Overclocking my 955 BE ; Halp

[duncandun]

Hey guys.

Let me just post my system specs to get it out of the way:
Phenom II x4 955 BE c2
Asus M4a77td MB
4gb ddr3 1333
asus 7870 CUII
brand new xigmatek Gaia

So, the last 4 days before yesterday were interesting. Starting on saturday or friday my machine was having some incredibly high temps(max I saw was 100C) that I'm guessing weren't accurate or something because I'm pretty sure my CPU would have burned out at those temps for as long as it was at it.

Fast forward to yesterday, I got my new HS/F in the mail and put it on. Temps are down to 28-30C at idle stock. I have it OC'd to 3700(18.5) and its idling at 37.

So my problem is this:

I was able to get a not-really-stable(enough to get into windows, mess around, watch a few episodes of twin peaks, run wprime @ 6 threads no errors several times) 3.9 GHZ with 2.8 NB 2.2 HT and my ram @ 1066.

This morning when I went to test it with prime95 it crashed roughly 3-6 seconds after starting every time. 1334-1732's, small and large FFTs, anything sent it directly to a blue screen.

All of my crashes in windows end with a blue screen(or the new w8 bluescreen frowny face thing).

Now, I reset everything and started over with only underclocking the ram and am sitting at 3.7 GHZ @ 4.0 Vcore(which seems really high).

I'm afraid to run prime because I'm pretty sure its just going to crash. I'm getting a little tired of it, when I first put this machine together (4 years ago) I tried to OC and could never get it stable. Not sure what i'm doing wrong, but its frustrating.

Any tips or ideas would be great.


Edit:

So i ran prime95 and It crashed like I guessed it would. So when I restarted, I changed my Vcore to 1.55 (which is actually ~1.5 almost exactly on my motherboard, I guess due to droop. Fluctuates between 1.492 and 1.52 but stays at 1.504 mostly). Got into windows, ran p95 and low and behold It was stable for 3 runs of 1344-1792k on 4 threads for 3 minutes per.
Heat was good too, never went above 55C with all cores at 100%. That feels nice.

Anyway, any suggestions for how to proceed? should I just start lowering the voltage by one notch and testing it every time till i find the threshold? or should I bump up the multiplier till its no longer stable at 1.5v?

Also, how should I overclock the NB/HT stuff? I read that the phenoms dont get much out of overclocking unless the NB is also overclocked. This seems to support why yesterday when I initially got 3.9ghz I had no improvement in FPS when playing TLS on Dolphin emulator.

By the way, the whole reason I'm even overclocking is so I can play my wii collection in glorious HD through dolphin. I've been getting pretty terrible performance and attributed it to my CPU(which seems to be holding me back in other games as well(Arma/Dayz, BF3, etc). My GPU is rarely utilized more than 70%.

Anyway, thanks again! any tips about NB/HT overclocking and stuff would be amazing at this point.

 

[codyray10]

If your temps are good at 3.9ghz with 1.55v and seems to be stable enough, I would start backing off the vcore in the smallest increments you can, until it becomes unstable. 3.9ghz is a good OC for the 955. It is an ABSOLUTE MUST to OC the NB with the PII chips. Just go into the bios and set the speed to 2400mhz (2000mhz is stock) to start with, and test for stability. You should be able to hit that with stock voltages on the NB. If all goes well at 2400mhz go for 2600mhz NB. If you need more voltage to the NB, I would not exceed 1.3v. I could be wrong, but I dont think you get much if any added performace from OC'ing HT. Main concern should be CPU/NB

 

[duncandun]

If your temps are good at 3.9ghz with 1.55v and seems to be stable enough, I would start backing off the vcore in the smallest increments you can, until it becomes unstable. 3.9ghz is a good OC for the 955. It is an ABSOLUTE MUST to OC the NB with the PII chips. Just go into the bios and set the speed to 2400mhz (2000mhz is stock) to start with, and test for stability. You should be able to hit that with stock voltages on the NB. If all goes well at 2400mhz go for 2600mhz NB. If you need more voltage to the NB, I would not exceed 1.3v. I could be wrong, but I dont think you get much if any added performace from OC'ing HT. Main concern should be CPU/NB

In my bios I don't have a NB Voltage, the only voltages I can change are

CPU Voltage
VDDNB voltage(not sure what this does, but it doesn't change the voltage on the NB)
HT over voltage
Memory over voltage

and Chipset over voltage. I'm not really sure which controls the NB voltage, but I feel like It may be the Chipset voltage.


Also, I'm at 3.7 @ 1.55 V atm. Sorry If it was confusing in my OP. I had 3.9 last night(stable in windows) but it BSOD'd as soon as I'd try to stress it in p95.

It's at 3.7 right now and relatively stable(30 minutes in P95 no errors, no bsods).

 

[codyray10]

In my bios I don't have a NB Voltage, the only voltages I can change are

CPU Voltage
VDDNB voltage(not sure what this does, but it doesn't change the voltage on the NB)
HT over voltage
Memory over voltage

and Chipset over voltage. I'm not really sure which controls the NB voltage, but I feel like It may be the Chipset voltage.


Also, I'm at 3.7 @ 1.55 V atm. Sorry If it was confusing in my OP. I had 3.9 last night(stable in windows) but it BSOD'd as soon as I'd try to stress it in p95.

It's at 3.7 right now and relatively stable(30 minutes in P95 no errors, no bsods).

Hmm. I wouldnt think you need 1.55v for 3.7ghz. Have you tried something like 1.45-1.475v @ 3.7? Dont worry about adjusting any NB voltage just yet. Leave the voltage stock and just increase the speed to 2400mhz.

 

[duncandun]

Hmm. I wouldnt think you need 1.55v for 3.7ghz. Have you tried something like 1.45-1.475v @ 3.7? Dont worry about adjusting any NB voltage just yet. Leave the voltage stock and just increase the speed to 2400mhz.

I bumped it up to 2600 MHZ and It booted, haven't stressed it yet though.

Going to go down to 2400 if it fails.

Also, I'm using HWiNFO for my voltage readings. Is there a better/more accurate program than this? I bumped my voltage up to 1.575 just to see if I could reach 1.55V on the vcore, and according to HWiNFO It was topping out at 1.534 but was mostly bouncing between 1.48 and 1.504, which is exactly the same as when It was at 1.55.

 

[codyray10]

Also is prime95 all you are using for stability testing? In my experience, p95 never really worked well on my PII system so i stopped using it. I use intel burn test, the standard 10 run test is pretty good for quick general stability.

 

[codyray10]

I bumped it up to 2600 MHZ and It booted, haven't stressed it yet though.

Going to go down to 2400 if it fails.

Also, I'm using HWiNFO for my voltage readings. Is there a better/more accurate program than this? I bumped my voltage up to 1.575 just to see if I could reach 1.55V on the vcore, and according to HWiNFO It was topping out at 1.534 but was mostly bouncing between 1.48 and 1.504, which is exactly the same as when It was at 1.55.

Never used HWinfo myself. Try HWmonitor/cpu-z and compare those readings with what you have set in the bios and what hwinfo reads.

 

[duncandun]

Never used HWinfo myself. Try HWmonitor/cpu-z and compare those readings with what you have set in the bios and what hwinfo reads.

I got HWMonitor and compared with my bios readings, they're all pretty much the same. I like HWmonitors layout more though.

I ran Intelburntest for 8 minutes, didn't bsod or anything so thats great.

However, I noticed the Vcore dropped from ~1.504 average to 1.440-1.452 max during the test. It never went above 1.452, is this something I should be concerned about? If anything I would expect the voltage to be more stable under load than that far below my setting(set at 1.55 in the bios).

Right now the min/max variance in the vcore is 1.136 minimum and 1.536 maximum, this seems like a pretty crazy range.

Maybe its just my shitty motherboard?

 

[codyray10]

Somewhere within your bios, look for a setting called "Load line calibration (LLC). " Once you track that down, post what the options for that setting are. You want that to be enabled in some form or another. It helps keep the vcore at a constant voltage under load, offsetting some of that vdroop you are experiencing.

 

[duncandun]

Somewhere within your bios, look for a setting called "Load line calibration (LLC). " Once you track that down, post what the options for that setting are. You want that to be enabled in some form or another. It helps keep the vcore at a constant voltage under load, offsetting some of that vdroop you are experiencing.

Ah, Okay. It's right under the VDDNB setting. I'll check out the available settings and report back.

Looks like its represented as a %,

auto is 51.325%

Ranges from 0 to 100% in 3.25 % increments.

 

[duncandun]

So I changed the LLC to 0% and my idle voltages were much more stable and closer to what I set (1.448 when set to 1.45).

However, after running intelburntest for 5 minutes(no crashes or anything, seems stable) HWmonitor reported a minimum vcore of 1.072 and a maximum of 1.52.

That minimum seems crazy, and the variance is far greater than without LLC.

Also, my core temps seemed to go up, before my max temp when running intelburntest on Very High was 61C. Now it was 65C.

Gonna fiddle with it more, but I feel like LLC maybe should be closer to 100% than the auto setting of 51.325%.

Oh i was also able to get my ram up to 1333MHZ instead of downclocked to 800, so thats nice.

 

[Kalessian]

See the rig in my sig for my results. I also have a gaia, but with two AC 120mm PWM fans in push-pull (lowers temps a lot).

Deneb does not like fast RAM speeds. I think you are just fine at 1333, if your ram is really running at that speed. I have mine somewhere near 1500mhz IIRC and it was tough to get it there. To see if RAM is an issue lower the divider and retest.

You will get heat instability above 60C. I personally like to keep mine below 55C. See what volts get you near 60C and get the highest OC from there.

Your lower Vcore is probably due to CnQ, disable it if you wish, I have mine on.

I find Prime95 mixed test to be the most stressful for my CPU for some reason. It will fail when other tests run for long periods.

 

[codyray10]

So I changed the LLC to 0% and my idle voltages were much more stable and closer to what I set (1.448 when set to 1.45).

However, after running intelburntest for 5 minutes(no crashes or anything, seems stable) HWmonitor reported a minimum vcore of 1.072 and a maximum of 1.52.

That minimum seems crazy, and the variance is far greater than without LLC.

Also, my core temps seemed to go up, before my max temp when running intelburntest on Very High was 61C. Now it was 65C.

Gonna fiddle with it more, but I feel like LLC maybe should be closer to 100% than the auto setting of 51.325%.

Oh i was also able to get my ram up to 1333MHZ instead of downclocked to 800, so thats nice.

Put LLC at 100%

 

[duncandun]

See the rig in my sig for my results. I also have a gaia, but with two AC 120mm PWM fans in push-pull (lowers temps a lot).

Deneb does not like fast RAM speeds. I think you are just fine at 1333, if your ram is really running at that speed. I have mine somewhere near 1500mhz IIRC and it was tough to get it there. To see if RAM is an issue lower the divider and retest.

You will get heat instability above 60C. I personally like to keep mine below 55C. See what volts get you near 60C and get the highest OC from there.

Your lower Vcore is probably due to CnQ, disable it if you wish, I have mine on.

I find Prime95 mixed test to be the most stressful for my CPU for some reason. It will fail when other tests run for long periods.

My most recent burntest with intelburntest had several test runs with lower performance(22 second test, @30gflops instead of 48 which is the norm), seems to get progressively worse as time goes on and the low performance runs correlated with a low vcore(as low as 1.1V at times).

Put LLC at 100%

Going to try this, it's at 81.325% now.

My last test had a pretty huge variability as well, I'm not sure why but it's much greater than it was earlier.

1.120V min to 1.504V max, set @1.55 in the bios.

 

[duncandun]

My most recent burntest with intelburntest had several test runs with lower performance(22 second test, @30gflops instead of 48 which is the norm), seems to get progressively worse as time goes on and the low performance runs correlated with a low vcore(as low as 1.1V at times).



Going to try this, it's at 81.325% now.

My last test had a pretty huge variability as well, I'm not sure why but it's much greater than it was earlier.

1.120V min to 1.504V max, set @1.55 in the bios.

Huh, and this time Intelburntest didn't cause a BSOD or a hard reset or anything, just gave me a critical error about it being unstable(guessing it miscalculated something).

I'm not sure if thats a good thing or not, heh.

 

[Shamrock]

3.9Ghz is a great OC. Consider yourself blessed. I can't get my 955 above 3.7 with the Hyper 212+ aftermarket cooler.

 

[Kalessian]

My most recent burntest with intelburntest had several test runs with lower performance(22 second test, @30gflops instead of 48 which is the norm), seems to get progressively worse as time goes on and the low performance runs correlated with a low vcore(as low as 1.1V at times).

I have never used intelburntest, true, so maybe it is indeed the best. I do test performance, however, using various benchmarks to see if there is noticable slowdown and I see performance scale with clockspeed if prime95 is stable.

If you really have varying voltage like that then there is a chance your PSU or mobo are limiting you with unclean power. In that case tweak away at LLC and try to find clock combinations that work best but you may have to resign to a lower OC than the chip is capable of. (This is just my speculation)

 

[mojothehut]

If your temps are good at 3.9ghz with 1.55v and seems to be stable enough, I would start backing off the vcore in the smallest increments you can, until it becomes unstable. 3.9ghz is a good OC for the 955. It is an ABSOLUTE MUST to OC the NB with the PII chips. Just go into the bios and set the speed to 2400mhz (2000mhz is stock) to start with, and test for stability. You should be able to hit that with stock voltages on the NB. If all goes well at 2400mhz go for 2600mhz NB. If you need more voltage to the NB, I would not exceed 1.3v. I could be wrong, but I dont think you get much if any added performace from OC'ing HT. Main concern should be CPU/NB

Hey quick question about NB tweaking.
I have a 975@4.0ghz on a Sabertooth 990fx, in bios I have options for both NB and HT link speed, i set both to 2400. Everything booted but CPU-Z still shows HT Link at 2000mhz :hmm: Bios says one thing, CPU Z another? hmm.