OCCT 3.0.0 now available

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
OCCT doesn't load my CPU nearly as much as Orthos small. Both temps, and I have much less vdroop running OCCT than I do Orthos Small.

I like Orthos small.

you can like whatever you want; but just because a program generates more heat for your component, it doesn't mean that it is a better checker of stability. (thats what we're all trying to achieve with these programs right?) if you just want heat, why not run your cpu with a blow dryer blowing at it?

p95 was last century. it is long, and finds errors (instabilities) very slowly; often taking 8-24 hours to find errors when occt would find them in less than 2.

i think that OCCT uses a VERY SIMILAR (mostly the same, but better optimized algorithm) as Prime95. so even if OCCT generates less heat (for you, not for everyone else) than p95, the error checking is still the same and just means that unnecessary heat put on your CPU

 

[dguy6789]

Why use the OCCT test at all when you can just use the Linpack test in the same program? Linpack is better than all of the rest.

 

[yh125d]

I expected it to heat my system so much I'd be pushed to go with water, but 36c CPU/35 GPU after 10 minutes? I'm happy for now

 

[WobbleWobble]

I get a ton of errors in the GPU Memtest

I got a stock BFG 260 GTX and I'm running my system at stock. Anyone else able to run the GPU memtest successfully?

 

[taltamir]

there have been a variety of beta and than release candidate releases of v3. But its nice to have an officially "done" version.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: WobbleWobble
I get a ton of errors in the GPU Memtest

I got a stock BFG 260 GTX and I'm running my system at stock. Anyone else able to run the GPU memtest successfully?

Me too and it quacked at me! GTX280 factory OC from EVGA here.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Wow, what a workout. Running PSU stress test. CPU cores get up to 79C each, on an E5200 @ 3.75Ghz, 1.4v. GPU gets up to 71C, 9600GSO EVGA dual-slot cooler, slightly overclocked to 600/1500/1000, fanspeed 61%.

Still stable on a ThermalTake 500W PSU.

Edit: How lame. It shuts off the testing once the CPU hits 80C. That's still 20C away from TJmax. WTF. Plenty of headroom.

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
p95 was last century. it is long, and finds errors (instabilities) very slowly; often taking 8-24 hours to find errors when occt would find them in less than 2.

i think that OCCT uses a VERY SIMILAR (mostly the same, but better optimized algorithm) as Prime95. so even if OCCT generates less heat (for you, not for everyone else) than p95, the error checking is still the same and just means that unnecessary heat put on your CPU

Hmm, not sure where you get this information from, but I highly doubt a 2 hour stability check from ANY utility will convince ME that my OC is stable.

Yes, OC stability is a relative term to everyone, but for me, I consider something stable that will 1) not corrupt my data in the long run, 2) not cause any software glitches in the long run.

To me, OC stability testing takes time, and if you don't take this time to make sure everything is properly stable, then of course in the long run, you may run into stability related issues.

Saying this, all I ever use is Prime95 v25.2 and Memtest+86 v2.11.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
p95 was last century. it is long, and finds errors (instabilities) very slowly; often taking 8-24 hours to find errors when occt would find them in less than 2.

i think that OCCT uses a VERY SIMILAR (mostly the same, but better optimized algorithm) as Prime95. so even if OCCT generates less heat (for you, not for everyone else) than p95, the error checking is still the same and just means that unnecessary heat put on your CPU

Hmm, not sure where you get this information from, but I highly doubt a 2 hour stability check from ANY utility will convince ME that my OC is stable.

Yes, OC stability is a relative term to everyone, but for me, I consider something stable that will 1) not corrupt my data in the long run, 2) not cause any software glitches in the long run.

To me, OC stability testing takes time, and if you don't take this time to make sure everything is properly stable, then of course in the long run, you may run into stability related issues.

Saying this, all I ever use is Prime95 v25.2 and Memtest+86 v2.11.

24 hour testing was a thing of the past. why dont u try this. start to push ur CPU a litle bit further and first, run a 2 hour test of OCCT. if it passes, then run a 24 hour test of p95, what are your results? If there is an error within 2 hours of the OCCT test, run a p95 test right away and tell us how long it takes p95 to find an error?

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: roid450
Any idea how accurate this new version is for GPU Memtest? Gave me 34177 erros on 10 passes for GTX260

ya, mine got 40000 errors overclocked so I put it to stock and still got 40000.... I'm thinking its broken.

edit: the program that is

 

[error8]

Your cards are all broken.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Thor86
Hmm, not sure where you get this information from, but I highly doubt a 2 hour stability check from ANY utility will convince ME that my OC is stable.

Yes, OC stability is a relative term to everyone, but for me, I consider something stable that will 1) not corrupt my data in the long run, 2) not cause any software glitches in the long run.

To me, OC stability testing takes time, and if you don't take this time to make sure everything is properly stable, then of course in the long run, you may run into stability related issues.

Saying this, all I ever use is Prime95 v25.2 and Memtest+86 v2.11.

If you REQUIRE error free results (errors as a result of hardware malfunction due to overspeed) then NEVER overclock. There is no guarantee of results once you overclock your system. The guarantee of stability is Intel or AMD's job.

EDIT:

Yes I would not be surprised if the code (CUDA?) on that GPU mem test is broken.

 

[aigomorla]

running into problems with vista 64 and i7.

doesnt like HT it seems.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Rubycon

Originally posted by: WobbleWobble
I get a ton of errors in the GPU Memtest

I got a stock BFG 260 GTX and I'm running my system at stock. Anyone else able to run the GPU memtest successfully?

Me too and it quacked at me! GTX280 factory OC from EVGA here.

maybe nvidia engineers KNEW what they were doing when they set those default clocks...

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Rubycon

Originally posted by: WobbleWobble
I get a ton of errors in the GPU Memtest

I got a stock BFG 260 GTX and I'm running my system at stock. Anyone else able to run the GPU memtest successfully?

Me too and it quacked at me! GTX280 factory OC from EVGA here.

maybe nvidia engineers KNEW what they were doing when they set those default clocks...

The tests give the same results regardless of how the clocks were set. This program is most likely producing bogus results. I never have any issues with the card otherwise.

 

[Tetedeiench4]

Okay, another nickname as i lost previous ones( sick) and such...

I'm the guy behind OCCT and i can give you a few answers to your questions :

* If the OCCT:GPU and PSU tests tabs are disabled,your DirectX9 version isn't up to date. Just go to MS website and update it. DirectX 10 and 9 are completly apart, as far as maintenance is concerned : if you update DX10, DX9 is left untouched... It's stated in OCCT's FAQ

* Virtuallarry> You can customize OCCT's max CPU temp in the monitoring settings (the options tab, the big Orange button, you'll see "Max CPU temp on top)

* It seems that the GPU Memtest isn't realiable, as it gives different results based on hardware and on driver versions. When it was still on beta, i had pretty good reports, but as usual when you go stable... well... It seems you should trust it when it discovers errors when you overclock, whereas before it never did report errors. I'll be working on it, but test hardware is very hard to come by, and i can't reproduce your bugs on my test hardware. My personal opinion, looking at the code, is that Cuda isn't yet too reliable when you strech it to extreme (which i do, regarding memory managment)

* OCCT:GPU and PSU tests are already Multi-GPU. The GPU:Memtest isn't, but will be in the near future.

* Linpack isn't better than CPUCCT to detect errors. This claims originates from changelogs from IntelBurntests where agentgods said "5 mins from IBT = 2 hours from test Y". I never knew where he got that, as my testing never could obtains the very same results. My results clearly shows that Linpack is very good at getting your CPU really hot, it is very good at drawing alot of power from the PSU, but not that good at "producing", or making errors likely to happen. on that particular part, CPUCCT till seems to have the edge.

* OCCT is compatible with Vista x64 and i7. Only thing is that you should trust the CPU Usage % in the Task manager (as it'll report 50%, as it takes into account HT, which, i remind you, displays, to cut it short, 50% of "virtual" CPU power), but OCCT's CPU Usage). As far as i know, everything seems to work fine there Now, maybe i don't know of a bug there

Anyway, i'll keep track of this topic, and i'll do my best to answer your questions. Just remember that English isn't my native language, so excuse my spelling mistakes and other errors i'll probably do

---

YGPM about regaining your original user name.

Harvey
Senior AnandTech Moderator

 

[error8]

Tetedeiench, will there ever be a memtest for ATi cards?

 

[Tetedeiench4]

I do hope so, however :
* i do not have any ATI hardware, nor do i have the funding, or the way of getting test hardware yet, as it would require months, and i can only get such hardware for a few weeks at best
* I have yet to look at the current capabilities of the ATI GPGPU technologies

Once the GPU:Memtest for Nvidia cards is stabilized, i will probably implement it for ATI cards. It is in the pipe, but i can't tell you when it will be done, unfortunately :/

 

[habbakuk87]

GPU : OCCT gave 8 errors in a 10 min test with no OC any reason to be worried.

 

[CrystalBay]

This is really an awesome utility, thanks ...!!!

 

[Rubycon]

GPU/PSU blocked due to DX9 files missing? Anyone else get that? Shouldn't Vista already have this stuff?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Hmm, curious problem. I ran OCCT PSU test again on my friend's system, this time setting the CPU overheat protection to 90C.

It ran for a while, the CPU temps reported on-screen got to 70-71C, and then I started to hear sirens from the mobo. This never happened before, even though the reported CPU temps got to 80C. But my temps weren't anywhere near that this time yet.

Obviously, the mobo's temp overheat sensors got triggered. I have BIOS temps set to warn at 70C, and shutoff at 80C.

So why was Tcase hitting 80C (enough to shut down the machine), when OCCT was reporting core temps only up to 70-73C. I thought that the temperature gradient works the other way around, that core temps of 80C+ were equal to Tcase temps of 70C or so.

The first time I ran the PSU test, reported core temps hit 79C for a while, and I never got a BIOS temp warning warble even.

So something is up with my temp sensors, or OCCT isn't reporting core temps correctly.

The other question is, is the temp limit in the OCCT settings based on the Tcase sensor, or the core temps reported?


Edit: The other problem, and this is a fairly serious bug - the sensors on the options page are set up nearly at random. CPU #1 is set to "Core #1", CPU #2 is set to "(GPU)", and GPU temp is set to "(HDD)".
I manually configured them, but OCCT doesn't save that info, even after restarting the program. It gets the sensors wrong every time I start it up.

I ran it again, with CPU max temp set to 80C. It ran for 10 minutes, and then I got a quack and "CPU too hot". But this time, unlike the first time that I ran OCCT, I had to endure the BIOS warning warble throughout the ten minutes.

So something is up, something is different about my temp sensors today or something. Or the gradient between TCore and Tcase just got a lot smaller. Could running OCCT the first time, and getting high temps, have caused my thermal paste to cure? (Would running Warhammer online for extended sessions on this PC not have done that?)

 

[nyker96]

interesting will give it a shot.

 

[TidusZ]

I ran prime95 blend on an overclock on a new pc I built, and got an error on one core after 5 1/2 hours, and no errors on the other 3 cores after 12 hours. I have since ran it for 2 hours on occt and no errors (2 x 1 hour tests) and I'm running it some more now. Q9550 @3.8x 1.344v on UD3P (1.3v nb). I'm interested to see if occt will pickup an error and how long it will take. I'll try a 12 hour test overnight tonight.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Is this program bloatware compared to P95/Orthos?

How does the GPU testing work? I've yet to find one that's accurate.

ATI-tool is the generally accepted norm?

It's completely inaccurate.