What are people smokin'

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen
chicken

j/k :laugh:

Now there IS something I would dare not OC out of pure rational FEAR! :laugh:

 

[SunSamurai]

Originally posted by: alyarb
do you perform other diagnoses based on attitude?

Only when im not raging on forums and blaming everyone else ;P

 

[SunSamurai]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: SunnyD
There's a reason I usually don't overclock - sure the extra performance would be nice, but when stock gives me everything I need without suffering for performance I don't have to worry about how far my CPU/Video Card/Whatever can go before I blow it up or it is deemed to suck.

The reason: irrational fear of overclocking damaging something

The result: stock performance


the Rest of us enjoy getting results like 4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz CPU - which is *drastic* but completely stable

and i understand the OP's FRUSTRATION that lead to this rant

expect one from me next week - as i try to unlock X550 .. and Overclock
- my *first* AMD system
:Q

New AMD build - *budget* high performance gamer for 19x12

There's nothing irrational going on here. I haven't run into anything yet that requires additional performance beyond what I already have. Of course, I'm plenty happy with 40fps, where 43fps isn't going to make much of a difference for the amount of effort to ensure a stable overclock (in some cases).

Now when I get to the point where I need more performance, then I'll consider it. Until then, it's just wasted effort.

4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz is going to net far more than 3FPS. Also, you do not need what you have now, the word youre looking for is want. But i understand your drift, its better to OC later in a CPUs life, becuse even if you brake it, you were going to want to upgrade anyway.

 

[Rhoxed]

To OP:

The dependence on a good chip/mobo/ram/psu combo will outweigh any other factor in OC.

http://img199.imageshack.us/i/superpig.jpg/

my 720BE is a gem, hits 4ghz without too much trouble, and runs NB speeds of 2800+ quite easy also

also 4 cores unlocked.
gigabyte ma790x-ud4p

this same chip in a foxconn a79a-s motherboard would not post with 4 cores, and would not run ANYTHING past 3.8ghz stable

people are not smoking anything, these are very good chips for the $, and OC extremely well.

3.4ghz on stock volts is no problem for me, on 4 cores no less.

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: SunSamurai

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: SunnyD
There's a reason I usually don't overclock - sure the extra performance would be nice, but when stock gives me everything I need without suffering for performance I don't have to worry about how far my CPU/Video Card/Whatever can go before I blow it up or it is deemed to suck.

The reason: irrational fear of overclocking damaging something

The result: stock performance


the Rest of us enjoy getting results like 4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz CPU - which is *drastic* but completely stable

and i understand the OP's FRUSTRATION that lead to this rant

expect one from me next week - as i try to unlock X550 .. and Overclock
- my *first* AMD system
:Q

New AMD build - *budget* high performance gamer for 19x12

There's nothing irrational going on here. I haven't run into anything yet that requires additional performance beyond what I already have. Of course, I'm plenty happy with 40fps, where 43fps isn't going to make much of a difference for the amount of effort to ensure a stable overclock (in some cases).

Now when I get to the point where I need more performance, then I'll consider it. Until then, it's just wasted effort.

4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz is going to net far more than 3FPS. Also, you do not need what you have now, the word youre looking for is want. But i understand your drift, its better to OC later in a CPUs life, becuse even if you brake it, you were going to want to upgrade anyway.

Not necessarily. For me, OCing my CPU did nothing but raise my max fps, and avg fps only raised a few. Min didn't budge

 

[farscape]

Now that I have completely alienated myself from the members of this site, I wish to apologize for my rant. One should read what one writes BEFORE one presses the send button.

Frustrated - I was. But worse was my attitude. That is not normally me.

I have to admit that this has been my first AMD game type build in a long time. First with DDR3, this chipset, and a PhenomII. Nomenclature of the BIOS, the shear mass of memory timings - which I've never had a need to mess with before (some I've never seen before). Hey, I will admit that most of the builds I've been doing over the last few years were/have been vanilla business rigs.

OK - I was overwhelmed by/with the prospect.

Actually, I really am not normally stupid. I repair CNC machine tools for a living. If I was, the company I work for would not let me anywhere near $1.5 million machines. Normally, I don't hit a wall like this.

This weekend, I start over. Much more calmly. Progress forthcoming.

'scape

 

[deimos3428]

Good luck. I find stepping away from the computer and taking deep breaths helps a lot.

If multiplier overclocking isn't working for you for whatever reason, try doing it via the reference clock. That defeats the purpose of owning a BE, I suppose...but it's worth a shot, right?

 

[Cookie Monster]

It probably has to do with overclocking the HT, ala upping the FSB like how you would OC intel platforms. Phenoms, and Im sure PHII dont benefit from OCing HT, and can cause unstability. What you want is to keep those at stock, and play around with the unlocked multipliers to increase NB/Core clock speeds. I mean its a BE afterall.

 

[Marty502]

Good luck buddy. Tell us how it goes!

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: SunnyD
There's a reason I usually don't overclock - sure the extra performance would be nice, but when stock gives me everything I need without suffering for performance I don't have to worry about how far my CPU/Video Card/Whatever can go before I blow it up or it is deemed to suck.

The reason: irrational fear of overclocking damaging something

The result: stock performance


the Rest of us enjoy getting results like 4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz CPU - which is *drastic* but completely stable

and i understand the OP's FRUSTRATION that lead to this rant

expect one from me next week - as i try to unlock X550 .. and Overclock
- my *first* AMD system
:Q

New AMD build - *budget* high performance gamer for 19x12

There's nothing irrational going on here. I haven't run into anything yet that requires additional performance beyond what I already have. Of course, I'm plenty happy with 40fps, where 43fps isn't going to make much of a difference for the amount of effort to ensure a stable overclock (in some cases).

Now when I get to the point where I need more performance, then I'll consider it. Until then, it's just wasted effort.

i doubt you will get much support from the guys in OC'ing forum

yes it IS irrational FEAR
:lips:

none of us have it and we don't "blow up" our CPUs and DO get a LOT of *free* and extra performance

you can try to minimize your sour grapes all you want because of your trepidation, but we already know better

I wasn't originally going to post a response to Sunny's original post above on the topic because I thought it would be sort of needless, but given how the thread iterated on his post I will go ahead and weigh in on my thoughts.

Folks here who know me know I was a bit of an extreme overclocker for a while, vaporphase with 4GHz Kentsfield in fall of 2006, etc. So my tolerance for risk probably needs no further elaboration.

That said, I run my desktop rig at stock 2.4Ghz (Q6600) at all times in which I am not expecting to do anything that involves heavy crunching for more than a few minutes (15min is about my patience threshold). When I know I am about to get into some heavy backtesting runs or some lengthy encoding/transcoding queues I OC the CPU to 3.3GHz.

Why do I clock my CPU at 2.4GHz instead of running balls-to-the-walls 24/7 all the time? For me it simply has to do with heat (power-consumption as well as ambient temp impact) as well as noise (the higher OC requires higher fanspeed to keep temps in check) combined with the fact that my computing experience is otherwise identical insofar as I can tell whether my chip is clocked at 2.4GHz or 4GHz when I am doing nothing more intensive than the simple office related application stuff that consumes most of my working time.

I would hardly characterize my personal OC'ing preferences as being driven by "irrational FEAR". And unless you happen to know SunnyD intimately well (heh, my wife doesn't even know my OC preferences ), I propose you can't be too sure about the basis of his OC'ing preferences either.

Sunny's is irrational fear
:Q

read his post again



Maybe you are cheap like me - Heck, i use my NOTEBOOK for EVERYTHING - except gaming
--then i oc the hell out of my desktop for a better gaming experience

This IS an overclocking forum isn't it?
- not for the faint hearted
:evil:

Not necessarily. For me, OCing my CPU did nothing but raise my max fps, and avg fps only raised a few. Min didn't budge

Perhaps you were limited by your video card - or it might have been a game that was not very CPU intensive. i get nice *practical/useful* frame rate increases by Overclocking my CPU
[and GPU ]

Enough stirring the pot Apoppin. Continuing along this line of posting can only be called baiting, which isn't tolerated. - Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr

 

[yh125d]

Yes I stated I was bottlenecked by my video card, so there was absolutely no reason to OC since everything else I do these days is just NEFing on AT

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: yh125d
Yes I stated I was bottlenecked by my video card, so there was absolutely no reason to OC since everything else I do these days is just NEFing on AT

well, i am NE .. i mean posting from an Athlon X2/GeForce 8200 M
- it saves energy and i like a small screen for typing
[15.6" - 13x7 ]

my desktop is sitting *off* - the ultimate underclock
- saving energy

 

[Gillbot]

I also love it when people read a few reviews and expect their chips will hit the same numbers, especially with completely different hardware. (ie: different ram, mobo, etc.)

I keep harping this over and over but it's true, everyone assumes all Q6600 G0's are an easy oc to 3.6-4.0GHz and as we found out, the later binned chips struggled to get up to 3.4GHz.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: SunSamurai

4.0GHz from a 2.83GHz is going to net far more than 3FPS. Also, you do not need what you have now, the word youre looking for is want. But i understand your drift, its better to OC later in a CPUs life, becuse even if you brake it, you were going to want to upgrade anyway.

That's my take on it as well. My processor was something like $300 when I bought it, so I didn't increase the voltage for the first two years of owning it. Now, who cares. If it melts, I can buy an even better processor that overclocks higher and uses less power for $50

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Gillbot
I also love it when people read a few reviews and expect their chips will hit the same numbers, especially with completely different hardware. (ie: different ram, mobo, etc.)

I keep harping this over and over but it's true, everyone assumes all Q6600 G0's are an easy oc to 3.6-4.0GHz and as we found out, the later binned chips struggled to get up to 3.4GHz.

is this also happening with the Q-9550 as was speculated a few months ago?

They were pretty awesome OC'ers, known to hit close to 4.0GHz and above .. but now the "S" spec is probably chosen from the center of the wafer, the 'leftovers' may not be so good

 

[Candymancan21]

First computer i have ever built myself was a Athlon 1800+ many years ago i went right into watercooling also i didnt aircool. Been doing it ever since, and i do it because its fun. You can get alot more fps on games also. Overclocking 1k+ mhz on my e8400 yeilds me 10more fps for the min on Crysis, and other games i get as much as 20 more fps. Others tho i get only 3.

I find the challenge's of overclocking exciting not boring. To the OP you probably just dont have a good batch CPU or something. Remember in the past overclocking was mainly based off what stepping you got for AMD. Now its more of a Revision and batch #. My E8400 is a good example of someone being lucky. I have the original CO revision and one of the later batch numbers before the switch to EO. In fact when i bought this cpu it was at the time EO's were just comming out. Luckily i have been able to reach 4400mhz with it, while alot of people with CO's can only reach 3.6-4ghz. I get alot of people asking how i do it but in fact i did nothing diff then they did i just have a good cpu.

Its the same thing with my Opteron 165 its a CCBBE stepping one of the better ones i was able to reach 3100mhz with it, one guy who posted in this thread mentioned his Opteron 165 could only do 2.4ghz. You just have to be lucky mainly. Sometimes steppings and revisions dont mean anything. Some people have EO E8x00's and can barely get to 4ghz.

I dont think iv seen you re-post back tho what voltages are you using ? You have a BFG 550W psu. That might be your problem, i know in my system when i put it through crossfire which uses another 100+ watts of power i actually have to lower my cpu overclock by 350mhz because my PSU cant handel the power load. You have quiet a hefty computer with a power hungry 4890, so i honestly think it could be your powersupply that is holding your overclock back.

Think about it. If crossfire uses another 150 watts for me and i have a 650w psu and that causes me to lower my cpu clock by 350mhz how do you think a 550w psu would handle the system without crossfire? You have 150w less than me, so if i draw that 150w and it causes instability then obviously your 550w psu cant handle the power load of your system once you reach a certain overclock. The higher you overclock the more watts the cpu/gpu uses even if you keep the voltage the same.

I really think its your PSU, TBH nowadays if your want the maximum overclocks on a computer with top of the line stuff i wouldnt recomend anything less than 650w, crossfire 850

 

[Gillbot]

No idea, I haven't really kept up lately with the latest other than the E7x00 chips that people assume will hit 4.4G or so.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21

I really think its your PSU, TBH nowadays if your want the maximum overclocks on a computer with top of the line stuff i wouldnt recomend anything less than 650w, crossfire 850

i think you are way overstating it

Certified Power supplies - recommended by AMD on their site for CrossFire - are only around 600w

i just got a Cooler Master Silent Power 600w for a Quad Core AMD/4870-X2 PC i am building next week = plenty!!

for single card operation:
http://ati.amd.com/products/ce...wersupplies.html#pstop

for CrossFire;
http://game.amd.com/us-en/cros...ex_components.aspx?p=3

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: farscape
Frustrated - I was. But worse was my attitude. That is not normally me.

Well you totally redeemed yourself with that post, we all have our bad days, here's to a fresh restart tomorrow :beer:

 

[Candymancan21]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Candymancan21

I really think its your PSU, TBH nowadays if your want the maximum overclocks on a computer with top of the line stuff i wouldnt recomend anything less than 650w, crossfire 850

i think you are way overstating it

Certified Power supplies - recommended by AMD on their site for CrossFire - are only around 600w

i just got a Cooler Master Silent Power 600w for a Quad Core AMD/4870-X2 PC i am building next week = plenty!!

for single card operation:
http://ati.amd.com/products/ce...wersupplies.html#pstop

for CrossFire;
http://game.amd.com/us-en/cros...ex_components.aspx?p=3

Look at the bold i quoted. Im talking about for overclocking not for running systems on stock... AMD recomendations are for running stock systems. When you overclock your whole system it can use double the amount of power that it would on stock.

Iv already experianced crossfire on a 4850/4890 as you know and with my cpu i had to lower its overclock by 350mhz and lower the voltage i was severly power limited. The 650W TP trio is a high quality powersupply too. Use the 600w you bought and overclock the computer, then put in a 800w psu if you have one and tell me if your overclocks got better. I also noticed overclocking the 4850 in crossfire caused the system to become more unstable, once i lowerd the cpu even more over the 350mhz i was able to overclock the video card more. Both use 12v power and the 12v power is where most of the wattage on your powersupply comes from nowadays.

If you have another explanation for what happend to me im more then willing to hear. According to what you said i shouldnt have to lower my overclocks to use crossfire, but i did, and i have 650w of power with 54A 12v

The OP is using a 550w Powersupply with a 4890/4gb of ram and 720BE. His cpu is not able to overclock to even the average iv seen on these 720's. I honestly think that psu is holding him back.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx
I had my s939 4200+ that only hit 2.4ghz. That's it. Other people on here got up to 2.9ghz. (Eerily similar to Marty502)

Yeah, I had a 4000+ San Diego core that easily did 3.12GHz (did more with lower memory multiplier). Had a bunch of other San Diego core chips (3700+, FX-55) and the worst one was around 2.7GHz, so there's quite a spread.

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: farscape
I AM NOT STUPID - I've been building PCs for 15 years - But this is throwing me for a loop....

OP - with your stated experience it really boggles my mind that you appear to have expected, as others rightly pointed out above, that ALL cpu's would reach comparable OC's and at comparable voltages and temperatures...

Yeah, my initial reaction to reading that was, "if you have to state your number of years worth of experience..." :disgust:

Originally posted by: Denithor
Now, instead of being confrontational here - let's see if there's anything we can do to help you push your OC higher. The suggestion above to isolate to a single stick of memory is a great place to start.

Great idea! Also, lower memory multiplier and HT multiplier (unless overclocking using multiplier).

Originally posted by: Rifterut
Sometimes you get a bad chip

Sometimes you feel like a nut...

If it works at stock speeds, then it isn't "bad." Better terminology would be "Sometimes you get a chip that isn't as overclockable." If you overclock enough, you'll find those. BITD I had purchased three 1.8GHz Opteron 144 chips. One was a good 2.9GHz chip, one was pretty solid 2.7-2.8GHz and the third... well, the third was barely in the low 2GHz range (2.1-2.4GHz, varied). Yeah, it was like the retarded half brother of the other chips. I tested using same parts too, so it wasn't as if my parts or techniques were bad. However, I got a pounding in these forums with a number of people telling me that I must be stupid or have lousy parts. Made me feel really happy, I must say. :|

Originally posted by: farscape
I wish to apologize for my rant...

Frustrated - I was. But worse was my attitude.

Thanks, Yoda. Apology accepted and don't feel so bad. I, too, can throw around the "I have XYZ years of experience" but I never, EVER do that (besides on a resume). I'm always learning new things. Heck, today I learned how to use a Sun Moon SM-8800 load tester for power supplies. Woot!

Years of experience means squat in the computer industry where new technologies comes out all the time and generations are measured in months. Experience doesn't help us DO new stuff, but it does help us LEARN new stuff.

I am reminded of a site I visited years ago called something like webjourneymen. Their philosophy was that there are no webmasters because we are always learning new stuff.

Originally posted by: Gillbot
No idea, I haven't really kept up lately with the latest other than the E7x00 chips that people assume will hit 4.4G or so.

Really? That's a crappy OC for an E7X00 series chip because I've seen PROOF via a screenshot of one doing easily 5.5GHz+ with 1.475v on air. But seriously I'm soooo upset at my own E7400 because I can barely get 4.8GHz on 1.58v running really hot.

Not really.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
Look at the bold i quoted. Im talking about for overclocking not for running systems on stock... AMD recomendations are for running stock systems. When you overclock your whole system it can use double the amount of power that it would on stock.

This might be true if you're doing liquid nitrogen overclocking. On my E6600 the difference between 2.4ghz stock and 3.0ghz overclock is 10 watts, according to my UPS. I'm basing that on OCCT's PSU test.

The OP is using a 550w Powersupply with a 4890/4gb of ram and 720BE. His cpu is not able to overclock to even the average iv seen on these 720's. I honestly think that psu is holding him back.

But according to Anand's 4890 overclock article (link), the stock configuration was just under 290W. Even if he overclocked that 720 to the point of it needing water cooling, the PSU should still be adequate.


I don't know if this applies to computers, but a lot of electrical equipment (breakers, conductors, generators) are intended to run at 80% of what they say. For example, a "15A" breaker will actually trip at 12A. If this same kind of lying applies to computer power supplies, it should be reasonable to expect 440W (80%) of constant power out of a 550W supply. Even if his 720BE was using twice the rated power, it should still be ok.

 

[Candymancan21]

Im not sure if this means anything, but in GPU-TOOL during load its telling me the 4890 is using 48-50A of power and on idle its 2A. Maybe thats the problem ?

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
Im not sure if this means anything, but in GPU-TOOL during load its telling me the 4890 is using 48-50A of power and on idle its 2A. Maybe thats the problem ?

wtf rail is it connected to? 50A * 12V = 600W. I can't imagine a single 4890 taking that much power. Maybe if you had 3 of them in crossfire....

 

[richierich1212]

yes farscape please keep us updated