Could you please post your 45 NM Core Temp Factory VID, Please?

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Just like it says, if you are the lucky owner of a new 45 NM chip, please Down Load the newest version of Core Temp, and list here what your VID is, please? Just doing the usual research to see whats up with the lower VIDs. It's already interesting, QX7700, the big boys, get a 45 NM VID of 1.2500?? That's a standard VID.

Most 45 NM chips should be between 1.1000 and 1.2500.

The faster QX series may go a bit higher, and that kinda sucks if they do, because that means intel just ands VID, now that it has the new chip and old chip standard VIDs to choose from.

Guess they wanna do the over clocking for you, and sell it like a faster chip. Obviously if you start high, you get less voltage to over clock with. I am hoping to be proven wrong! That would be great, and mean that intel isn't just being tricky!

ALSO!!

Please just list your chip type, factory VID, and current over clock and LOADED voltage if applicable!

Please don't spam here. This is serious research, believe it or not.

Think it isn't? Look up my Q6x00 series threads on VID and take a peek at what VID can do, if you actually have a range to work with. Because the VIDs varied GREATLY in that series, you could simply get lucky and get a low VID chip, like 1.2000, and you can OC berserkly with it. 3.6 @ 1.312 volts and a bit lower, as I didnt fine tune it. Not bad for a 50% OC. As opposed to a 1.3250 VID that needs 1.45 or more volts to get 3.6 Ghz.

Thanks alot in advance! And thanks for not spamming!

I will gather the data after enough people have replied and we can keep our fingers and circuits crossed that the VID ranges for the chips, especially the faster normal series rangers Greatly! That means you have a shot at a good chip, and not only the bad ones.

--Lupi!
 

YourGodOnEarth

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
48
0
18,530
Q9450 rev. C1
2.66gHz stock
8x multiplier (locked)
VID 1.2375v
S-Spec.: SLAWR

OC'd to 3.20gHz with core voltage set to 1.3025
(*all 4 cores at 100% brings it down to 1.272v)

OC'd @ 3.54gHz needs a core voltage of ~1.4165

Asus p5e mobo
 

pcgamer12

Distinguished
May 1, 2008
1,089
0
19,280
My Proc isn't 45nm. I'm still posting it though,

E4600
VID 1.3250v
12x multiplier (6-12)

Currently overclocked (8x 333 = 2,664 mhz)
from (12x 200 = 2,400 mhz) using 1.3250v w/o stability issues.


ga-p35-ds3l rev. 2.0
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
I need lots more! Like 50 of each speed! Come on, guys! You all can fork over the cash, I will collect the Data, and then know what one to get for me!!

:)

Hehehe!

Naw, but I really need to see alot more!!

--Lupi
 

shadowthor

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2008
1,128
0
19,280
Q9450 Stepping C1
VID = 1.25 V
Running 3.6ghz (Default speed 2.66ghz)
Vcore with LLC not enabled 1.40 volts, load 1.36.
Vcore with LLC enabled 1.36 volts. Have it one notch lower but one core crapped out in 16hrs.
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Awesome, thanks alot. That right there told me something. That's the VID of the two QX7700s, and as long as it isnt the highest one, thats good to see a q9450, the little guys bigger bro get the same VID. (Lil' guy being q9300)

No need to reply, thanks!

:)

--Lupi
 

shadowthor

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2008
1,128
0
19,280
I think personally the VID for the Q9450 I have is the worse to get. It seems to be the highest, might be Intel setting the VID higher to screw with us, now that Intel knows ppl like lower VID when overclocking.
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
If that was the case, then you'd get a good OC without changing the VCore.

The closer it is to what it actually needs, the less you can OC before having to raise VCore, so that would be a good indication.

So if you go from default 2.66 to like 3.2-3.3 it's not that bad a chip, though its a high VID. If you get beyond that, it's getting more than it should at that VID! And you can suspect that intel may just make em high for GP, since it wouldn't technically hurt it at stock, and they'd get their 3 years for warranty.

Try it and see. Place it at 1.2500 and Find your highest 1 hour prime stable speed with the same VCore.

Just think, if you get only like 200 Mhz before it craps out, it's just $hitty, and no more need to speculate, hehe!

:)

--Lupi
 

espslyxerx2

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2007
101
0
18,690
Thanks for the thread, Im assuming I triggered this haha.

E3110

VID = 1.1875v

OC'ed to 4.23 ghz with 1.375 Volts.


Im at work so I cant check load voltage. I will edit my post when I get home.


Thanks again Lupi.
 

YourGodOnEarth

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
48
0
18,530
Hmmm...
I went back into my BIOS after you suggested try to find out what the max OC a person could get at 1.25v, and figured I had everything to gain by trying it.

I was OC'd to 3.4 (8x425) and had to incrementally bump my core voltage to 1.3315 for it to be stable (that was a day before you started this thread).

I reduced the voltage down to 1.25v (left everything alone except making sure RAM voltage was still set to 2.1v and timings relaxed to 5-5-5-15 for running at DDR2-850, which was also done a few days prior, and incrementally adjusted until stable under load), rebooted and it's been under full load for hours at a time and just chugs along.

Under full load, the CPU voltage drops to 1.192v (flutters between 1.192v and 1.2v, but weighted more to 1.192v)

It's actually stable for me this time at the same 3.4gHz, and running much cooler thanks to the voltage reduction (idles at 35c, maxes out at 48c).

I don't know what changed in the universe between a few days ago and today, but I'm liking it so far. :)

I'm going to run the heck out of it like this and let you know if it stays stable.
Then I'll find it's max@1.25v and let you know.

Thanks for starting to collect the info.
Will be very interesting to see if any patterns develop for the 45nm CPU's.
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
Ohhhh! A good VID! I believe the lowest natural VID may be 1.1000, which would mean that you have only 1 VID higher than the best one.

1.25000 looks like it's gonna be the top one, so far. And remember, 1.2000 and higher is Normal VID range, so that means for the QX7700 types, they just used the highest VID to get 3.2 or whatever from it.

But what we need to see is a QX7700 that has a lower than 1.2500, and lower than 1.1500 would make one hell of an excellent over clocking chip.

The problem is this, for people buying them, its 1000 bucks or some trash!! And if they are all 1.2500 then they all would overclock to the same speeds at the same voltages.

In other words, not worth it for someone wanting to over clock, because it's technically just a factory OC chip already.

because he has a 1.1125 VID he easily obtains that speed, and alot more. Same with the q6x00 series, that I already studied, hehe!

In other words, for the OCer, if the budget chips VID varies greatly, like it's appearing that it does, and the bigger chips VID doesnt vary much, then they are not worth the cash, period. You will not obtain a bigger OC by much for the money.

So that makes the only good chip for overclocking the Little ones in the series. No q9300!

if we get some low VID QX7700s then that will mean that it is indeed worth it to get one, hoping for that LOW VID, and you would be in OC heaven if you manage to get one of the exceptionally low ones!

Thanks you all. Please try not to add a normal conversation in here, if you get good info, start a thread, I am a poster hog, so a good title grabs me every time!

Thanks, and keep up with those VIDs! Make sure Speed Step and EIST are disabled if you are checking while idle. For you checking loaded voltage and reporting their OCs, no need, because it would jump up while loaded, and obviously you'd know something was amiss! (Only old core temps have that problem, from what I can tell.)

THANKS!!!

So far, the 9450 looks the best, just need VIDs of the other ones. But 1.1125 is great!! I am very happy to see it vary.

--Lupi
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
The 1400$ chip. Please PM me or start a new thread for off topic comments! It's the "biggest" chip you can buy now. 3.2 Ghz, 400 x 8 FSB standard... etc.

There is now a 7750, but its only for the Skulltrail junk.

Come on, people, more VIDs!

--Lupi
 

Try QX9700 :)
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
You guys are great! Google for QX7700 and you get them too! What the hell is the real chip?

Hmmm, they seem to costs the most, too.

--Lupi
 

aznguy0028

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2007
887
0
18,990
Q9450 @ 3.2ghz (400x8)

VID: 1.2125

and holy god level101...your VID is teh roxxor. T_T jealous i am! haha. grats though.

Bios Voltage at : 1.2315 completely stable.
 

Dopekitten

Distinguished
May 10, 2008
161
0
18,680
Q9450 @ 3.6ghz (stable) w/ 1.2725 V
Multi x8
VID: 1.25 V
Batch: L817A183

Also, on a side note, if you are going to get a Q9450, i suggest a P45 chipset aswell. Most people get a FSB wall at 450 FSB+, however i can boot at 3.8, and even 4.0ghz into windows. However, i have a "bum" core, (Core 1) and it fails prime within the first minute. Very annoying, i had the rest run at 3.8ghz with 1.3625 V for an hour, then i quit. I swear. Even tweaking VTT/GTL voltages doesn't do much.

In any case, it seems like a P45 chipset is a good idea, i've got the P5Q-E, no complaints so far.

Also, if anybody has any tips on getting my "bum" core to cooperate, that'd be great =P
 

Lupiron

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2008
1,711
0
19,780
The only suggestion I have is more VCore first, with your VID, hehe, the highest, I am rather amazed that you can get 3.6 Ghz at such a low voltage to begin with.

That could be why it fails, and that could also be why you get 3.6 Ghz at all, on 3 cores!

Also, I assume you are using small FFTs for testing? because if not, that explains your low voltage too!

I am quite interested in your testing and such.

The other guys need over 1.35 for 3.6 Ghz with the same VID. And that is what I would expect you to need as well!

:)

Gimmie info!!

--Lupi