• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Highest safe core voltage?

T

ThePiston

Senior member
My AXP mobile is doing very well. 2600+ (2Ghz) at 2580 Ghz. I'd like to try and get it over 2600Mhz, but I'll be going well over 1.9V probably. My mobo lets me go over 2.o actually.

Is there a max voltage you don't want to go over or is the only concern the heat? If heat's the only concern, I'm doing fine. I'm at 42C idle with budget air cooling.
 
I think at this point its just heat. Early p4 processors used aluminum interconnects instead of copper interconnects which caused P4 SDS but now I think its just heat that gives cpus the heebie-jeebies.

 
There is also something called electromigration that could shorten the life of your chip at higher voltages. It's caused by increased electrical current and while extreme heat makes it worse, I think it can occur regardless of temperature at very high voltages. It's a degenerative process though, and the chip might well be obsolete by the time EM failure takes hold. Just something to think about.
 
I've had the same question with my Winchester A64...it would be stable at 1.7 but that's really high above the stock voltage. It's watercooled to temps below most people's stock temps, but still, I don't like the idea of seriously shortened lifespan. Any thoughts or anyone who knows Winchesters will do those high of voltages without problem?
 
1.7 volts on your winchester will slowly 'eat' your cpu nomatter how cool it runs. basically at stock voltage and a decent temperature a cpu will run pretty much forever. question is how useful this is as youll most likely not need your cpu in 25 years. prolly not in 2 years. maybe not even in 1.
 
Lower is better man. Im only running at 2.2 with 1.75 with my 2500m. I could reach 2.4 with 1.775 V on my NF7S, but whats the point. Even extra 200 MHz only gives me less than 100 points in 3dmark03. 10300 at 2.4 vs 10213 at 2.2. My CPU is running like 7 C less with .2 V less voltage. NO matter how much u OC, XP is just XP, it cant match with latest AMD 64 these day. I think best thing to do is to benchmark and c the difference, and its ur own decision to c the trade off. Personally I cant tell the difference between 2.2 and 2.4 so, I decide to go with 2.2. I know mine can go up to 2.5(208x12) with 1.9 V, but I wont do that to my CPU lol
 
I'm a cautious person. If you can over-clock and still keep the components within their maximum specified acceptable voltages, that's where I stop.

Visit the web site for your processor manufacturer -- did you say it was an AMD? There should be a table of processors which specifies the maximum rated voltage for the processor core.

My inclination is that anything over that voltage, and the greater the difference the greater the risk -- is riskier.

Until about a year and a half ago -- spring 2003 - I had a Gateway Pentium 166 still running with a string of hard disks totalling about 15 GB. It had been a proxy server in 2000, then from 2001 onward it was just a file server. So, as I said, I retired it in 2003, modded the lovely full-tower case into a fully-compliant ATX form-factor, and it is now a 3.0C @ 3.75 Ghz.

What I mean is -- it lasted that long, just like the assertions of a ten-year life-span for processors said it would.

The problem with going outside rated specs is that you can never anticipate just exactly when the lightbulb will burn out. So even if you plan to dump the machine in a couple years, worrying about reliability and the integrity (and continued life) of your data means attention to a backup schedule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top