happy with the performance of the xeon. still has lots of life left in her


----------



## f00b4h

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badmojo24*
> 
> i compared this 5660 @ 4.2ghz with a 1080 to my overclocked haswell 4770k at 4.2ghz with a 1080.
> 
> The 5660 scored 4100 in the new superposition benchmark @ 1080p extreme where as my 4770 score 4500.


My [email protected] with GTX 1070 scored 3906 1080p extreme benchmark. Check my gallery for other results.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badmojo24*
> 
> i compared this 5660 @ 4.2ghz with a 1080 to my overclocked haswell 4770k at 4.2ghz with a 1080.
> 
> The 5660 scored 4100 in the new superposition benchmark @ 1080p extreme where as my 4770 score 4500.
> gta v @ 4k resolution scored 5fps lower than my 4770k with same video card. I could go on with benchmarks but in the end the xeon scored +5 to -5% of my haswel in both synthetic and gaming benchmarks.
> 
> overall i was very happy with the performance of the xeon. still has lots of life left in her


Yep, this is pretty much how it is. So many get caught up in 720p results, but real world results are more important. Although [email protected] would see some bigger advantages with the higher IPC.


----------



## verbatim

Hello I need some specific help on my x5660 system. It has been great, it IS great but its about 7 years old now. Im still a student and haven't been able to afford any upgrades in a while.

I'm feeling its pretty long in the tooth, it needs to be snappier. I want more ram and a faster SSD. I have the option of starting again with a new system or trying to supercharge this one. See my sig for current specs. Hopefully some parts can be used for any future upgrade like SSD and gfx cards.

1st thing: Ram. 6gb is too small with all my browser windows open. This motherboard uses dual or tripple channel ram. Do I need kits? I'm assuming triple channel is dead, so I should get what speed ram 2x8gb? Well Thats what I would like but the supported ram list is old and has no 8gb sticks on it. *What can I really put in this rig??*

2nd thing: SSD. This SSD is tiny, old and slow. It barely has windows and some programs on it. No games at all fit. I would really like to put a 960 evo on a m.2 adapter on a pci slot and boot from that. *Is this possible on my mobo*? What slot should I use?

Above are the main things that would supercharge my PC, the rest are just nice.
3rd thing; Big GFX card. Would a 1080 or 1080ti be hampered by this x5660 system? Is it ridiculous to try?

4th thing: overclock - Im pretty sure I used to have this chip at a higher overclock but I cant remember how. Overclocking these things is a absolute PITA. I couldnt get it stable at 4 and I was short on time so I left it at 3.5.

Saving the CPU, board and cooler would save a $1000 on upgrades right now and I should be able to carry over the products used (except ram) to the future.
Please help with as much detail as you can above. im really stuck. All this new stuff was not designed to go into a 7 year old board and socket.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> 1st thing: Ram. 6gb is too small with all my browser windows open. This motherboard uses dual or tripple channel ram. Do I need kits? I'm assuming triple channel is dead, so I should get what speed ram 2x8gb? Well Thats what I would like but the supported ram list is old and has no 8gb sticks on it. *What can I really put in this rig??*


How much RAM you want? I brought three 2x8GB kits for my rig.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> 2nd thing: SSD. This SSD is tiny, old and slow. It barely has windows and some programs on it. No games at all fit. I would really like to put a 960 evo on a m.2 adapter on a pci slot and boot from that. *Is this possible on my mobo*? What slot should I use?


I believe it can but I personally didnt try it
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> Above are the main things that would supercharge my PC, the rest are just nice.
> 3rd thing; Big GFX card. Would a 1080 or 1080ti be hampered by this x5660 system? Is it ridiculous to try?


If you overclock, no
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> 4th thing: overclock - Im pretty sure I used to have this chip at a higher overclock but I cant remember how. Overclocking these things is a absolute PITA. I couldnt get it stable at 4 and I was short on time so I left it at 3.5.


For any overclocking, you need to be patient. You probably need to spend a good weekend to get the overall voltage and a week or two to really dial down.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> Hello I need some specific help on my x5660 system. It has been great, it IS great but its about 7 years old now. Im still a student and haven't been able to afford any upgrades in a while.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I'm feeling its pretty long in the tooth, it needs to be snappier. I want more ram and a faster SSD. I have the option of starting again with a new system or trying to supercharge this one. See my sig for current specs. Hopefully some parts can be used for any future upgrade like SSD and gfx cards.
> 
> 1st thing: Ram. 6gb is too small with all my browser windows open. This motherboard uses dual or tripple channel ram. Do I need kits? I'm assuming triple channel is dead, so I should get what speed ram 2x8gb? Well Thats what I would like but the supported ram list is old and has no 8gb sticks on it. *What can I really put in this rig??*
> 
> 2nd thing: SSD. This SSD is tiny, old and slow. It barely has windows and some programs on it. No games at all fit. I would really like to put a 960 evo on a m.2 adapter on a pci slot and boot from that. *Is this possible on my mobo*? What slot should I use?
> 
> Above are the main things that would supercharge my PC, the rest are just nice.
> 3rd thing; Big GFX card. Would a 1080 or 1080ti be hampered by this x5660 system? Is it ridiculous to try?
> 
> 4th thing: overclock - Im pretty sure I used to have this chip at a higher overclock but I cant remember how. Overclocking these things is a absolute PITA. I couldnt get it stable at 4 and I was short on time so I left it at 3.5.
> 
> Saving the CPU, board and cooler would save a $1000 on upgrades right now and I should be able to carry over the products used (except ram) to the future.
> Please help with as much detail as you can above. im really stuck. All this new stuff was not designed to go into a 7 year old board and socket.


1. I'd buy three of the same sticks, 3x8gb would work nicely. I did that for on my x58 system and it worked well, may have to tune the timings a bit to get them to work 100% though.

2. I don't believe the 960 Evo has AHCI fallback, so that may be out of the question without UEFI. I've heard the 950 Pro should work though, not sure about the 960 Pro.

3. 1080 would work fine at 1440p or 4k if paired with a 4ghz+ x5650, higher refresh rates may see some bottlenecks in certain games.

A 1080ti may be a waste on this platform, I'm sure you'd see some increases in certain games, but you'd really need something 4.8ghz+ to really get the most out of it. Considering 1080's regularly go on sale for around $400 they give much better performance for the dollar especially with the way the GPU market is right now.

4. Overclocking on those boards can be a bit of pain from what I've heard.


----------



## christophp

Hi!
Does the Gigabyte X-58-UD7 (Rev 1) Board work with the Xeon X5660? Does anybody run this combination?
Thx!


----------



## verbatim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *christophp*
> 
> Hi!
> Does the Gigabyte X-58-UD7 (Rev 1) Board work with the Xeon X5660? Does anybody run this combination?
> Thx!


I run the UD3 and it works fine. Id be very surprised if yours didn't work with a bios update.

In other news can anyone share the screenshots of their settings to overclock to hit 4.0 GHZ in a GA-X58A-UD3R ? please. Or at least the settings. I have not overcvlocked this board in years and Ive forgotten what everything means. I used to have it at 4.2 ghz but now I cant get past 3.5 ghz. I followed the noob 4.0 ghz guide but it didnt work. Neither did subsequent playing around.

Cheers


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> I run the UD3 and it works fine. Id be very surprised if yours didn't work with a bios update.
> 
> In other news can anyone share the screenshots of their settings to overclock to hit 4.0 GHZ in a GA-X58A-UD3R ? please. Or at least the settings. I have not overcvlocked this board in years and Ive forgotten what everything means. I used to have it at 4.2 ghz but now I cant get past 3.5 ghz. I followed the noob 4.0 ghz guide but it didnt work. Neither did subsequent playing around.
> 
> Cheers


Basic 4GHz w/ x5660

Turbo on
X23 all core Turbo Multi
LLC Level 2 (If I remember correctly)
175MHz BCLK
2975MHz Uncore (X17)
1400 (700MHz) (2:8) RAM (or 1750 (875MHz) 2:10 if your mems can do it).

1.3V VCore
1.2V QPI/VTT
1.64V VDIMM

Set all other voltages manually to their defaults.

CPU PLL: 1.8V
IOH Core: 1.1V
ICH Core: 1.1V
QPI PLL: 1.1V
PCIE: 1.5V
ICH I/O: 1.5V

Been a while since I played with Gigabyte X58, but that should get you at least 4GHz easy.

Also unless the Northbridge on your board is total garbage don't touch the IOH & ICH voltage, it's completely unnecessary and just makes the IOH hotter. 1.1V is all it takes to hit the max BCLK your board can do. (Note: this is with the IOH on ambient cooling. Increasing it will yield higher BCLK with the CPU & IOH under LN2 or Dry Ice).

Doing 4.2GHz should be as simple as increasing the BCLK to 184MHz and VCore to 1.35V if it's not stable at 1.3V with these settings.


----------



## verbatim

Thank you so very much!

There are a couple of things on there I didnt mess with before, I am sure.

I tried 4.0 and it worked fine. Now I am at 4.25 and running prime 95. Temps on some cores are getting v close to 80 deg tho in some tests, which is a worry.

The voltage in CPU-Z is showing a decent bit lower than in the bios. The bios is set to 1.31odd but CPU-z shows 1.296. This sounds familiar from memory, whats the right figure?

*EDIT I run battlefield to check stability also as it fails quite easily on my overclocks Ive found. All good there. Minimum core maxed at 45deg and hottest core was 57deg.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> Thank you so very much!
> 
> There are a couple of things on there I didnt mess with before, I am sure.
> 
> I tried 4.0 and it worked fine. Now I am at 4.25 and running prime 95. Temps on some cores are getting v close to 80 deg tho in some tests, which is a worry.
> 
> The voltage in CPU-Z is showing a decent bit lower than in the bios. The bios is set to 1.31odd but CPU-z shows 1.296. This sounds familiar from memory, whats the right figure?
> 
> *EDIT I run battlefield to check stability also as it fails quite easily on my overclocks Ive found. All good there. Minimum core maxed at 45deg and hottest core was 57deg.


Your welcome.









Temps in Prime95 don't matter a whole lot because you will never see that in real world use. Just keep it below 90C in Prime95 and it will be fine.

As for the VCore, the UD3R uses an analog VRM setup and so the voltage will never be exactly as it's set in the bios ( can be higher or lower), LLC can also play a role in this under load. If you had a board with digital VRM (Like X58A-OC, Evga Classified, Asus Rampage II/III Extreme) the voltage would be almost exact to what is set in the bios.


----------



## verbatim

Ran some new benchmark called timespy from 3dmark. Got a 4660 CPU while watching a movie on the other screen. Seems pretty good compared to some other cpus https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/amd_ryzen_7_1800x_cpu_review/18 but then this makes the score seem weak as https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/luke-hill/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu-review/8/
What you think?

Edit* 4941 with some more ram in there.


----------



## christophp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> I run the UD3 and it works fine. Id be very surprised if yours didn't work with a bios update.


Ok. Thank you. But has anybody seen a wokring Xeon X5660 / Gigabyte X-58-UD7 combination?
I want to sell a Gigabyte X-58-UD7 and the buyer asks this. I can't tell him that I think that it works
if I don't really know it...


----------



## verbatim

In lieu of someone answering, scroll back through the posts here and check people signatures. Their pc builds are in them and I bet you will find a ud7 easy.

In other news I wasn't happy when I downloaded crystalmark to check my ssd drives speed. It was 130mb/s. Unplugged the cord from a sata 3 port and into a sata 2 port and now its 230mb/s. Guess the sata 3 ports were mature on this board?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

X58 motherboards didn't have native SATA3. Motherboard manufacturers added it themselves and I guess the added latency between the controller and chipset/CPU makes it not worth using. I haven't bothered moving my 850 Pro to SATA2 because I'm pleased with the performance. If Windows would load a second or two faster from a SATA2 port, I wouldn't notice it.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *christophp*
> 
> Ok. Thank you. But has anybody seen a wokring Xeon X5660 / Gigabyte X-58-UD7 combination?
> I want to sell a Gigabyte X-58-UD7 and the buyer asks this. I can't tell him that I think that it works
> if I don't really know it...


It does work. I have a Xeon X5660 paired with a X58A-UD7 rev 1


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> It does work. I have a Xeon X5660 paired with a X58A-UD7 rev 1


I have the same board and CPU. Currently it has an X5680 in it. Does not run any faster than X5660 so don't spend money on anything higher than X5680 unless you have a board that does not like high FSB.


----------



## Allkubano

Hey friends, I have a little trouble, I have an x58 tpower motherboard, so the big question is, may I set a xeon x5660 cpu in my motherboard???


----------



## verbatim

http://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=390#cpusupport

Does not list it. Youd have to find someone who has tried.


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> http://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=390#cpusupport
> 
> Does not list it. Youd have to find someone who has tried.


A lot, if not all, the broads dont list xeons since they are consumer boards


----------



## wonderbrah

On these xeon x58 cpus is it safe to run higher than 1.5x or 2.0x uncore than dram? My ram is 1600 mhz but my uncore is around 3600-3700. Is that okay?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wonderbrah*
> 
> On these xeon x58 cpus is it safe to run higher than 1.5x or 2.0x uncore than dram? My ram is 1600 mhz but my uncore is around 3600-3700. Is that okay?


Ya thats ok


----------



## ZinC25

Hey guys,

i am moving to another town as a second place to live. Therefore I need a second PC.
I currently have a Ryzen 7 1700X, 16GB RAM and a GTX 970 and want a somewhat similar performance, although the "new" PC will be for gaming only (meaning i don't really need 8 cores, actually I guess I wont even need 6 cores







).

My question is, if it is worth to get a X58 board with a X56xx (OC) and put a second hand graphics card in it, or get a newer platform (i7 2600K maybe, or even newer?)? I think i can have a X58 board + CPU for about 100€. I guess the performance would be nice, however I would miss out on SATA3 and USB3 (which i can live with, i guess). I am really not sure what I should get. Any recommendations are highly appreciated.

Oh, and yes, I would like to save some money on this PC, otherwise I would just get new hardware (which I will if it makes more sense).

Kind regards,
Thomas


----------



## chessmyantidrug

If you can get a X58 board priced that low, it's worth it. I don't know if the pricing has trended downward, but motherboard pricing has been what makes an X58 build less ideal. I would say go for Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge if you want better gaming performance. An i5 from either of those generations should provide enough performance.


----------



## verbatim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> Basic 4GHz w/ x5660
> 
> Turbo on
> X23 all core Turbo Multi
> LLC Level 2 (If I remember correctly)
> 175MHz BCLK
> 2975MHz Uncore (X17)
> 1400 (700MHz) (2:8) RAM (or 1750 (875MHz) 2:10 if your mems can do it).
> 
> 1.3V VCore
> 1.2V QPI/VTT
> 1.64V VDIMM
> 
> Set all other voltages manually to their defaults.
> 
> CPU PLL: 1.8V
> IOH Core: 1.1V
> ICH Core: 1.1V
> QPI PLL: 1.1V
> PCIE: 1.5V
> ICH I/O: 1.5V
> 
> Been a while since I played with Gigabyte X58, but that should get you at least 4GHz easy.
> 
> Also unless the Northbridge on your board is total garbage don't touch the IOH & ICH voltage, it's completely unnecessary and just makes the IOH hotter. 1.1V is all it takes to hit the max BCLK your board can do. (Note: this is with the IOH on ambient cooling. Increasing it will yield higher BCLK with the CPU & IOH under LN2 or Dry Ice).
> 
> Doing 4.2GHz should be as simple as increasing the BCLK to 184MHz and VCore to 1.35V if it's not stable at 1.3V with these settings.


Ever since changing this I have had system instability. Upping the cpu mem volts does nothing, neither does drastically reducing the overclock.
I get micro pauses whilst browsing the net or navigating windows. Further more the PC freezes every now and then and when the screens power down after idle, the computer freezes.

Any idea which setting to mess with?


----------



## bill1024

Maybe try lowering the uncore to 2800 if your ram is at 1400 2x ram speed or one step lower.
Raise the QPI/VVT to 1.30 or 1.35v and see if that helps
Never hurts to test the ram sticks one stick at a time


----------



## brootalperry

For anyone familiar with the Asus X58 motherboards (particularly the Rampage III boards) are there any options to have an offset voltage so that even with EIST and C states turned on my CPU doesn't have 1.36v (It's actually set to 1.35 in the BIOS but I also have full LLC turned on) going through it while I'm just browsing the net?

Thanks to EIST the multiplier goes down to 12 from 21, making it 2.4Ghz instead of it being a constant 4.2Ghz, which is great for cutting down on the heat and noise but I don't think this really does anything in the way of saving power...

Also is it okay for the voltage to be at 1.36v? I've been told many times here that going over 1.35 for the vcore is a big no no and will degrade my CPU one way or another, but yet I look on other forums and see a lot of people are running these chips near 1.4v! I mean i guess it wouldn't be too bad if they can set an offset voltage, but i don't know how on my board or if I even can.


----------



## Wishmaker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> For anyone familiar with the Asus X58 motherboards (particularly the Rampage III boards) are there any options to have an offset voltage so that even with EIST and C states turned on my CPU doesn't have 1.36v (It's actually set to 1.35 in the BIOS but I also have full LLC turned on) going through it while I'm just browsing the net?
> 
> Thanks to EIST the multiplier goes down to 12 from 21, making it 2.4Ghz instead of it being a constant 4.2Ghz, which is great for cutting down on the heat and noise but I don't think this really does anything in the way of saving power...
> 
> Also is it okay for the voltage to be at 1.36v? I've been told many times here that going over 1.35 for the vcore is a big no no and will degrade my CPU one way or another, but yet I look on other forums and see a lot of people are running these chips near 1.4v! I mean i guess it wouldn't be too bad if they can set an offset voltage, but i don't know how on my board or if I even can.


HI there.
My Rampage III Formula does not have OFFSET for Voltage settings. I was looking for it as I had an UD3 and UD5 in the past. Do you really need it? I have all the power saving features on and while my chip drops down to 2 GHz on 1.42 V heat is under control.

I am running 1.42V at 4750 MHz on my 5650x and it has been like that for months. What you need to understand that VCORE will not kill this chip. It is a solid chip, IMC on the other hand needs loads of tenderness.


----------



## brootalperry

I figured. I just thought that maybe it would be under some kind of weird name that I was missing. I suppose it's fine. Having the CPU downclock when idle really does help keep the temps down so I'm pretty happy. I've also turned off hyperthreading which I'm sure shaves a few degrees off too









Anyway thanks for telling me about the vcore and everything else. I feel like I could really push this a lot higher then if I need to. It's been awhile but I'm guessing IMC = QPI voltage? I've got that set at 1.25v and have Uncore at 3008 Mhz. I think this is pretty safe (?)


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> For anyone familiar with the Asus X58 motherboards (particularly the Rampage III boards) are there any options to have an offset voltage so that even with EIST and C states turned on my CPU doesn't have 1.36v (It's actually set to 1.35 in the BIOS but I also have full LLC turned on) going through it while I'm just browsing the net?
> 
> Thanks to EIST the multiplier goes down to 12 from 21, making it 2.4Ghz instead of it being a constant 4.2Ghz, which is great for cutting down on the heat and noise but I don't think this really does anything in the way of saving power...
> 
> Also is it okay for the voltage to be at 1.36v? I've been told many times here that going over 1.35 for the vcore is a big no no and will degrade my CPU one way or another, but yet I look on other forums and see a lot of people are running these chips near 1.4v! I mean i guess it wouldn't be too bad if they can set an offset voltage, but i don't know how on my board or if I even can.


My Asus p6x58d premium has the offset voltage setting, which is why i find it wierd that the R3 above doesn't. Also i ran 1.45v for vcore for more than a year on my x5660 but it is on semi custom water(swiftech) so temps were ok even if it was a bad overclocker.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> It's been awhile but I'm guessing IMC = QPI voltage?


I'm pretty sure IMC is Integrated Memory Controller.


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> I'm pretty sure IMC is Integrated Memory Controller.


QPI / VTT / VCCIO / IMC voltages are all the same thing aren't they?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spinFX*
> 
> QPI / VTT / VCCIO / IMC voltages are all the same thing aren't they?


Yup.

Asus named it QPI/DRAM on their boards all other manufactures call it VTT.


----------



## brootalperry

Thanks for the clarification


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> For anyone familiar with the Asus X58 motherboards (particularly the Rampage III boards) are there any options to have an offset voltage so that even with EIST and C states turned on my CPU doesn't have 1.36v (It's actually set to 1.35 in the BIOS but I also have full LLC turned on) going through it while I'm just browsing the net?
> 
> Thanks to EIST the multiplier goes down to 12 from 21, making it 2.4Ghz instead of it being a constant 4.2Ghz, which is great for cutting down on the heat and noise but I don't think this really does anything in the way of saving power...
> 
> Also is it okay for the voltage to be at 1.36v? I've been told many times here that going over 1.35 for the vcore is a big no no and will degrade my CPU one way or another, but yet I look on other forums and see a lot of people are running these chips near 1.4v! I mean i guess it wouldn't be too bad if they can set an offset voltage, but i don't know how on my board or if I even can.


My X58 sabertooth has an offset mode... not sure why it was not implemented for the R3.

I found this dating back to 2011:
Source TWEAKTOWN

"Regarding the offset vCore question, as of right now we have no plans of implementing this option. We asked a lot of users about their thoughts on having vCore offset and we did not get a lot of feedback. We did get feedback from the extreme community and most said that they did not utilize dynamic VID, and that they are more concerned with maintaining a more consistent voltage using absolute vCore. However, we do have 2 options for load-line calibration (50% and 100%) to give users more voltage control. So as of right now vCore offset will only be implemented in our mainstream board as well as the upcoming Rampage III Formula."

I use offset on my Xeon, and like that it ramps down voltage and clocks at idle. I even use the single core turbo to run 4.675ghz when multi core runs at 4.5ghz. Allows me to maximize performance while being as energy efficient as I can be.


----------



## CrazyNES

Hello I can't take it no more!!! lol

I've installed my x5650 a few days ago to hopefully have a little upgrade that would have me good for 1 or 2 years.
This thread has provided me with lot's of info about OCing the x5650. But still I have trouble to find my solution.
Maybe anyone can help me out...

Here's some info:

This is what I use:

P6T SE Bios 0908 (latest)
Xeon x5650 Westmere-EP B1
Cooler Master 212 EVO
12 GB triple Channel (3x 4GB DDR3 Cruical 1800)

Now I want to set my x5650 the right way to make it top efficient. I think @4Ghz is my sweetspot.
Remember I use aircooling and don't want to invest more money in cooling or whatever. Hitting 75-80 degrees @ Prime or IBT is fine with me.
With my i7 920 I also had patience with OCing. Lowest vcore and QPI to keep the temps low. Screwed BLCK up with steps of 50-100 and see if it was stable.
Best way to have max performance on lowest vcore imo.

I want...

- Have a nice still good enough PC no heavy rendering. I use it mostly as a mediastation these days. lol
- Play some games at 1080p around 60 FPS. I have a option on a cheap GTX 1060 6GB. I think this is max. for this processor??

Some numbers from CPU-Z at stock/default settings:

vcore 0.960-1.183

Dram NB 2138 / freq 668.1 / 2:10 / 9 - 9 - 9 - 24

37,5 Gflops in IBT

Info on OCing my x5650 B1

manual
20x locked
Intel Speedstep (TM) tech disabled
Intel Turbomode tech disabled
C1E support disabled
C states disabled
LLC enabled
Spectrums disabled
BLCK 200
PCIe 100
DRAM Freq: DDR3 1603 (x8)
UCLK x1.5 - 2x (whatever I try my system only reads 4 GB???)
QPI 7200 something (lowest multiplier)

vcore 1.3250 VTT 1.3250 RAM 1.64 ...These setting I will tune down when I have find a stable good perfomance. Both should be more than enough from what I've read.

DRAM NB 2999 / freq 800 / 2:8 / 8 - 11 - 11 - 28

The problem is that my system only read 4GB ...With my i7 920 DRAM multiplier x8 was fine (was around 15xx) and ofcourse Uncore x 2

When I go to DRAM x4 and Uncore x2 (can't go Uncore x1.5 on the lowest memory multiplier somehow) I get the full 12GB.

Everything the same as above with DRAM x4 and Uncore x2

DRAM NB 2399 / freq 600 / 2:6 / 8 - 8 - 8 - 20

40 Gflops in IBT *Only 2,5 higher than stock!*

If anyone has some ideas... Please speak and I will try.

Thanks for reading anyway


----------



## Wishmaker

In my quest to stabilize the 5650 I have, I spotted some weird stuff with IBT. I sometimes had less scores at higher clocks. I actually found that for some reason IBT is sensitive to certain voltage changes. Unless you have a very degraded chip, I would not use IBT as a performance indicator.
Use another benchmark and compare your scores with ours. You will notice that your GFLOPS will change based on memory used as well.

IBT is sensitive to QPI voltage and also VCORE. After a certain thresholds, your results will become sporadic.









PS: you can use the 1080 as well on this chip without any issues.


----------



## brootalperry

It seems that it takes a longer time for my computer to boot to Windows (as in it takes ages for it to boot to the Windows login screen) when I raise the multiplier to 22 (4.4Ghz) and the vcore from 1.35 to 1.375. This is something that started in the past couple days and today it almost wouldn't boot to Windows at all until I brought it back down to 4.2Ghz and 1.35 vcore.

What could this mean?


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *verbatim*
> 
> Ever since changing this I have had system instability. Upping the cpu mem volts does nothing, neither does drastically reducing the overclock.
> I get micro pauses whilst browsing the net or navigating windows. Further more the PC freezes every now and then and when the screens power down after idle, the computer freezes.
> 
> Any idea which setting to mess with?


I'm running 4.2GHz (183x23) on 1.28V , ram @ 1467mhz / 1.5V (24gb - 4GBx6dimms) __ with pretty much everything else on auto__ at the moment (Asus px568d-e) .
Have you tried leaving mostly auto values?
This board doesn't report much, hwinfo doesn't tell me what voltage everything is running at besides VTT (1.098), but it seems fine.


----------



## chungsteroonie

After a long time watching and waiting, and not really thinking I would find a "reasonably priced" copy, finally got my hands on a couple of X58 motherboards to play with. I'm reading this thread from top to bottom, but have a bit to catch up on so I thought I'd post my question here.

After some really precarious motherboard soldering (EVGA mod and BIOS chip replacement), I think I'm ready to build.

I have a question about power consumption on a strong x3650/x3660 overclock. The information I am getting online is all over the map. . . all the way up to vlogger reading 700 watts pulled from the wall on a gold rated PSU (single X5650 / single GTX 970).

I'd love to be able to use a pair of EVGA SuperNOVA 550 G2's that I have available, but am heavily second guessing that now. Do I need something stronger?

MSI X58M MS-7593 v1.1
EVGA X58 SLI LE v.1.0 (E757 now modded)

GPU is GTX 980 TI

I'm using a Kraken X61 280mm AIO, so I'm hoping to push a little motherboard permitting. I'm wondering what kinds of power consumption measurements folks are getting on this platform.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I am 4GHz @ 1.28V, 3200 Uncore, 12GB 1600MHz RAM, SLI 970, 3xHDD, 1xSSD, 1xDVD Drive + Wireless. Power consumption at the wall is <500W at all times, more like 450 peak. As measured by my UPS.


----------



## artdom

Heya all,

Recently upgraded my old i7 920 @ 4ghz to a X5675 @ 4,6Ghz and had loads of fun trying to tweak it . Gotta love it !

I did come up with some problems along the way above 4,4ghz. Mainly i had to raise my Vcore to 1,4V, and i had to disable hyperthreading.

Even tough i have a Corsair AIO H110iGT wich is pretty decent, my temperatures with hyperthreading go towards 90C in prime and AIDA64 max stress tests and i wasn't confortable with it. Also the whole PC doesnt seem stable.

After i disabled hyperthreading, my temperatures droped 20C in load (wow!) and quite honestly i don't see any benefit to hyperthreading outside of benchmarks like cinebench (in games its virtualy non-existant performance since we already have 6 REAL cores).

Basicaly i have to choose between :

a) 4,6ghz - 1,4V with no hyperthreading ( 6Cores/6 Threads)
b) 4,4Ghz - 1,35V with hyperthreading (6 cores / 12 threads)

It seems to me that the achiles heel of the xeon X58 is the single-threaded performance, so i gather its way more beneficial to have 200mhz more than to the 6 more virtual threads in gamming.

Would you pick option b) aswell for gamming or am I missing something ?


----------



## EMUracing

I would choose option A unless you need more than 6 threads for the application you are using. With HT disabled, each core will have better ipc than HT enabled.


----------



## artdom

Thing is, i don't realy use any productivity aplications like video rendering or 3d work. Only gamming performance interests me at this PC, and of course cost vs performance.

I was using the i7 920 for 7 years, and this upgrade cost me $50 and i realy enjoyed it. I'm sure this were the best $50 i've spent in over a decade









Regarding gamming, checking reviews all over the web, i only found 3 games that actualy gain performance with more than 6 threads to the point that the FPS actualy makes any diference, but then again, with the same clock-speeds with and witout HT. If you take into account that you can get 200mhz more if you disable HT (in my case), that it seems that i would get no advantage with HT in ANY game at all.

- Crysis 3
- GTA5
- Watch Dogs2

On this games, going from 6C/6T to 6C/12T goes a couple frames up, but even then it's debatable if the extra heat + lower IPC + less 200mhz on the cores is actualy worth it...

Not even mentioning that it seems that some other games actualy lose performance with HT...


----------



## EMUracing

I agree... you can always try running a benchmark in each scenario to see your performance difference.


----------



## tbob22

I personally find that my minimums are almost always better with HT enabled, even on a hexa core.

You can see that reflected here:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2867-intel-i7-2600k-2017-benchmark-vs-7700k-1700-more/page-3

Look at the huge jump with the 7700k when HT is enabled. Of course if you are running a low/mid range card, you'll probably be GPU limited 99% of the time.


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> I personally find that my minimums are almost always better with HT enabled, even on a hexa core.
> 
> You can see that reflected here:
> http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2867-intel-i7-2600k-2017-benchmark-vs-7700k-1700-more/page-3
> 
> Look at the huge jump with the 7700k when HT is enabled. Of course if you are running a low/mid range card, you'll probably be GPU limited 99% of the time.


it's hard to compare a 6c with without HT to a 4c/8t.

Hyper threading only helps the 6 core if there are more than 6 threads. Without HT, and a higher clock, I think it will perform better until you notice needing more cores. Then HT will improve performance.


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EMUracing*
> 
> it's hard to compare a 6c with without HT to a 4c/8t.
> 
> Hyper threading only helps the 6 core if there are more than 6 threads. Without HT, and a higher clock, I think it will perform better until you notice needing more cores. Then HT will improve performance.


Well, you can see the 6900k outperforming the much higher clocked 7700k so I'd say the games that were tested are using quite a few threads. I've seen it on my own system, averages can be a bit higher in certain games with HT disabled but if I check the min 1% it's almost always higher with HT enabled.


----------



## artdom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tbob22*
> 
> Well, you can see the 6900k outperforming the much higher clocked 7700k so I'd say the games that were tested are using quite a few threads. I've seen it on my own system, averages can be a bit higher in certain games with HT disabled but if I check the min 1% it's almost always higher with HT enabled.


Thats probable sure. But would you trade 200mhz overclock for that hyperthread on a 6core already ? on a 4core it's a nobrainer ofc. 4c/8T is realy usefull, what i'm not entirely convinced is 6C/12T worth it...


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artdom*
> 
> Thats probable sure. But would you trade 200mhz overclock for that hyperthread on a 6core already ? on a 4core it's a nobrainer ofc. 4c/8T is realy usefull, what i'm not entirely convinced is 6C/12T worth it...


I personally would, but I also run Photoshop, etc that will happily use more threads when needed. I guess you'll just have to test it and see what performs best on your config and the games you play.


----------



## tbob22

A bit of fun with a w3530, needs some more volts.


----------



## deadsmiley

GTX 980 is not held back much by a X5660 @4.3GHz

Firestrike graphics: 15,691
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13534571

Here is the same system with GTX 980 SLI

Firestrike graphics: 29,605
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13534901

Both cards are nVidia reference cards with the VBIOS mod I for the blower version found here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1517316/extract-and-flash-gtx-970-and-980-firmware-zosons-h2o-and-air-custom-bios
(third file from the top)
EVGA.GTX980SCACX.04G-P4-2983-KR.84.04.31.00.83-AIRv2.zip

The rest of the system:
GA-X58A-UD7 Ver. 1
X5660
2x 8GB Corsair Vengence DDR3-1600 (Xeon gives us lot's of options here, 288GB potenial baby!)
Sandisk Plus 480GB SSD
Western Digital Black 1TB
Corsair CX650M modular power supply
DeepCool Tesseract SW Red - This is a very cheap case. This is my second build with it and I like it. Was $29.99 on sale.
No floppy or optical drive. Nothing on IDE interface.


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> GTX 980 is not held back much by a X5660 @4.3GHz
> 
> Firestrike graphics: 15,691
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13534571


Looks like I need to work to try to match that 980 with my 1060 6gb.

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13534571/fs/11900656/fs/12254425#

For comparisons sake, I added my 7700k score at 5.17ghz.

I get the physics score with my higher cpu clock speed, but you smash my graphics scores. I can almost meet your score with the 7700k, but just not enough power. The gpu wasn't overclocked on the Xeon... but was on the 7700k. (4th highest user with 7700k/1060 6gb combo, 9th fastest score).


----------



## deadsmiley

I have my X5660 @ 4.3GHz and my GTX 980 at 1480MHz for a daily use. With my Kill-a-Watt meter I see the following draw from the wall while benchmarking.

In Firestrike I see 449 watts from the wall.

In 3DMark11 I see 400 watts from the wall.

In Player Unknown Battlegrounds I see 440w from the wall. I heard this game was a a machine killer.

In MechWarrior Online I never saw it go over 300w.

Just for fun I put my other GTX 980 in the system for SLI and ran Firestrike again. *I saw 700w from the wall.*

I have a 650w semi-modular power supply, Corsair CX650M. According to the Corsair website this PSU is up 85% efficient. If we take 650w wall draw by 85% (the best case efficiency rating of the PSU) we get 595w.

A power supply is rated for how much current it can supply, not how much it draws from the wall. Worst case is that I am pulling 595w on my 650w power supply. This is why it works. Now my cards have been flashed to raise the power of the cards. They now run at 1480MHz almost all the time while under load. I am sure they are pulling more than 165w specified for a reference design. The GTX 980 Ti reference design is a 250w card. Even if my cards were stock they would pull up to 330w total, so I think am exceeding your setup in total power draw.

*TL;DR:*
Your EVGA SuperNOVA 550 G2 is a very nice power supply. I have a lower end unit. I think your 550w power supply will be OK for running your system with a single GTX 980 Ti. I would try it.


----------



## deadsmiley

The 980 cards I have are overclocked and they have been flashed for more power so they hold the 1480MHz under load. Even though the stock 980 is right with the stock 1060 in Firestrike, the 1060 tends to run away from the 980 in games. The GTX 1060 6GB is really good card. Thanks for the comparison. I find these types of things very interesting.









P.S.
The 1510MHz was a maximum effort run, which is adding 30Mhz in MSI Afterburner. The card already boost to 1480MHz. At 50Mhz on the slider I get artifacting even with the voltage maxed out, so it's on the hair edge. I don't do anything with the CPU slider in MSI Afterburner since I flashed the VBIOS. I just use it to control fans and max out the power.


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> The 980 cards I have are overclocked and they have been flashed for more power so they hold the 1480MHz under load. Even though the stock 980 is right with the stock 1060 in Firestrike, the 1060 tends to run away from the 980 in games. The GTX 1060 6GB is really good card. Thanks for the comparison. I find these types of things very interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S.
> The 1510MHz was a maximum effort run, which is adding 30Mhz in MSI Afterburner. The card already boost to 1480MHz. At 50Mhz on the slider I get artifacting even with the voltage maxed out, so it's on the hair edge. I don't do anything with the CPU slider in MSI Afterburner since I flashed the VBIOS. I just use it to control fans and max out the power.


Thats a strong 980 you have with those mods. I remember when the 1060 came out, and they touted it a 980 killer. I think that the 980 is stronger when overclocked compared to the 1060, but at stock the 1060 has the edge. It really comes down to driver optimizations now for the 1060 since they arent really supporting the 980 much any more.

I like tinkering with stuff too... enjoy the little comparisons. I used to have an old ATI 4890 that I would throw into every new system that I built and bench it to the max to see the differences, but I gave up a little while ago after my Ivy bridge and dont have the card anymore. I got the x5675 after I gave my Ivy to my nephew as b-day present to have a budget system to have fun with while I worked out my Kaby Lake system. Got CPU/Mobo/24gb ram on ebay/amazon for about $200... its the most fun that I've had tinkering since the old s775 builds or Socket A, where every little tweak could see a noticeable improvement. Modern mainstream really isnt as much fun as it used to be, bump the multi, tighten the memory and its basically done in an hour or two. I spent weeks if not months trying different BCLK vs multi at roughly the same CPU speed, with different uncore/memory speed and timings to try to push the performance as much as I could.

I like my 1060, for a base level card, it gets a good OC. Not the greatest, but good enough for me. I may try to borrow my brothers 980 and see how it compares (I bought it for myself, but he was struggling with 580 classified SLI, so I gave it to him). I havent seen much info about performance boosts on the 1060 with voltage increase, so havent really wanted to do any bios mods.

If I find some time, and the weather plays nice, I may try dropping the 1060 back into the x58 and pushing some clocks up to see what it can do. I had my eyes on getting a 980ti for the system, but then the mining craze came, and GPU prices are out of hand.


----------



## artdom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artdom*
> 
> Heya all,
> 
> Recently upgraded my old i7 920 @ 4ghz to a X5675 @ 4,6Ghz and had loads of fun trying to tweak it . Gotta love it !
> 
> I did come up with some problems along the way above 4,4ghz. Mainly i had to raise my Vcore to 1,4V, and i had to disable hyperthreading.
> 
> Even tough i have a Corsair AIO H110iGT wich is pretty decent, my temperatures with hyperthreading go towards 90C in prime and AIDA64 max stress tests and i wasn't confortable with it. Also the whole PC doesnt seem stable.
> 
> After i disabled hyperthreading, my temperatures droped 20C in load (wow!) and quite honestly i don't see any benefit to hyperthreading outside of benchmarks like cinebench (in games its virtualy non-existant performance since we already have 6 REAL cores).
> 
> Basicaly i have to choose between :
> 
> a) 4,6ghz - 1,4V with no hyperthreading ( 6Cores/6 Threads)
> b) 4,4Ghz - 1,35V with hyperthreading (6 cores / 12 threads)
> 
> It seems to me that the achiles heel of the xeon X58 is the single-threaded performance, so i gather its way more beneficial to have 200mhz more than to the 6 more virtual threads in gamming.
> 
> Would you pick option b) aswell for gamming or am I missing something ?


Decided to go with disabled hyperthreading @ 4,4ghz but i keep feeling i'm missing something, gotta love the 12 threads in games just for show in the overlay. What can i say, i'm sucker for more threads even though they are not realy doing much









Not giving up trying to get 4,6Ghz with hyperthreading, i raised my voltage to 1,42V and i got it stable except when the temperatures were over 85C, then it all went tits-up.

So problem was temperatures even with a Corsair H110GT. On a hunch decided to get a stick of noctua thermal paste and replaced my crappy included CPU paste, and i managed to get 6C less. The funny fact was that the Corsair temperature raised from 42 to 46C, meaning that the Noctua paste is actualy making a much better job transfering heat from the CPUs to the Corsair loop.

Oh well, the geeky mind of a proud overclocker ah ?







Remember guys, quality thermal paste DOES make a diference. Now i'm at 4,6ghz 6C/12T.

(Yes, i know i can probably try 4,7ghz with 6C/6T now, but... naw... threads on ma xeon are kool m'kay)

Cheers


----------



## spinFX

Been seeing my x5660 hitting 23.7/8 multiplier, giving 4300+mhz when the oc is for 4.2ghz. Sometimes just 1 or 2 cores. Is that normal behavior or is it just a reporting error or something else?


----------



## GENXLR

I don't even think that's possible, have you monitored your bus freq to make sure it's not oscillating? What motherboard. Need more info than that. How are you measuring

Post below is correct, I was under the impression you were actually read 23.7 in software which I don't believe is possible


----------



## theister

X5660 has max Multi of 24 for 2 cores with turbo and cstates.


----------



## gofasterstripes

I also get this sometimes, I'm on 20x200, but sometimes in Realtemp I see something like 21.3x200 ?! Odd, but it doesn't crash so I ignore it. I think it can happen once, shortly after boot, but after I hit 100% load it tends to stick to 20x or less [C-States are enabled].


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *theister*
> 
> X5660 has max Multi of 24 for 2 cores with turbo and cstates.


well there you go. thanks and rep+


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> I don't even think that's possible, have you monitored your bus freq to make sure it's not oscillating? What motherboard. Need more info than that. How are you measuring
> 
> Post below is correct, I was under the impression you were actually read 23.7 in software which I don't believe is possible


think it was actually realtemp that was showing 23.7/23.8 multiplier fluctuating, so probably nothing to take too serioulsy, although it could have been hwinfo, not sure now...bclk was stablish at 182.95/6 or thereabouts. I bumped the bclk up to 187 and increased vcore to 1.29 and it seems to be reading more consistently now.


----------



## Knoxx29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spinFX*
> 
> Been seeing my x5660 hitting 23.7/8 multiplier, giving 4300+mhz when the oc is for 4.2ghz. Sometimes just 1 or 2 cores. Is that normal behavior or is it just a reporting error or something else?


My X5690 does the same, in bios multiplier is set at 26 but CPU-z shows 27.0.

Every CPU has a minimum and maximum multiplier.

See the screenshot below, where it says multiplier in brackets there is (12 - 28 ) 12 is the min multiplier and 28 is the max even if my CPU max multiplier is 26.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EMUracing*
> 
> Thats a strong 980 you have with those mods. I remember when the 1060 came out, and they touted it a 980 killer. I think that the 980 is stronger when overclocked compared to the 1060, but at stock the 1060 has the edge. It really comes down to driver optimizations now for the 1060 since they arent really supporting the 980 much any more.
> 
> I like tinkering with stuff too... enjoy the little comparisons. I used to have an old ATI 4890 that I would throw into every new system that I built and bench it to the max to see the differences, but I gave up a little while ago after my Ivy bridge and dont have the card anymore. I got the x5675 after I gave my Ivy to my nephew as b-day present to have a budget system to have fun with while I worked out my Kaby Lake system. Got CPU/Mobo/24gb ram on ebay/amazon for about $200... its the most fun that I've had tinkering since the old s775 builds or Socket A, where every little tweak could see a noticeable improvement. Modern mainstream really isnt as much fun as it used to be, bump the multi, tighten the memory and its basically done in an hour or two. I spent weeks if not months trying different BCLK vs multi at roughly the same CPU speed, with different uncore/memory speed and timings to try to push the performance as much as I could.
> 
> I like my 1060, for a base level card, it gets a good OC. Not the greatest, but good enough for me. I may try to borrow my brothers 980 and see how it compares (I bought it for myself, but he was struggling with 580 classified SLI, so I gave it to him). I havent seen much info about performance boosts on the 1060 with voltage increase, so havent really wanted to do any bios mods.
> 
> If I find some time, and the weather plays nice, I may try dropping the 1060 back into the x58 and pushing some clocks up to see what it can do. I had my eyes on getting a 980ti for the system, but then the mining craze came, and GPU prices are out of hand.


It seems that the Maxwell and Pascal cards just need the power and voltage tweaked. Boost takes care of the rest. I don't add anything to the clocks with this bios mod and it goes to 1480MHz all the time (unless not needed, like in menus, etc.) I am pretty happy with them especially since 1060 is more than I wanted to spend right now with the inflated price. I bought my GTX 1070 SC for $400. Sold it to my son for $300 after I bought my GTX 1080 Ti. I thought is was a good deal. If I had held on a bit longer I could have sold it to a 3rd party for more than I paid for it. Ha!


----------



## Slayer3032

Picked up a "B Stock" X5660 off ebay for $24.13 shipped, figured it would be fun to play with and should outperform my junk i7 930 that never could make it past 3.9ghz and degraded to a 3.75 shortly. What I really didn't really expect was a cpu that when I was done overclocking it, belted out a champ of a Cinebench score which beats a stock i7 7700k and looks similar enough overall to the Ryzen cpus I've been looking at. All on air(NH-D14) and within safe voltages and safe temps. Well, at least until you p95 it..



I tried pushing it further but I think I've hit the wall my old cpu would where it just stops being stable then it just starts to shut off at higher voltages. I think it's probably related to my GA-X58A-UD5 Rev.1 board with the less power phases or my PSU that I acquired for free after my previous died. I'm beyond impressed with these cpus and the hyperthreading effected the single thread Cinebench scores on higher clocks at negligible levels as well. I got it to benchmark at higher clocks such as 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 but none were any higher and hyperthreading had to go. Single core performance only went up by single digits at most that I found. My core #6 would also peg out at 96c while at least two cores would be upto or over 30c cooler so I'm not really sure what was up with that anyways.

I ran into an issue almost instantly when I was trying to overclock it which was that if I were to touch the Uncore multiplier it would refuse to post and I would be forced to clear cmos and start over most of the time. Doing some research into this I found that the rev.1 board is pretty underwhelming for something I paid quite a bit for new and was later revised significant enough. What I found was that updating the bios for these boards requires you to either pick the last 1MB bios and flash it via QFlash or install windows 7 and use @Bios. I flashed the F6 bios before I installed the cpu because of this.

Later on after finding a post by @nitrobg in this thread here I was curious if the newer bios versions or the modded bios files for this board contained more upto date microcode for this cpu, they didn't. So since at the time of that picture I was running 1.335v on the QPI and still had a single random BSOD while playing PUBG. I decided to look into modding my patching the microcode into the F6 bios which was still very easily flashable. This lead me all over but found that I couldn't rip them from the Sabertooth as was suggested since the UD5 uses an Award bios. Luckily the "FF3_Orom" modded bios for the Rev.2 board contained the updated microcodes so I dumped them with CBROM, patched them into a fresh F6 off Gigabyte's site and checked them with Intelmicrocodelist. I flashed this directly after in QFlash along with telling QFlash to not clear CMOS and voila! It worked perfectly and I could now lower my Uncore multiplier from 20x and still post.

I found however lowering my Uncore to significantly lower my Cinebench score down to almost 900 from 1000 at 12x, so I settled in at 18x which net me a 989 while lowering my QPI/VTT down to 1.315v

Most of the settings and voltages I found unnecessary to stability but leaving some on auto, especially anything memory timing related will shoot you in the foot pretty quick as it seems the BIOS likes to change them. So I set my mess of 3x2gb and 2x1gb all to the spec of one and gave them 1.6v.

Here's what settings got me to where I am now on my GA-X58A-UD5 Rev.1

Clock Ratio: 23x
QPI Ratio: 36x
Uncore Ratio: 18x (20x in 1001cb Cinebench)
Memory Multi: 6.0
Base Clock: 191
CPU Clock Drive: 800mV (These were changed by optimized defaults from 700mV compared to my i7)
PCI-E Clock Drive: 900mV

Turbo Boost: On
Hyperthreading: On
C States/EIST/Thermal Mon: Off

LLC: Level 2
CPU VCore: 1.31875v
QPI/Vtt: 1.315v (1.335v a hair unstable on Uncore 20x from pictured benchmark)
DRAM: 1.6v

I still can't believe it beats my buddy's 4790k and keeps up extremely well with all the current gen tech in a synthetic benchmark. If only my board didn't take like 15 seconds to go through post, AHCI bios "post" and the esata startup. I've totally fallen in love with this computer again, about as much as I did when I built it almost 8 years ago. Now I probably need to upgrade over 8gb of ram with some more modern speeds and timings.


----------



## asiki

Hi,
A question, what do you think?
Xeon x5675, OC-ed to 4.3GHz (25x172), vcore=1.3v, qpivtt=1.25v (or something like that). Stable. Cooling is a cheap but fine Arctic Freezer 13.
What worries me a bit are temperatures. On idle all temps are approx. 38-44*C (both CPU and cores, measured with Open Hardware Monitor). But under Prime95 I have 68*C on CPU and 86*C on the hottest core.
I know that Tcase is 81.3*C and this refers to IHS, so let's say that CPU temp=68*C is ok. But how about 86*C on core? What do you think?
Thx


----------



## over01

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *}SkOrPn--'*
> 
> Yes I realize that. But uncore is not locked on these Westmere Xeon's. Gulftown is based on Westmere-EP *but not the same as*. Gulftown's are the Enthusiast equivalent chips such as i7-970-990x and come with a different IMC and completely unlocked. They work slightly different then these Xeon's quite simply because the IMC is built differently in order to support ECC and two physical chips (Its not a identical chip thus does not over clock the same way). Slight differences means everything seemingly changes, haha. You can't use what you learned with your old Gulftown (not entirely anyway) because your not trying to overclock a Gulftown. On my board uncore is called UCLK and it is NOT locked on Westmere based Xeons (maybe on your board). I do not show multipliers such as 20x, or 6x or even 2x, etc in the UCLK section. In my Uncore settings (a.k.a UCLK), only frequencies such as 3047 Mhz is shown, which is exactly 2x of memory speed (which RAM is set to 1523 mhz). On these Westmere Xeon's it is OK to run up to and beyond 2x Uncore *so long as you don't go above the 1.35v* limit (PER INTEL ENGINEERS, the voltage is what matters not the uncore, which is why there is a million different Uncore freq settings to chose from, lol). The chips default uncore is 1.5x for safety concerns related to Intel's goal of protecting the IMC and simply carried over from Gulftown-Westmere and vice versa. However, as you raise the Xeon's uncore it appears to become more energy efficient and thus uses less voltage (ONLY on Westmere Xeon's, NOT I7's). If you think these chips are identical and thus have identical over clocking characteristics you would be wrong. On these chips you are supposed to use the 1.5x uncore ratio to start out with according to Intel. On 45nm yes it is 2x (but this is not needed to know here), but on Gulftown and Westmere chips it is 1.5x, but on Gulftown it is dangerous to run higher than 2x especially when your working with higher than 1.35v on QPI and VTT. But not so on Westmere Xeon's, because the IMC is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. If uncore is locked for you then there is something wrong with your board or bios, because I can guarantee that these Westmere Xeon's do NOT have a locked uncore. The ONLY thing locked on this chip is the CPU multiplier, and even that seems to vary from board to board for some odd reason. LOL
> 
> You are correct in trying to find a fix for your seemingly locked uncore but there is no reason to get rude with someone only trying to help you. *The only reason I stated what I stated is because it appears your trying to use what you learned with a Gulftown chip and that "might" (I'm not saying it will) get you in trouble with your new Xeon chip.* Xeon's are locked CPU multi chips but have a more energy efficient IMC thanks to different architecture, thus things have slightly changed. Gulftown i7's are unlocked all the way around and has an IMC built specifically for Desktop memory and the Enthusiast crowd... One can run up to 298 GB of RAM (Westmere-EP Xeon's) and the other (Gulftown i7's) is limited to something like 24 GB.
> 
> Now back to your Uncore problem. I have no clue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: it appears I said it is not dangerous to run the Xeon over 2x. This is NOT true, it is VERY dangerous to run it over 2x (even over 1.5x) *IF AND ONLY IF the voltage HAS surpassed 1.35v.* Example: You can run the Westmere's at 8000 mhz Uncore if you want to, so long 1.35v has not be broken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet you wont make it there though, haha. This explains why we have such a very long list of frequencies in the Uncore drop down (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense at all). I retain the right to be wrong though, but this is what I gathered from thousands of hours of reading tech material on this subject.


I have read the above reply from 2014 and now is 2017, I just overclock my x5650 at this morning and found out that I can't boot successfully when I set the uncore multiplier 2x with the memory multiplier, and then after some accident, I had set it at 1.7x which is 17 (uncore multiplier) and 10 (memory multiplier) and the system can boot successfully with a 1333 mhz ram overclocked to 1660mhz. (Bclk is 166)

In the bios of my board which is intel dx58so, it state that "(uncore multiplier) in auto, it will set at least 2x the memory multiplier", so after I have overclock bclk from 133 to 166, I have keep the uncore multiplier at 20 and memory multiplier at 10 which are the default value, and the system never boot successfully with this setting, I have tried increase the memory voltage but it won't work.

After the above accident, and I had read someone at the other forum said the "1.5x" thing and then I keep searching on the internet and I reached here, I totally agree to the reply which made by SkOrPn-- english is not my native language and I am from Hong Kong, its nice to meet you guys.

p.s. one more thing, I thought my ram are too weak to overclock in the past and now I can overclock it without increase any voltage.







I even don't need to increase any voltage of the whole system to do the whole overclock thing.


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *over01*
> 
> I have read the above reply from 2014 and now is 2017, I just overclock my x5650 at this morning and found out that I can't boot successfully when I set the uncore multiplier 2x with the memory multiplier, and then after some accident, I had set it at 1.7x which is 17 (uncore multiplier) and 10 (memory multiplier) and the system can boot successfully with a 1333 mhz ram overclocked to 1660mhz. (Bclk is 166)
> 
> In the bios of my board which is intel dx58so, it state that "(uncore multiplier) in auto, it will set at least 2x the memory multiplier", so after I have overclock bclk from 133 to 166, I have keep the uncore multiplier at 20 and memory multiplier at 10 which are the default value, and the system never boot successfully with this setting, I have tried increase the memory voltage but it won't work.
> 
> After the above accident, and I had read someone at the other forum said the "1.5x" thing and then I keep searching on the internet and I reached here, I totally agree to the reply which made by SkOrPn-- english is not my native language and I am from Hong Kong, its nice to meet you guys.
> 
> p.s. one more thing, I thought my ram are too weak to overclock in the past and now I can overclock it without increase any voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I even don't need to increase any voltage of the whole system to do the whole overclock thing.


What is the vtt/qpi voltage when trying to run 20/10 uncore/memory?


----------



## icecool26

hello good day, i just got my x5650 and installed it on my msi pro-e mobo. powered it on and everything lights up but unfortunately it just displays black screen and wont post.

any help please?


----------



## TLCH723

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *icecool26*
> 
> hello good day, i just got my x5650 and installed it on my msi pro-e mobo. powered it on and everything lights up but unfortunately it just displays black screen and wont post.
> 
> any help please?


Reset BIOS??


----------



## icecool26

2fixed bad ram.. thank you


----------



## over01

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EMUracing*
> 
> What is the vtt/qpi voltage when trying to run 20/10 uncore/memory?


at its default value(minimum) which is 1.15v


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *over01*
> 
> at its default value(minimum) which is 1.15v


As you increase the uncore speed, vtt will need to be raised to stabilize. Try raising it slightly, maybe 1.25v +/-.2v and see if you can get 3200 uncore speed stable. At higher bclk you may need a little more voltage as well.


----------



## asiki

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EMUracing*
> 
> As you increase the uncore speed, vtt will need to be raised to stabilize. Try raising it slightly, maybe 1.25v +/-.2v and see if you can get 3200 uncore speed stable. At higher bclk you may need a little more voltage as well.


In my case the same - both L5638 and X5675 require qpivtt 1.25v to be stable at uncore 3200.
Over01, try different multipliers, required qpivtt can be dependent on uncore multiplier too. My L5638 on 1.5x required quite hight voltage to be stable, even not overclocked so much (fsb 170, uncore 2700 or something and required qpivtt was 1.25-1.3). Increasing the multiplier allowed me to lower the voltage or to get much higher clock (fsb 215, uncore 3200) with the same voltage (1.25v). At the end of the day the sweet spot for it was 2x-1. What's funny, X5675 couldn't boot at 2x-1 and works fine on 2x (at the moment uncore 3440 at 1.27v)


----------



## DooM3

It never ceases to surprise me with this socket


----------



## brootalperry

Have any of you ran with an odd number of RAM sticks? Right now I have a working set of 3x4GB sticks. I have another set but when I put them in I get all sorts of problems which means one or maybe two of these sticks are bad. All 6 sticks are under the same model number with the same specs.

I'm testing the bad set one by one at the moment. If I were to salvage one or two of these sticks and add them to my my good set, will an odd number cause them to all run in single channel and therefore have a negative impact on performance?


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Knoxx29*
> 
> My X5690 does the same, in bios multiplier is set at 26 but CPU-z shows 27.0.
> 
> Every CPU has a minimum and maximum multiplier.
> 
> See the screenshot below, where it says multiplier in brackets there is (12 - 28 ) 12 is the min multiplier and 28 is the max even if my CPU max multiplier is 26.


Yeah i didnt even look at that when i had cpuz open now i think about it. This cpu is just different to others i've had where the top multiplier is accessible in the bios. I can't set 24 in my bios with the x5660...


----------



## Knoxx29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spinFX*
> 
> Yeah i didnt even look at that when i had cpuz open now i think about it. This cpu is just different to others i've had where the top multiplier is accessible in the bios. I can't set 24 in my bios with the x5660...


I don't have any experience with X5660 because i have never owned one but i hope this can help a little:

The short answer is that the multiplier for the X5660 processor is locked at 21 but, with TURBO BOOST, the multiplier can increase by either 2 or 3.

The long answer is that turbo boost will change the multiplier for one or more cores in a complicated schedule described by shorthand expression, 2/2/2/2/3/3/. The meaning is described in the following figure where the term "bin" refers to increments of the base-clock frequency. For example, if BCLK=133 MHz, 2 bins = increment of 266 MHz. Or another way of saying this is that the multiplier for some cores can be raised from the nominal value, e.g.,21 to 23,24 or whatever. On the X5660, the multiplier for all six cores could be raised to 23 in some circumstances. In other circumstances, however, turbo boost will only raise the multiplier for 1 or 2 cores to 24 (and keep the other cores running with a multiplier of 21). The main determinants of the exact configuration include the work load and the cpu core temperatures.


----------



## theister

depending which board u are yousing u can set the all core turbo multi (in case of the x5660 its the 23) manually as fixed multi but the higher multis ( for you 24) is only usable with turbo and c-states and can not be forced. everything else was already said by knoxx


----------



## brootalperry

So I found the dead stick. I also read my motherboard's manual and am now using one of the "good" sticks. This board doesn't seem to support odd numbered configuration (apart from 3 obviously). With 4 sticks it's in triple channel mode as said in the manual and CPU-Z, which is fine by me since now I'm running 16GB instead of just 12 as I've been doing the past couple years.

I also had to up my QPI voltage. It was 1.25v before. Windows kept freezing and I thought maybe this stick was bad too, but upping it to 1.275 made it stable, as in Windows hasn't frozen yet and I've played a bit on RPCS3. I think i'll be able to keep it at this voltage when I populate all 6 slots in the near future...hopefully


----------



## Slayer3032

I run 3x2gb and 2x1gb since I hate to buy new DDR3, runs just fine.


----------



## 99belle99

Well I am running a X5660 @ 4.2GHz 200x21 for the past few years and reading this and the other thread got me wanting to overclock more. So I went 198x23 for 4.55GHz.

I got my CB15 score up from 945 to 1010 and single core from 127 to 138.

I never bothered stress testing. I was browsing a few webpages and all was fine until I went to YouTube and the chrome browser went Aw, Snap. I was thinking maybe there is something wrong with YouTube tonight and then a while later the system just crashed in the end I went back to rock solid stable 4.2GHz without turbo.


----------



## brootalperry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slayer3032*
> 
> I run 3x2gb and 2x1gb since I hate to buy new DDR3, runs just fine.


That's actually a genius idea. Why have I never thought of that?







:

Ah I forgot to ask, but since you're running with 24GB, what do you have your QPI voltage set to?


----------



## Slayer3032

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> That's actually a genius idea. Why have I never thought of that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> 
> Ah I forgot to ask, but since you're running with 24GB, what do you have your QPI voltage set to?


I always figured mismatched ram made everything unstable, ect. All I've found is that this board just doesn't seem to care what you put into it as long as the ram is happy running at the settings you chose. My QPI is 1.325v or 1.315v, I can't remember if I notched up the voltage or notched down my Uncore Multi but that fixed my single random restart after I posted my settings a few weeks ago. My post went over my QPI voltage issues.

I'm only running with 8GB though, my ram is mismatched purely because I had spare DDR3 and 6GB just wasn't cutting it anymore.


----------



## EMUracing

If i recall correctly, i'm running 24gb 1333 ecc Samsung memory at 1850 with 3700 uncore at 1.32vtt. Been a while since I've touched the x58 or really any of my rigs. No time to play.


----------



## Slayer3032

Buffered or unbuffered ecc? I was really tempted to try buying 24gb of buffered ecc but the general consensus from google was that it wouldn't work.


----------



## ms178

I use 24 GB Micron DDR3-1866 unbuffered ECC, and it works in my Asus P6T Deluxe V2 crossflashed with a P6T WS PRO Bios as ECC RAM. It works also with the original Bios and the crossflash to a P6X58D-E Bios, but without the ECC functionality.


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EMUracing*
> 
> If i recall correctly, i'm running 24gb 1333 ecc Samsung memory at 1850 with 3700 uncore at 1.32vtt. Been a while since I've touched the x58 or really any of my rigs. No time to play.


im running 24gb @ 1457mhz with 1.275 vtt (9-9-9-27) -- gotta double check uncore though, think it might be on lowest.


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Knoxx29*
> 
> I don't have any experience with X5660 because i have never owned one but i hope this can help a little:
> 
> The short answer is that the multiplier for the X5660 processor is locked at 21 but, with TURBO BOOST, the multiplier can increase by either 2 or 3.
> 
> The long answer is that turbo boost will change the multiplier for one or more cores in a complicated schedule described by shorthand expression, 2/2/2/2/3/3/. The meaning is described in the following figure where the term "bin" refers to increments of the base-clock frequency. For example, if BCLK=133 MHz, 2 bins = increment of 266 MHz. Or another way of saying this is that the multiplier for some cores can be raised from the nominal value, e.g.,21 to 23,24 or whatever. On the X5660, the multiplier for all six cores could be raised to 23 in some circumstances. In other circumstances, however, turbo boost will only raise the multiplier for 1 or 2 cores to 24 (and keep the other cores running with a multiplier of 21). The main determinants of the exact configuration include the work load and the cpu core temperatures.


all good cheers mate, the guy a few posts up had already answered. As I said, just overlooked something earlier.


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slayer3032*
> 
> Buffered or unbuffered ecc? I was really tempted to try buying 24gb of buffered ecc but the general consensus from google was that it wouldn't work.


unbuffered. Got them for $43 shipped used on Amazon a few months ago. 6x4gb. Really surprised me with the overclock. Can get up to 1863 at 9,10,10,24 1t with 1.68v.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> Have any of you ran with an odd number of RAM sticks? Right now I have a working set of 3x4GB sticks. I have another set but when I put them in I get all sorts of problems which means one or maybe two of these sticks are bad. All 6 sticks are under the same model number with the same specs.
> 
> I'm testing the bad set one by one at the moment. If I were to salvage one or two of these sticks and add them to my my good set, will an odd number cause them to all run in single channel and therefore have a negative impact on performance?


You can run 4 and 5 sticks with the nahalem/westmere memory controller, but milage may vary between mainboards.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *brootalperry*
> 
> That's actually a genius idea. Why have I never thought of that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> 
> Ah I forgot to ask, but since you're running with 24GB, what do you have your QPI voltage set to?


Its not genius at all, its a feature of the imc and has limitations,

the main being that only the shared capacity is mapped in triple channel with the upper region of the larger sticks in single channel.


----------



## chungsteroonie

Holy Hell, I think I nearly blew up my shiny new X5670 build.

I was half working up the overclock from a "general" X58 guide, and half reading this thread when I came across the discussion about 1.5X minimum and 2X MAXIMUM uncore frequency. I was assuming 2X and above was A-OK.

I hope no permanent damage was done . . . when getting close to limits, I was staying near 2X when working up.

I'm ending the night with"

4.39GHz
1.4V CPU voltage
1.35V VTT

210 BCLK
21 Multiplier
14X uncore (2944 MHz)
DRAM 1682 MHz (9-9-9-24 1T 1.5V)

Hopefully this is a good start.


----------



## deadsmiley

Ok, I am still messing with these old X58 systems. I still have my X58A-UD7. Paired it with X5670 or X5675 (can't remember) and it is running at 4.2GHz. This drives a BIOS modded GTX 980 very well. Frame rates are very smooth and consistent. I am thinking this will go to my daughter as she is an avid PC gamer. She converted her husband over from consoles.









Just bought an entire system off ebay with 920, 8GB RAM, 500GB HDD, and GT9400. This will get a 2TB HDD, GTX 780 and X5660 and will go to a friend of my son's. I have yet to receive it. What can I say? I like playing with hardware (especially old hardware) as much as I like gaming.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Ok, I am still messing with these old X58 systems. I still have my X58A-UD7. Paired it with X5670 or X5675 (can't remember) and it is running at 4.2GHz. This drives a BIOS modded GTX 980 very well. Frame rates are very smooth and consistent. I am thinking this will go to my daughter as she is an avid PC gamer. She converted her husband over from consoles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just bought an entire system off ebay with 920, 8GB RAM, 500GB HDD, and GT9400. This will get a 2TB HDD, GTX 780 and X5660 and will go to a friend of my son's. I have yet to receive it. What can I say? I like playing with hardware (especially old hardware) as much as I like gaming.


Not surprised the x58 xeon is pushing your 980 well, I have a 4.2GHz x5675 with a 1080ti running pretty good on 1080p. Can't complain.


----------



## chungsteroonie

The framerates I'm getting with my X5670 / GTX 980TI build are really no joke at 1080. . . this is Overwatch.


----------



## deadsmiley

Hey brothers... I bought a GA-X58A-UD3R for cheap. Well, it is missing the Northbridge heat sink. Any ideas on how to get one or what to replace it with? I don't want to fire up this board without a heatsink on there!


----------



## artdom

Heya all, been having fun testing out the max overclock of my X5675 but i'm reaching a roadblock and i need some advices.

Here is my system atm:

[email protected],6Ghz with Hyperthreading enabled
Asus p6t deluxe v2
16Gb 1600mhz 9-9-9-26- 2T
Cooling: Corsair H110i GT

200x23 = 4.600mhz
Uncore/UCLK 2.806mhz
QPI 7.218 Mt/S
Memory 1603Mhz

CPU Voltage:1.40V
CPU PLL : 1,88V
QPI/DRAM : 1.35
IOH: 1.30
ICH: 1.40
IOH PCIE: Auto
ICH PCIE: Auto

Even tough i'm having lots of voltage thrown in, I'm having 30º C idle, 45-50º Gamming, 80º Full Load Prime95 at 22-24ºC Ambient.

So, all is fine and dandy, but what's realy bugging me is that i've seen most people get 3.200-3.400Mhz on the Uncore, but i can't for the life of me get it stable even if i bump the voltages up (QPI/DRAM, right?).

What makes the higher uncore unstable? Memory timmings/speed? my BLCK at 200 is probably too much? any voltage i can change to make it more stable?

And, in the end, the million dollar question, is this clock speed important in the general performance of the CPU, namely gamming ? in Cinebench R15 moving from 2.800mhz uncore to 3.200mhz (i can bench, but not 24/7 stable) is like 70 points, wich is a lot in cinebench R15...

Thanks!


----------



## Jimmo

VTT alters the UNCORE voltage. 1.35 V maximum. There are reports of IMC degradation and failure form VTT voltage over 1.35V


----------



## tbob22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Hey brothers... I bought a GA-X58A-UD3R for cheap. Well, it is missing the Northbridge heat sink. Any ideas on how to get one or what to replace it with? I don't want to fire up this board without a heatsink on there!


Does that mean it's also missing the mosfet cooling? x58 gets pretty hot.

Maybe something like this would work on the NB and you could get smaller heatsinks for the mosfets/sb
https://www.moddiy.com/products/PC-Cooler-H.D.T-Technology-Northbridge-Cooler-.html

bit less on ebay:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-PCCOOLER-HB-802-2-Heatpipes-Radiator-Heatsink-80mm-Cooler-Cooling-Fan-G5V0-/162682746323

May also be enough
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Enzotech-CNB-S1-One-Piece-Copper-Northbridge-Heatsink/252099419832


----------



## Slayer3032

Does anyone else here get insanely inconsistent temps across their cores during a Prime95? I lapped my CPU and rotated my Noctua NH-D14 to blow through the rear of the case rather than up and now it only goes upto 90c. My IHS wasn't very flat and the die directly under it was pushing all of the thermal paste out the sides but it still has funky temps. The 40c difference between cores 4 and 6 seems ridiculous, I was ignoring it when I was trying to find a stable overclock with a much higher vcore but since the temps seem normal under normal load I'm inclined to think the sensors are actually working. It's just really hard for me to understand a difference of 40c inside of a CPU with a heatsink and IHS evening out the heat.

Prime95 before lapping


Idle after lapping with max temps during a couple hours of PUBG


----------



## artdom

Normally my Core#6 is around 10-15º higher than the other cores on full load with prime95 or Aida64. I always thought it was rather strange but in your case 40º i think something bad is going on there...

Also, i'm not sure what is your ambient temps or your voltages/OC, but 90º seems too much, i never get over 80º with core #6 in prime95, with a corsair H110 GT and 1,4Vcore.


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slayer3032*
> 
> Does anyone else here get insanely inconsistent temps across their cores during a Prime95? I lapped my CPU and rotated my Noctua NH-D14 to blow through the rear of the case rather than up and now it only goes upto 90c. My IHS wasn't very flat and the die directly under it was pushing all of the thermal paste out the sides but it still has funky temps. The 40c difference between cores 4 and 6 seems ridiculous, I was ignoring it when I was trying to find a stable overclock with a much higher vcore but since the temps seem normal under normal load I'm inclined to think the sensors are actually working. It's just really hard for me to understand a difference of 40c inside of a CPU with a heatsink and IHS evening out the heat.
> 
> Prime95 before lapping
> 
> 
> Idle after lapping with max temps during a couple hours of PUBG


It could be the solder between the IHS and die. My X5670 was the same way one core was 30 to 40c hotter than the rest, lapped it but it made no difference. So I delidded it and replaced the solder with liquid metal paste, now there's only a 3c difference between all the cores.
I'm not saying you should do this though, unless you don't mind the possibility of killing it of course.


----------



## Slayer3032

My ambient temps are always pretty comfortable, it idles on par and cooler than my drives or any other sensor. Core 4 was just reading 14c and while it's a touch on the cold side currently right now. I'm having issues believing it's colder than 16-17c in here. I'll just have to keep an eye on it over time I guess and see if I notice any changes. These huge temp variations only come out during synthetic loads, maybe next time it's out of my computer I'll mess with it.

Is Intel's solder really that bad too? I know everyone complains about all the newer cpus having poor quality paste under the IHS but the complaints are literally that they don't solder them like these anymore lol. I would imagine that my solder is not making full contact or something along those lines if you had such great success with relidding yours. I wonder if just hitting it with a torch a little around the die to "reflow it a little" could help. I watched some delidding videos for the lidless mac pros and found that pretty interesting, it didn't seem hard at all provided you just hit the IHS with a little heat.


----------



## deadsmiley

Thanks for this. Looks like it is just the Northbridge. I did not notice this was missing until after it was on it's way and the sale is as-is. Don't want to spend a lot of money on something that may not work.


----------



## Slayer3032

I pried the labels off of my heatsinks, I saw a vague post recommending to do it somewhere and that they come off so I figured I'd give it a try. I want to say my northbridge temps came down a 1-2c but I didn't record my prior temps. I know that they didn't increase and with the style of cooler you have on your mosfets or whatever is to the left of the cpu it may help cooling if you have some airflow in that direction. Probably more so than it did for my UD5 rev.1



I cleaned the adhesive off afterwards, if you hit them with a little heat first they would probably come off much easier. You should be fine with just a generic heatsink for your northbridge, just observe your temps and if you're really concerned get a infrared temp gun to double check.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slayer3032*
> 
> I pried the labels off of my heatsinks, I saw a vague post recommending to do it somewhere and that they come off so I figured I'd give it a try. I want to say my northbridge temps came down a 1-2c but I didn't record my prior temps. I know that they didn't increase and with the style of cooler you have on your mosfets or whatever is to the left of the cpu it may help cooling if you have some airflow in that direction. Probably more so than it did for my UD5 rev.1
> 
> 
> 
> I cleaned the adhesive off afterwards, if you hit them with a little heat first they would probably come off much easier. You should be fine with just a generic heatsink for your northbridge, just observe your temps and if you're really concerned get a infrared temp gun to double check.


Cool (no pun intended), thanks for the input. I have a Northbridge heatsink coming on the slow boat from China. It's cheap at $9 including shipping. We will see how it goes. The board could be dead for all I know.


----------



## NBrock

I have a PowerEdge T410 with Dual X5650 in it right now. Is it worth Picking up two X5675 or x5680 for the higher clock speeds. I don't have an issue with temps so It should run the max clock for all cores. I was also wondering if you guys knew what the max clocks for those are on all threads. I know the max clock intel lists but not for all threads.

Thanks!


----------



## Space Marine

Guys, serious question:

I just checked with the Intel tool for detecting the Minix vulnerability on my X5670 system, and it is showing that the system is vulnerable

You can check this out by yourself here:

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27150

I have no hope my Asus P6T is gonna receive any bios update fixing that, does anyone here has any idea of how to fix or avoid that issue?


----------



## Squall Leonhart

false positive, this is only present on intel chips after 2015/


----------



## Blameless

There are critical Intel ME/ATM vulnerabilites going way back, much further than 2015. However, these are generally only exposed if you have a board with the 5MB ME firmware and the full AMT feature set...and most desktop boards don't.

If you want to be safe, update to the newest IME firmware for your board, disable all extraneous IME/AMT features in the BIOS, and remove the functional IME driver for good measure.


----------



## ms178

As far as I know the X58 chipset does not contain the Intel Management Engine and researched quite a bit on that topic, trying out several diagnosis tools which are available in the win-raid.com forums. The Intel tool doesn't recognize it as well (therefore the warning there). Hence we should be "safe" at least from these vulnerabilities.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> As far as I know the X58 chipset does not contain the Intel Management Engine


Both the X58/5500 series IOHes and the ICH10R have the ME. Correction, only the 5500 series LGA-1366 chipsets have IME.

If you have an LGA-1366 board that has access to Standard Manageability, (AMT) Active Management Technology, or Small Business Technology, remote features, you have one affected by an elevated privileged vulnerability: https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/product_security/len-14963

There is a _second_ collection of vulnerabilities that only affects SPS and TXE components of the ME, which is applicable to Skylake and later.

*EDIT:* Looks like I was mistaken. ms178 is correct, the X58 + ICH10R platform lacks the Management Engine.


----------



## ms178

@Blameless

Well, I can just tell you about my P6TWS Pro BIOS that it doesn't contain any Intel ME Firmware according to this ME Analyzer tool: https://github.com/platomav/MEAnalyzer

You can drag and drop your BIOS file there and it'll show you if it contains an outdated version if at all.


----------



## Blameless

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> @Blameless
> 
> Well, I can just tell you about my P6TWS Pro BIOS that it doesn't contain any Intel ME Firmware


Double checked my X58A-UD5 and it seems I was mistaken about the X58+ICH10R. It was in the Tylersberg 5500 and 5520 chipsets for LGA-1366, but not in the X58 desktop platform.

Thanks for the correction.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> https://github.com/platomav/MEAnalyzer
> 
> You can drag and drop your BIOS file there and it'll show you if it contains an outdated version if at all.


This is an uncertain way to verify this as even platforms that depend on the ME and it's firmware often have BIOS updates that don't include the ME firmware.


----------



## deadsmiley

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deadsmiley*
> 
> Thanks for this. Looks like it is just the Northbridge. I did not notice this was missing until after it was on it's way and the sale is as-is. Don't want to spend a lot of money on something that may not work.


I got an $8 cooler off eBay and this board works perfectly. So I have $63 in this board total. It will get put into a system and will be the 6th gaming system I have given away to people that cannot afford one.


----------



## GENXLR

anyone got a x58 motherboard they would be willing to let go, my brother stole my P6T, and i'm not able to shell 200$ for another right now


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> anyone got a x58 motherboard they would be willing to let go, my brother stole my P6T, and i'm not able to shell 200$ for another right now


PM sent


----------



## Xoriam

Any of you guys tried running faster ram than 1600mhz?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My RAM is currently running at 1750 MHz. I've been able to push it to 2050 MHz, but that required me removing half my DIMMs and my system was noticeably less smooth.


----------



## Xoriam

Is the ram rated at higher than 1600?
The ones I'm currently running are 1600 but running at like 1700ish.
Been thinking about seeing if I can pick up a 2k or 2,400 kit


----------



## ezveedub

Going through this post....gonna fire 'ol X58 sparky here soon with a Xeon possibly...









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xoriam*
> 
> Is the ram rated at higher than 1600?
> The ones I'm currently running are 1600 but running at like 1700ish.
> Been thinking about seeing if I can pick up a 2k or 2,400 kit


Mine are rated for 1600 6-7-6-18. RAM speed is limited on this platform and favors tighter timings anyway.


----------



## EMUracing

1800-1900mhz seems to be about the max speed that is easily achieved with 2:1 uncore:dram. Going higher memory speed, either means that QPI voltage will get too high or you will need to reduce uncore ratio which will lose the additional performance that your memory could have over those speeds. The increase in performance from 1600 to 18XX can be worth it depending on the timings.

Most memory that I have used has needed the timings loosened right around 1866, which is why I tend to run 1850-1856. At 1600, the timings may be worth keeping it there, it all depends on the memory and the timings at each divider.

I wouldnt recommend memory over 2000, since you will probably not be running around those speeds if you care about the health of the CPU.

When I test memory, I test the maximum clocks that a set will run at a set timing, then loosen and see where that gets me. Testing a set of memory can take a while to see what speeds it is strongest at, but on this platform, there are not much gains to be made with faster memory. The CPU is not really bandwidth starved at 1600 with tight timings, so gains by loosening timings and raising clocks are only to be had by improving its clock:timing ratio.

Check what the tightest timings you can run at 1600, compared to the tightest at the next divider. Run some benchmarks, and real world scenarios and see what differences there are. Going higher than 2000 has proven me that there is little more to gain other than in synthetic performance, I saw no changes in real world workload scenarios.

Sandybridge, on the other hand, showed improvements up to 2400...

edit: If you do want to pick up a higher rated kit, look for ICs that can run good tight timings at lower speeds and scale well with voltage to tighten the timings. I have had good results with Samsung DDR3 on x58, and decent results with PSC. My cheap Nanya 1600 c9 sticks could run <1855 at 9,10,9,28 1t, which I think it decent for this platform. It beats out the tightest timings that they can run at 1600 8,9,8,28. For a while I thought they could run 8,8,8,28, but I would get very random errors, and 8,9,8,28 fixed that. Ideally, at 1600 you want to be c6 or c7, and 1800 you want to be c7 or c8. If you can find a set of 2133 that can run c9, or 2400 for c10, it should give you good timings if you lower the clocks.

I dont know if I would really invest much into new memory for this platform, if you can find it cheap, then go for it... otherwise its not really worth it.


----------



## GENXLR

i have 2000Mhz DIMM's but to get there you will TRASH your IMC, so don't do it, just run 1600mhz and 1T timmings, it's as fast if not faster anyways


----------



## deadsmiley

I recently bought 4x 4GB DDR3-1600 off eBay for $70 shipped. If you are patient good deals do pop up from time to time.


----------



## DooM3

https://postimg.org/image/5o94bintu3/

https://postimg.org/image/6k5lqz0iaz/

https://postimg.org/image/286sjfheij/


----------



## theister

your cb score is some kind of low. you should reach at least 1030 with 4,4ghz, mostly 1040+. looks like cache ecc is holding you back.

try to change your uncore and ur ram speed. i think ur high ramspeed is the problem. also your volts could be a little to low. whats your qpi vtt?

also clock skews can be the issue.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I running 1600Mhz right now. I have ran 2000Mhz and 2100Mhz [1095mhz].

1600Mhz seems to be the best for gaming from my previous test. Higher averages. 2000Mhz is better for actual workloads.

I still can't believe I haven't upgraded to Ryzen just yet, but the DDR4 prices have been throwing me off for a long time now, plus there are still some great upgrades I can perform on my X58. Any upgrades at this point is moving over the next build. For gaming and everyday usage the Xeon still holds it's own ground.


----------



## Shofield

Hi guys, i am using a X5650 CPU instead of X5660. At the top u can see my results. I do the guide from Maru to OC my system:

- Motherboard ASUS Sabertooth X58
- DRAM 6x 2 GB Corsair XMP CL9 1600MHz
- CPU X5650
- MSI GTX 970

BCLK increased to 182
CPU ratio increased to 22 ( not more available ? ? ? )
DRAM set to 9-9-9-24

Core Voltage Auto (i know it is to high) 1.296V on full load
DRAM Voltage Auto

This setup runs 13 hours prime stable.

Next step is to decrease the Core Voltage, could u guys look at my resaults to help me get better in OC the old systems


----------



## GENXLR

you be better off dropping multi to 20 and increasing blck to 200, change vtt to 1.3v and set ratio to 2x for 3200mhz uncore, 1.29 is NOT high at all, thats typical


----------



## Shofield

Really Fast Answer, thank U

BCLK 200
CPU multi 20
DRAM 9-9-9-24

Core Voltage Auto
DRAM Voltage Auto

_VTT Voltage 1.3V
ratio 2x 3200mhz uncore_

I hope i find the settings in the BIOS ( Manual will help me  )
testing it at 7 PM GMT

EDIT:



Is there any difference between the prozessors from Costa Rica OR Malay ?


----------



## GENXLR

very little, what matters is batch letter, yours is an A chip, B seems to take less volts. set voltage to 1.3Vcore, you probably can work it down to 1.28 but start at 1.3

makesure dram is at 1T timming mode not 2T, also row refresh cycles should be 88 at these clocks, try and set dram to 1.66v unless you have low voltage DDR3 ram of 1.5v, makesure spreadspectrum is disabled!!!


----------



## Shofield

I got the chip on the picture with the i7 960...on the artikle page was the other picture with the XEON only

So i have a B-Chip, is it a reason to convert it ? it costs 20€ on ebay

EDIT:

I will test my system with your tipps


----------



## dg6464

Hey Guys,

I bought my Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 (Rev. 1.0, BIOS F13s) in like 2008... it's done me well to say the least.

Recently, I upgraded to a Xeon W3580 (not realizing the X5660 should work), which has also served me well, using the original 12GB of RAM that I put into the system.

Running this thing as a Plex server with transcoding on the fly... so looking to add a little more power for cheap.

I purchased a Xeon X5660 from eBay for like $40.00... hoping this thing will work on the latest F13s BIOS and that I can do some overclocking.

One question I have is regarding RAM... has anyone used ECC RAM in an X58 Board alongside an X5660 processor?
Has anyone gone beyond the 24GB limit of RAM in these boards when using an X5660 processor... and ECC RAM?

Any guidance would be helpful.

I've got the W3580 and a Core i7 920 lying around, just found an EVGA X58 board locally on kijiji for $40.00 as well... so if I can get some cheap ECC server RAM at 24GB or more on eBay and build another simple machine with the other EVGA board and one of these processors (and the RAM I pull out if I can use ECC RAM), that would be awesome.

Thanks in advance!

Best Regards,

dg6464


----------



## 99belle99

Some people have had success with ECC RAM but will not share which RAM it is for some strange reason but as far as I know you lose all error correction and it just works as normal RAM.


----------



## GENXLR

no, 100% wrong, any Unbuffered ECC will work with an x58 xeon, including ecc functions, you can't use registered ram


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dg6464*
> 
> One question I have is regarding RAM... has anyone used ECC RAM in an X58 Board alongside an X5660 processor?
> Has anyone gone beyond the 24GB limit of RAM in these boards when using an X5660 processor... and ECC RAM?
> 
> Any guidance would be helpful.


I have not went above 24GBs, but I am running 24GBs Registered ECC RAM - triple channel. I have a X5660 as well. I looked and verified every test I could find online to verify that it is indeed running Registered ECC. I even went as far as checking with other OS's like Linux\Unix. I never followed up or made a post about my findings, but so far so good. If I did I would had more than likely posted it on my blog anyways. I didn't feel that it was that important. Some people have been questioning me and have been finding ways to talk against me about ANYTHING, so I just perform my test to verify and move on. With that being said from what I can see you can use Registered ECC. It has been recognized in ALL of my testing.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana-Maru*
> 
> I have not went above 24GBs, but I am running 24GBs Registered ECC RAM - triple channel. I have a X5660 as well. I looked and verified every test I could find online to verify that it is indeed running Registered ECC. I even went as far as checking with other OS's like Linux\Unix. I never followed up or made a post about my findings, but so far so good. If I did I would had more than likely posted it on my blog anyways. I didn't feel that it was that important. Some people have been questioning me and have been finding ways to talk against me about ANYTHING, so I just perform my test to verify and move on. With that being said from what I can see you can use Registered ECC. It has been recognized in ALL of my testing.


RAM and motherboard combo? I tried registered on my P6T and Rampage III, no post, only my P6T WS board posts with it. I'm so confused. Also I have posted a x5670 with 48GB


----------



## Kana-Maru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> RAM and motherboard combo? I tried registered on my P6T and Rampage III, no post, only my P6T WS board posts with it. I'm so confused. Also I have posted a x5670 with 48GB


Server RAM, and no I'm not giving model numbers + ASUS Sabertooth X58 motherboard. Honestly I was surprised when the system posted. I didn't think it would run at all, especially not to so well. So far so good. I am able to clock upwards towards 2100Mhz [2095]. I still have some other good 12GB triple channel RAM with heatsink [7-9-8-24] on standby just in case, but as far as numbers go the server RAM is on par with the 12GB RAM I have on standby. I need a lot of RAM for certain task I perform on my PC and the Registered ECC RAM uses less power than the other 1.65v RAM I have.


----------



## GENXLR

I need model #'s kana, I need to figure out why yours posts and mine doesn't, I need to find engineering differences!!! I need to make this work, you've given me hope, possibly buying same sticks


----------



## Shofield

Hi GENXLR, hi guys,

BCLK 200
CPU multi 20
Core Voltage 1.3V
PCIe frequency 100

Processor is stable with 4 GHz, DRAM 9-9-9-24 2T 1200MHz - cinebench check - prime 24h check - intelburntest 20 rows check

I use six of them -->


then i tested your configuration:

DRAM 9-9-9-24 2T 1600MHz
PCIe frequency 100
Core Voltage 1.3V
DRAM Voltage 1.66V
VTT Voltage 1.3V
DDR spreadspectrum off
PCIe spreadspectrum off

no memory fails on memtest - cinebench check - intel burn test FAILS with errors (no bluescreen)

need your help again


----------



## EMUracing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shofield*
> 
> Hi GENXLR, hi guys,
> 
> BCLK 200
> CPU multi 20
> Core Voltage 1.3V
> PCIe frequency 100
> 
> Processor is stable with 4 GHz, DRAM 9-9-9-24 2T 1200MHz - cinebench check - prime 24h check - intelburntest 20 rows check
> 
> I use six of them -->
> 
> 
> then i tested your configuration:
> 
> DRAM 9-9-9-24 2T 1600MHz
> PCIe frequency 100
> Core Voltage 1.3V
> DRAM Voltage 1.66V
> VTT Voltage 1.3V
> DDR spreadspectrum off
> PCIe spreadspectrum off
> 
> no memory fails on memtest - cinebench check - intel burn test FAILS with errors (no bluescreen)
> 
> need your help again


what is the qpi/vtt voltage? Try giving it a little nudge and see if it stabilizes.


----------



## Shofield

VTT Voltage 1.3V - called on the ASUS Sabertooth X 58 - QPI/DRAM Core Voltage

I am NOT using the bottom RAM header ... i bought a new one with the other settings seen on the top one


----------



## GENXLR

Hey, sounds like it might need a little more VTT, you are running Uncore at 2x not 1.5 right? also your ram should be 1t not 2t, if that fails increase vcore to 1.325


----------



## xXlAinXx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> Both the X58/5500 series IOHes and the ICH10R have the ME. Correction, only the 5500 series LGA-1366 chipsets have IME.
> 
> If you have an LGA-1366 board that has access to Standard Manageability, (AMT) Active Management Technology, or Small Business Technology, remote features, you have one affected by an elevated privileged vulnerability: https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/product_security/len-14963
> 
> There is a _second_ collection of vulnerabilities that only affects SPS and TXE components of the ME, which is applicable to Skylake and later.
> 
> *EDIT:* Looks like I was mistaken. ms178 is correct, the X58 + ICH10R platform lacks the Management Engine.


It's well documented on paper, the intel management engine is on 1366 socket motherboard. Exposed mode is called Advanced TCO.
Fun fact: the LED nearby the RAM are indeed controlled by the intel management engine. On most consumer board the firmware is set to not talk outside it's defined GPIO. Anyway, the ME is always available with the proper tools since the controller uses an out of band channel (USB).
Fun story: some non-reference X58 motherboard had the issue to NOT reclaim the effective size of the available memory to the ""GUEST"" OS (EG: WINDOWS). Even today, on these board the SMBIOS report one empty slot plus the populated one duo the reference dx58so & cheap manufacturer solution. Also, duo the out of band channel the very same board, under certain condition caused the ME watchdog to go into uncorrectable mode, thus causing a system global reset requiring the user to "LOAD DEFAULT" from the bios to make the platform functional again.

GG2017!


----------



## GENXLR

most boards with an "LED BY THE RAM" is a 5vSB light, it's not controlled by the IME. Nearly all 1366 Boards lack onboard IME and have it as a secondary add in, it was not deployed functionally on X58, try it yourself, probe the memory addresses, it's not there when I tried


----------



## xXlAinXx

If we are talking about nice and dandy software the ICH10D\ICH10DO should support once enabled the manageability commander (M/DTK/AMT) while the ICH10\ICH10R does NOT unless specified by the manufacturer or implemented by user if you are into that.


----------



## GENXLR

Ah yeah that sounds about right. Most consumer x58 boards use the ich10R


----------



## Shofield

OH YEAH I GOT IT

Thanks a lot for your help !

10 Rounds Intel Burn Test Maximum
24h PRIME95
6h Destiny 2 gaming


----------



## spinFX

Just reading through some of these posts and saw people talking about bclk of 200 for 1600/3200. Gave that a try, moved from 4.3GHz / 187 BCLK x23 to 4.2GHz / 200 BLCK x21. Everything seems to be running a bit nicer and significantly cooler (~15 degrees from 4.2ghz on 23 multi). Cant use 22 multi for some reason and having trouble using 23 multiplier for 4.6GHz though, getting BSODs related to IMC/QPI/DRAM


----------



## GENXLR

It's like the magic number i swear, it's what I run, and it's great!!!


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> It's like the magic number i swear, it's what I run, and it's great!!!


Yeah tis great. i guess sticking to 100/133/166/200 is the way to go.
@ 4.2GHz / 1600 im getting a 50 points higher firestrike extreme score than @ 4.3GHz / 1500 with much lower temps. I think i'll try to push it a little further but this is definitely my new fallback overclock









Loving this thread.


----------



## GENXLR

what chip?


----------



## spinFX

x5660
full rig in my sig (Ol' faithful)


----------



## GENXLR

you can probably get 4.2ghz with 21 multi fine, or try 23 turbo for 4.6 with some voltage increases. 22 and 23 are turbo multi's, thats why you can't select 22, it's either turbo off or turbo on, and if you select 23 turbo and have c5/6 on, you will get a 24 multi for c state boost so be careful


----------



## spinFX

yeah noticed the 24 multi when i was running @ 4.3 earlier. I think ill have to push close to 1.35V vcore or over for 4.6 or possibly 1.35V+ qpi voltage.

Do you know what is the safe max qpi voltage?

Also, on my board i have qpi 3600MHz but also the link speed in MT/s, 7700 or something like that. Tried to set it to a higher value (but leaving qpi @ 3600MHz) and cant post. Do you have the same, and what's yours set to?

*edit*
updated bios to 0701 with a little trouble but got there eventually. tried a few times to get 4.6 going, could get to windows logon screen but couldnt get into the desktop. BSODs hinted at more vcore which i had at 1.35 already.
Might try to push it that extra bit later on, for now i just went up to 210 BCLK for 4.4ghz


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spinFX*
> 
> ... Cant use 22 multi for some reason ...


The X5660 doesn't have the 22 multiplier. The turbo skips it and goes to 23 for all cores, 24 for one or two cores, I believe.


----------



## 99belle99

Regarding the 4.6GHz. I have the same chip X5660 and to get 4.6 I had to loosen the RAM timings and when I done that I got to 4.6GHz no problem. At 4.2GHz I run 1600MHz 7-8-7-20 1T and 4.6GHz 8-8-8-22 1T.


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Regarding the 4.6GHz. I have the same chip X5660 and to get 4.6 I had to loosen the RAM timings and when I done that I got to 4.6GHz no problem. At 4.2GHz I run 1600MHz 7-8-7-20 1T and 4.6GHz 8-8-8-22 1T.


edit:
tried loosening the timings and tried dropping frequency back but couldn't get to desktop, only login screen. Might try get there a little more incrementally


I noticed that the final test which is supposed to be cpu/gpu (i think?) gpu's were around 90-99% usage but cpu was only 19-22% usage. I suppose thats normal given the cpu is pretty powerful and the 7970's are long in the tooth ha



with 780 ti (factory oc)


and 780ti SLI (factory oc)


1070ti (factory oc)




in the 780Ti and 1070Ti runs, gpu's were at 100% most of the way through, cpu 15-30%.
That seems like a low score for the 1070ti, maybe something in the system holding it back?

1070ti core+200, mem+150

(about 300 graphics points difference from a 7700K)


----------



## gofasterstripes

Hey.
Anyone yet know if Westmere has this security hole with address randomisation?


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey.
> Anyone yet know if Westmere has this security hole with address randomisation?


I hope not. My next CPU was always going to be a Ryzen+ or even Ryzen 2. I was leaning more to Ryzen 2 in 2019 due to the price of RAM but if there is a slow down on my X5660 then I will just have to suck it up and buy a Ryzen+.


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gofasterstripes*
> 
> Hey.
> Anyone yet know if Westmere has this security hole with address randomisation?


Not supposed to, the Intel ME isn't on CPU for x58, it was up to vendors to add it via a specific version of the ICH10, which most boards do not use


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> Not supposed to, the Intel ME isn't on CPU for x58, it was up to vendors to add it via a specific version of the ICH10, which most boards do not use


Management Engine has nothing to do with Speculative Execution.

Yes, All Intel processors in the Xeon family and from Pentium Pro and on are affected by Meltown.

Every vendor is affected by Spectre.


----------



## GENXLR

what the heck is happening now then?


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GENXLR*
> 
> what the heck is happening now then?


We all just have to avoid Intel and buy the far superior Ryzen+ when it's released in March.


----------



## shadowrain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Squall Leonhart*
> 
> Management Engine has nothing to do with Speculative Execution.
> 
> Yes, All Intel processors in the Xeon family and from Pentium Pro and on are affected by Meltown.
> 
> Every vendor is affected by Spectre.


Any references that all Xeon Families are affected by Meltdown? Because so far Intel hasn't included the Xeon X family and the E5 and E3-**** v3 and v4 Family on their listings.

So far the only included ones are...

1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th generation Intel® Core™ Processor Families (ouch)
Intel® Xeon® Processor E3-1200 v5 and v6 Product Family (Last Gen Xeon?)
Intel® Xeon® Processor Scalable Family (This Gen Xeon?)
Intel® Xeon® Processor W Family (Workstation Xeons including W3680 and such as they were pretty much like the i7 970, 980 and such)
Intel Atom® C3000 Processor Family
Apollo Lake Intel Atom® Processor E3900 series
Apollo Lake Intel® Pentium® Processors
Intel® Pentium® Processor G Series
Intel® Celeron® G, N, and J series Processors

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000025619/software.html


----------



## GENXLR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> We all just have to avoid Intel and buy the far superior Ryzen+ when it's released in March.


AMD still lacks in the IPC department and non of my vendors program for AMD chips, all program using Intel kernel drivers.

Checking I also notice a lack of X chips listed

And yes W chips are simply 900 series clones with extra parts while x chips are actually different chips


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I think some people have unrealistic expectations for the Ryzen refresh. I don't expect an IPC improvement, just higher clocks and better efficiency. If there _is_ an IPC improvement, it won't be much at all. I would only call Ryzen "far superior" when talking about specific multi-threaded tasks as it is otherwise inferior.


----------



## 99belle99

To be honest lads I think you missed my joke but either way i will be ditching Intel anyway either for a Zen+ or more than likely Zen 2 in 2019.


----------



## deadsmiley

I have gone with 32GB (4x 8GB) non-ECC RAM just to test it out. It worked like a charm. Of course it was in Dual Channel mode. I don't remember the exactly CPU but it was definitely X56xx as that is all I run (no L or W series).


----------



## superj1977

Just got an X5660 and installed it today in my UD7 rev2.
Have been running an i7 930 for years now at 4.Ghz no problem.

Got the X5660 up to 4.2Ghz in about 2-3 mins in bios easily. Nice low temps passes 20 runs IBT and been gaming for hours no BSOD etc.
I am looking to take it to 4.4Ghz for my 24/7. Then i will dial in sub mem timings and tidy up the bios settings.

Im running 1600mhz Corsair DDR3 9-9-9-24 Ram 12GB.

What will i likely looking at with vcore and qpi/vtt for 4.4Ghz?
Currently 21x200 but going to push the base clock to 210, my board does this do problem as i have found it hits 220 in the past for benching and still no problem.
Does anybody have suggestions of settings?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Every motherboard and every processor is different. I would test for maximum base clock first. It sounds like your board could handle up to 220 with the i7-930 so it should be able to with the X5660. Only concern with running a 210 base clock would be 1680 MHz RAM, which should be fine. I would feel comfortable with any CPU voltage up to about 1.375. I know people run higher than that, but that's where I start to worry. Depends on your cooling, obviously. For QPI/VTT, I don't go over 1.35. That voltage is usually why these processors die and the limit the consensus agrees is safe is 1.35V.


----------



## superj1977

Well this ram is fine at 1680mhz i know that for sure, i even spent a long time setting up the subtimings a while back with a 4.4Ghz overclock profile in the bios. It was super stable so im confident on the base clock and memory running at that speed its more a case of the Uncore and QPI ratio im needing help with.

What should my uncore and qpi be set at so as to not hold back the cpu overclock?

CPU Clock Ratio 21
BCLK 210
Memory Multiplier 8

QPI Clock Ratio X ??
Uncore Clock Ratio X??

I remember years ago i found an online calculator for working out straps etc with overclocks but i cant find it anymore, it was pretty useful for the 45nm 1366 cpu when i first had a go at overclocking them, i could do with finding this again but i couldnt find it using Google.

I did a little reading last night and came up reading about a memory/uncore ratio of 1.875 being good is this right? So 1.875 x 1680 = 3150 mhz uncore


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Uncore needs to be at least 1.5x RAM. If you can run it at 2x that would be preferable. As for QPI, there's only three options. I don't consider slow mode an option because it isn't a viable one. I don't remember what the ratios are, but you'll have to run one of the two lower ratios.


----------



## ms178

By the way, it seems that even Westmere will get a microcode update soon, as there is a BIOS update scheduled for January 26th for the HP Z400 Workstation which uses these Xeon 5600 series chips, see https://support.hp.com/de-de/document/c05869091 for reference.


----------



## superj1977

Ok i got it. Not claiming its fully stable as of yet, that would take at least a month before i would even say that and be happy but its got through a couple hours of Prime95, IBT and my son gamed on it for about 4-5 hours last night. So far so good. Im sure it will need further tweaking though before its a final bios template.

Had to up vcore to about 1.36v and qpi/vtt to about same. Big jump in required volatges going from 4.2ghx to 4.4ghz not sure it really worth it just yet. Temps hit 73 degrees C on hottest core after about 20-30 mins and stay at that max once my WC loop has warmed up. Kinda wish i had go the X5670 or X5675 now to see if i could have pushed further.


----------



## deadsmiley

Just gave to my son-in-law:

GA-X58A-UD7
X5670 @ 4.4GHz
16GB DDR3-1600
480GB SSD
212 LED Cooler
GTX 980 BIOS modded to hold it's clocks

It replaces:

FX 6300
8GB DDR3-1600
240GB SSD
GTX 970

He tells me, "it's much faster".


----------



## bill1024

I'm sure your son-in-law is one happy camper.
Hope he has good luck with it.
With an overclock and a good GPU, they still hold their own.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ms178*
> 
> By the way, it seems that even Westmere will get a microcode update soon, as there is a BIOS update scheduled for January 26th for the HP Z400 Workstation which uses these Xeon 5600 series chips, see https://support.hp.com/de-de/document/c05869091 for reference.


who cares, im not installing knee jerk updates for either os or bios without minimal 6 month testing.


----------



## bill1024

For those that do care and are running Linux and want to patch now, Linux can update the microcode at bootup.
Here are the codes for all the Intel CPUs that are involved.

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27431/Linux-Processor-Microcode-Data-File


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> For those that do care and are running Linux and want to patch now, Linux can update the microcode at bootup.
> Here are the codes for all the Intel CPUs that are involved.
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27431/Linux-Processor-Microcode-Data-File


Can you extract the microcode and flash them if you have a windows PC or do you need microcode made for Windows 10?


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bill1024*
> 
> For those that do care and are running Linux and want to patch now, Linux can update the microcode at bootup.
> Here are the codes for all the Intel CPUs that are involved.
> 
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27431/Linux-Processor-Microcode-Data-File


for those who want an unstable computer because of knee jerk untested bootcode you mean.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Can you extract the microcode and flash them if you have a windows PC or do you need microcode made for Windows 10?


I really do not know, it is code for the Linux OS.


----------



## bill1024

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Squall Leonhart*
> 
> for those who want an unstable computer because of knee jerk untested bootcode you mean.


Mine seems stable, been crunching along with no hickups. If it acts up I can always go back, no big deal.


----------



## lefizz

After a day of testing I've got my old bent pin P6T deluxe v2 with a 5675 up to 180 x 25. It generally just goes to 4.2 but will occasionally boost up to 4.5 ghz. around 944 in cinebench and it seems pretty stable. Not as high as id hoped but that a pretty decent setup and i would rather go stable than have a corrupted installed or other silliness. it will post at 5ghz but won't load windows and anyway that's a bit mean on the old girl. If she sits like that it will be absolutely fine for general gaming and work. The cpu is on 1.36v which is probably a bit high but hey if it gives out they are 40 a pop and i have always got the 4 core 8 thread 45nm to fill in while i wait for the slow boat from china


----------



## lefizz

I forgot to say around 27c on idle and peaks at around 63c in AIDA64 on a 30 quid Coolermaster 212X which seems perfectly reasonable. In real life usage, i doubt it would get to 60c.


----------



## 99belle99

I cannot believe I waited years to do this mod. I used to just put up with the fan noise until recently. At first I thought it was the massive fan on the top of my case so I disconnect it and it was still noisy so I connected it back up and pulled the plug on the CPU fan and that was the culprit. It has a three pin connection so I pulled out the 12v wire and connected it up to a 5v wire and it is silent. I can still hear case fans but it is no where near as bad as it used to be. To embarrass myself I have this case and cooler since I had my i7 920 years ago when they were first released.


----------



## spinFX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> I cannot believe I waited years to do this mod. I used to just put up with the fan noise until recently. At first I thought it was the massive fan on the top of my case so I disconnect it and it was still noisy so I connected it back up and pulled the plug on the CPU fan and that was the culprit. It has a three pin connection so I pulled out the 12v wire and connected it up to a 5v wire and it is silent. I can still hear case fans but it is no where near as bad as it used to be. To embarrass myself I have this case and cooler since I had my i7 920 years ago when they were first released.


Haha im still running the cooler from my 920 also (noctua dh-14?). And only just recently upgraded the case to something with a bit more space in it (old case was a super tight fit, and couldn't fit some modern gpus.


----------



## 2010rig

^^^ I've no idea what you guys are talking about, please enlighten me...

My HX750 died on me recently, should be 6 months left in that warranty, but I ended up buying an RM650i in the mean time, I'll also be putting my rig into an R5 case and H115, to replace my NH-D14

This will hold me over till Ryzen 2.


----------



## 2010rig

Hey guys,

I think my P6X58D-E is dead, computer won't turn on. I initially thought it was my PSU, so I got a RM650i and it won't turn on still.

I even bought an R5 case to put everything into ?

I'm wondering how hard it'd be to find an X58 motherboard these days

Lol, just noticed I'm the last 2 posts


----------



## tieberion

Anyone still around this thread running a X5690? Wanted to compare some overclocking notes.


----------



## tieberion

2010rig said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I think my P6X58D-E is dead, computer won't turn on. I initially thought it was my PSU, so I got a RM650i and it won't turn on still.
> 
> I even bought an R5 case to put everything into ?
> 
> I'm wondering how hard it'd be to find an X58 motherboard these days
> 
> Lol, just noticed I'm the last 2 posts


You can find the base intel boards for about $110. MSI is the next cheapest, beyond that it becomes almost the same price, save DDR 4, to upgrade to the latest and greatest. Or you could upgrade up to the last generation to use DDR3, it's still a few generations and more features than our X58 boards.


----------



## 2010rig

tieberion said:


> You can find the base intel boards for about $110. MSI is the next cheapest, beyond that it becomes almost the same price, save DDR 4, to upgrade to the latest and greatest. Or you could upgrade up to the last generation to use DDR3, it's still a few generations and more features than our X58 boards.


I ended up buying another P6X58D-E to hold me over for Ryzen 2. I just built a 1700 rig, and quite impressed with the performance and platform.


----------



## $ilent

Hi guys

Quick question. If i can sell my 4790k cpu/mobo/ram bundle for say £350, and get an X58 bundle including a 5650 for £50, is it worth doing?

thanks


----------



## tieberion

$ilent said:


> Hi guys
> 
> Quick question. If i can sell my 4790k cpu/mobo/ram bundle for say £350, and get an X58 bundle including a 5650 for £50, is it worth doing?
> 
> thanks


As much as I love my X5690, I would gladly trade you for the 4790k. The 4790k will have a little more snappiness to the feel, plus the boards have updated features on board. I have add in cards for usb 3.0 and sata 6.0gbs on my board to have more "modern" features.


----------



## $ilent

tieberion said:


> As much as I love my X5690, I would gladly trade you for the 4790k. The 4790k will have a little more snappiness to the feel, plus the boards have updated features on board. I have add in cards for usb 3.0 and sata 6.0gbs on my board to have more "modern" features.


Hmm I didnt know old X58 boards didnt have sata 6. Would it make the trade not worth it?


----------



## Squall Leonhart

$ilent said:


> Hmm I didnt know old X58 boards didnt have sata 6. Would it make the trade not worth it?


How are you retired staff and not know this o.o?

x58 still uses the ich10 introduced with core 2's P45, which is sata 2 native.

sata 3 early implementation was poor with some using single lane 2port controllers, iirc, only the R3E Black had a 2 lane marvel controller, not that it improved much since the ICH10 is gen 1.1 only.


----------



## theister

That's not right.
Boards with Marvel 9182 are RE III BE and the latest series of gigabyte released 2011 (X58A-OC, Guerilla, Assassin, Sniper ).
The 9182 performance is close to native sata III, it uses full x2 pcie 2.0, cause it is connected through the x58 chipset.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

theister said:


> That's not right.
> Boards with Marvel 9182 are RE III BE and the latest series of gigabyte released 2011 (X58A-OC, Guerilla, Assassin, Sniper ).
> The 9182 performance is close to native sata III, it uses full x2 pcie 2.0, cause it is connected through the x58 chipset.


Sorry, you are correct, I misremembered what devices were on what pci-e controllers.

The R3EB has both a 4 port usb 3 controller (2 lane) and 9182 (2 lane) hard wired to the x58.
R3E has a 2 port usb 3 controller on 1 lane and 9123/8 on 1 lane.

all the R2/R3 boards have the 16x slots wired to a pci-e switch that lets them use the 1.0 lanes of the ich if the card simply doesn't need anything higher (and the ich isn't fully distributed),


----------



## LoTechGreg

Need your thoughts guys, system has been up running and stable. Upgraded case, Proc cooler, case fans, DVD drive, refreshed NB/SB TIM, rebooted, and, 8 gig of mem is MIA. Reseated all DIMM's, same. HWINFO shows slot 0 and 1 as being the culprits. This leads me to believe the IMC on my 5680 is the problem. Your thoughts appreciated. 
OK, thought my rig was in my sig, and it's not anymore with new OCN.....


----------



## Squall Leonhart

dismantle, check all mounting standoffs and make sure there are none unused touching the back of the board or have any busted screws.

use a soft antistatic brush to remove any debris from ram slots and cpu socket


----------



## LoTechGreg

Thanks, Squall. Tomorrows chore....


----------



## $ilent

Squall Leonhart said:


> How are you retired staff and not know this o.o?
> 
> x58 still uses the ich10 introduced with core 2's P45, which is sata 2 native.
> 
> sata 3 early implementation was poor with some using single lane 2port controllers, iirc, only the R3E Black had a 2 lane marvel controller, not that it improved much since the ICH10 is gen 1.1 only.


I havent been staff for years so its not something I continuously read up on to keep myself up to date. Also I just wasnt aware of it? I wrote a few guides in the intel section if you were wondering what I did when I was staff


----------



## AllenG

Figured this might be useful here... 



AllenG said:


> Want more life out of x58 platforms? They are still solid performers as we know, but the lack of decent storage options is the biggest issue we run into. Here's a few tips.
> 
> Look into secondhand LSI SAS 6g controllers to get solid sata6g out of this platform, they are CHEAP. The 4 and 8 port cards have no problem sustaining 6g on all ports simultaneously. Disable the onboard marvel sata 6g controllers all together in the bios, they're trash as most of us know.
> 
> A tip for going NVME... I have come to find the Plextor M8PE Add in Card SSD's come equipped with an option rom bios making it possible for us older BIOS based machines to boot from it. This is the major hurtle to getting NVME working on this old platform, we can then use other NVME m2 to pci express cards populated with ANY newer m2 nvme ssd for data storage once we are booted into the OS on the Plextor M8PE with the NVME driver loaded. Effectively, you can go full NVME on an x58 system using this combination. One hard limitation is the pci express 2.0 though, each x4 drive will run into a wall at about 1500-1800 MB/s. Still not shabby though, and well worth it if you ask me. Another AIC SSD that seems to have an option rom bios is the HyperX Predator.
> 
> Note that some other AIC's dont play well together on certain motherboards, you may have to disable onboard storage controllers, or not be able to use other 3rd party storage controllers such as LSI's at the same time. Results have varied based on the motherboard.
> 
> Hopefully this helps someone decide their x58 can last them longer and save their pocketbooks while being able to switch to newer storage technologies that will be used in future possible upgrades.



An extra note though, since there might be people here working with dual cpu platforms... i wanted to confirm that the NVME drives listed with option rom bios' seem to lock up during boot initialization on any dual IO Hub equipped server board such as the Supermicro X8DTH-6F. All server boards with single IO Hub have seemed to work fine though and allow an LSI controller and the NVME op rom bios both load.


----------



## Atomic_Sheep

Hi, I purchased an X5670 for my X58A-UD3R Rev 1.0 motherboard and it booted into windows straight away, no worries there.

However, now that I've gone to try to over clock it, that's when I've run into a problem.

I am following the same procedures as outlined for over clocking i7 920/930 etc, but it doesn't work.

I am stuck at the first stage where you reduce all the multipliers like DRAM, QPI, uncore and CPU. As soon as I do that (leaving bclock at the stock 133), the computer no longer posts. I waited for 2 and a half minutes and all the lights come on and the fans come on, but nothing after that.

Does anyone have any suggestions on what might be going wrong? I have tried turning all the energy states on and off. Doesn't make a difference. My uncore is x2 of DRAM, so that's not a problem either.

Anyone have any suggestions?


----------



## 99belle99

Try 200 blck and 21 multi. Turn turbo off and leave all settings in where turbo is on.

Vcore 1.3Volts, QPI/VTT 1.235Volts

What RAM have you? Is it 1600MHz if so set that to 8 to get 1600(This is from memory so I could be wrong so it may be 10) and then double the UNcore I think it called I could be wrong this is from memory so it is 3200.

Also RAM is important to get right. If I run at 1600MHz I have to change RAM voltage to 1.64Volts but if you have more modern 1600MHz RAM I think they run 1600MHz at lower volts and check RAM timings also.


----------



## Atomic_Sheep

Well, I managed to get an overclock which is a start. bclock 160, memory multi x10, uncore x20, I think my QPI was x36, processor was set at x22 and with turbo boost up to 3.8Ghz. I set my memory timings as per my previous overclocking attempts, slight tighter timings and 1.54V. Vcore set to normal 1.225 and DVID set to 0.075V. Those settings seemed to work, it posted and booted and passed 5 minutes of OCCT and Prime 95.

Next, it stopped posting again. I just changed bclock to 170 and reduced all the multipliers by 1 notch, keeping CPU multi at 22. No post.

Next, I tried what you suggested, bclock 200, memory multi 8, uncore 16, QPI x36 @ 7.2Ghz and CPU multi at x20. No post.

I can't see a pattern why it posted in the first instance but not in the next two. I thought maybe I need to keep my uncore at 3200 and memory at 1600, but that didn't work as could be seen in the 3 attempt. I also know that the CPU posts and boots if I have a multi less than 22. It no longer turbo boosts but it posts and boots, at least at a multi of x21. So hmm, not sure what is going on.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Atomic_Sheep said:


> Well, I managed to get an overclock which is a start. bclock 160, memory multi x10, uncore x20, I think my QPI was x36, processor was set at x22 and with turbo boost up to 3.8Ghz. I set my memory timings as per my previous overclocking attempts, slight tighter timings and 1.54V. Vcore set to normal 1.225 and DVID set to 0.075V. Those settings seemed to work, it posted and booted and passed 5 minutes of OCCT and Prime 95.
> 
> Next, it stopped posting again. I just changed bclock to 170 and reduced all the multipliers by 1 notch, keeping CPU multi at 22. No post.
> 
> Next, I tried what you suggested, bclock 200, memory multi 8, uncore 16, QPI x36 @ 7.2Ghz and CPU multi at x20. No post.
> 
> I can't see a pattern why it posted in the first instance but not in the next two. I thought maybe I need to keep my uncore at 3200 and memory at 1600, but that didn't work as could be seen in the 3 attempt. I also know that the CPU posts and boots if I have a multi less than 22. It no longer turbo boosts but it posts and boots, at least at a multi of x21. So hmm, not sure what is going on.


could be a defective motherboard.


----------



## Atomic_Sheep

Maybe I wrecked it when I was trying to over clock my i7 930 on it. Not sure why though. I wasn't chasing ridiculous speeds. I got up to 4Ghz and then backed off.

Any way to test it?


----------



## 99belle99

Atomic_Sheep said:


> Maybe I wrecked it when I was trying to over clock my i7 930 on it. Not sure why though. I wasn't chasing ridiculous speeds. I got up to 4Ghz and then backed off.
> 
> Any way to test it?


Did you try those settings I gave a few posts up?


----------



## Atomic_Sheep

Yes, didn't work.


----------



## 99belle99

Atomic_Sheep said:


> Yes, didn't work.


There is deffo something wrong some where either the chip or motherboard is acting up as these chips are very easy to overclock. Do you still have your i7 to test out the motherboard. If it overclocks on that chip then that Xeon is faulty.


----------



## Blameless

Atomic_Sheep said:


> I am following the same procedures as outlined for over clocking i7 920/930 etc, but it doesn't work.


Nehalem/Bloomfield and Gulftown/Westmere have a fair number of differences and using a guide for one will often produce poor results with the other.



99belle99 said:


> What RAM have you? Is it 1600MHz if so set that to 8 to get 1600(This is from memory so I could be wrong so it may be 10) and then double the UNcore I think it called I could be wrong this is from memory so it is 3200.


Westmere only needs uncore at 1.5x DDR and 3200MHz uncore on a Westmere is near the peak uncore clock of some samples.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Blameless said:


> Nehalem/Bloomfield and Gulftown/Westmere have a fair number of differences and using a guide for one will often produce poor results with the other.
> 
> 
> 
> Westmere only needs uncore at 1.5x DDR and 3200MHz uncore on a Westmere is near the peak uncore clock of some samples.


I'm yet to find a xeon 56xx that can't do 200bclk, the issue keeps being a crappy mainboard.


----------



## Blameless

Squall Leonhart said:


> I'm yet to find a xeon 56xx that can't do 200bclk, the issue keeps being a crappy mainboard.


That doesn't have much to do with what uncore clocks are attainable.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

Blameless said:


> That doesn't have much to do with what uncore clocks are attainable.


except for the fact 1.5x puts a significant benchmarkable bottleneck on IMC to Cache bandwidth.


----------



## Blameless

Squall Leonhart said:


> except for the fact 1.5x puts a significant benchmarkable bottleneck on IMC to Cache bandwidth.


Still doesn't have much of anything to do with BCLK.

I've had more than twenty LGA-1366 parts, with a roughly even split between Nehalem/Bloomfield and Westmere/Gulftown. All of them could do at least 220MHz BCLK in any of the half-dozen boards I've owned, but none of the 32nm (Westmere/Gulftown) CPUs were fully stable with more than 3.6GHz uncore at any BCLK, and most maxed out around 3.4-3.5GHz uncore. 3.2GHz was borderline for weaker samples, and is a bad place to start when trying to diagnose issues.

1.5x DDR is the starting point for uncore clocks on 32nm parts. Once issues are ruled out, and after core and memory clocks are settled on, then you can worry about increasing uncore further. Starting at 2x is iffy for 1600MT/s memory, and unlikely to be workable at higher memory clocks.

It's certainly possible that a bad motherboard is limiting BCLK, but for a 32nm part, diagnosis should start with the uncore at 1.5x, not 2x, in order to rule out the uncore itself.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

My X5670 can run uncore at 3600 MHz no problem. I definitely haven't experienced a 3200 MHz uncore cap. I don't know of anyone who has. The wall is typically 4000 MHz.


----------



## tbob22

chessmyantidrug said:


> My X5670 can run uncore at 3600 MHz no problem. I definitely haven't experienced a 3200 MHz uncore cap. I don't know of anyone who has. The wall is typically 4000 MHz.


Yeah, I've had quite a few boards/chips. Some of the cheaper boards like the original Asus P6T, or Asrock X58 Extreme I had a hard time getting even 4.2ghz stable on a chip that would do 4.5ghz no problem in a P6T6.

On the P6T6 I was able to run around 3800mhz without much issue albeit at with the VTT at ~1.35+, 24/7 was 3200mhz/1.25v. Some of the other boards did have a hard time over 3200mhz and it was probably more to do with the power delivery and not the chip itself.


----------



## Atomic_Sheep

My i7 930 stopped working when overclocked. So I guess something is wrong with my Mobo.


----------



## chungsteroonie

Kindof late to the party, but just finished up my X58 mATX build. The MSI motherboard was quite disappointing as the uncore ratio could not be adjusted and, it couldn't hold a "normal" baseclock overclock. 180 was stretching for stability.

If anyone here knows anyone who might be able to help with microcode to unlock that uncore ratio, it be SUPER.

This build was kindof 4.3Ghz or bust for me, and I ended up trying x5650, x5660 , and when those didn't get the results I was shooting for, bit the bullet and bought an x5680 although it kindof killed the joy of cheap "super cheap" CPU's a bit.

175 baseclock
25 multiplier
1.408V CPU
1.32V VTT

What a nightmare. This was my first custom loop (on really cheap parts), and changing CPU is a bit rougher than with an air cooler!


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Did you try pushing the base clock higher to somewhere in the 200 range? Several X58 boards were notorious for having base clock "holes" where a certain range of base clocks wouldn't work regardless of multiplier. I'm not sure if your board was one of them, but it's worth testing.


----------



## Blameless

chessmyantidrug said:


> My X5670 can run uncore at 3600 MHz no problem. I definitely haven't experienced a 3200 MHz uncore cap. I don't know of anyone who has. The wall is typically 4000 MHz.


I've had a couple of Westmere's that can do 3600, and I use 3400 for my 24/7 stable clocks on my current X5670, but I've never had a 32nm LGA-1366 part reach anywhere near 4000 on the uncore, certainly not with stability. 3200 is a good starting point for testing; most parts will do higher, but I'd wager there are more than won't do 3200 than will do 4000.

Do you have any links to examples of a stable (not just suicide runs or bench clocks) 4GHz uncore clock on a Gulftown or Westmere that didn't require subambient cooling?


----------



## the matty

I did a thing, though unfortunately the CPU won't go any further than this (person who had this before me had a 920 at 4.4GHz on this so i know the board can go far, cpu is the limit here unfortunately) https://valid.x86.fr/dhe6p7


----------



## 99belle99

the matty said:


> I did a thing, though unfortunately the CPU won't go any further than this (person who had this before me had a 920 at 4.4GHz on this so i know the board can go far, cpu is the limit here unfortunately) https://valid.x86.fr/dhe6p7


Major disappointment, when i was reading your post I was expecting 5GHz+

Sure these chips can do 4.6GHz daily and more just for fun.


----------



## the matty

99belle99 said:


> Major disappointment, when i was reading your post I was expecting 5GHz+
> 
> Sure these chips can do 4.6GHz daily and more just for fun.


unfortunately not in this case, i must have been unlucky in the silicon lottery since my old X5650 did 4.4 so 100MHz difference from my old one from an X5650 to an X5670 is a bit annoying, that'd have been nice though, this one won't go to 4.6 for love nor money, i can't quite afford to replace it if it pops so i don't want to give it more than 1.4v, with 1.4v for 4.6GHz it didn't take so i'll stick to my 1.375v 4.5GHz


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Blameless said:


> I've had a couple of Westmere's that can do 3600, and I use 3400 for my 24/7 stable clocks on my current X5670, but I've never had a 32nm LGA-1366 part reach anywhere near 4000 on the uncore, certainly not with stability. 3200 is a good starting point for testing; most parts will do higher, but I'd wager there are more than won't do 3200 than will do 4000.
> 
> Do you have any links to examples of a stable (not just suicide runs or bench clocks) 4GHz uncore clock on a Gulftown or Westmere that didn't require subambient cooling?


I had mine at 3900 stable.










That was only with 6 GB and my system had a noticeable stutter so I backed everything back down and installed the other 6 GB. I ran those settings for a few days before going back. Most of these processors won't do 4000. That's why the memory clock speed wall was around 2000 MHz. Westmere allows for a lower uncore ratio making memory speeds past 2000 MHz possible.


----------



## chungsteroonie

chessmyantidrug said:


> Did you try pushing the base clock higher to somewhere in the 200 range? Several X58 boards were notorious for having base clock "holes" where a certain range of base clocks wouldn't work regardless of multiplier. I'm not sure if your board was one of them, but it's worth testing.


I started at 200 pushing VTT up to the limit as around 205-215 was the sweet spot on a previous build (EVGA X58 SLI) that I foolishly sold. But nothing I tried seemed to work, so I backed it down to 150 and worked up.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

I didn't realize you had experience with the X58 platform before. I just bring up the base clock hole thing in case it was something you hadn't tried. It has worked for others before.


----------



## chungsteroonie

chessmyantidrug said:


> I didn't realize you had experience with the X58 platform before. I just bring up the base clock hole thing in case it was something you hadn't tried. It has worked for others before.


It's certainly worth another look. I'll try to go beyond 200, but the system just has black screen at 200. I read that other MSI boards have similar issues so that's what I assumed the problem was.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

the matty said:


> I did a thing, though unfortunately the CPU won't go any further than this (person who had this before me had a 920 at 4.4GHz on this so i know the board can go far, cpu is the limit here unfortunately) https://valid.x86.fr/dhe6p7


drop your command rate back to 2 if you want to push the bclock higher.


----------



## Bialy1996

Hi guys, I have a problem with running Xeon X5660 on GA-EX58-UD3R rev. 1.6 MOBO. PC start booting but can't post and didn't make any noises from speaker even with or without RAM/GPU/etc. It boot loops a few times then giving up and when I power on it's repeating.
Against forward questions I tried almost EVERY single bios version available at gigabyte site(except FA FD FE FG), trying to reset BIOS settings by putting battery from a few minutes to all night time, reset by clearing CMOS, tried different ram/slots. Cleared all mobo/case/sockets from dust. Checked CPU socket for bent pins( i7 920 D0 works just fine, and I checked visually and everything was just fine).
I know that this MOBO don't oficially support this CPU but there is plenty of examples in the net that people can use 6 core Westmere X56xx xeons on that board. IDK maybe they have special modded bios or they have luck on a lottery or something fully random. I searched all the net for a solution for 3 days, several hours of reading and I felt to write in this awesome thread to look for a hand with that. Also I read many of pages in that thread but it's hard to read so many pages one by one and I could miss something.
Maybe someone can check if gigabyte's latest BIOS FK ( http://download.gigabyte.eu/FileList/BIOS/motherboard_bios_ga-ex58-ud3r_1.x_fk.exe ) has up to date microcode for X5660, as I know its 206C2 microcode, but i don't know how to check Award Bios for that, AMI with MMTOOL was much more easier. I also have some theory but tell me if I'm wrong: can it be possible that when I insert X5660 and boots MOBO is using secondary(backup) BIOS which is FB bios I think(I had FB on the first startup as main BIOS and from what I read when I'm flashing BIOS only Main bios is updated) because of whatever reason (it's really confusing that after every BIOS update and loading default setting in BIOS on i7 920 everytime X5660 acted the same way: PC turn on running for a few seconds and shutdowns and repeats for a few times and giving up), not the main BIOS which is now updated to FK version?
Thanks for helping me.


----------



## Whisky2

Try modified BIOS - https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/48085-gigabyte-modified-bios.html?


----------



## Jimmo

Bialy1996 said:


> Hi guys, I have a problem with running Xeon X5660 on GA-EX58-UD3R rev. 1.6 MOBO. PC start booting but can't post and didn't make any noises from speaker even with or without RAM/GPU/etc. It boot loops a few times then giving up and when I power on it's repeating.
> Against forward questions I tried almost EVERY single bios version available at gigabyte site(except FA FD FE FG), trying to reset BIOS settings by putting battery from a few minutes to all night time, reset by clearing CMOS, tried different ram/slots. Cleared all mobo/case/sockets from dust. Checked CPU socket for bent pins( i7 920 D0 works just fine, and I checked visually and everything was just fine).
> I know that this MOBO don't oficially support this CPU but there is plenty of examples in the net that people can use 6 core Westmere X56xx xeons on that board. IDK maybe they have special modded bios or they have luck on a lottery or something fully random. I searched all the net for a solution for 3 days, several hours of reading and I felt to write in this awesome thread to look for a hand with that. Also I read many of pages in that thread but it's hard to read so many pages one by one and I could miss something.
> Maybe someone can check if gigabyte's latest BIOS FK ( http://download.gigabyte.eu/FileList/BIOS/motherboard_bios_ga-ex58-ud3r_1.x_fk.exe ) has up to date microcode for X5660, as I know its 206C2 microcode, but i don't know how to check Award Bios for that, AMI with MMTOOL was much more easier. I also have some theory but tell me if I'm wrong: can it be possible that when I insert X5660 and boots MOBO is using secondary(backup) BIOS which is FB bios I think(I had FB on the first startup as main BIOS and from what I read when I'm flashing BIOS only Main bios is updated) because of whatever reason (it's really confusing that after every BIOS update and loading default setting in BIOS on i7 920 everytime X5660 acted the same way: PC turn on running for a few seconds and shutdowns and repeats for a few times and giving up), not the main BIOS which is now updated to FK version?
> Thanks for helping me.


I have a GA-EX58-UD3R rev 1.6 and the only BIOS version that would boot and run with my X5675 was the FK BIOS.

I had trouble getting the FK BIOS update file to actually flash but I eventually worked it out - I think I needed to use a newer flashing tool to allow the FK file to flash the BIOS.

Once I got it to flash it was all go no problems. I've since tried many overclock settings from default to a stable if hot 4.6Ghz and even got a 5.1 Ghz validation.
I usually run it around 4.4 CPU and 3600 UNCORE.

Tried everything and every Gigabyte BIOS file but FK was the only one that worked.

Good luck!


----------



## Bialy1996

Whisky2 said:


> Try modified BIOS - https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/48085-gigabyte-modified-bios.html?


Here isn't BIOS for mine motherboard sadly..



Jimmo said:


> I have a GA-EX58-UD3R rev 1.6 and the only BIOS version that would boot and run with my X5675 was the FK BIOS.
> 
> I had trouble getting the FK BIOS update file to actually flash but I eventually worked it out - I think I needed to use a newer flashing tool to allow the FK file to flash the BIOS.
> 
> Once I got it to flash it was all go no problems. I've since tried many overclock settings from default to a stable if hot 4.6Ghz and even got a 5.1 Ghz validation.
> I usually run it around 4.4 CPU and 3600 UNCORE.
> 
> Tried everything and every Gigabyte BIOS file but FK was the only one that worked.
> 
> Good luck!


It seems I will have to try this 4 BIOSes which i skipped because they were old, maybe this will help.


----------



## drawix

Hello y'all!
I'm using EX58-UD3R with ooold I7-920 (my cooler is Noctua NH-D14) and GTX 590. I don't have much money so I'm getting 1060 and X5660.
My I7 sucks, it's nearly not overclockable. 
If Xeon will appear as good overlocking CPU i'm planning to get it around @4GHz.

Is it still good choice?


----------



## TLCH723

drawix said:


> Hello y'all!
> I'm using EX58-UD3R with ooold I7-920 (my cooler is Noctua NH-D14) and GTX 590. I don't have much money so I'm getting 1060 and X5660.
> My I7 sucks, it's nearly not overclockable.
> If Xeon will appear as good overlocking CPU i'm planning to get it around @4GHz.
> 
> Is it still good choice?


The xeon is easy to OC. You probably can get x5670/5675 for similar price of the x5660


----------



## DooM3

drawix said:


> Hello y'all!
> I'm using EX58-UD3R with ooold I7-920 (my cooler is Noctua NH-D14) and GTX 590. I don't have much money so I'm getting 1060 and X5660.
> My I7 sucks, it's nearly not overclockable.
> If Xeon will appear as good overlocking CPU i'm planning to get it around @4GHz.
> 
> Is it still good choice?



The cpu you have chosen is not compatible with the motherboard unofficially.
the advice is to check the supported CPUs https://goo.gl/8V5pZs


----------



## TLCH723

DooM3 said:


> The cpu you have chosen is not compatible with the motherboard unofficially.
> the advice is to check the supported CPUs https://goo.gl/8V5pZs


Is just doesnt support it officially. It can still work. See below for Jimmo's post, same board, assume same reversion, with X5675



Jimmo said:


> I have a GA-EX58-UD3R rev 1.6 and the only BIOS version that would boot and run with my X5675 was the FK BIOS.
> 
> I had trouble getting the FK BIOS update file to actually flash but I eventually worked it out - I think I needed to use a newer flashing tool to allow the FK file to flash the BIOS.
> 
> Once I got it to flash it was all go no problems. I've since tried many overclock settings from default to a stable if hot 4.6Ghz and even got a 5.1 Ghz validation.
> I usually run it around 4.4 CPU and 3600 UNCORE.
> 
> Tried everything and every Gigabyte BIOS file but FK was the only one that worked.
> 
> Good luck!


----------



## drawix

Yeah, i may get X5670 at same price. 
Still I'm bit worried, these are old cpu's so they may be worn out and don't oc that great.

I'm using FK daily, so i guess I shoudn't care.

PS. Sorry, I'm new to this forum and I don't know how the quotes work here.


----------



## Aleslammer

drawix said:


> Yeah, i may get X5670 at same price.
> Still I'm bit worried, these are old cpu's so they may be worn out and don't oc that great.


The board you are using is old too, try to get your purchase from one of the larger recycle dealers, helps not getting one abused by a hardcore user. Side note do a little research and find the CPU that has the multi that works with the the 200 Bclk for the OC you want in relation to your cooling.


----------



## AllenG

So, who's going to buy one of, or has one of the Plextor m9pe AIC ssd's to see if it still supports legacy boot for x58 like the m8pe did?


----------



## MARSTG

Guys, do you know if the Intel dx58og supports X5600 series Xeons?


----------



## chessmyantidrug

Yes, it should.


----------



## aaronsta1

i have a x58 extreme from asrock and a x5660 and ive noticed an issue that ive never noticed before.. 
if i set 1600mhz in the bios, it wont go to 1600 but only 1333.. 

the reason ive never noticed this before is because ive always had the chip overclocked and using a lower ram speed.. 

ive started getting some instabilities due to a bad ram module i set it back to stock speed, t hen i noticed it.

im using 3 corsair vengaence and 3 gskill 1600 ram that are 9-9-9-24 been running them at 1400 8-8-8-21 (24x175) for years.. 

i just got the bad module back from rma and going to crank it up to 160 buss to get to 1600, but is it normal the x58 chip doesnt have the 6x muli to do 1600?? 
to be honest i never think i ran this board at stock speed before. so it might be bad?


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

Due to microcodes, you need updated modified BIOS. If you do not want the spectre codes, use ones from 2015. If you need this done I can do, let me know
This will also fix your locked uncore multiplier as well. 

For some BIOS, and some boards, certain CPU's only have two memory multipliers (8 and 10 usually, when this happens). This is usually most prevalent with ES CPU's, but sometimes effects Xeons on desktop boards too
If at 133 bclk you can only get 1333 memory then 10x might be your max memory multi for this board/BIOS/CPU combo. Microcodes might help that, but possibly not due to how some BIOS treat certain CPU's


----------



## Jacor

*On GA-EX58-Extreme?*

Hello, many time reader first time poster here. I've tried to commit a reply here about an hour ago but I lost the data., so I'll have to keep this reply.. briefer. Thank you for your attention to my reply. 


For the past few days I've been in the market for a Xeon x5650, x5660, or x5670, x5675 and I think I've settled on purchasing an x5660, however, I've read a few reports of problematic issues with the overclock where the multiplier is lost, something regarding the board i am using the Gigabyte GA-EX58-EXTREME and in conjunction with the processor during an overclock. Something about c states(?) perhaps, where the multiplier setting is lost on reboot.. Is anyone familiar with this?


I've never overclocked before, but i could really use an upgrade over my system's stock i7-920. I have 6 gigs of g.skill 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 1.5v ram, and am looking to receive another kit of this type within 2-3 days, to total 12gb for the platform. I have concerns about having a trouble-free moderate overclock with this chip with my board where the ram speeds are finally properly operating at the rated speed of 1600mhz.


Is this x5660 chip not advisable for my situation, and should I maybe go with an x5670 or x5650 instead? I hear that the multiplier on the x5670 is "better", so might be more compatible with my board and ram for my overclock goals?
Please advise. I'm running short on time, and I've tired to find this sort of information for this particular implementation but I've seen a few problematic reports.. and so figure this is a good place to ask for help, sirs and mam's. I also read some good reports from people who have used an x5680 with the board i have here, too and achieving great results.. I understand also that a system-board firmware update is in order, to a present latest beta bios for better processor support. 


I'd like to chat more when i have some more time, however any assistance and expertise granted at this time is appreciated. Also way to go everyone for contributing materials to this great subject, especially the OP who i understand has started threads over in Hardforum too. Props indeed :thumb::thumb: This thread rules.


Cheers
Jacor


----------



## 99belle99

I have a X58A-UD7 rev 1.0 with a X5660 @ 4.2GHz daily. I can easily run it at 4.6GHz for bench marks and such but I do not bother to keep it at that daily as 4.2 is more than enough.

It is very easy to get to 4.2GHz on the X5660 by 200 bclk and 21 multi. then RAM at 1600Mhz.

I don't know how true it is as I never tested it myself but supposedly 6 sticks of RAM can be problematic but that may not be the case.


----------



## aaronsta1

HelpDatBIOS said:


> Due to microcodes, you need updated modified BIOS. If you do not want the spectre codes, use ones from 2015. If you need this done I can do, let me know
> This will also fix your locked uncore multiplier as well.
> 
> For some BIOS, and some boards, certain CPU's only have two memory multipliers (8 and 10 usually, when this happens). This is usually most prevalent with ES CPU's, but sometimes effects Xeons on desktop boards too
> If at 133 bclk you can only get 1333 memory then 10x might be your max memory multi for this board/BIOS/CPU combo. Microcodes might help that, but possibly not due to how some BIOS treat certain CPU's


ive already updated the bios with a custom bios. i upgrade the raid bios and i believe i used the newest intel microcode at that time but i cant remember.

its not really an issue as i went back to 175x23/24 and running the ram at 1400 mhz 175x4. its just something ive never noticed before. 
the x5660 is in the bios since version 1.60 its on the approved list altho the x5660 on intels sheet says 1066/1333 for ram.. it might not OC to 1600? the version i have is 2.9 dated 2011/5/6. 


here is my settings..

BCLK 175
PCIE 100
RATIO 23 - the board wont let me choose 24 but it boosts up to it.

the qpi on the 5660 is 6.4 and im running it at 6.3GT.. not sure that is causing any issues. 
in hwinfo64 it lists qpi at x18 @ 3151, i dunno if i can change this in the bios..
Uncore is 2800

DRAM is 1400 @ 8-8-8-21
vcore is 1.2 +0.075 offset for a 1.275 total.

the core temp never goes above 50.. even while encoding a h265 video.

one thing ive noticed tho since i had to do all the tests to figure out why it was crashing, i have pcie/pci hardware errors showing up in hwinfo64.. its unrelated to the OC as it does it at stock speeds.. i checked online and i dunno.. some say lowering the pcie to 99 or 98 might work, never tried.


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

I'm not sure what your questions are there? Don't be "unsure" about what microcodes are being used, check this out and update as desired to either current latest or 2015 versions.


----------



## aaronsta1

HelpDatBIOS said:


> I'm not sure what your questions are there? Don't be "unsure" about what microcodes are being used, check this out and update as desired to either current latest or 2015 versions.


i flashed the bios from here my board is the x58 extreme
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/meltdown-and-spectre-patched-bios-for-x58-motherboards.246101/
it says has the raid update and the newest microcode. passes inspectre test. still only has 1333 for the default memory speed.. but running at 175x23 so the ram is at 1400 the next step is 1750 and it cant handle it.

my original question was the ram speed, but i guess it doesnt really matter.


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

That BIOS is up to date on most microcodes, all for your CPU, sounds like limit is x10 for memory and that CPU then on this board, you can use x8 or x10. That may be the CPU's memory multi limit on any board


----------



## TLCH723

aaronsta1 said:


> i flashed the bios from here my board is the x58 extreme
> www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/meltdown-and-spectre-patched-bios-for-x58-motherboards.246101/
> it says has the raid update and the newest microcode. passes inspectre test. still only has 1333 for the default memory speed.. but running at 175x23 so the ram is at 1400 the next step is 1750 and it cant handle it.
> 
> my original question was the ram speed, but i guess it doesnt really matter.


Have you tried 190+x21? Maybe you are in the infamous bclk hole. Also have you tried lower all the multiplier to the lowest and try to find the highest bclk your board can handle?


----------



## Hammad1029

I have been running my x5660 with an Asrock x58 extreme 3 on 2.8 ghz using the stock intel hs with 8gb kingston ddr3 @1333mhz for a year now (bought the whole package for about 110$ somehow  ). Thing is I now want to OC this cpu? how much can I go with this HS while maintaining reasonable temps? how much ghz can i go with an aftermarket cooler and which one should I get? If needed, should I buy a liquid cooler? recommend me one please and also how much ghz can i do with that?
my idle temps are normally 28C on the lowest core and 37 on highest. my load temps vary from 60-70C and 75 at max on a core. 
I'm a total noob when it comes to OCing. Never done it before and couldn't find a proper guide for this mobo either. 
Thanks in advance


----------



## GENXLR

Best intel cooler is the DBX-B cooler from the 980 and 990x, aftermarket a ven-x, megahalem or even a hyper 212 will do you plenty good, if you don't have any of these coolers i would avoid overclocking

On an intel DBX-B which can be bought on ebay for less than 20$, i was able to do 200x20 and get 4ghz stable with reasonable 78C core load temps in IBT

With my Hyper 212 I can get 200x22 and get 4.4ghz at 86C(higher than i want, i went back to 4Ghz because on a hyper 212 its 67C load temps in IBT)

You have an X5660 not an X5670 so your max multi is 21 and 23 turbo and 24 c-state(special boost clock used for efficiency, not performance and is never used under max load)

These chips are odd to OC, especially with the L2 having ECC you can have a stable clock with lower volts but suffer performance because ECC error occur silently and are corrected.

Every board OC's different, what cooler you have now?


----------



## manhattan222

Hello,

I've been trying to get my x5680 stable with anything over 2600-ish mhz on the Uncore but no matter what VTT, blck or multiplier I set I can't do it. It bsods when idling every single f****** time. Error code 0x124. Speedstep and C states are disabled. I tried with VTT from 1.2 all the way up to 1.38V. I am aware the chip needs a ton of vcore to achive 4.4GHz.

The chip is delidded and mounted bare die with liquid metal, so temps are super fine, never exceeding 70ºC at full load.

Xeon x5680 @ 4.4GHz @ 1.46V
ASUS Sabertooth x58
24GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM 9-9-9-24
CoolerMaster Masterliquid Non-Pro 240 AIO

Did I get THE WORST x5680 ever made or what? It seems that every other x56xx out there can do AT LEAST 3000MHz uncore...

Cheers!


----------



## Hammad1029

*x5660 ocing*



GENXLR said:


> Best intel cooler is the DBX-B cooler from the 980 and 990x, aftermarket a ven-x, megahalem or even a hyper 212 will do you plenty good, if you don't have any of these coolers i would avoid overclocking
> 
> On an intel DBX-B which can be bought on ebay for less than 20$, i was able to do 200x20 and get 4ghz stable with reasonable 78C core load temps in IBT
> 
> With my Hyper 212 I can get 200x22 and get 4.4ghz at 86C(higher than i want, i went back to 4Ghz because on a hyper 212 its 67C load temps in IBT)
> 
> You have an X5660 not an X5670 so your max multi is 21 and 23 turbo and 24 c-state(special boost clock used for efficiency, not performance and is never used under max load)
> 
> These chips are odd to OC, especially with the L2 having ECC you can have a stable clock with lower volts but suffer performance because ECC error occur silently and are corrected.
> 
> Every board OC's different, what cooler you have now?


I have an Intel Stock cooler (larger than the ones you see on google. couldn't find name so attached pic, didn't have much space to take so excuse that pls). Can I really get a 4ghz with an air cooler like hyper 212? how much do you get with that at idle? how much better is the hyper 212 than the tx3 evo? asking cus tx3 evo is much cheaper here.


----------



## hecatomb

I have a really cheap X5675 coming from ebay. I've been using a Thermalright Ultra Extreme 1366RT HS/F. Do you guys think that this is still a competent cooler? Should I pick up something like the Hyper 212 Evo or better?

http://thermalright.com/product/ultra-120-extreme-1366rt-rev-c/

It seems to handle my X5650 @4.2GHz quite well.


----------



## dasparx

hecatomb said:


> I have a really cheap X5675 coming from ebay. I've been using a Thermalright Ultra Extreme 1366RT HS/F. Do you guys think that this is still a competent cooler? Should I pick up something like the Hyper 212 Evo or better?
> 
> http://thermalright.com/product/ultra-120-extreme-1366rt-rev-c/
> 
> It seems to handle my X5650 @4.2GHz quite well.


The TRUE should be within 50mhz max overclock of the 212. The temp difference is going to be so small it ain't worth it. And a TRUE is hella oldschool, keep it! I used to love them.


----------



## Owterspace

The Ultra 120 Extreme completely destroys a 212 Evo in every single way, its just a little piece of junk in comparison. Its fine if you don't have anything else, or any money.. but that's the only reason to buy one. Its better than s stock cooler I suppose.. although I have never had a stock cooler for 1366.


----------



## Coldblackice

manhattan222 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I've been trying to get my x5680 stable with anything over 2600-ish mhz on the Uncore but no matter what VTT, blck or multiplier I set I can't do it. It bsods when idling every single f****** time. Error code 0x124. Speedstep and C states are disabled. I tried with VTT from 1.2 all the way up to 1.38V. I am aware the chip needs a ton of vcore to achive 4.4GHz.
> 
> The chip is delidded and mounted bare die with liquid metal, so temps are super fine, never exceeding 70ºC at full load.
> 
> Xeon x5680 @ 4.4GHz @ 1.46V
> ASUS Sabertooth x58
> 24GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM 9-9-9-24
> CoolerMaster Masterliquid Non-Pro 240 AIO
> 
> Did I get THE WORST x5680 ever made or what? It seems that every other x56xx out there can do AT LEAST 3000MHz uncore...
> 
> Cheers!


Did you end up having any better luck with this? Curious if you were able to find any voltage/settings that helped things out. I have an x5675 that seems to be a dud, as well :/


----------



## 8ax

I'm getting rid of my X5650 as it used to hold [email protected] (4.5 all cores) but started degrading heavily in the past year - at the moment I'm at 1.51vcore, 1.45vVTT and 1.74vDIMM. Are the higher-series Xeons significantly better binned or is there no benefit in getting an X5690 over an X5670 or X5680?

Also, if anyone is selling a well-overclocking (at least 4.6GHz all cores) non-degraded X5650+ series chip, let me know.


----------



## mak1skav

Hey guys I just got one X5670 to play with but I am having some problems. I replaced my i930 with it but every time I am trying to load the installed Windows 7 the system stays on the loading screen with the animated windows logo. When I disable 2 cores in my bios then Windows are booting without any issues and they see it as a 4 cores 8 threads cpu like my old i930. I have tried 2 different live cds with linux and they can boot and load without any problems with all 6 cores enabled.

Anyone have seen this problem before when he upgraded to a X56xx Xeon? 

P.S. My motherboard is an Asus P6T Deluxe, the 1st version one.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Try msconfig and select normal start up, then reboot. Could be stuck in 4core 8 thread mode.


----------



## mak1skav

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Try msconfig and select normal start up, then reboot. Could be stuck in 4core 8 thread mode.


Unfortunately it didn't change anything still hangs if I enable all 6 cores.


----------



## TLCH723

mak1skav said:


> Unfortunately it didn't change anything still hangs if I enable all 6 cores.


Have you try booting into safe mode with all 6cores?


----------



## mak1skav

If I boot in safe mode then it hangs when it's trying to load one of avira sys files and if I uninstall avira antivir then it hangs when it's trying to load disk.sys file that it's odd.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Go into Device Manager and uninstall the I7 930 cpu cores?

Then reboot...

spitballing an idea here


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

Did you update the microcodes already?


----------



## mak1skav

HelpDatBIOS said:


> Did you update the microcodes already?


If you are talking about motherboard bios then yes I am on the last bios that Asus has made for P6T Deluxe but if you are talking about something else can you give me some info about that ?


----------



## mak1skav

I am one step closer but not there yet unfortunately. After clearing the cmos for the 3rd time and letting all CPU options in bios on auto I can now boot into Windows with all cores enabled but only if I disable hyper threading, if I enable HT then I get the same symptoms with windows hanging when loading at the windows logo splash. The odd thing is that the windows logo is staying animated/flashing even though it doesn't continue with the windows loading procedure.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

sounds like faulty cpu.


----------



## mak1skav

I decided that it was time to abandon my trusty Windows 7 installation and I installed Windows 10 Pro today, In the new windows installation I can use all 6 cores and 12 threads without any problems. Time to learn the tricks off these Windows 10 and begin the overclocking adventures again.

Something was odd with my old windows installation but I decided that I didn't want to spend any more time searching for the solution.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

did you have windows 7 home? i do remember there being slowness issues for chips with more than 8 threads unless you used the pro edition.


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

I was asking if you modified and updated the CPU microcodes. If you need me to do that for you @*mak1skav* let me know.
I checked and your BIOS contains one of the bugged (uncore bug) 206C2 microcode version (0F and 13, you're contains 13), you want 14 or above (1D -2015 or 1F-2018)


----------



## mak1skav

Squall Leonhart said:


> did you have windows 7 home? i do remember there being slowness issues for chips with more than 8 threads unless you used the pro edition.


I was using Windows 7 Ultimate but with no luck probably some installed driver or software was causing the issues but I gave up and upgraded to Windows 10 at the end.



HelpDatBIOS said:


> I was asking if you modified and updated the CPU microcodes. If you need me to do that for you @*mak1skav* let me know.
> I checked and your BIOS contains one of the bugged (uncore bug) 206C2 microcode version (0F and 13, you're contains 13), you want 14 or above (1D -2015 or 1F-2018)


Sorry but my knowledge doesn't let me to understand exactly what you are talking about. I am using the bios version 2209 that I have downloaded from the official Asus support site, is that microcode you are talking about the one needed for spectre and meltdown hacks ? Because I have downloaded a modified version of my 2209 bios from techPowerup forums with a patch for that but never installed if because I was afraid that something could go wrong with the bios update and I end with a bricked motherboard.


----------



## realcapone

*Still alive?*

Hey guys, anyone using a Xeon X56** at 1.4Vcore from 2015 still kicking today? I just acquired a X5675 and currently running it at 1.392 Vcore at 4.4ghz, anything lower than that will result in a BSOD. Just wondering if how many years can it survive with that kind of voltage. Also, QPI/VTT voltage is at 1.335V just in case some of you are running at 1.35v or more as well as I am planning to go that route if I'll push for 4.5ghz. 

Cheers!


----------



## HelpDatBIOS

Yes @mak1skav - somewhat, that patched BIOS may patch to a certain version but maybe not very latest. In general though, yes, that BIOS would get you updated microcode to some 2018 version and fix the uncore bug too.
It would not brick your board, unless bad BIOS flash out of the blue, as long as you flash safely you'll be OK (ie DOS or EZFlash).


----------



## kbc8090

AllenG said:


> So, who's going to buy one of, or has one of the Plextor m9pe AIC ssd's to see if it still supports legacy boot for x58 like the m8pe did?


Has anyone tried out the m9pe variant yet?


----------



## AllenG

Yup. Confirmed that M9Pe doesn't work as a native boot device, only the M8Pe does.


----------



## kbc8090

AllenG said:


> Yup. Confirmed that M9Pe doesn't work as a native boot device, only the M8Pe does.


Do you know if you can get just the bare m.2 drive and any pcie nvme card and have it work? Meaning there's nothing on the adapter card here making it recognizable, it's all in the m.2 drive itself?


----------



## AllenG

The option rom is on the actual nvme device, not the AIC board. Yes, M8Pe in a standard adapter will boot.


----------



## dagget3450

Hey guys, anyone here noticing huge gaming performance drops with windows 1809 update? I was able to recreate it on my SR2 build. I have some friends running x58 still and they only really game on it. Just wondering if there is a workaround because i suspect its related to spectre/meltdown patches baked in the update maybe?


----------



## Stefan101

*M9PeY 256G will not boot on X58 - confirmed*

Just bought M9PeY 256G for my other computer and tried it in my Rampage III Formula x58 and bios does not see it.


----------



## SmOgER

Squall Leonhart said:


> did you have windows 7 home? i do remember there being slowness issues for chips with more than 8 threads unless you used the pro edition.


Sorry but that's simply not true. I find W7 Home to be faster than any other version of W7 and I'm actually still using it as I don't hate W8/W10 tablet buttons / menus and overlapping settings.


----------



## Squall Leonhart

SmOgER said:


> Sorry but that's simply not true. I find W7 Home to be faster than any other version of W7 and I'm actually still using it as I don't hate W8/W10 tablet buttons / menus and overlapping settings.


its true.


----------



## SmOgER

Squall Leonhart said:


> its true.


Mate, like I've used I'm using it as we speak. No issues of any kind, performance exactly where it should be and benchmarks on point.


----------



## Heuchler

Plextor M8PeY has legacy support not sure bout M9PeY


----------



## kbc8090

Heuchler said:


> Plextor M8PeY has legacy support not sure bout M9PeY


Nope, someone confirmed it didn't.


----------



## Heuchler

I have one and it works on my ASUS P6T SE as a boot drive [M8PeY].


----------



## kbc8090

Heuchler said:


> I have one and it works on my ASUS P6T SE as a boot drive [M8PeY].


Yeah im talking about the M9PeY as confirmed by this post where I asked: 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/8-i...l5639-benchmarks-inside-203.html#post27698820


----------



## rootmoto

I just bought a Xeon X5675 with batch number of 3241F118, the manufacturing year and week is 41 & 2012 respectively, even though it is from the F batch, would it be a better overclocker/at least on par with for eg. 2010 B Batch due to being a newer one?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Do I stick with the X58 or move on to Ryzen 3000......decision decisions. I've been held off from upgrading to a Ryzen build since 2016-2017 mostly due to ridiculous RAM pricing and other things. In 2019 I'm STILL using this X58 build. Playing Resident Evil 2 @ 4K with a stock Fury X on nearly Maxed out settings and getting good FPS is wonderful. 

I'm wondering if it's even worth sinking more money into this platform or not. Just about all of the important hardware is out of warranty and there's no much new technology now. However, the platform still runs fine. I guess I could wait for the hype train prices to mature on a newer platform. More cores would be nice, but I'm still getting by with 3.8Ghz in the summer mostly due to heat. I don't even feel the need to run my platform at 4.6Ghz any longer.


----------



## chungsteroonie

I just built a 1st Gen Ryzen 1600 on sale for $80. Seems like that is the current price/performance crossover point with the x58 platform. Amazing it took so long to catch up.


----------



## AllenG

Kana-Maru said:


> Do I stick with the X58 or move on to Ryzen 3000......decision decisions. I've been held off from upgrading to a Ryzen build since 2016-2017 mostly due to ridiculous RAM pricing and other things. In 2019 I'm STILL using this X58 build. Playing Resident Evil 2 @ 4K with a stock Fury X on nearly Maxed out settings and getting good FPS is wonderful.
> 
> I'm wondering if it's even worth sinking more money into this platform or not. Just about all of the important hardware is out of warranty and there's no much new technology now. However, the platform still runs fine. I guess I could wait for the hype train prices to mature on a newer platform. More cores would be nice, but I'm still getting by with 3.8Ghz in the summer mostly due to heat. I don't even feel the need to run my platform at 4.6Ghz any longer.


Switch. You will thank yourself on the power bill alone. Not saying this platform isn't still totally viable. I still use the ones i decommissioned in favor of Ryzen or TR.

I can confirm that one first gen ryzen 7 1700 at stock settings with 2400 ram beats out dual x5687's @3.73ghz which is 8c/16t across 2 cpus.

To put it further into perspective, that dual x5687 system draws 400W in cpu alone and no single 6c/12t oc'd chip on x58 could compete with it. Then, Ryzen came thru draws 1/3 the power and has about 20% better performance doing it. If you're being bottlenecked on NVME devices at x58, thats also a good reason to switch. 

So ya, if you are fine what you have now on x58 then going to a stock ryzen 5 will set you about even with what ya got. Ryzen 7 would definitely be a step up. Ryzen 3000 series? Not even worth comparing, definitely upgrade then.


----------



## Kana-Maru

AllenG said:


> Switch. You will thank yourself on the power bill alone. Not saying this platform isn't still totally viable. I still use the ones i decommissioned in favor of Ryzen or TR.
> 
> I can confirm that one first gen ryzen 7 1700 at stock settings with 2400 ram beats out dual x5687's @3.73ghz which is 8c/16t across 2 cpus.
> 
> To put it further into perspective, that dual x5687 system draws 400W in cpu alone and no single 6c/12t oc'd chip on x58 could compete with it. Then, Ryzen came thru draws 1/3 the power and has about 20% better performance doing it. If you're being bottlenecked on NVME devices at x58, thats also a good reason to switch.
> 
> So ya, if you are fine what you have now on x58 then going to a stock ryzen 5 will set you about even with what ya got. Ryzen 7 would definitely be a step up. Ryzen 3000 series? Not even worth comparing, definitely upgrade then.


Thanks for the input man. I never considered the power bill, but that could be a decent factor as well. The heat output from my X58 is one of the reasons I wanted to change as well. I don't think I've maxed out on my NVMe drives as far as bandwidth goes. I actually still have plenty of bandwidth left on this platform that is unused, but paying for those expansion cards can be a pain. The Intel Matrix is too unreliable for the RAID setups I want and need with the versions currently available to me on this platform. Although the software RAID in Windows 10 works it doesn't perform anywhere close as hardware or software emulated solution.

I normally go high end, but everything has become so efficient since I built this X58 build 8 years ago! 8! My goal was going Threadripper 3000 (12c\24t) for $499, but now I’m starting to eyeball the 3700X (8c\16t) for $329. Obviously the 3700X has a TDP of 65W and will be limited when it comes to overclocking, but I’m starting to think I would be satisfied with stock since it reaches 4.4Ghz. Maybe there’s a little headroom left. The extra NVMe drives would be simple since I wouldn't need a RAID-0 setup. RAID 10 is my goal no matter what I do at least for the HDDs. 

Since the 3000 series is new, I’m expecting the new motherboards to be priced decently high. I could wait for prices to settle a bit as well. AMD usually have killer deals. Most things in my current build would be moved over. The GPU, PSU, HDDs for starters. So the only thing I would need is CPU, MB, RAM and possibly a new chassis. I just don’t know because there are so many options now. 

Originally Skylake was my upgrade path, then Broadwell, then……..then I just never felt compelled to upgrade based on the performance. The DDR4 prices also didn't help during those times either. Switching to Westmere in 2013 instead of going X79 or X99 just gave me so much bang for the buck and even competed with Ivy-Bridge in 2014. I haven't even got started on the security issues, but I've talked about that in the past. 

Thankfully I won’t have to purchase a new GPU so fast since I’m still playing games and getting great results across the board over the past 4 years. Check out my RE2 benchmarks and gameplay in 2019 with Fury X stock and X5660 @ 3.8Ghz:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/bervnl/resident_evil_2_fury_x_benchmarked/


----------



## TLCH723

Also, you may want to consider downsiding your rig to like a SFF. This is one of the reason I want to moving to another platform. Of course is really depend on your setup and situation. Sometime I need to travel and running on laptop is just not as fast and bound by the memory.

My gigabyte X58A-UD3r third memory channel doesn't work any more so I just use it as a TV gaming rig now running dual channel. But the full tower doesn't look nice by the TV. It just too big. And back then there was only micro ATX and no ITX


----------



## TLCH723

Another thing to think about is the US-Chinese Trade War. They said it will make all the components more expensive. So should we upgrade now or hold on?


----------



## crazycrave

Well what do you do with a 9 year old platform = I made an XFire rig out of it to play my vintage games on as my board is a 3 Way Sli and two RX 570 are about what my 290x draw in power alone and I have about 5 games I play current with it but the Windows 10 patches I feel has taken a bite some .

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/19516913

https://valid.x86.fr/u60a6i


----------



## Kana-Maru

TLCH723 said:


> Also, you may want to consider downsiding your rig to like a SFF. This is one of the reason I want to moving to another platform. Of course is really depend on your setup and situation. Sometime I need to travel and running on laptop is just not as fast and bound by the memory.
> 
> My gigabyte X58A-UD3r third memory channel doesn't work any more so I just use it as a TV gaming rig now running dual channel. But the full tower doesn't look nice by the TV. It just too big. And back then there was only micro ATX and no ITX


Actually I was thinking about building a small portable ITX\Micro-ATX type of build a few years ago. I would have two PCs, one stationary and one portable. Since the Fury X is a very small GPU I was going to move it over the portable build. The portable would have been similar to your needs such as long vacations. Laptops are fine for short vacations and I normally VPN into my home network and connect to my PC remotely. The main reason for the portable PC is that the Laptop is just to slow for my needs after a while. 

I have thought about smaller “main” build, but I do need the HDD space so I guess a Mid-Tower is the smallest I’d go I guess, unless you have something in mind(?). M.2\SSD storage is more affordable and takes up nearly no space compared to old HDDs. The HDDs would mostly be for RAID 10 setups, but I suppose I could use a USB 3.0\3.1 RAID backup solution instead of having it inside the PC itself. 




TLCH723 said:


> Another thing to think about is the US-Chinese Trade War. They said it will make all the components more expensive. So should we upgrade now or hold on?


That’s true. I mean I guess we don’t HAVE to upgrade our computers right now. Thankfully AMD normally have awesome deals for their products after a while which could help. They have deals now for the 6 Cores + different MB for approx. $250 USD. That’s a steal, but I would like the 8 core. Maybe being patient until the holidays could be for the best. It’s so hard since there’s always so much new stuff coming out. 




crazycrave said:


> Well what do you do with a 9 year old platform = I made an XFire rig out of it to play my vintage games on as my board is a 3 Way Sli and two RX 570 are about what my 290x draw in power alone and I have about 5 games I play current with it but the Windows 10 patches I feel has taken a bite some .
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/19516913
> https://valid.x86.fr/u60a6i


Nice. Good performance. What vintage games need 3 way SLI? That’s good you are still using the build. I’m not sure what I’d do with my build at this moment IF I build another one. Right now it’s still my main build.


----------



## crazycrave

I trying Tomb Raider (2010) in 4K Max as of today ..


----------



## Kana-Maru

I didn't think Tomb Raider was consider "vintage" already  I'm getting old. Nice vid. I've always been a big fan of the TR games since TR1 on PS1.


----------



## AllenG

Kana-Maru said:


> Actually I was thinking about building a small portable ITX\Micro-ATX type of build a few years ago. I would have two PCs, one stationary and one portable. Since the Fury X is a very small GPU I was going to move it over the portable build. The portable would have been similar to your needs such as long vacations. Laptops are fine for short vacations and I normally VPN into my home network and connect to my PC remotely. The main reason for the portable PC is that the Laptop is just to slow for my needs after a while.
> 
> I have thought about smaller “main” build, but I do need the HDD space so I guess a Mid-Tower is the smallest I’d go I guess, unless you have something in mind(?). M.2\SSD storage is more affordable and takes up nearly no space compared to old HDDs. The HDDs would mostly be for RAID 10 setups, but I suppose I could use a USB 3.0\3.1 RAID backup solution instead of having it inside the PC itself.


This is what i ended up doing as a everyday usage replacement for my main sig rig i ended up building a ITX Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3.8 (was the best performance ratio per watt i could achieve in such a small box on air) w/ 32gb of c14 3200 ram. Ran a short gtx1060 6gb with a single NVME ssd and two SATA ssd's. Definitely an upgrade at 1/5 space used and like 1/4 the wattage drawn... under full cpu and gpu load machine only pulls 360w from the wall, the i7/gtx780 pulled 920w. If i was more gaming oriented, i probably wouldn't have went ITX though as all the high end cards don't fit very easy and if they do, the rig is already almost micro atx size. That being said, running on a 1440p 60hz single monitor setup the gtx1060 does well enough.

Still built a threadripper with vega 64 like 6 months later for heavier tasks, but tbh i don't use it anywhere near as much as i do the ITX rig as it already handles most tasks with ease.

I have all my spinning media in a NAS that i store most things on, besides my normal usage stuff on the local SSD's. I'll say that is definitely a determining factor when deciding between ITX and MATX/ATX. With USB3.0 you have a good solution as you described though... if i were only working from one computer at a time with my data on the drives then your idea is exactly how i would be doing it too. If i were building a machine might now for all use and wanted a couple 3.5 HDD's and full size video cards, i'd probably go MATX. Only reason i say not to bother with full ATX is because most of the main stream platforms don't offer enough pci-e lanes to need all 6 or 7 slots anyways. Most of the real estate just goes to waste.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Man I have some ideas, but I’m trying to take the cheapest most effective route at this point. Then later I will upgrade to what I want. I guess I’m just putting builds together and waiting to see what’s worth it and what isn’t. Luckily I’m on a single PC as of right now. I’d definitely prefer to have a RAID 10 setup since I’m not the best when it comes to backups. 

I’ve been checking out some PC cases. They seem to be limited to only 2x 2.5 HDD slots in most cases. I can use 6 (and more if I needed it) in my current case which is an older case. I don’t really care for all the RGB stuff, but it seems liquid cooling has taken up the space where HDD or removable HDD cages used to be. I have a removable HDD cage in my build, but I’m currently running 2 different RAIDs so I have it installed. SSDs can be installed directly on the board which is cool, but replacing HDDs are easy and more affordable when it comes to storage capacity. I’m not sure how long a SSD running RAID setups would perform with a lot of backups throughout the year. At least with an HDD it will be much less expensive to keep the RAID going. 

I’m not going a lot of gaming on my PC like I used to so I was simply going to transfer my Fury X to my next build for now. As you saw above I’m STILL playing game @ 4K in 2019 with no issues. It’s time for a better architecture and CPU. I want a 8-Core Ryzen, but I think I might have to settle for the 6 core and decently priced motherboard (B550 or something).


----------



## the matty

What's the rough average people get out of X5660's? My old i5 isn't really cutting it any longer and I've been offered a rampage 3 gene and 12gb ram (I have 16gb spare from the i5 build so will have 24gb total) for £55 from a friend which I've taken and should be here Tuesday, I have played with 1366 xeons before so I know what I'm doing overclocking wise but I've only ever played with a decent bin X5650 (that was 4.4GHz 1.35v) several decent X5670s (4.5GHz between 1.35v and 1.4v on all of them) and a dud bin X5680 (4.2GHz 1.45v) but with funds being a little tight I've had to step back to an X5660 from my usual go to X5670 as the X5660 was about half the cost of the X5670 (£10 as opposed to £20), but all in all I was just wondering what to expect from it as a rough average, if I can get above 4GHz then that'll be enough for what I do but the more the better  

Many thanks in advance


----------



## 99belle99

4.2-4.6GHz average. I daily 4.2Ghz with 1.3Volts stable for a few years now. I can easily get it to 4.6Ghz but that requires more volts so I do not bother.


----------



## the matty

99belle99 said:


> 4.2-4.6GHz average. I daily 4.2Ghz with 1.3Volts stable for a few years now. I can easily get it to 4.6Ghz but that requires more volts so I do not bother.


ahh great thainks, my cpu arrived today, not as nice a bin as i'd have liked but good enough, am running 4.1GHz 1.31v but it takes me around 1.45v to get 4.5GHz, i may run that though when my new cooler arrives with these cpus being so cheap now it doesn't particularly matter if it dies


----------



## crazycrave

https://valid.x86.fr/gujwe6

I use turbo for the 23x and 24x and it loves it..


----------



## the matty

Same, Im using the 23 multi myself: https://valid.x86.fr/shyv5f


----------



## Kana-Maru

With my X5660 I can run: 
3.8Ghz @ 1.18 (Stable)
4.0Ghz @ 1.21v (Stable)
4.2Ghz
4.6Ghz @ 1.35-1.36v (Stable)
4.8Ghz @ 1.41v (Stable)

The HIGHEST I've hit was with the X5660 was 5.5Ghz and I can't remember the vCore off the top of my head but I almost killed the CPU. 

With my L5639 which is 60W TDP I pushed it to 4.5Ghz-46Ghz @ 1.46v

I normally run 3.8Ghz unless I need more for benchmarking purposes. I'm pretty much done benchmarking this platform and 3.8Ghz is enough for 4K gaming. Well at least 4K gaming in RE2 on nearly 100% maxed settings while recording gameplay footage (I have the video on YT).

Unless I need more i normally just run 3.8Ghz since it's the summer time now and I'll like to watch the temps. Plus as I stated earlier 3.8Ghz seems to be the sweet spot for my needs on a daily basis at the moment.


----------



## crazycrave

I just moved up to 4.5Ghz and 2 passes so far on Fire Strike http://www.3dmark.com/fs/19681543


----------



## the matty

i like running 4.5 but it's too much of a voltage spike really, my poor 212 evo doesn't like 1.45v much XD


----------



## the matty

Welp I may have gotten around the cooling problem XD someone I've done lots of trades with before has offered me a H100i pro rgb thing in trades for some custom water stuff i've not used in, well, ever, i actually have two of those budget ML120 fans too so I can go push pull with that too, should be able to push 1.45v with that no problem then


----------



## crazycrave

Go into bios and drop fsb bus say 186 and turn speed spectrum on , set voltage to 1.35v with v droop and leave memory as is in 2:8 

As just a safe starting point and work the fsb up till more voltage is needed as I am boosting from 2.8Ghz down clocked to 4.3 turbo like that and it runs good for me in dual channel mode https://valid.x86.fr/mr8z5x with out the high heat of full clocks all the time , mine has 2 turbo mode (performance turbo leave off) and I am thinking of adding a little voltage to the fsb just for the 3400Mhz clock speed as single thread is like gaming I guess so it should match a 1600X in IPC for gaming .


----------



## the matty

it really is amazing what this platform can still pump out, though my poor little board doesn't much like running high bclk, or, rather, it can, but i don't like having to point fans at my chipset heatsink because this is a fairly mobile system XD i think im going to get a pair of X5680s come payday (a pair so i have one spare in case i kill one while benching or something) with that said i got a new gpu the other day and it's amazing that this platform can still pump out a score like this: https://www.3dmark.com/fs/19876642


----------



## the matty

here if cooled reasonably well do we reckon that 1.45v would be okay for daily?


----------



## shadowrain

the matty said:


> here if cooled reasonably well do we reckon that 1.45v would be okay for daily?


Yes but expect "slight" degradation at those voltages even on dual rad custom waterloop. This is from my own experience. Nothing to worry about if you expect to upgrade in a few years and those "slightly" if even degraded chips of mine can still do 4ghz on air for light loads to this day.


----------



## the matty

shadowrain said:


> Yes but expect "slight" degradation at those voltages even on dual rad custom waterloop. This is from my own experience. Nothing to worry about if you expect to upgrade in a few years and those "slightly" if even degraded chips of mine can still do 4ghz on air for light loads to this day.


Ahh that's fine then, realistically I bounce from platform to platform quite often and I pretty much always have spares, I'm thinking of moving up to an X5680 and just running whatever 1.45v gives me from that and also buy say a W3670 as a high multi spare or something since the two of these are rather cheap now


----------



## Caffinator

I just got a X299 setup in the mail so i am going to overvolt the hell out of this thing and see if i can get some good benchmarks ????????????. Will post direct clock-for-clock comparisons. Xeon X5650 at 4.4GHz(18x Uncore)(200BCLK) compared to i7 7800X


----------



## Kana-Maru

Congrats on the new build and good luck with the overclock. 

I did clock vs clock comparisons back in 2014-2016 for Sandy\Ivy Bridge using some of the highest rated overclocks on both of those platforms. This is before Ryzen and Intel latest and greatest dropped. At the time I was thinking about going Sandy\Ivy Bridge-E. Saved a lot of money in the process based on my findings. Maybe others will think otherwise, but it wasn't that "big" of a jump for me. Especially when you look at all the money that "could" have been involved.


----------



## crazycrave

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/19681543

I have to get a better AM4 board 

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/19974916


----------



## Caffinator

Only got to 4.7GHz at 1.32v. Jealous of the CPU I got for my work computer. I'm sitting here at 4.8GHz 1.21v


----------



## the matty

So i might be onto a nice lead for an X5675 for reasonably cheap that can manage 4.7GHz at at around 1.375v, with some luck I can grab that and and pump out some silly numbers 

Edit to add: it seems I've actually spoken to this person before on another site and i've seen the guy run this for long periods of time so it's a winner


----------



## the matty

So, X5675 ended up selling before I got chance to nab it, only missed it by a few days, get paid monday and it sold today, am the sad now, fortunately though I found a pair of X5675's on the bay, server pulls so likely been babies their whole life too so that's nice, dunno how they clock as a result but it's £20 more for a pair than it would have been for the single binned one from before, hopefully one of them is a good bin, but if not I can always just take one and pump say 1.5v into it daily till it either dies or gets degraded or something, but either way should be reyt, comes with a pair of dell server heatsink things which I can shift on after the fact to claw back some money too so that's nice


----------



## the matty

ended up grabbing just a bog standard pair of X5670s off of ebay for 30 quid, one was DOA but will see about getting a replacement/refund for that as they were bought separately, the other one is a borderline god tier bin though, does 4.5GHz for 1.32v


----------



## SmOgER

the matty said:


> So, X5675 ended up selling before I got chance to nab it, only missed it by a few days, get paid monday and it sold today, am the sad now, fortunately though I found a pair of X5675's on the bay, server pulls so likely been babies their whole life too so that's nice, dunno how they clock as a result but it's £20 more for a pair than it would have been for the single binned one from before, hopefully one of them is a good bin, but if not I can always just take one and pump say 1.5v into it daily till it either dies or gets degraded or something, but either way should be reyt, comes with a pair of dell server heatsink things which I can shift on after the fact to claw back some money too so that's nice


I've personally found motherboard to be a more limiting factor than the CPU itself. Hence why I have X5450 and not X5470 (exchanged awhile ago when the prices were higher). As for degrading, just a shy of 1.4 VTT abd 3.76Ghz uncore for 3 years made it degrade only ever so slightly. Currently it's at 1.45 VTT and I see no problem with that.


----------



## SmOgER

the matty said:


> So, X5675 ended up selling before I got chance to nab it, only missed it by a few days, get paid monday and it sold today, am the sad now, fortunately though I found a pair of X5675's on the bay, server pulls so likely been babies their whole life too so that's nice, dunno how they clock as a result but it's £20 more for a pair than it would have been for the single binned one from before, hopefully one of them is a good bin, but if not I can always just take one and pump say 1.5v into it daily till it either dies or gets degraded or something, but either way should be reyt, comes with a pair of dell server heatsink things which I can shift on after the fact to claw back some money too so that's nice


I've personally found motherboard to be a more limiting factor than the CPU itself. Hence why I have X5650 and not X5670 (exchanged awhile ago when the prices were higher). As for degrading, just a shy of 1.4 VTT abd 3.76Ghz uncore for 3 years made it degrade only ever so slightly. Currently it's at 1.45 VTT and I see no problem with that. I wouldn't run it at 1.5 though but part of me thinks it would take that as well for couple more years and then simply degrade some more.


----------



## the matty

SmOgER said:


> I've personally found motherboard to be a more limiting factor than the CPU itself.


this is true to an extent yes but the the higher end skews like the X5670 and the X5675 tend to be better binned, even on my borderline god tier bin rampage 3 gene (does 220 bclk with only 1.25v into the chipset) I've had much more success running X5670s and X5675s rather than X5650s and X5660s, of the 15 X5650s I've put through this board only one has done 4.5GHz with vcore at 1.4v, of the 7 X5660s I've put through this board only two did 4.5GHz at the same vcore, as for the X5670s of the 5 I've run in this all of them have done 4.5GHz with 1.4v or less (my main X5670 did 4.5GHz with 1.32v before it degraded running 4.8GHz 1.52v for benching) and I've found this to be the norm for X5670s, I've yet to have an X5670 that wouldn't do 4.5GHz with 1.4v or less, I've only had 5 X5670s in this particular board but I've had 25 or 30 X5670's across this board and other boards and not a single one has needed more than 1.4v for 4.5GHz, the board does make a difference but the higher skews are usually binned better, at least within the 95w chips anyways, I've not had much luck with the 130w parts


----------



## 99belle99

I must have a good 5660 as I can do 4.2GHz @ 1.3v daily never bothered to go any lower as it's stable like that for a few years. It can do 4.784Ghz @ 1.42v and I'm a bit worried about above comment about the chip degrading at 4.8Ghz while benching as I do that sometimes and I hope I don't degrade this chip as it seems to be a good one.


----------



## the matty

99belle99 said:


> I must have a good 5660 as I can do 4.2GHz @ 1.3v daily never bothered to go any lower as it's stable like that for a few years. It can do 4.784Ghz @ 1.42v and I'm a bit worried about above comment about the chip degrading at 4.8Ghz while benching as I do that sometimes and I hope I don't degrade this chip as it seems to be a good one.


1.42v isn't going to degrade the chip in any way shape or form, or not in less than 2 years anyways, I degraded my X5670 pushing 1.52v, around 1.42v you're not going to have any issues, but either way the higher skews up to the X5675 tend to be better binned in my finding, my X5660 will do 4.2GHz with 1.32v but for even 4.5GHz it needs 1.45v and for 4.6GHz it needs 1.5v but that seems to be an average bin for an X5660 so you definitely have a unicorn level bin there if it does 4.7 at 1.42v


----------



## 99belle99

It needs more voltage though for 4.807GHz for some reason. I can get 4.784GHz at that low voltage but for those extra Hz the voltage goes up. Still a pretty good chip.


----------



## Kana-Maru

I'm "thinking" about buying another Mid-Tower case to replace my old 2013 NZXT. The only issue is most of the newer cases is that although they look nice they have has limited support for things I need\use. Features such fan controllers and expansion slots such as 4 HDD slots + 2 HDD slots for RAID 10 and RAID 1 setup. I guess I could switch to all SSDs to replace my HDDs, but the HDDs (2TBs+) prices are so much more reasonable. 

Plus I have a fan controller (5.25mm) then there's the issue of air flow. The older X58 NEEDS great air flow which appears to be lacking in a lot of nice looking cases. The AIOs also don't seem that great since older hotter units aren't the target. I wish I could find my older Kuhler CPU cooler, but they no longer make them, but my current AIO for now. 

Then again I guess I could use that money I would spend on a nice case to get more performance upgrades or something. I don't know. I never know since I'm still enjoying this platform and plan on getting as much performance out of it before I build a new PC.


----------



## chessmyantidrug

There's plenty of modern cases with great airflow, but it's going to hard to experience that airflow with a bunch of hard drives in the case. They achieve the great airflow was unimpeded air coming through the front panel. Manufacturers are also selling their cases with the lowest HDD support possible needing to purchase brackets to support additional drives. I'm glad I don't need so much HDD space or I wouldn't have been able to go with the ITX case I picked. I'm going to replace a 2.5" drive with a M.2 drive at some point. Just a matter of the price making sense.


----------



## AeroZ

Kana-Maru said:


> I'm "thinking" about buying another Mid-Tower case to replace my old 2013 NZXT. The only issue is most of the newer cases is that although they look nice they have has limited support for things I need\use. Features such fan controllers and expansion slots such as 4 HDD slots + 2 HDD slots for RAID 10 and RAID 1 setup. I guess I could switch to all SSDs to replace my HDDs, but the HDDs (2TBs+) prices are so much more reasonable.
> 
> Plus I have a fan controller (5.25mm) then there's the issue of air flow. The older X58 NEEDS great air flow which appears to be lacking in a lot of nice looking cases. The AIOs also don't seem that great since older hotter units aren't the target. I wish I could find my older Kuhler CPU cooler, but they no longer make them, but my current AIO for now.
> 
> Then again I guess I could use that money I would spend on a nice case to get more performance upgrades or something. I don't know. I never know since I'm still enjoying this platform and plan on getting as much performance out of it before I build a new PC.


Sorry for being lazy and not searching through this huge thread but which programs do you use to test OC stability?


----------



## Kana-Maru

chessmyantidrug said:


> There's plenty of modern cases with great airflow, but it's going to hard to experience that airflow with a bunch of hard drives in the case. They achieve the great airflow was unimpeded air coming through the front panel. Manufacturers are also selling their cases with the lowest HDD support possible needing to purchase brackets to support additional drives. I'm glad I don't need so much HDD space or I wouldn't have been able to go with the ITX case I picked. I'm going to replace a 2.5" drive with a M.2 drive at some point. Just a matter of the price making sense.


Exactly, it’s just a matter of price and making sense. I’ve been getting rid of a lot of programs and junk I haven’t used in years or things that aren’t that important to make space. I do have a pretty good back up. Going mostly SSD was the plan for my next build (and current at some point). I do have 2 SSDs in RAID 0 now, but I got these drives many years ago. HDDs are simply affordable, but there are good 1TB SSDs with great speeds around $90-$110 dollars now. That still doesn’t compare to 1TB to 2TBs HDDs for only $40-$55. The speed makes up for the SSD price though . 

SSDs also seems to have better reliability since I’ve been running my 3 SSDs (2 of them in RAID) for several years now. I had a bad experience with a SSD back in 2013. Took awhile to get over that fear lol. I’ve been looking at PCIe M.2 cards and RAID cards. 




AeroZ said:


> Sorry for being lazy and not searching through this huge thread but which programs do you use to test OC stability?


No problem. You can use quite a few programs. Prime95 is a good one for RAM\CPU and many other components, but be careful not to damage anything from the heat. IntelBurnTest is old and nice + it can really cook the CPU. MemTest64 for RAM. For GPUs you can use Furmark or the presets. Cinebench R10, R11, R15 and R20 are good test to see how stable your build is. There are many others as well, but that should be enough to get your started.


----------



## AeroZ

Kana-Maru said:


> Exactly, it’s just a matter of price and making sense. I’ve been getting rid of a lot of programs and junk I haven’t used in years or things that aren’t that important to make space. I do have a pretty good back up. Going mostly SSD was the plan for my next build (and current at some point). I do have 2 SSDs in RAID 0 now, but I got these drives many years ago. HDDs are simply affordable, but there are good 1TB SSDs with great speeds around $90-$110 dollars now. That still doesn’t compare to 1TB to 2TBs HDDs for only $40-$55. The speed makes up for the SSD price though .
> 
> 
> 
> SSDs also seems to have better reliability since I’ve been running my 3 SSDs (2 of them in RAID) for several years now. I had a bad experience with a SSD back in 2013. Took awhile to get over that fear lol. I’ve been looking at PCIe M.2 cards and RAID cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No problem. You can use quite a few programs. Prime95 is a good one for RAM\CPU and many other components, but be careful not to damage anything from the heat. IntelBurnTest is old and nice + it can really cook the CPU. MemTest64 for RAM. For GPUs you can use Furmark or the presets. Cinebench R10, R11, R15 and R20 are good test to see how stable your build is. There are many others as well, but that should be enough to get your started.




Still the “good ol prime95” then heh. I’ve been using it myself since I started OC’ing when I got a 2500K many years ago.
About a year ago I was able to get a leftover PC with X58 motherboard. At that time it had the i7-920 that I switched out to x5670.
From the sandy bridge days I’m used to using prime for testing as well. After the shorter initial tests I run custom test with full FFT range, 90-95% memory and 10 minutes for each test. If that doesn’t crash for 1-2 days then I claim it as stable.
Do you think that IBT would do the same or better job quicker or long prime test is still the way to go?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kana-Maru

Prime95 still has it's purpose, but be careful with it as with all stress testing. I guess you won't really know how stable a machine unless you stress it for many hours under different conditions. I usually make sure I'm rock solid by stress testing for MANY hours or a few days at a time when I can monitor the machine. 

Many years and counting and I've never had a crash @ 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz + 1600Mhz RAM or 2000\2100Mhz ECC Server RAM. I Since this machine is so old now I run it at 3.8Ghz most of the time and can still get great FPS @ 4K with 2019 games WHILE recording. Can't wait for RDR2 to release on PC.


----------



## paiNsage

Hey Kana,i wanted to ask you if you could explain a bit of your thinking process when overclocking,i guess i want to ask you how to overclock my x5660 chip.. Seeing that the website on the first page is down,the only way was through a message... These are my specs:
X5660
P6T SE motherboard
3x4 (12gb) Micron ddr3 1600mhz memory
650w Cooler master MWE Bronze PSU
Snowman cooler with 6 heat pipes (Still waiting for it to arrive  )
I've asked a few people on the forums,and they said that you were the god of X58 Xeon overclocking,so i wanted to learn from the best (if possible  )
Im basically a newbie on x58,never had it,so this is the first time.. If you could explain a bit of your overclocking methods,that would be great..
Thanks for your time and effort .


----------



## 99belle99

BCLK: 200
Multi x 21

Turbo off, All other power saving on.

Vcore 1.3 V

QPI/Vtt: 1.235V everything else auto

It's a while since I messed with my X58 so this all from memory but I was running my X5660 at 4.2GHz for a few years and could push to 4.6GHz and 4.8GHz for benchmarks. But 4.2GHz is best all rounder not putting too much strain on system.

Another thing QPI is 7200 and RAM multipier set it so RAM is 1600MHz.


----------



## Kana-Maru

paiNsage said:


> Hey Kana,i wanted to ask you if you could explain a bit of your thinking process when overclocking,i guess i want to ask you how to overclock my x5660 chip.. Seeing that the website on the first page is down,the only way was through a message... These are my specs:
> X5660
> P6T SE motherboard
> 3x4 (12gb) Micron ddr3 1600mhz memory
> 650w Cooler master MWE Bronze PSU
> Snowman cooler with 6 heat pipes (Still waiting for it to arrive  )
> I've asked a few people on the forums,and they said that you were the god of X58 Xeon overclocking,so i wanted to learn from the best (if possible  )
> Im basically a newbie on x58,never had it,so this is the first time.. If you could explain a bit of your overclocking methods,that would be great..
> Thanks for your time and effort .


Hey man sorry for such a late reply. I did get your PM and I have replied to it. Hope you see this post or that message. 




99belle99 said:


> BCLK: 200
> Multi x 21
> 
> Turbo off, All other power saving on.
> 
> Vcore 1.3 V
> 
> QPI/Vtt: 1.235V everything else auto
> 
> It's a while since I messed with my X58 so this all from memory but I was running my X5660 at 4.2GHz for a few years and could push to 4.6GHz and 4.8GHz for benchmarks. But 4.2GHz is best all rounder not putting too much strain on system.
> 
> Another thing QPI is 7200 and RAM multipier set it so RAM is 1600MHz.


Also good quick info. Getting to 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz is fairly easy with STOCK settings for the most part. At least I didn't need to mess with the QPI settings etc. 

4.2Ghz might require some tweaking, but usually not much. 

I'm still rolling with my X58 + Fury X. I normally use my Xeon @ 3.8Ghz and the Fury X @ Stock and can still enjoy bearky MAX 4K gaming in the games I love to play. 1440p has always been the sweet spot depending on the game and FPS I need.

I'm pretty sure when Ryzen 4000 series drops I'm upgrading, but heck I been saying that for like....I don't know 4 or 5 years now (been using my X58 since 2011). It sucks that I know exactly how much horsepower I need  - I wish I didn't know so I could just blast through money. 

I still record (at 4K) and Stream games with no problems either. I literally have no need to upgrade ugh, but it's time to leave this old tech behind. I'm pretty sure I won't be going Intel like I've said since late 2014 since non of their CPUs was not worth the upgrade to me. Ryzen came along and looks like a great upgrade. 

I also stand by my Fury X review in 2015, it was and IS still a great GPU that continues to surprise me yearly. Still going strong in 2020. I run my own benchmarks by the way. I love the way it can handle RE2 nearly maxed out in 4K. Great little card.


----------



## 99belle99

Kana-Maru said:


> Also good quick info. Getting to 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz is fairly easy with STOCK settings for the most part. At least I didn't need to mess with the QPI settings etc.
> 
> 4.2Ghz might require some tweaking, but usually not much.
> 
> I'm still rolling with my X58 + Fury X. I normally use my Xeon @ 3.8Ghz and the Fury X @ Stock and can still enjoy bearky MAX 4K gaming in the games I love to play. 1440p has always been the sweet spot depending on the game and FPS I need.
> 
> I'm pretty sure when Ryzen 4000 series drops I'm upgrading, but heck I been saying that for like....I don't know 4 or 5 years now (been using my X58 since 2011). It sucks that I know exactly how much horsepower I need  - I wish I didn't know so I could just blast through money.
> 
> I still record (at 4K) and Stream games with no problems either. I literally have no need to upgrade ugh, but it's time to leave this old tech behind. I'm pretty sure I won't be going Intel like I've said since late 2014 since non of their CPUs was not worth the upgrade to me. Ryzen came along and looks like a great upgrade.
> 
> I also stand by my Fury X review in 2015, it was and IS still a great GPU that continues to surprise me yearly. Still going strong in 2020. I run my own benchmarks by the way. I love the way it can handle RE2 nearly maxed out in 4K. Great little card.


I made the switch to a 3700X a good few months ago. I also had a Fury X and then a Vega 56 and currently a 5700 XT. I also game at 4k on a large HDR Tv.

If the 4000 series follows the trend with previous Ryzen chips it will be a serious set of chips and would even be a upgrade for me on my 3700X which I might do as all I would have to buy is a new CPU.

The 4000 series might be delayed due to CV19. It will be releasing the end of this year or even into the beginning of 2021 if delayed.


----------



## Kana-Maru

99belle99 said:


> I made the switch to a 3700X a good few months ago. I also had a Fury X and then a Vega 56 and currently a 5700 XT. I also game at 4k on a large HDR Tv.
> 
> If the 4000 series follows the trend with previous Ryzen chips it will be a serious set of chips and would even be a upgrade for me on my 3700X which I might do as all I would have to buy is a new CPU.
> 
> The 4000 series might be delayed due to CV19. It will be releasing the end of this year or even into the beginning of 2021 if delayed.


That's great to hear about the 3700X. I thought about getting a the 3000 series or a Threadripper, but I didn't want those fans on my X570 MB. I like to build once and use the rig for years. Many people told me that my X58 wasn't "future proof", something I will be writing about soon, but honestly I'm kinda re-thinking the "future proof" stuff. I really enjoy building gaming rigs so I could get something that would last a few years instead of 5+ years. Decisions.....descions.....build for a few years or a decade lol. AMD has so many cores and performance that it would be easy to build for at least 6 years now. 

I'm looking forward to AMDs 7nm. I really wish I could get my hands on a good RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooled to replace my AIO Fury X. I guess I'll wait and see what big Navi brings to the table against Nvidia this time around.


----------



## OCmember

Hey Kana-Maru, still here. Just more active with the X570 Aorus Xtreme thread. I still have my old X58 systems


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah man I'm still here. Congrats! 

I almost went X570 + 3900X recently due to the great prices. I think I'm going to wait for the 4000 series at this point though. I'm sure the X58 will easily hold me over until late this year


----------



## OCmember

Kana-Maru said:


> Yeah man I'm still here. Congrats!
> 
> I almost went X570 + 3900X recently due to the great prices. I think I'm going to wait for the 4000 series at this point though. I'm sure the X58 will easily hold me over until late this year


4K series will be the last AM4 chip so aggregate your purchases optimally!


----------



## Kana-Maru

OCmember said:


> 4K series will be the last AM4 chip so aggregate your purchases optimally!


Ugh......well now I don't know WHAT I'm going to do. Shall it be X58 until mid-late next.......stay tuned....for next years episode......


----------



## OCmember

Kana-Maru said:


> Ugh......well now I don't know WHAT I'm going to do. Shall it be X58 until mid-late next.......stay tuned....for next years episode......



Haha. I hear ya! I was worried this expensive MB wouldn't get a CPU upgrade. Either way this system will most likely last as long as my X58 gaming rig did. My daily is still X58. I have 2 spare X58 boards and I think a W3690, and for sure an i7-970 layin around. When the 4K series comes out what I do with the spare AMD cpu, this 3800X, will depend on what the X670 has to offer. I'm not expecting too much OC headroom with the 4K series but I hear it's between 10-15% increase in IPC.. don't quote me and correct me if I'm wrong. Either way the upgrade was worth it. For me it doesn't need overclocking, just a solid fast set of DIMMS with tight timings. 

Keep us posted!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Sounds great and of course I will, you keep us posted as well. I guess it would be a bad idea to finally upgrade, but things feel much better when you have an upgrade path. Where would the X58 platform be with out the 32nm Westmere's right now? Easy....DEAD. AMD has supported the AM4 for many years. I guess now my plan is to continue using the X58 until the next platform that way I'll at least have a upgrade path if I really need one a few years down the line. Maybe start out with something affordable, bench the heck out of it like I did with the X5660 and later upgrade it if I need more performance.


----------



## 99belle99

Kana-Maru said:


> Sounds great and of course I will, you keep us posted as well. I guess it would be a bad idea to finally upgrade, but things feel much better when you have an upgrade path. Where would the X58 platform be with out the 32nm Westmere's right now? Easy....DEAD. AMD has supported the AM4 for many years. I guess now my plan is to continue using the X58 until the next platform that way I'll at least have a upgrade path if I really need one a few years down the line. Maybe start out with something affordable, bench the heck out of it like I did with the X5660 and later upgrade it if I need more performance.


There is always the current X570 or X670 and upgrade in a few years time to a 3950X or 4950X as they will surely drop in price in the future. Those two chips will be to AM4 what 32nm Westmeres were to X58.


----------



## Kana-Maru

99belle99 said:


> There is always the current X570 or X670 and upgrade in a few years time to a 3950X or 4950X as they will surely drop in price in the future. Those two chips will be to AM4 what 32nm Westmeres were to X58.


Well dang man I never though it of like that since there has been so much going on. You make a fine point my good fellow 

The Threadrippers normally release much later with newer architectures as well. Still something is tell me to wait. I don't know why. I think it's because I really don't "have to" or "need to" upgrade at the moment.


----------



## Kana-Maru

99belle99 said:


> .....


Also check your PM when you get a chance. Thanks.


----------



## Kana-Maru

PotatoVonEpicus said:


> Sadly the sticks i have won't do lower tCAS regardless of voltage, really curious what timings you have with ECC RAM on 2000 MHz ~.


With the server RAM @ around 2100Mhz I ran (9-10-10-22) stable. 
I preferred 1600Mhz - 1700Mhz because I could get as low as (7-8-8-24).


----------



## croc1118

I'm having some problems regarding my xeon x5650 overclock, these are the settings currently. Everything is fine until i do large FTTs tests on prime 95, everything else seems ok, alhtough i still haven't finished calibrating the voltages. Is there some setting i must up for it to be stable, and if there's also some that are way too high and could go down without impacting the rest.


----------



## Kana-Maru

croc1118 said:


> I'm having some problems regarding my xeon x5650 overclock, these are the settings currently. Everything is fine until i do large FTTs tests on prime 95, everything else seems ok, alhtough i still haven't finished calibrating the voltages. Is there some setting i must up for it to be stable, and if there's also some that are way too high and could go down without impacting the rest.


What CPU speed are you targeting? Set the CPU ratio manually as well. For testing set the UCLK to the lowest possible for now and try to set your BCLK Freq. to match your DRAM Frequency @ or around 1600Mhz......so start the BCLK Frequency around [160]. Set your CPU ratio accordingly. Test for stability. Then you can try shooting for something around 180 - 200, but you'll be changing several power settings at that point. First just get used to overclocking and the settings. 

Also go ahead and set your DRAM Voltage to 1.65v and timings to 9-9-9-9-24


----------



## croc1118

Kana-Maru said:


> What CPU speed are you targeting? Set the CPU ratio manually as well. For testing set the UCLK to the lowest possible for now and try to set your BCLK Freq. to match your DRAM Frequency @ or around 1600Mhz......so start the BCLK Frequency around [160]. Set your CPU ratio accordingly. Test for stability. Then you can try shooting for something around 180 - 200, but you'll be changing several power settings at that point. First just get used to overclocking and the settings.
> 
> Also go ahead and set your DRAM Voltage to 1.65v and timings to 9-9-9-9-24


Im targeting around 3.4 ghz with 20x (as it says in the bios), but it sometimes goes to 22 or 23x (dont know if its on all cores on only just one), so in full load cpu-z says its 3.7, still haven't set the ratio manually, thought it wouldn't affect anything else, just the cpu.
I've already set the timings you mentioned, just wanted to know what DRAM voltage you're refering to, if its the DRAM bus voltage or the one above that. Sorry for making these questions but i want to be sure i don't change anything that could potentially damage any component. Right now the ram is at 1704 Mhz, so the UCLK is as low as it can be already.
If i may ask, what is the QPI link data rate? What does it affect and how does it affect overclocking.

Will change the DRAM voltage to 1.65, but after that, what should I try to do? Test the stability of it and if it's fine, try to lower it by one level until it's at the minimum possible?


----------



## Kana-Maru

croc1118 said:


> Im targeting around 3.4 ghz with 20x (as it says in the bios), but it sometimes goes to 22 or 23x (dont know if its on all cores on only just one), so in full load cpu-z says its 3.7, still haven't set the ratio manually, thought it wouldn't affect anything else, just the cpu.


I saw the CPU Ratio set to "Auto" in the BIOS screenshot that you provided so I was just making sure. You'll definitely want to set this to x20 manually then. To stop the CPU ratio from changing while in Windows OS Disable "Intel SpeedStep" and "Intel TurboMode (or TurboBoost)". You can also the CPU C-States as well. 



croc1118 said:


> I've already set the timings you mentioned, just wanted to know what DRAM voltage you're refering to, if its the DRAM bus voltage or the one above that. Sorry for making these questions but i want to be sure i don't change anything that could potentially damage any component.


Yes DRAM Bus Voltage is what I am referring to on your motherboard. Don't go above 1.65v though so you won't have to worry about damaging anything. Also don't worry about the questions, that's why we are here.....to discuss and help each other out the best way we can. Believe it or not I'm actually contemplating writing an X58 OC guide in 2020 for the X58......better late than never right? I see a lot of people still buying and trying to overclock these beasts. I also see people that want that overclocking "nostalgia: and those who are plain out bored during quarantine. One of the major reasons for me wiring it would be the last statement. 




croc1118 said:


> Right now the ram is at 1704 Mhz, so the UCLK is as low as it can be already.
> If i may ask, what is the QPI link data rate? What does it affect and how does it affect overclocking.
> 
> Will change the DRAM voltage to 1.65, but after that, what should I try to do? Test the stability of it and if it's fine, try to lower it by one level until it's at the minimum possible?


In short, QPI Link Data Rate controls how much bandwidth you can move from the X58-Northbridge to the CPU. The maximum theoretical throughput is 25.6GB\s. It is possible to go over that from overclocking. You can leave the DRAM at 1.65v and 1600Mhz (9-9-9-24) for now. 1600Mhz or 1333Mhz is where you want to be for stability tests. You'll need to make sure your CPU has enough vCore. 1.22v should be a good starting point.


----------



## croc1118

Kana-Maru said:


> In short, QPI Link Data Rate controls how much bandwidth you can move from the X58-Northbridge to the CPU. The maximum theoretical throughput is 25.6GB\s. It is possible to go over that from overclocking. You can leave the DRAM at 1.65v and 1600Mhz (9-9-9-24) for now. 1600Mhz or 1333Mhz is where you want to be for stability tests. You'll need to make sure your CPU has enough vCore. 1.22v should be a good starting point.


Ok, so the plan is testing the ram for now, and lower the voltage the most that I can. After that, do I do the same for the cpu vCore?
Should I also change the QPI Link Data Rate to some other value? I heard that uping that setting can give a nice performance boost, but I'm not sure in what situation, or if I could do it right now, if it may interfere with something else etc.


----------



## Kana-Maru

croc1118 said:


> Ok, so the plan is testing the ram for now, and lower the voltage the most that I can. After that, do I do the same for the cpu vCore?
> Should I also change the QPI Link Data Rate to some other value? I heard that uping that setting can give a nice performance boost, but I'm not sure in what situation, or if I could do it right now, if it may interfere with something else etc.


No the plan is testing the CPU for now. You'll worry about the RAM later. Setting the RAM to 1333Mhz or 1600Mhz @ 9-9-9-24 (2T) should be fine while overclocking the CPU. Honestly with such a LOW overclock you should have nearly ALL settings to stock (I think I explained this before, but now that I have you here maybe we can have some order). So just start over. Set everything to STOCK. 

Only change the: 
-CPU Ratio = x20 
-BCLK =160
-CPU Voltage = 1.22v (we can lower this later, we just want to make sure it's stable first)
-Intel SpeedStep & Turbo = Disabled
-C-States = Disable
-DRAM Frequency 1333Mhz or 1600Mhz 
-DRAM Timing = 9-9-9-24 [2T]
-DRAM Bus Voltage = 1.65v 

Leave everything else STOCK or AUTO. That's it. Give it a shot and benchmark for awhile.


----------



## croc1118

Kana-Maru said:


> No the plan is testing the CPU for now. You'll worry about the RAM later. Setting the RAM to 1333Mhz or 1600Mhz @ 9-9-9-24 (2T) should be fine while overclocking the CPU. Honestly with such a LOW overclock you should have nearly ALL settings to stock (I think I explained this before, but now that I have you here maybe we can have some order). So just start over. Set everything to STOCK.
> 
> Only change the:
> -CPU Ratio = x20
> -BCLK =160
> -CPU Voltage = 1.22v (we can lower this later, we just want to make sure it's stable first)
> -Intel SpeedStep & Turbo = Disabled
> -C-States = Disable
> -DRAM Frequency 1333Mhz or 1600Mhz
> -DRAM Timing = 9-9-9-24 [2T]
> -DRAM Bus Voltage = 1.65v
> 
> Leave everything else STOCK or AUTO. That's it. Give it a shot and benchmark for awhile.


I have tested the cpu for a few hours and it's stable, it's the ram that has been giving me a few problems, probably because of a too low of a voltage, since it got much better when i upped the ram voltage as you sugested.


----------



## Kana-Maru

croc1118 said:


> I have tested the cpu for a few hours and it's stable, it's the ram that has been giving me a few problems, probably because of a too low of a voltage, since it got much better when i upped the ram voltage as you sugested.


Well that's great to hear. We will leave the RAM alone for now. Next you need to try to reach 3.8Ghz. So now you'll need to increase your BCLK to around 171 to 173. You'll need to re-adjust your DRAM Frequency as well to get it around 1600Mhz or lower (timings and voltages can stay the same for now). See if you can boot by just changing the: 

-BCLK between 171 - 173
-Adjust your DRAM Frequency to around 1600Mhz or lower.
-See if you can boot into Windows. If so try running a quick stability test. Your temps should be fine, but keep an eye on your temps regardless.


----------



## croc1118

Kana-Maru said:


> Well that's great to hear. We will leave the RAM alone for now. Next you need to try to reach 3.8Ghz. So now you'll need to increase your BCLK to around 171 to 173. You'll need to re-adjust your DRAM Frequency as well to get it around 1600Mhz or lower (timings and voltages can stay the same for now). See if you can boot by just changing the:
> 
> -BCLK between 171 or 173
> -Adjust your DRAM Frequency to around 1600Mhz or lower.
> -See if you can boot into Windows. If so try running a quick stability test. Your temps should be fine, but keep an eye on your temps regardless.


I upped the BCLK to exatcly 180, upped the cpu voltage to 1.225 and the rest was left on auto so that i wouldnt bother me for now. But i left the ram on the same multiplier, so right know it's at 1800 mhz, guess I should lower it down to the next step then. I was about to say it was going well but I just got a BSOD. I gave the cpu voltage a little boost to 1.23 and lowered the RAM frequency back down to about 1400 mhz.


----------



## Kana-Maru

croc1118 said:


> I upped the BCLK to exatcly 180, upped the cpu voltage to 1.225 and the rest was left on auto so that i wouldnt bother me for now. But i left the ram on the same multiplier, so right know it's at 1800 mhz, guess I should lower it down to the next step then. I was about to say it was going well but I just got a BSOD. I gave the cpu voltage a little boost to 1.23 and lowered the RAM frequency back down to about 1400 mhz.


Yes try keeping the DRAM Frequency below 1600Mhz for now. Also 180 for the BCLK should be fine as well. Give it a shot.


----------



## croc1118

Kana-Maru said:


> Yes try keeping the DRAM Frequency below 1600Mhz for now. Also 180 for the BCLK should be fine as well. Give it a shot.


I ran a Small FTTs stress test on prime 95 for abour one hour and a half and it gave me a bsod. These are the current settings.

Also, the max multiplier seems to be 22 instead of 20, so the cpu actually reaches 4 ghz. Is the voltage too low for 4 ghz or is it something else? All other settings are on automatic or on a safe value, so I really don't know what is wrong now. Checking other overclocks, maybe i did hit the sweetspot for me in this case, maybe if i up the voltage by just 1 step, it will become completely stable, and then i could focus on the RAM and other settings. What do you think?

Also, forgot to mencion, it may be important but my ram stock speed is 1333 mhz, and with those settings, its running at 1440 as you can see. Does it impact or a slight overclock like that doesn't really impact it?

Update: I upped quite a bit the QPI/DRAM Voltage. I compared what it set as auto to the profile i had before overclocking (that was perfectly stable), and somehow it was lower, in that other profile, so I turned it up a bit so it was at least 1.29 (stable nonoverclocked profile had 1.27).


----------



## Kana-Maru

You need to make sure that you are setting the CPU Ratio MANUALLY. It should not be set to auto. Everything else can be set the way it was before.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

Kana-Maru said:


> With the server RAM @ around 2100Mhz I ran (9-10-10-22) stable.
> I preferred 1600Mhz - 1700Mhz because I could get as low as (7-8-8-24).


That is indeed impressive, how far did you push uncore and uncore voltage?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks. It definitely took sometime to finally get it stable, but it was worth it overall. I was able to push my Uncore to 4Ghz. My CPU was also stable at 4.8Ghz. I didn't have to throw that much voltage on it either.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

This x5680 seemingly really likes high voltage or overall is degraded chip, to even run uncore at 3800 it needs around 1.415v, although from what i seen lower uncore seems to work better for me, as performance gain is not that significant while temperatures are much lower running lower uncore frequency.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah that has been a big problem over the years with the X58 CPUs\MBs........finding some that haven't been abused by enthusiast.

_Gather around it's STORY TIME kids:_

The golden years were when I first posted this topic and my even older L5639 topic back in late 2013 - early 2014. I was able to push my Bloomfield, L5639 & X5660 comfortably since they weren't straight up abused by overclockers (until I got my hands on them haha ). The benchmarks had to be completed . However, anyone that knows me know that I try to stay within Intel's recommendation the best I can, especially for daily usage and even when I upgrade this won't change on my next AMD\Intel build especially since their doesn't appear to a lot of overclocking headroom like the old days. They are really pumping out the high clocks straight out of the box. 

For instance I was able to overclock my X5660 up to a whopping *96%* over the base. I overclocked my L5636 even further, up to a whopping *116%* over the base clocks. I specifically remember saying something along the lines of "Intel will NEVER allow this to happen again". Those days are more or less over unless you have some serious money involved. I did all of my CPU OCs using a sub 120mm AIO cooler. 

After I finally wrote up my topic and posted it on two websites the X58 EXPLODED and people were just buying them up looking for the "Golden Chip" and as usual with most overclockers they just cranked the voltages + clocks down to the frequencies on the PCI and degraded a ton of them. Shortly after that you seen people trying to sell tons of them for cheap since they were practically worthless. 4Ghz - 4.4Ghz with high voltages + heat wasn't enough when I was getting 4.6Ghz & 4.8Ghz with extremely decent temps and voltages considering what most were getting. Now we have YouTubers and others focusing on the X58 several years late, but better late than ever.

Anyways the X58 spread like wild-fire since I proved that it was ONLY less than 10% slower than the more expensive Sandy & Ivy Bridge back in 2014 (_"*X5660 vs High-End SB-E & IVB-E Benchmarks Comparisons*"_) clock for clock using lower clocked DDR3. So yeah when you have people buying up the CPUs, ruining them in the process while looking for the Golden Chip, then re-selling them for cheap on Amazon+Ebay and other outlets you end up with some rough CPUs. So who knows how many people touched that CPU before you did. Luckily I'm sure I bought mine from a re-seller that actually re-sold the CPUs from the servers they were retired from. I can't remember how much I paid for my L5639, but I remember my X5660 being around $200 - $250 or something like that and they both have been the best money I've spend on the X58 platform to date.

-------------------

Now personally I am looking at potentially chasing "more cores" from AMD close to EoL platform or continuing to deal with Heat output\high TDP from Intel. Guess I'll wait since I've been on the X58 THIS long already. I'm wondering if Intel will pull another Nahelem like upset in 2021-2022 at this point. I'm all for AMD succeeding and actually planned to build a 3900X, but I'm looking at them in a different light at the moment.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

I am thinking its still time of waiting, unless you need many cores for work you do. I certainly have no hope for Intel at this moment, other than house fire meme potential. Although AMD is better price wise and generally seems like they catch up to Intel and possibly even do better, due price / performance ratio, that aside i still seen this old x5680 with perhaps massive voltage of 1.560v ( certainly not 24/7 voltage ) reaching 4.6 - 4.7 GHz still being able to produce more fps than 3700x in some games, that i tested. I think you should run your x5660 on 4.6 GHz for 24/7 if you need that performance boost, especially if its under 1.420v ~, degradation at such voltage still should be fairly slow. 
Yes cooling might indeed be an issue, but if you still have that 120mm radiator you could, so to say, extend your AIO. In a way that i might do ( more information here - https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...-using-aio-pump-2-radiators.html#post28459038 ), it should be cost effective upgrade to cooling. Its perhaps past the glory age of x58, but 4 GHz to 4.2 GHz can still bring very acceptable performance, especially by today's standards considering that ryzen 6 core CPU's are easily reachable for normal consumers and to think that x58 can even put up a fight compared to these much newer CPU's is still very impressive for this old platform.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Intel will get their stuff together, but they really aren't "hurting" as far as sales and profits goes. Yes, the news on the enthusiast "RGB bro" Desktop consumer side has been looking bad for Intel lately (security issues doesn't help either), but Intel is still making tons of revenue & net profits. During Intel's worse year after AMD Ryzen, Intel came out with $10 Billion net profit easy. That number has jumped back up to $21 Billion as of 2019 and that's not even the revenue. Intel doesn't just make "gamer PCs" they have their feet in several larger markets that are long term. So when I see AMD stock price is near Intel stock price I have to pause look beyond the speculation. That's not to say that AMD isn't a great company that's doing great right now, but they aren't as big as Intel so they are extremely overvalued in the market and probably will be for sometime. Competition is always good, but I'm starting to wonder about AMD. Once Intel gets off of 14nm+ ('insert ++++++++ meme here') it's going to be interesting. AMD should be on 5nm by the time Intel gets their stuff together. 

1.560v is extremely high and you should be careful. I thought I killed my X5660 many many years ago going to high voltages like that (can't remember the exact voltage). I was trying to hit 5.5Ghz (and I did  ) - but it was NOT worth it. The CPU died....... then revived ITSELF 40 minutes later. It kept running strong for years after and till this day. I got very lucky. I didn't realize that the X5660 can produce MORE fps in some games than the Ryzen 3700X...wow. I would think that the newer platforms would be much better. 

I actually can run my CPU @ 4.6Ghz within Intel's recommendation so that's never been a problem for me. The issue was the heat during the summer months. The middle of the year (later April - October) can be brutal for the temps. Then there's the power draw, but even that's not always an issue if I'm not running the CPU at 40% or higher. The CPU isn't the major issues it's the other components that get heated as well. The X58 northbridge can get very warm once you start overclocking and other things. 4Ghz has been perfect for awhile. Most video editing can be paired with my Fury X and CPU so that's not a issue either. I normally settled for 3.8Ghz since the voltages were extremely low and I didn't have to heavily overclock anything. Less voltage = less heat in most cases. 

I have never compared my X5660 against a Ryzen 6 core. I would had thought the newer Intel and AMD platforms would just run circles around the 1st gen since the architectures are optimized and using better tech overall nowadays.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

You would be surprised how well x58 CPUs can perform compared to new 6 core CPUs, especially if heavily pushed, to 4.6 GHz or more. As for summer temps i fully agree, it can get really toasty, believe me i know from my experience using HD 6990. I was successful in AIO mod to have 2 radiators in same loop and temperatures dropped, although i don't see myself running high clocks, probably not even 4.4, likely staying in 4 GHz - 4.2 GHz range.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Are we talking gaming? I took a quick look and it shows the Ryzen 6 cores (3600) 36% faster in Single Core speed and roughly 40% faster for multi-core workloads in Cinebench R15 against my X5660 @ 4.8Ghz.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

Kana-Maru said:


> Are we talking gaming? I took a quick look and it shows the Ryzen 6 cores (3600) 36% faster in Single Core speed and roughly 40% faster for multi-core workloads in Cinebench R15 against my X5660 @ 4.8Ghz.


Yes, we are talking gaming. Productivity wise newer ryzens are much better. I am not saying all games will perform better on x58 Xeons, but there are a lot that will or at very least will go toe to toe with new 6 core ryzens.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Kana-Maru said:


> USEFUL INPUT USUALLY GOES HERE


Waves at everyone! Man this lockdown got us all dusting off our hobbys, ayeee?

Does anyone have any advice regarding GPUs for X58?

I have 2 overclocked 970's in SLI in my machine, and I see that the promised support for SLI everywhere with W10, Vulkan etc etc never happened. So, It seems I'd be better selling the two cards and buying a single, faster card. 

I have PSU headroom to spare and I don't have a budget in mind at the moment, though I guess I could spend a couple of hundred euro over what I sell my two 970s for.

Machine is UD7R v2, X5660, 4GHz, 3200 Uncore, 12 GB Ram on 777,24,1T and scores around 930 in R15 Multithread [so, basically your average X58 Xeon tank]

So, can I get some suggestions?


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

gofasterstripes said:


> Waves at everyone! Man this lockdown got us all dusting off our hobbys, ayeee?
> 
> Does anyone have any advice regarding GPUs for X58?
> 
> I have 2 overclocked 970's in SLI in my machine, and I see that the promised support for SLI everywhere with W10, Vulkan etc etc never happened. So, It seems I'd be better selling the two cards and buying a single, faster card.
> 
> I have PSU headroom to spare and I don't have a budget in mind at the moment, though I guess I could spend a couple of hundred euro over what I sell my two 970s for.
> 
> Machine is UD7R v2, X5660, 4GHz, 3200 Uncore, 12 GB Ram on 777,24,1T and scores around 930 in R15 Multithread [so, basically your average X58 Xeon tank]
> 
> So, can I get some suggestions?


Used GTX 1070 or 1080, 1080 is upper limit for x58 CPUs, unless you gonna overclock that CPU much much higher or if you gonna run higher resolutions than 1080p, for 1440p and 4k you could get much better GPU if its needed. I would say anything from 1060 up to 2070 would do well and be within performance range of x58 platform for 1080p.


----------



## bacon612

gofasterstripes said:


> Waves at everyone! Man this lockdown got us all dusting off our hobbys, ayeee?
> 
> Does anyone have any advice regarding GPUs for X58?
> 
> I have 2 overclocked 970's in SLI in my machine, and I see that the promised support for SLI everywhere with W10, Vulkan etc etc never happened. So, It seems I'd be better selling the two cards and buying a single, faster card.
> 
> I have PSU headroom to spare and I don't have a budget in mind at the moment, though I guess I could spend a couple of hundred euro over what I sell my two 970s for.
> 
> Machine is UD7R v2, X5660, 4GHz, 3200 Uncore, 12 GB Ram on 777,24,1T and scores around 930 in R15 Multithread [so, basically your average X58 Xeon tank]
> 
> So, can I get some suggestions?


Hey there. I bought a RTX2080 the year before last and have been enjoying it. I game on a 4k tv with it and it has been able to play everything nicely. LMK if you want me to run any benchmarks.

Edit: Specs in short
x58 Sabertooth with Xeon 5650 @ 4.4
24 gigs of ram
Plextor 1gb nvme


----------



## Kana-Maru

gofasterstripes said:


> Waves at everyone! Man this lockdown got us all dusting off our hobbys, ayeee?
> 
> Does anyone have any advice regarding GPUs for X58?
> 
> I have 2 overclocked 970's in SLI in my machine, and I see that the promised support for SLI everywhere with W10, Vulkan etc etc never happened. So, It seems I'd be better selling the two cards and buying a single, faster card.
> 
> I have PSU headroom to spare and I don't have a budget in mind at the moment, though I guess I could spend a couple of hundred euro over what I sell my two 970s for.
> 
> Machine is UD7R v2, X5660, 4GHz, 3200 Uncore, 12 GB Ram on 777,24,1T and scores around 930 in R15 Multithread [so, basically your average X58 Xeon tank]
> 
> So, can I get some suggestions?



I would say check out the 5700XT. 



Good Prices are available 


From your 970 SLI to the 5700xt it looks like it'll be a pretty good increase of 30%. Obviously that's 2 SLI vs 1 GPU so it's a no brainier upgrade for you. _(using a standard synthetic benchmark for comparison)_


If we compare your X5650 with a 5700XT to a much newer i7-9900K for your upgrade, gaming-wise, you'll only be gaining literally (roughly) 6% of gaming performance which could EASILY end up in the margin of error. So you shouldn't have any problems with the X5650. _(using a standard synthetic benchmark for comparison)_

There's always Nvidia as well that was suggested by the above posters. I just see a lot of reasonably priced 5700XT GPUs around. You could also wait until later this year when Nvidia (Ampere) and AMD (Navi) newer GPUs are released :thumb: I think that's what I'm going to do at this point.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

I think used 1080s are the best choice right now, i seen Vega 64 going even cheaper than 1080, but if we look at TDP, 1080 is more reasonable choice. I believe 5700XT has such good price only in US and might not be best price / performance choice in other countries.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Yeah I'm always speaking from US pricing. 5700XT is worth checking out.


----------



## gofasterstripes

Thanks for the replies chaps


----------



## dotagaming

Glad to see this thread and the old x58 crew is still kicking, lol!
I've been using my X5675 @ 4.2 for another few years now, this platform has served me so well close to a decade now. 

However lately, I've been having some DPC Latency issues. I'm pretty sure they started with some Windows 10 Update some months ago, but I couldn't tell you which exactly, it may be further back.
I don't really notice any microlags in games (may be the age), but audio is crackling even just idling at the desktop/playing with the volume and it's driving me nuts.
I've tried all the standard solutions to solving DPC Latency and they didn't help, so I'm hoping this may be some X58 specific issue that someone else had before. Maybe they stopped supporting some driver or something? I wish I knew.

I've updated all the drivers I could find, disabled every driver but the essential, tried different BIOS revs, moved hardware/USB devices around to different ports, disabling power saving features for CPU/GPU, playing around with BIOS settings, changed the polling rate of USB devices and tried just about anything except reinstalling Windows. Overall, these measures improved the overall situation somewhat, but the audio dropouts/crackling are still present.

If any of you has an idea how I could fix this, that would make me so happy. The current HEDT situation does not really appeal to me that much, I'd rather enjoy this system a couple more years.

System
*CPU*: X5675
*MB*: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
*RAM*: 3x Crucial Ballistix Tactical 8GB, DDR3-1866, CL9-9-9-24
*GPU*: Asus Dual GeForce GTX1070 8GB
*SSD*: Samsung 850 EVO 1TB

Latencymon Log Output (Pastebin.com)








https://i.imgur.com/***uvJX.png
Top DPC/IPC offender point to GPU, but updating the drivers didn't change anything I'm afraid.
Also, what's interesting to me is that the system starts out with really low DPC/ISR with no crackle and gradually gets worse, showing the symptoms about 10 minutes after boot. Maybe a memory leak in some driver?


----------



## Kana-Maru

dotagaming said:


> Glad to see this thread and the old x58 crew is still kicking, lol!
> I've been using my X5675 @ 4.2 for another few years now, this platform has served me so well close to a decade now.
> 
> However lately, I've been having some DPC Latency issues. I'm pretty sure they started with some Windows 10 Update some months ago, but I couldn't tell you which exactly, it may be further back.
> I don't really notice any microlags in games (may be the age), but audio is crackling even just idling at the desktop/playing with the volume and it's driving me nuts.
> I've tried all the standard solutions to solving DPC Latency and they didn't help, so I'm hoping this may be some X58 specific issue that someone else had before. Maybe they stopped supporting some driver or something? I wish I knew.
> .....
> ....
> Top DPC/IPC offender point to GPU, but updating the drivers didn't change anything I'm afraid.
> Also, what's interesting to me is that the system starts out with really low DPC/ISR with no crackle and gradually gets worse, showing the symptoms about 10 minutes after boot. Maybe a memory leak in some driver?


Well seems like you've tried everything and it probably is related to another Windows 10 update. I only get those issues whenever I'm running stock in power saving mode. Another thing you can try is to try enabling your HPET settings. 

Run this commands as the Administrator to *enable* it. 
*bcdedit /set useplatformclock true*

If it doesn't solve your issues after checking with DPC checker use this command to disable it
*bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock*

In addition to use a DPC\Latency checker you can use other software like a timer checker to make sure everything is working properly. You can also try using older GPU drivers or using System Restore on your OS to remove the most recent updates.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

dotagaming said:


> Glad to see this thread and the old x58 crew is still kicking, lol!
> I've been using my X5675 @ 4.2 for another few years now, this platform has served me so well close to a decade now.
> 
> However lately, I've been having some DPC Latency issues. I'm pretty sure they started with some Windows 10 Update some months ago, but I couldn't tell you which exactly, it may be further back.
> I don't really notice any microlags in games (may be the age), but audio is crackling even just idling at the desktop/playing with the volume and it's driving me nuts.
> I've tried all the standard solutions to solving DPC Latency and they didn't help, so I'm hoping this may be some X58 specific issue that someone else had before. Maybe they stopped supporting some driver or something? I wish I knew.
> 
> I've updated all the drivers I could find, disabled every driver but the essential, tried different BIOS revs, moved hardware/USB devices around to different ports, disabling power saving features for CPU/GPU, playing around with BIOS settings, changed the polling rate of USB devices and tried just about anything except reinstalling Windows. Overall, these measures improved the overall situation somewhat, but the audio dropouts/crackling are still present.
> 
> If any of you has an idea how I could fix this, that would make me so happy. The current HEDT situation does not really appeal to me that much, I'd rather enjoy this system a couple more years.
> 
> System
> *CPU*: X5675
> *MB*: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
> *RAM*: 3x Crucial Ballistix Tactical 8GB, DDR3-1866, CL9-9-9-24
> *GPU*: Asus Dual GeForce GTX1070 8GB
> *SSD*: Samsung 850 EVO 1TB
> 
> Top DPC/IPC offender point to GPU, but updating the drivers didn't change anything I'm afraid.
> Also, what's interesting to me is that the system starts out with really low DPC/ISR with no crackle and gradually gets worse, showing the symptoms about 10 minutes after boot. Maybe a memory leak in some driver?


I had similar latency issues here, but i am pretty sure it was audio driver. Chipset, Audio and Lan drivers are the ones that i updated, finding them manually instead of using some ancient version from vendors website. Very high CPU core voltage and unstable RAM can also cause audio crackling, although i am sure its a driver in your case.


----------



## SYNCHRON1C

dotagaming said:


> Glad to see this thread and the old x58 crew is still kicking, lol!
> I've been using my X5675 @ 4.2 for another few years now, this platform has served me so well close to a decade now.
> 
> However lately, I've been having some DPC Latency issues. I'm pretty sure they started with some Windows 10 Update some months ago, but I couldn't tell you which exactly, it may be further back.
> I don't really notice any microlags in games (may be the age), but audio is crackling even just idling at the desktop/playing with the volume and it's driving me nuts.
> I've tried all the standard solutions to solving DPC Latency and they didn't help, so I'm hoping this may be some X58 specific issue that someone else had before. Maybe they stopped supporting some driver or something? I wish I knew.
> 
> I've updated all the drivers I could find, disabled every driver but the essential, tried different BIOS revs, moved hardware/USB devices around to different ports, disabling power saving features for CPU/GPU, playing around with BIOS settings, changed the polling rate of USB devices and tried just about anything except reinstalling Windows. Overall, these measures improved the overall situation somewhat, but the audio dropouts/crackling are still present.
> 
> If any of you has an idea how I could fix this, that would make me so happy. The current HEDT situation does not really appeal to me that much, I'd rather enjoy this system a couple more years.
> 
> System
> *CPU*: X5675
> *MB*: Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R
> *RAM*: 3x Crucial Ballistix Tactical 8GB, DDR3-1866, CL9-9-9-24
> *GPU*: Asus Dual GeForce GTX1070 8GB
> *SSD*: Samsung 850 EVO 1TB
> 
> Latencymon Log Output (Pastebin.com)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/***uvJX.png
> Top DPC/IPC offender point to GPU, but updating the drivers didn't change anything I'm afraid.
> Also, what's interesting to me is that the system starts out with really low DPC/ISR with no crackle and gradually gets worse, showing the symptoms about 10 minutes after boot. Maybe a memory leak in some driver?





Try dropping your OC to 4ghz whilst keeping voltages the same. Sometimes a on the limit OC can cause DPC issues I've found.


----------



## Kana-Maru

It's weird since I never had DPC Latency issues in Windows 7. It became an issue initially after Windows 10 released and even made some of my Overclocks unstable. Messing around with the HPET timing did help, but who knows what MS removes, adds, breaks in the process of pushing out these updates.

I have yet to update my Windows 10 version to the latest, but I'm hearing it could increase performance in games depending on the GPU you have. I guess I'll re-test a few games to see if I notice anything differently whenever I update.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

Kana-Maru said:


> It's weird since I never had DPC Latency issues in Windows 7. It became an issue initially after Windows 10 released and even made some of my Overclocks unstable. Messing around with the HPET timing did help, but who knows what MS removes, adds, breaks in the process of pushing out these updates.
> 
> I have yet to update my Windows 10 version to the latest, but I'm hearing it could increase performance in games depending on the GPU you have. I guess I'll re-test a few games to see if I notice anything differently whenever I update.


I actually have HPET disabled, in windows and in BIOS. I did check latency before and after and it was minimal reduction in latency with HPET disabled.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

Information regarding GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 2.0) and likely other x58 Gigabyte boards. All of the sudden i started getting memory management BSODs, clearly RAM related and i know for a fact memory was stable and i been using this same overclock for a while now without any issues. Now it was basically crashing a lot of programs i been running and generally giving me BSOD within 10 minutes of booting to windows. And i may already know where the issue is, and no my RAM sticks are fine, especially when i been running just 1.56v through them. What i believe this board does, when i have XMP enabled is using different sub timings sometimes, so whatever i had stable before, gets unstable as timings change. It has Standard / Turbo / Extreme profiles and i always been using Extreme profile for that little performance gain, but clearly inconsistency ruins stability here, quite a while ago i seen some thread about similar Gigabyte board having issues running RAM on their rated frequency and timings with Extreme profile enabled in very similar manner. QPI PLL voltage was left on auto, which i checked with Easy Tune in windows to make sure its the same that is shown in BIOS and it is 1.1v which was stable before ( might have to go higher for more tight timings, but from what i tried before doesn't seem like timings can be that much better, so might as well stay here with lower voltage ). Long story short, don't trust XMP on these old x58 boards, i will be using Standard profile from now on and so far with 1 hour of Prime95 it seems to be working.

EDIT - Just had BSOD, so i guess its possible uncore degradation, will stress test tomorrow.


----------



## TLCH723

PotatoVonEpicus said:


> Information regarding GA-X58A-UD3R (rev. 2.0) and likely other x58 Gigabyte boards. All of the sudden i started getting memory management BSODs, clearly RAM related and i know for a fact memory was stable and i been using this same overclock for a while now without any issues. Now it was basically crashing a lot of programs i been running and generally giving me BSOD within 10 minutes of booting to windows. And i may already know where the issue is, and no my RAM sticks are fine, especially when i been running just 1.56v through them. What i believe this board does, when i have XMP enabled is using different sub timings sometimes, so whatever i had stable before, gets unstable as timings change. It has Standard / Turbo / Extreme profiles and i always been using Extreme profile for that little performance gain, but clearly inconsistency ruins stability here, quite a while ago i seen some thread about similar Gigabyte board having issues running RAM on their rated frequency and timings with Extreme profile enabled in very similar manner. QPI PLL voltage was left on auto, which i checked with Easy Tune in windows to make sure its the same that is shown in BIOS and it is 1.1v which was stable before ( might have to go higher for more tight timings, but from what i tried before doesn't seem like timings can be that much better, so might as well stay here with lower voltage ). Long story short, don't trust XMP on these old x58 boards, i will be using Standard profile from now on and so far with 1 hour of Prime95 it seems to be working.
> 
> EDIT - Just had BSOD, so i guess its possible uncore degradation, will stress test tomorrow.


Does it crash with stock with manual setting on the voltage? Do you have another CPU to try?

I have the same board with an X5650 @ 3.8GHz for like a few years. Then I kept getting BSODs and crashes. Put everything in stock. Ran fine for a few months then BSODs/crashes again. Brought a X5660 ran fine a few months again and then BSODs/crashes again. Then I play around different memory config and find it crashes whenever it is using the third channel.


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

TLCH723 said:


> Does it crash with stock with manual setting on the voltage? Do you have another CPU to try?
> 
> I have the same board with an X5650 @ 3.8GHz for like a few years. Then I kept getting BSODs and crashes. Put everything in stock. Ran fine for a few months then BSODs/crashes again. Brought a X5660 ran fine a few months again and then BSODs/crashes again. Then I play around different memory config and find it crashes whenever it is using the third channel.


I didn't try stock voltage and i don't have another CPU to try, i really suspect two things here, either too low tRAS which was stable in Prime95 / Aida64 / Memtest 86 or its uncore degrading. I know that RAM slots can be weird with this board sometimes, but its probably XMP, simply not using correct settings. I also have triple channel here 3x8 GB, but i think in your case its actually dead RAM slot. Using the newest available BIOS as well.

tRAS increase didn't help.

Increasing IMC voltage didn't help either.

Increased QPI PLL, from AUTO 1.1v to 1.3v, Prime95 seems fine so far, 40 minutes without any issues. Quite possible that this board lied about its QPI PLL voltage when i stress tested back when this was stable. Today i booted to windows and ran Prime95 to test lower tRAS and higher IMC voltage, both were giving errors within 3 to 15 minutes. Clearly can't leave voltages on AUTO with these older boards, i can't say that this is stable yet, but its much better than it was. I remember once i forgot to change RAM voltage from AUTO to whatever value i needed at the time and this board decided to use 1.820v, these older boards are really not user friendly.

Increased QPI PLL voltage passed 1 hour and 20 minutes of Prime95 and then on next restart got error within 1 minute. Looks to me like board is changing something on its own, not a problem though i was going to reduce BCLK anyway, just couldn't find time for stress testing. But i am sure these are memory errors and something is clearly wrong with memory or memory related voltages, gonna try 187 MHz resulting in 1870 MHz on RAM, 10-10-11-31-244-1T. Also tried reseating RAM again, cleaning dust, didn't seem to matter at all. Its just weird to me because 2170 MHz was fine before and stable in everything and this doesn't look like any sort of degradation as voltage increase would have fixed it. I don't really know what voltages board would be changing at this point as i have most of them set manually now.

And finally 1870 MHz seems to be stable, in Prime95, although this still needs more stress testing, but for now i can say its stable enough compared to how it was.


----------



## dotagaming

Thanks everyone for the suggestions re. the DPC issues I've been having.
I have tried them all but unfortunately didn't manage to solve the issues completely yet. It's slightly better maybe?
I'm gonna attempt a fresh Windows 10 install on a new drive and see how well it performs.

Although the reported latency stats are just slightly better, I don't notice much audio crackling. I might just be able to live with it, lol.
Edit: Oh well, after about 30 minutes of uptime the audio crackling gets bad again. Maybe I should invest in a PCI(e) soundcard and avoid the onboard sound.











Edit2: Ok interesting, so after moving my PCIe cards around the Nvidia driver stopped working and I'm getting better perfomance.
I guess I'll try another clean reinstall of those. Maybe I should get a cheap Radeon and see if their drivers perform better.
Edit3: Never mind, after enough uptime it crackles even without graphics drivers...


----------



## PotatoVonEpicus

It was likely combination of C states behaving weirdly and RAM voltage being too low, as i had C states enabled from different profile with higher CPU voltage so it was fine, however crashing while at the same time RAM was also on the edge of stability, thus giving me weirdest crashes. Still weird to me as it passed a lot of Prime95 and Aida64.


----------



## Kana-Maru

dotagaming said:


> Thanks everyone for the suggestions re. the DPC issues I've been having.
> I have tried them all but unfortunately didn't manage to solve the issues completely yet. It's slightly better maybe?
> I'm gonna attempt a fresh Windows 10 install on a new drive and see how well it performs.
> 
> Although the reported latency stats are just slightly better, I don't notice much audio crackling. I might just be able to live with it, lol.
> 
> Edit: Oh well, after about 30 minutes of uptime the audio crackling gets bad again. Maybe I should invest in a PCI(e) soundcard and avoid the onboard sound.
> 
> Edit2: Ok interesting, so after moving my PCIe cards around the Nvidia driver stopped working and I'm getting better perfomance.
> I guess I'll try another clean reinstall of those. Maybe I should get a cheap Radeon and see if their drivers perform better.
> Edit3: Never mind, after enough uptime it crackles even without graphics drivers...


I would definitely go with a sound card, even if it's a USB sound card and it would be a great start. It _might_ not solve your problems. There could be several reasons as to way you are hearing popping\crackling. Depending on how rough you were with your MB during overclocking that could have caused some issues with the onboard audio chipset. Most X58 MBs have been through a lot of the past decade or so.


----------



## jwrdr

Hello,

I'm trying to get a nice OC on this x5675. These are my specs:

CPU: Intel Xeon X5675
MB: EVGA SLI FTW3
RAM: 24 GB Patriot Sector 7, DDR3 1600Mhz (I'm just using a single stick of 4GB to OC the CPU only, it seems to run more stable)
Cooler: EVO 212
PSU: Corsair RMX, 650x, 650 Watt, 80+ Gold. 

I'm a noob when it comes about OC and I've been reading and searching and was able to get this with these settings, please see below. I'm looking for a stable 24/7 OC 4.0 or more would be fine, cooling doesn't look bad.

https://imgur.com/JPHBfXJ
https://imgur.com/QMovguD
https://imgur.com/QHLCW8z
https://imgur.com/aU6DWlj

EDIT: Had to roll back to stock settings as it was not taking al the RAM. It was just showing me 20GBs and sometimes 16GBs. Going back to stock is showing me everything. Any advice?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Kana-Maru

Thanks for the pictures. Your temps are under 70c so that's always a good thing in my book. You'll need to really push the machine to see if it's stable for awhile to be sure. I would make a few suggestions: 

-About the RAM make sure that the slots are clean (compressed air should do the trick) and re-install the modules. 
-You should also set the DRAM Freq. to 1600Mhz (9-9-9-24) and the DRAM\DIMM Voltage to 1.65v for now
-Set the CPU PLL to "Auto" or whatever the stock setting is (usually 1.80v). 
-You can leave the CPU Vcore set to 1.35v for now.

So once you determine if you are stable or not you can start rolling back some of those voltages until you become unstable. I don't think you'll need 1.35v for 4.2Ghz-4.3Ghz, but every CPU is different.


----------



## jwrdr

Kana-Maru said:


> Thanks for the pictures. Your temps are under 70c so that's always a good thing in my book. You'll need to really push the machine to see if it's stable for awhile to be sure. I would make a few suggestions:
> 
> -About the RAM make sure that the slots are clean (compressed air should do the trick) and re-install the modules.
> -You should also set the DRAM Freq. to 1600Mhz (9-9-9-24) and the DRAM\DIMM Voltage to 1.65v for now
> -Set the CPU PLL to "Auto" or whatever the stock setting is (usually 1.80v).
> -You can leave the CPU Vcore set to 1.35v for now.
> 
> So once you determine if you are stable or not you can start rolling back some of those voltages until you become unstable. I don't think you'll need 1.35v for 4.2Ghz-4.3Ghz, but every CPU is different.


Thanks! Coming back with some updates.

So I was able to locate the issue with the ram, it will just not boot nor work properly if the CPU is OCed and the Ram is not. Weird thing. So I took the ram to the 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 @ 1.625v and it works. It would not take the 1.65v with those settings. 

Now that I have all my ram and everything looks good, I underclocked the CPU to x14 multiplier and 200 MHz bus to check if it was stable with my ram and auto voltages. It was stable.

Now, I was jumping on the multiplier by x3 every time and adding 0.07 to the vCore (Coming from 1.1v on auto and x14, 200 bus). From there, I grabbed my pencil and a piece of paper to start writing down voltages, temps, and any other thing I would find weird. With this, I was able to get 4.4Ghz stable at 1.35625v on the BIOS but it was showing 1.388/1.399 on CPU Z. I didn't like the temps as I was x22 on the multiplier and 200mhz. Dropped to x21 and 200mhz with the same voltages to check on those and from there, I was notching down one on the voltage, booting, testing 10mins of prime to look at temps and Cinebench for score/stability. I was able to go down to 1.28750v @ 4.2Ghz (x21 - 200mhz) but I noticed that on LinX the GFlops were dropping and I read somewhere it might be due to low voltage. So I went to the previous setting @ 1.29375v and left it overnight on Prime95 and then 5 hours of LinX to check on GFlops, and Cinebench.

Right now it seems stable, would need to keep pushing, playing, and creating to check on stability, but it looks good. Pictures here of my current settings and temps while running Prime95.

https://imgur.com/nLZQCw8
https://imgur.com/thyWoVA
https://imgur.com/omzmGCO
https://imgur.com/11zkH9r
https://imgur.com/MBAWTOc

Thank you so much! At least I was able to boot with all my ram at 1600mhz, first time. Any advice from here?


----------



## Kana-Maru

jwrdr said:


> Thanks! Coming back with some updates.
> 
> Thank you so much! At least I was able to boot with all my ram at 1600mhz, first time. Any advice from here?


No problem. Also set the CPU PLL Voltage to 1.80v if possible. No need to mess with things that could potentially kill your build if don't need to. Otherwise don't listen to me and do whatever you want with any settings. 

I was actually going to have you try the 200 BCLK with the 21x CPU Raion, but since you said you were stable I deleted it from my post. Also your voltages were looking good and I saw no reason to increase the BCLK and potential issues. 1.62v on the DRAM should be fine, just don't go above 1.65v. 



jwrdr said:


> With this, I was able to get 4.4Ghz stable at 1.35625v on the BIOS but it was showing 1.388/1.399 on CPU Z.


Yeah it's overvolting. You are bypassing vDroop and that's normal behavior so don't worry about it for now. You'll definitely want to get it under 1.35v for daily usage though. Ideally under 1.30v so you won't have to deal with a lot of heat and voltages and we know the X58 can get pretty warm. So based on the rest of your post you are under 1.30v and doing good :thumb:. Congrats. Just keep running several different test on it (RAM, CPU, GPU and on) and tweak your voltages. AND YES low voltages can cause your GFLOPs and performance to drop so you want to monitor that for sure while overclocking. 

Ok now once you are stable and you are SURE you are stable start increasing the QPI from 4.8GT\s to 6.4GT and test. Then from 6.4GT to 7.0-7.2GT\s then test and test and test. Now you might need to adjust the QPI Vcore as well as the IOH voltage slightly if you are having stability issues. 

Once the QPI is stable start working on the Uncore Freqency. Normally it should be x2 your DRAM Frequency (1600Mhz x2) so in this case try setting the Uncore Frequency to "3200Mhz" and check your GFLOPS . You might also need to use more vCore voltage and IOH voltage as well during this stage. It depends on a lot of different variables that you'll need to play around with. On the other hand you might need to increase the vCore at all.


----------



## Enphenate

Kana-Maru said:


> I loved that L5639 and I still have mines somewhere. I would say that it's pretty much time to move on, but honestly we really don't "have to". I recently finished my "AMD Fury X 2020 - Kana's FineWine Edition" and honestly the platform (and the Fury X  ) still have plenty of gaming life in it. Of course that depends on the games you play and what you need to do on your PC. As long as your have your CPU to at least 3.8Ghz and up you should be fine for gaming.
> 
> I'm still as productive as ever and run many VMs, crunch tons of data and I think I've just about tapped all of the power out of this beastly platform. I was thinking about buying a new case, but I'm pretty sure I'll upgrade eventually, but I've been saying that for 4 years now lol. How does that GTX 1070 perform on the X58 platform in your opinion.


Hi Kana, I'm responding to this from the X58 club thread. I decided to wait a little longer before I upgrade my L5639 + X58 setup. I haven't tweaked my OC profile since 2015 lol. I haven't really had the need to, but lately my PC keeps crashing with an audio loop and no BSOD when I'm gaming. Happens in Witcher 3 and now with my new Valve Index on HL:Alyx, pretty frustrating. So I've decided to re-evaluate my OC. 

My old OC profile from 2015 had all sorts of weird settings, it was set to auto multiplier, offset of .175 for vcore, QPI - 1.337 and BCLK - 210 with Speedstep & C-state enabled. 

So I went back to the basics and I'm currently sitting at 3.6ghz with 18x multiplier, BCLK - 200 and vcore - 1.29 with C-state and Speedstep off. Tested this for 1.5hrs on Prime95 and 3hrs on OCCT with no errors (at v1.28 I hit errors around 4 hrs in). At the current settings the CPU is sitting at ~40C and under load at about 70C.

Any suggestions for this setup? Is it worth trying to push it any further to 3.8 or 4ghz? Looking back at my old forum posts, it looks like to get higher than 3.6 I really had to crank the QPI and vcore. I also noticed that it gets very unstable with C-state and Speedstep enabled. 

My Rig:
L5639
ASUS P6X58D-E
12GB Corsair Dominator 9-9-9-24 DDR3 1600
Nvidia RTX 2080 FE


----------



## jwrdr

Kana-Maru said:


> No problem. Also set the CPU PLL Voltage to 1.80v if possible. No need to mess with things that could potentially kill your build if don't need to. Otherwise don't listen to me and do whatever you want with any settings.
> 
> I was actually going to have you try the 200 BCLK with the 21x CPU Raion, but since you said you were stable I deleted it from my post. Also your voltages were looking good and I saw no reason to increase the BCLK and potential issues. 1.62v on the DRAM should be fine, just don't go above 1.65v.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah it's overvolting. You are bypassing vDroop and that's normal behavior so don't worry about it for now. You'll definitely want to get it under 1.35v for daily usage though. Ideally under 1.30v so you won't have to deal with a lot of heat and voltages and we know the X58 can get pretty warm. So based on the rest of your post you are under 1.30v and doing good :thumb:. Congrats. Just keep running several different test on it (RAM, CPU, GPU and on) and tweak your voltages. AND YES low voltages can cause your GFLOPs and performance to drop so you want to monitor that for sure while overclocking.
> 
> Ok now once you are stable and you are SURE you are stable start increasing the QPI from 4.8GT\s to 6.4GT and test. Then from 6.4GT to 7.0-7.2GT\s then test and test and test. Now you might need to adjust the QPI Vcore as well as the IOH voltage slightly if you are having stability issues.
> 
> Once the QPI is stable start working on the Uncore Freqency. Normally it should be x2 your DRAM Frequency (1600Mhz x2) so in this case try setting the Uncore Frequency to "3200Mhz" and check your GFLOPS . You might also need to use more vCore voltage and IOH voltage as well during this stage. It depends on a lot of different variables that you'll need to play around with. On the other hand you might need to increase the vCore at all.


You've been of soooo much help! Thank you a lot. 

I discovered (I don't why) my computer would be good if it had load, once I go idle it will freeze. I bumped the vCore a little bit and it's showing 1.352v on CPU Z and it has not happen again. So, I don't know what was that.

I think it is good there, but still I'm still trying, playing, benchmarking, stress testing and all. I will put the QPI PLL to Auto as you mentioned and check if it's good. Ram seems fine as of now, no freezes (even when it is idle) so I think I can go back to try the new settings you recommended me and check again.

Once again, thank you very much! I will keep posting updates on this. It's been really good with games, streaming and everything in general.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Enphenate said:


> Hi Kana, I'm responding to this from the X58 club thread. I decided to wait a little longer before I upgrade my L5639 + X58 setup. I haven't tweaked my OC profile since 2015 lol. I haven't really had the need to, but lately my PC keeps crashing with an audio loop and no BSOD when I'm gaming. Happens in Witcher 3 and now with my new Valve Index on HL:Alyx, pretty frustrating. So I've decided to re-evaluate my OC.
> 
> My old OC profile from 2015 had all sorts of weird settings, it was set to auto multiplier, offset of .175 for vcore, QPI - 1.337 and BCLK - 210 with Speedstep & C-state enabled.
> 
> So I went back to the basics and I'm currently sitting at 3.6ghz with 18x multiplier, BCLK - 200 and vcore - 1.29 with C-state and Speedstep off. Tested this for 1.5hrs on Prime95 and 3hrs on OCCT with no errors (at v1.28 I hit errors around 4 hrs in). At the current settings the CPU is sitting at ~40C and under load at about 70C.
> 
> Any suggestions for this setup? Is it worth trying to push it any further to 3.8 or 4ghz? Looking back at my old forum posts, it looks like to get higher than 3.6 I really had to crank the QPI and vcore. I also noticed that it gets very unstable with C-state and Speedstep enabled.
> 
> My Rig:
> L5639
> ASUS P6X58D-E
> 12GB Corsair Dominator 9-9-9-24
> Nvidia RTX 2080 FE


Hey man. I will be highly interested in your Nvidia RTX 2080 FE benchmarks in synthetic test like 3D Mark or any gaming benchmarks you have for comparisons. Once we get you to a decent OC I'd like to work with you on some benchmark tests. 

Make sure there's nothing wrong with your OS that could be causing the crashing as well. Run "sfc /scannow" from the command line as the Administrator for starters. Sometimes the issue can be Windows. I miss Windows 7 since it was almost never the problem. I'm not saying W10 is the problem (if that is the OS you are running), but it is known to cause issues with certain update and OS changes out of blue. 

Based on what I'm reading and see, first of all I don't know why people keep _feeling the need to mess with the CPU PLL_, but I have been telling people for more than 5 years that there's no reason to mess with it at all. So I can only guess that there is a lot of bad information out there on the internet and Youtube. Let's *set that CPU PLL to Auto (1.80v) and leave it there.* However, I understand that people will do what they want to do anyways. 

The second thing I'm seeing is your heat issue. You need to re-apply the thermal paste or get some better thermal paste with either: 

Better Cooling solution for the CPU.
 Better Ambient Temps.
 Better airflow in your case.

Your CPU is sitting at 40c which is pretty warm for an Idle temp on the L5639 who's purpose is low power usage and low temps. 3.6Ghz shouldn't be difficult to keep under 55c-60c. 70c should normally be for clocks around 4Ghz+ (or really 4.2Ghz+). 

If you can get your temps under control I would say shoot for at least 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz using the 200BCLK or whichever stable BCLK can get you near 3.8Ghz or higher hopefully with good vCore. 

Overall your voltages look nice (except CPU PLL - set it to AUTO or 1.80v). Once we can get you to a decent stable OC hopefully we can start lowering a few voltages until we determine what is stable and unstable. 





jwrdr said:


> You've been of soooo much help! Thank you a lot.
> 
> I discovered (I don't why) my computer would be good if it had load, once I go idle it will freeze. I bumped the vCore a little bit and it's showing 1.352v on CPU Z and it has not happen again. So, I don't know what was that.
> 
> I think it is good there, but still I'm still trying, playing, benchmarking, stress testing and all. I will put the QPI PLL to Auto as you mentioned and check if it's good. Ram seems fine as of now, no freezes (even when it is idle) so I think I can go back to try the new settings you recommended me and check again.
> 
> Once again, thank you very much! I will keep posting updates on this. It's been really good with games, streaming and everything in general.


No problem man, I never mind helping enthusiast on this great long lasting platform. 

What happened was more than likely directly tied to vCore and it's not happening so you should be fine now. Yeah man keep the updates coming. I'm sure many people will appreciate it since there's always people trying to overclock these X58's in 2020. Good luck :thumb:


----------



## Enphenate

Kana-Maru said:


> Hey man. I will be highly interested in your Nvidia RTX 2080 FE benchmarks in synthetic test like 3D Mark or any gaming benchmarks you have for comparisons. Once we get you to a decent OC I'd like to work with you on some benchmark tests.
> 
> Make sure there's nothing wrong with your OS that could be causing the crashing as well. Run "sfc /scannow" from the command line as the Administrator for starters. Sometimes the issue can be Windows. I miss Windows 7 since it was almost never the problem. I'm not saying W10 is the problem (if that is the OS you are running), but it is known to cause issues with certain update and OS changes out of blue.
> 
> Based on what I'm reading and see, first of all I don't know why people keep _feeling the need to mess with the CPU PLL_, but I have been telling people for more than 5 years that there's no reason to mess with it at all. So I can only guess that there is a lot of bad information out there on the internet and Youtube. Let's *set that CPU PLL to Auto (1.80v) and leave it there.* However, I understand that people will do what they want to do anyways.
> 
> The second thing I'm seeing is your heat issue. You need to re-apply the thermal paste or get some better thermal paste with either:
> 
> Better Cooling solution for the CPU.
> Better Ambient Temps.
> Better airflow in your case.
> 
> Your CPU is sitting at 40c which is pretty warm for an Idle temp on the L5639 who's purpose is low power usage and low temps. 3.6Ghz shouldn't be difficult to keep under 55c-60c. 70c should normally be for clocks around 4Ghz+ (or really 4.2Ghz+).
> 
> If you can get your temps under control I would say shoot for at least 3.8Ghz - 4Ghz using the 200BCLK or whichever stable BCLK can get you near 3.8Ghz or higher hopefully with good vCore.
> 
> Overall your voltages look nice (except CPU PLL - set it to AUTO or 1.80v). Once we can get you to a decent stable OC hopefully we can start lowering a few voltages until we determine what is stable and unstable.


So it looks like after I got rid of that old OC profile and changed the settings to what I posted above, I haven't had a crash yet and I played HL: Alyx for a few hours yesterday. Will play more and see if I run into issues. I think it had to do with the old settings as well as disabling Speedstep and C-state.

I joined the Xeon / L5639 train very early on in 2013 so I think that the PLL and other settings that I was using were settings/suggestions that I got from the old i7 920 OC thread as OCing the Xeons was still fairly new territory when I made the jump (~2013). I changed PLL to 1.80 and running a prime test for the next few hours to see how it handles it, then we can see if we can push it further to 3.8 or 4.

Replacing the thermal paste can definitely help, I don't think I've done in it since I got the processor (~7 years). I think I still have a tube of AS5 somewhere. I don't think the issue is with airflow or the CPU cooler (Corsair H70). Core 0 seems to idle around low 30s, but the rest of the cores are high 30s and low 40s, and now during my prime test all cores are between 73-78C.

I would be happy to run some benchmarks with my 2080, I only have PassMark installed, so if you have other suggestions feel free to let me know. As for games I have HL:A, CS:GO, Witcher 3, GTA5, PUBG.

Thanks again.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Enphenate said:


> So it looks like after I got rid of that old OC profile and changed the settings to what I posted above, I haven't had a crash yet and I played HL: Alyx for a few hours yesterday. Will play more and see if I run into issues. I think it had to do with the old settings as well as disabling Speedstep and C-state.
> 
> I joined the Xeon / L5639 train very early on in 2013 so I think that the PLL and other settings that I was using were settings/suggestions that I got from the old i7 920 OC thread as OCing the Xeons was still fairly new territory when I made the jump (~2013). I changed PLL to 1.80 and running a prime test for the next few hours to see how it handles it, then we can see if we can push it further to 3.8 or 4.
> 
> Replacing the thermal paste can definitely help, I don't think I've done in it since I got the processor (~7 years). I think I still have a tube of AS5 somewhere. I don't think the issue is with airflow or the CPU cooler (Corsair H70). Core 0 seems to idle around low 30s, but the rest of the cores are high 30s and low 40s, and now during my prime test all cores are between 73-78C.
> 
> I would be happy to run some benchmarks with my 2080, I only have PassMark installed, so if you have other suggestions feel free to let me know. As for games I have HL:A, CS:GO, Witcher 3, GTA5, PUBG.
> 
> Thanks again.


No problem at all mind. I never mind helping as much as I can. Replacing that thermal paste would be helpful for sure. That's great that your AIO fan lasted that long and that the coolant didn't evaporate. Did the motor run at full speed over the past 7 years? I wish I could find some of the older AIO since they seemed to be much better than what I've been seeing over the past few years. Maybe I'll check out some of the latest Corsair AIO coolers that are decently priced. 

Yeah 2013 i\when the I jumped on the L5639 as well. I posted a review here when I retired my i7-960. It's a great low powered CPU and one heck of an upgrade. Good luck with the prime test. Hopefully everything is stable and you get closer to that 4Ghz mark or possibly higher. I have CS:GO, GTA5 and The Witcher 3 + DLC. I'm using a 5 year old GPU so I wouldn't be directly comparing your results to mines, I would just be interesting in a few benchmarks for legacy reasons. I'll fill you in more once we can get your CPU OC'd more.


----------



## Enphenate

Kana-Maru said:


> No problem at all mind. I never mind helping as much as I can. Replacing that thermal paste would be helpful for sure. That's great that your AIO fan lasted that long and that the coolant didn't evaporate. Did the motor run at full speed over the past 7 years? I wish I could find some of the older AIO since they seemed to be much better than what I've been seeing over the past few years. Maybe I'll check out some of the latest Corsair AIO coolers that are decently priced.
> 
> Yeah 2013 i\when the I jumped on the L5639 as well. I posted a review here when I retired my i7-960. It's a great low powered CPU and one heck of an upgrade. Good luck with the prime test. Hopefully everything is stable and you get closer to that 4Ghz mark or possibly higher. I have CS:GO, GTA5 and The Witcher 3 + DLC. I'm using a 5 year old GPU so I wouldn't be directly comparing your results to mines, I would just be interesting in a few benchmarks for legacy reasons. I'll fill you in more once we can get your CPU OC'd more.


Honestly, I'm not sure if it has been running at full speed or not or if there is any liquid left in it haha, but I assume it still does since its a closed loop ill find out when I swap the thermal paste. it's just plugged into the mobo and I think I once set it to run at full speed.

I just ran Prime95 for 9 hours with no errors at the current 3.6GHz settings below:

18x multiplier (max) 
BCLK - 200
vcore - 1.29
QPI - 1.312
PLL - 1.8
C-state and Speedstep off

What settings do you suggest I tweak to up to achieve 3.8 or 4ghz? Bump BCLK to 210 and test? then if its unstable just increase vcore and QPI?

Thanks


----------



## Kana-Maru

Enphenate said:


> Honestly, I'm not sure if it has been running at full speed or not or if there is any liquid left in it haha, but I assume it still does since its a closed loop ill find out when I swap the thermal paste. it's just plugged into the mobo and I think I once set it to run at full speed.
> 
> I just ran Prime95 for 9 hours with no errors at the current 3.6GHz settings below:
> 
> 18x multiplier (max)
> BCLK - 200
> vcore - 1.29
> QPI - 1.312
> PLL - 1.8
> C-state and Speedstep off
> 
> What settings do you suggest I tweak to up to achieve 3.8 or 4ghz? Bump BCLK to 210 and test? then if its unstable just increase vcore and QPI?
> 
> Thanks


Yeah slightly bump it to 222-223 to reach 4Ghz however, you can move up to 3.8Ghz first if you want. Test and see if it is stable with no changes to any of your settings. If there are issues then you might want to bump the vCore slightly first. If vCore increase doesn't help, then you yeah bump the QPI voltages, but also increase the IOH voltage. if those can't get you stable you might have to bump the ICH voltages, but normally ICH voltages doesn't require a large increase in most cases until you go above 4Ghz. Still it's worth increasing just for more stability if you are having issues with vCore, QPI and IOH. Getting to 4Ghz shouldn't be to much of an issue. 

If you can get it stable then shoot for 4.1Ghz\4.2Ghz and 4.2Ghz will require much more vCore. Be sure to keep a eye on all of your temps.


----------



## Enphenate

Kana-Maru said:


> Yeah slightly bump it to 222-223 to reach 4Ghz however, you can move up to 3.8Ghz first if you want. Test and see if it is stable with no changes to any of your settings. If there are issues then you might want to bump the vCore slightly first. If vCore increase doesn't help, then you yeah bump the QPI voltages, but also increase the IOH voltage. if those can't get you stable you might have to bump the ICH voltages, but normally ICH voltages doesn't require a large increase in most cases until you go above 4Ghz. Still it's worth increasing just for more stability if you are having issues with vCore, QPI and IOH. Getting to 4Ghz shouldn't be to much of an issue.
> 
> If you can get it stable then shoot for 4.1Ghz\4.2Ghz and 4.2Ghz will require much more vCore. Be sure to keep a eye on all of your temps.



It looks like the CPU is really struggling to get stable even at 3.8Ghz without significant bumps in vcore and qpi.

I've changed these stable settings at 3.6Ghz to:
BCLK to 200 -> 212
vcore - 1.29 -> 1.35
QPI - 1.31 -> 1.35
IOH- 1.12 -> 1.20

What's an acceptable range to push these settings?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Enphenate said:


> It looks like the CPU is really struggling to get stable even at 3.8Ghz without significant bumps in vcore and qpi.
> 
> I've changed these settings:
> BCLK to 200 -> 212
> vcore - 1.29 -> 1.34
> QPI - 1.31 -> 1.33
> IOH- 1.10 -> 1.18
> 
> Whats an acceptable range to push these settings?



Well this is one of the reasons I decided to switch over to the X5660. Once you reach the top of the ratio on the L56xx you are forced to put more load on the BCLK to go higher. Getting to 4Ghz+ can be very tricky to say the least. 

For starters I would say lower your DRAM Freq. (some where between 1333 - 1600) and set it to 9-9-9-24 so we won't have to worry about that right now. You can also try setting the DRAM to 1.65v as well. Also set the QPI as low as it goes (you can use SLOW Mode if you want, but the lowest before slow mode should do). 

-Bump the QPI up to 1.30v 
-IOH: 1.22v - 1.28v
-ICH: 1.3v 
-IOH PCIe: 1.20
-ICH PCIe: 1.60 - 1.70
-LLC (Load Line Calibration) \ vDroop: Enable this setting for now 
-Make sure your Uncore is still x2 of the DRAM (DRAM Freq. x2 = Uncore)
-Set your CPU Spread Spectrum to Enable. 
-You CPU vCore should be fine. 
-Be sure to check your temps as well. Turn off C-States and in addition to Intel Speedstep make sure Turbo Mode is disabled as well. 

Give those a try and good luck. You can increase the IOH slightly higher if you need to.


----------



## jwrdr

Kana-Maru said:


> No problem man, I never mind helping enthusiast on this great long lasting platform.
> 
> What happened was more than likely directly tied to vCore and it's not happening so you should be fine now. Yeah man keep the updates coming. I'm sure many people will appreciate it since there's always people trying to overclock these X58's in 2020. Good luck :thumb:


So, after a few days, I have encountered the random freezes coming back again. It's weird, they happen most likely when the computer is idle and then I start a program, if PC is loaded it won't freeze, really weird. I put the PLL back to Auto as you requested and I don't think the vCore would be the issue here, like, I'm already @ 1.352v (CPU Z). What do you think I should be looking at right now? Memory? Any other Voltages settings perhaps?


----------



## Kana-Maru

jwrdr said:


> So, after a few days, I have encountered the random freezes coming back again. It's weird, they happen most likely when the computer is idle and then I start a program, if PC is loaded it won't freeze, really weird. I put the PLL back to Auto as you requested and I don't think the vCore would be the issue here, like, I'm already @ 1.352v (CPU Z). What do you think I should be looking at right now? Memory? Any other Voltages settings perhaps?


Your DRAM Freq. should be set to a fairly low frequency as I explained in the previous post, use9-9-9-24 (2T) as well. We shouldn't have to worry about the DRAM. I believe you said that 1.62v on the DRAM Voltage had you stable. So you can try 1.62v or 1.65v on the DRAM Voltage just to eliminate that as a problem for now. 

Sounds like you might need a bit more vCore so push it up a little and see if you become stable. Remember that when you are pushing the BLCK and the L5639 you'll need to apply more voltages and possibly more frequency to more components. You'll need to crank up the IOH Voltage as well as the QPI VTT. You can also Enable your PCIe Spread Spectrum as well.


----------



## Enphenate

Kana-Maru said:


> Well this is one of the reasons I decided to switch over to the X5660. Once you reach the top of the ratio on the L56xx you are forced to put more load on the BCLK to go higher. Getting to 4Ghz+ can be very tricky to say the least.
> 
> For starters I would say lower your DRAM Freq. (some where between 1333 - 1600) and set it to 9-9-9-24 so we won't have to worry about that right now. You can also try setting the DRAM to 1.65v as well. Also set the QPI as low as it goes (you can use SLOW Mode if you want, but the lowest before slow mode should do).
> 
> -Bump the QPI up to 1.30v
> -IOH: 1.22v - 1.28v
> -ICH: 1.3v
> -IOH PCIe: 1.20
> -ICH PCIe: 1.60 - 1.70
> -LLC (Load Line Calibration) \ vDroop: Enable this setting for now
> -Make sure your Uncore is still x2 of the DRAM (DRAM Freq. x2 = Uncore)
> -Set your CPU Spread Spectrum to Enable.
> -You CPU vCore should be fine.
> -Be sure to check your temps as well. Turn off C-States and in addition to Intel Speedstep make sure Turbo Mode is disabled as well.
> 
> Give those a try and good luck. You can increase the IOH slightly higher if you need to.


It's not looking promising, I can barely keep an OCCT test running for a few seconds at 3.8GHz

Latest settings:
Ratio 18x
BCLK - 212
Dram Freq - 1275
UVLK - 2550
QPI - 7651 (slowest before slow or auto)

CPU - 1.36v
QPI/Dram Core Voltage - 1.36
IOH Voltage - 1.26
IOH PCIE - 1.50 (lowest)
ICH Voltage - 1.3
ICH PCIE - 1.6
Dram voltage - 1.65

LLC enabled, spread spectrum enabled. When I'm at 3.6ghz it's super stable and requires a lot less voltage all around but seems to be wildly unstable after that. Don't know if it's even worth trying to get to 3.8 or 4ghz at this point.

On the bright side, replacing the CPU thermal paste and cleaning the fans resulted in a pretty noticeable decrease in temp. around ~8C different when idling.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Enphenate said:


> It's not looking promising, I can barely keep an OCCT test running for a few seconds at 3.8GHz
> 
> LLC enabled, spread spectrum enabled. When I'm at 3.6ghz it's super stable and requires a lot less voltage all around but seems to be wildly unstable after that. Don't know if it's even worth trying to get to 3.8 or 4ghz at this point.
> 
> On the bright side, replacing the CPU thermal paste and cleaning the fans resulted in a pretty noticeable decrease in temp. around ~8C different when idling.


Very nice idle temp difference :thumb: 3.6Ghz isn't bad at all if it doesn't require a lot of voltage and you get the performance you need. Pushing the BCLK and over system above 200BCLK can be tricky and sometimes difficult as you can see. 

So you have all of the power saving states turn off (speedstep\turbo\C-states and those other power saving options in the CPU). Before you venture off give the settings one last boost and see if you can become stable: 

QPI/Dram Core Voltage - 1.38v
IOH Voltage - 1.28v - 1.34v
IOH PCIE - 1.64v
ICH Voltage - 1.4v
ICH PCIE - 1.8v
Dram voltage - 1.65 (or whatever you can find to keep you stable)

Monitor your temps and see if you have any luck with OCCT then.


----------



## Fobia2000

*experiment*

https://valid.x86.fr/lkvi4l
Vcore 1.8v
The CPU in this mode under load worked only 2 hours and died


----------



## Kana-Maru

Fobia2000 said:


> https://valid.x86.fr/lkvi4l
> Vcore 1.8v
> The CPU in this mode under load worked only 2 hours and died


Ouch. I nearly killed my X5660 with 1.54v (5.5Ghz + boot into windows :thumb. Actually it died and 45 minutes it revived ITSELF(!) and has been running like a champ every since then. I remember getting ready to order another CPU and it just came on. Never took it above 4.8Ghz after that I have the 5.5Ghz file, but it wasn't stable so the file is corrupted. However, I was able to catch my 5.2Ghz file luckily before it became unstable. I also uploaded it many many years ago: 

https://valid.x86.fr/tbsew3


So 2 hours and it's dead....as in dead dead? Deader than dead? The dead'ist of them all? What other settings did you pump into the motherboard and CPU in addition to the 1.8vCore? If you really want to destroy some stuff and I mean a lot of stuff, increase the PCIe Frequency and push that CPU PLL up along with those high overclocks....I'd like to know what dies first.


----------



## Fobia2000

Kana-Maru said:


> Ouch. I nearly killed my X5660 with 1.54v (5.5Ghz + boot into windows :thumb. Actually it died and 45 minutes it revived ITSELF(!) and has been running like a champ every since then. I remember getting ready to order another CPU and it just came on. Never took it above 4.8Ghz after that I have the 5.5Ghz file, but it wasn't stable so the file is corrupted. However, I was able to catch my 5.2Ghz file luckily before it became unstable. I also uploaded it many many years ago:
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/tbsew3
> 
> 
> So 2 hours and it's dead....as in dead dead? Deader than dead? The dead'ist of them all? What other settings did you pump into the motherboard and CPU in addition to the 1.8vCore? If you really want to destroy some stuff and I mean a lot of stuff, increase the PCIe Frequency and push that CPU PLL up along with those high overclocks....I'd like to know what dies first.


Raised the voltage only to the core, other parameters Auto. He achieved stable operation 4.8 Ghz - 1.8v. Checked stability in the game Witcher 3, temperature 80-90. After two hours of play, bsod. It was no longer possible to start the system even by resetting the BIOS. The processor has fallen into disrepair. (I write through a translator, because I do not know English, please excuse me  ) 

What is your cooling system?


----------



## Kana-Maru

Fobia2000 said:


> Raised the voltage only to the core, other parameters Auto. He achieved stable operation 4.8 Ghz - 1.8v. Checked stability in the game Witcher 3, temperature 80-90. After two hours of play, bsod. It was no longer possible to start the system even by resetting the BIOS. The processor has fallen into disrepair. (I write through a translator, because I do not know English, please excuse me  )
> 
> What is your cooling system?


Your English is fine I was only joking around with the "dead" stuff. My cooling system on the CPU is a crappy.....one of the crappiest AIO I've ever used in all of my years on the X58 platform and I've been through some really bad ones. my current AIO is a CoolerMaster ML120L RGB TUF Garbage edition. Went through 2 of them within the first year (replacement) and I now I think it might be time to give the EVGA or Thermaltake AIO a chance or something. I might just say screw it and go back to regular heatsinks or something.


----------



## Fobia2000




----------



## Fobia2000

Kana-Maru said:


> What other settings did you pump into the motherboard and CPU in addition to the 1.8vCore? If you really want to destroy some stuff and I mean a lot of stuff, increase the PCIe Frequency and push that CPU PLL up along with those high overclocks....I'd like to know what dies first.



I don’t remember exactly what the parameters were, but I remembered that I achieved the maximum multiplier by turning on the Turbo boost and turning HT off to lower the temperature. At that time, I was just starting my way as an overclocker.
I tried to increase the frequency of pci-e, it leads to a system crash. In the future I will conduct a couple of experiments. add a couple of corpses to my collection of CPU or motherboard =)


----------



## realcapone

Does the X5675 work with ASUS P6T SE? My x58-UD3R just gave up and I wanted to replace it with another x58 and cheapest I saw is the ASUS P6T SE. I'm buying this temporarily while waiting for Ryzen 4 to come out. Which board should I best be looking for (I'll see if there are cheap ones)? Thank you


----------



## Kana-Maru

realcapone said:


> Does the X5675 work with ASUS P6T SE? My x58-UD3R just gave up and I wanted to replace it with another x58 and cheapest I saw is the ASUS P6T SE. I'm buying this temporarily while waiting for Ryzen 4 to come out. Which board should I best be looking for (I'll see if there are cheap ones)? Thank you


Check here for a full list of boards known to work with Westmere's: 

https://overclock-then-game.com/index.php/benchmarks/1-x5660-full-review?showall=&start=9

It was compiled years back, but it's not like they are making new motherboards now


----------



## realcapone

Kana-Maru said:


> Ok now once you are stable and you are SURE you are stable start increasing the QPI from 4.8GT\s to 6.4GT and test. Then from 6.4GT to 7.0-7.2GT\s then test and test and test. Now you might need to adjust the QPI Vcore as well as the IOH voltage slightly if you are having stability issues.
> .


Kana - how to increase QPI from 4.8G\s to 6.4GT and above without touching the BLCK? Change the multiplier? I have mine set at x36 and if I set it to x44 I can't boot. Goal right now is 3.8 - 4.0 ghz with 3600 uncore or higher if possible for daily use. My memory stick latency sucks so I'll not even bother with it.


----------



## Kana-Maru

realcapone said:


> Kana - how to increase QPI from 4.8G\s to 6.4GT and above without touching the BLCK? Change the multiplier? I have mine set at x36 and if I set it to x44 I can't boot. Goal right now is 3.8 - 4.0 ghz with 3600 uncore or higher if possible for daily use. My memory stick latency sucks so I'll not even bother with it.


There is usually a setting where you can increase or decrease the QPI Link Data Rate. It usually shows a number\frequency like 4800MT\s or 6400MT\s and so on. At least on my motherboard I can set it manually. The lowest I can set is slow mode. 

Getting 3600Mhz on the Uncore shouldn't be to much of a problem, but it will usually require more QPI\VTT Voltage and possibly more vCore voltage as well. 

For memory - 1600Mhz with 9-9-9-24 will be fine for gaming and everyday use. I recently ran 64+ individual tests in my most recent article and had no problems with the Vega 64 on the X58. The results were outstanding. X58 lives on. 3.6Ghz - 4Ghz should be all you really need for gaming and streaming.


----------



## realcapone

Kana-Maru said:


> There is usually a setting where you can increase or decrease the QPI Link Data Rate. It usually shows a number\frequency like 4800MT\s or 6400MT\s and so on. At least on my motherboard I can set it manually. The lowest I can set is slow mode.
> 
> Getting 3600Mhz on the Uncore shouldn't be to much of a problem, but it will usually require more QPI\VTT Voltage and possibly more vCore voltage as well.
> 
> For memory - 1600Mhz with 9-9-9-24 will be fine for gaming and everyday use. I recently ran 64+ individual tests in my most recent article and had no problems with the Vega 64 on the X58. The results were outstanding. X58 lives on. 3.6Ghz - 4Ghz should be all you really need for gaming and streaming.



Yes I have that option in my mobo, it's based on a multiplier x36 x44 etc but can't seem to get it to boot at x44(6400MT\s). What voltage is affecting this? 

Also I've set my uncore multiplier to yield 3600 but just shows 3557 in Windows, less than what it needs to be same with the cpu clock. Is that okay?

My mems are bad CL 11 lol . This was the cheapest I can get 2 or 3 years ago, I see better mems now but I don't want to purchase so I'll stick with this. Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Kana-Maru

realcapone said:


> Yes I have that option in my mobo, it's based on a multiplier x36 x44 etc but can't seem to get it to boot at x44(6400MT\s). What voltage is affecting this?
> 
> Also I've set my uncore multiplier to yield 3600 but just shows 3557 in Windows, less than what it needs to be same with the cpu clock. Is that okay?
> 
> My mems are bad CL 11 lol . This was the cheapest I can get 2 or 3 years ago, I see better mems now but I don't want to purchase so I'll stick with this. Thanks for the reply.


No problem man, I've been trying to help for years. Yeah that's fine if you are reading less than what you see in Windows since it might be off a little. My current QPI is x18 I believe. The stock QPI with stock BCLK is x24 from what I can remember. Try to get CL9 is possible, but it's not the end of the word and I understand if you don't want to invest any money in this old platform. Having a SSD will make things much quicker as well for daily tasks. 

For QPI voltage there usually a QPI\VTT voltage settings or something similar. Sometimes it'll say QPI\DRAM Voltage, but it's really just QPI and the DRAM voltage is obviously separate (DRAM Bus Voltage ). 

If you want to see how my X58 with "basic" overclock settings and daily usage is performing in High End gaming check out my Vega 64 + X58 in 2020 review: 

https://overclock-then-game.com/ind...ga-64-2020-x58-review-kana-s-finewine-edition

I think we will be fine with gaming on this platform for at least another year or so. Maybe longer...who knows. AMD and Intel will be releasing their newer architectures later this year and early next year. I hope I can manage to get AMDs RDNA\Navi GPUs to work on the X58. Hopefully the prices are better than Nvidia.


----------



## realcapone

Kana-Maru said:


> No problem man, I've been trying to help for years. Yeah that's fine if you are reading less than what you see in Windows since it might be off a little. My current QPI is x18 I believe. The stock QPI with stock BCLK is x24 from what I can remember. Try to get CL9 is possible, but it's not the end of the word and I understand if you don't want to invest any money in this old platform. Having a SSD will make things much quicker as well for daily tasks.
> 
> For QPI voltage there usually a QPI\VTT voltage settings or something similar. Sometimes it'll say QPI\DRAM Voltage, but it's really just QPI and the DRAM voltage is obviously separate (DRAM Bus Voltage ).
> 
> If you want to see how my X58 with "basic" overclock settings and daily usage is performing in High End gaming check out my Vega 64 + X58 in 2020 review:
> 
> https://overclock-then-game.com/ind...ga-64-2020-x58-review-kana-s-finewine-edition
> 
> I think we will be fine with gaming on this platform for at least another year or so. Maybe longer...who knows. AMD and Intel will be releasing their newer architectures later this year and early next year. I hope I can manage to get AMDs RDNA\Navi GPUs to work on the X58. Hopefully the prices are better than Nvidia.



Thanks for the help as always. I'll try to post some screenshots later for a little bit help. I would definitely agree that this platform will be fine for at least a year or so. I'm looking at the 4 or 5 series for AMD as a replacement(not really) =) 

I have my system stable now at 3550-3580 uncore , 3759 QPI clock and 3968 core clock as shown in HWinFO. Just wanted to explore a bit with higher QPI speeds though my QPI/VTT is already at 1.31 and I've destroyed my mobo's eps socket (burnt) when I pushed it a bit further than what I usually give it, not exactly sure though but that's the reason my revision 1 board is unusable atm. I may have to desolder and replace the socket.

I think I've read that when I revisited this page but I'll give it a good read tonight.


----------



## Kana-Maru

realcapone said:


> Thanks for the help as always. I'll try to post some screenshots later for a little bit help. I would definitely agree that this platform will be fine for at least a year or so. I'm looking at the 4 or 5 series for AMD as a replacement(not really) =)
> 
> I have my system stable now at 3550-3580 uncore , 3759 QPI clock and 3968 core clock as shown in HWinFO. Just wanted to explore a bit with higher QPI speeds though my QPI/VTT is already at 1.31 and I've destroyed my mobo's eps socket (burnt) when I pushed it a bit further than what I usually give it, not exactly sure though but that's the reason my revision 1 board is unusable atm. I may have to desolder and replace the socket.
> 
> I think I've read that when I revisited this page but I'll give it a good read tonight.


It's no problem at all man. :thumb: Screenshots always help. 4000 and 5000 will be more than enough I bet. Anything is more than enough than X58 though. 3550-3380 is pretty decent with a 3.9Ghz OC. If you go higher with QPI then you'll more than likely need to increase the QPI\VTT Voltage for stability in most cases. You might not want to push it to far since your MB has already suffered damage. Take it easy and fine the settings that you need for daily usage and gaming sessions. 

For me I'm running 3.8Ghz @ 1.16v and I've managed to get my 3.8Ghz idle voltage down to 1.06v. ECC Buffered DDR3 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24, but I can use tighter timings I guess and I have pushed it towards 2100Mhz with great timings in the past. I'm also using 3800Mhz Uncore. Yeah check out the article whenever you want. There is also a comparison for the Vega 64 vs the 5700XT 2060S\2070Super + GTX 1080 + 1080 Ti as well.


----------



## jwrdr

Hello again! So, it's been a while already, the freezing thing while being idle didn't go away, so I just let it be and I was trying to keep my PC stock and let it roll. Now, I'm trying to go back and work on it and I found that when I stress the CPU and GPU at the same time, I'm losing the video, but the PC is on and not crashing. So, my OC is good on the CPU (normally it would crash or BSOD when not) but now I'm losing the video when playing.

Sometimes, while booting my board will stay at "FF" and not boot, so I have to turn off/on the PSU and boot again (it's doing this even running stock).










Do you think my board is dying? The VRMs? My PSU? What would be the best step by step to troubleshoot this? 
I already try stressing both GPU and CPU (stock) and I'm not losing video. Undervolted GPU (-50% of power limit) and overclocked CPU and I'm losing video.


----------



## Kana-Maru

Hey man and welcome back. I didn't realize you decided to roll with stock settings. That's not bad for daily usage and gaming sessions if you aren't looking for crazy high framerates.

Losing the video does sounds weird. Try running the GPU at STOCK setting (no undervolting) while overclocking the CPU. See if you lose video or not during a stress test. If you are losing video then it could be that your GPU undervolt isn't stable. Try -40% and if you lose video, try -30% and so on until your undervolt is stable. 

If you your MB is getting "stuck" during the POST\Boot then it could mean the MB is dying or it could simply mean that your overclock is not stable. Perhaps the CPU or some other component on the MB is not getting enough voltage. Keep me posted.


----------



## TLCH723

Maybe is the PSU. How old is your PSU?


----------



## SmOgER

jwrdr said:


> Do you think my board is dying? The VRMs? My PSU? What would be the best step by step to troubleshoot this?
> I already try stressing both GPU and CPU (stock) and I'm not losing video. Undervolted GPU (-50% of power limit) and overclocked CPU and I'm losing video.


It's likely your PSU going bad mate. I saw the exact same thing on another board - new PSU fixed it.


----------

