Editor's Corner: Overclocking Core i7

[cangelini]

After discovering Intel's Overspeed Protection in yesterday's first-look at Core i7's performance, we're back to set the record straight on the overclocking headroom of the flagship 965 Extreme and entry-level Core i7 920.

Editor's Corner: Overclocking Core i7 : Read more

 

[dirtmountain]

Thanks for this clarification, it's appreciated.

 

[kyeana]

+1. Good article, way to clear up some of the confusion regarding overclocking the i7. I'm looking forward to actually see how far these processors can be pushed.

 

[DFGum]

Good follow up article to clear up misconceptions
Also provides some good information for making purchase decisions.
TY for this article.

 

[arkadi]

Grate news, i was about to change my rig with new q9550 and i planed to OC it to catchup with "non over clockble 920, but now i think i will wait few weeks.That follow up was just it time for me.

 

[randomizer]

1.52V... you can almost hear those 45nm transistors screaming.

You mentioned turning off the Thermal Monitor on the ASUS board. Wouldn't you also be disabling thermal protection by doing this? Hopefully the current limiter is not directly related to the Thermal Monitor, since there's no reason you'd normally want (or need) to disable that.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Thanks for the fix. I knew it was there but the ability to disable it seemed like an option because from everything I have read it was meant for enviroments where you wouldn't want to exceed the 130w TDP.

@randomizer, no I do not think it is. The Thermal Monitor is probably the same (hopefully better) DTS that is not linked to it. That wouldn't really make any sense to allow to turn off the Overspeed if it was linked to Thermal Monitoring. I am sure that the CPU will still throttle if it gets too hot, say over 70c.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Thanks for the fix. I knew it was there but the ability to disable it seemed like an option because from everything I have read it was meant for enviroments where you wouldn't want to exceed the 130w TDP.@randomizer, no I do not think it is. The Thermal Monitor is probably the same (hopefully better) DTS that is not linked to it. That wouldn't really make any sense to allow to turn off the Overspeed if it was linked to Thermal Monitoring. I am sure that the CPU will still throttle if it gets too hot, say over 70c.[/citation]

Well, that's the thing, right? If the two capabilities are linked, would you actually NEED thermal throttling to kick on, since you're being limited by both power and amperage anyway? I never saw temps go past 57C at 1.5V+ as it kept pushing frequency back down? Interesting though at the least...

 

[randomizer]

What if your fan failed or your heatsink fell off (ok that last one is rare but still...)? Your temps would skyrocket, and if you disabled the TM, you'd have a toasty CPU pretty quick.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]What if your fan failed or your heatsink fell off (ok that last one is rare but still...)? Your temps would skyrocket, and if you disabled the TM, you'd have a toasty CPU pretty quick.[/citation]

The price to overclock beyond Intel's Overspeed Protection on ASUS' board--at least for the moment--it seems.

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]randomizer[/nom]What if your fan failed or your heatsink fell off (ok that last one is rare but still...)? Your temps would skyrocket, and if you disabled the TM, you'd have a toasty CPU pretty quick.[/citation]
On the other hand this may disable the TM. Thermal Runaway. Temp of semiconductor goes up, resistance goes down, current goes up and the 100A limit kicks in.
On the other other hand - that does sound a bit dodgy, hopefully Intel have left thermal throttling in place

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]stuart72[/nom]On the other hand this may disable the TM. Thermal Runaway. Temp of semiconductor goes up, resistance goes down, current goes up and the 100A limit kicks in.[/citation]
Isn't the whole point of this to remove the current limiter? I understand what you're trying to say. If you disable the thermal monitor, you lose thermal protection, but you also lose the overcurrent limiter. A double edged sword it seems.

 

[Guest]

Thnx a lot Tom's. I really appreciate your concern for us gamer's on a tighter budget. A Core i7 920 running at a stable 3,8ghz and costing less than 300 dollars will indeed make the switch to the x58 platform much more appealing.

 

[zodiacfml]

I knew there was a clarification in all reviews coming out for the i7. Everything was rushed for the review making a lot things not clear.

Anyways, the entry level core i7 is really great for enthusiasts doing their work, overclock it then every rendering and coding is done half the time from a system they bought last year, at least.

 

[Guest]

1.45V or higher is not longterm vcore - High-K based gate insulation is good, but not so good. Transistors will start dying and the cascade failure is then just a moment. How long could you possibly run CPU with those settings? Few weeks? Months?

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]xenobius[/nom]1.45V or higher is not longterm vcore - High-K based gate insulation is good, but not so good. Transistors will start dying and the cascade failure is then just a moment. How long could you possibly run CPU with those settings? Few weeks? Months?[/citation]
Doesn't retail CPU comes with 3 years warranty?

 

[Guest]

Doesn't retail CPU comes with 3 years warranty?

I believe it applies only to the work with nominal parameters.

 

[cobra420]

i agree . if you overclock you void your warranty . i think it even says that in that wad of paper that comes with your cpu that nobody reads lol

 

[skywalker9952]

Will Intel let you keep your 920 so you can do a more long term overclocking test? Just keep it @ 3.8 and 1.45 and let us know if it dies in the next 6 months to a year. Not that your ES will necessarily be a good representation of production chips, but if xenobius is right and that high of a vcore will destroy you CPU within weeks to months, your chip will show side effects well before anybody in the community's because you have at least a month head start on us. It could give us a good idea of where to maintain an overclocking sweet spot.

 

[skywalker9952]

That was an excellent article thank you for the clarification.

 

[scook9]

To void the warranty, you have to run outside the intel specified frequency (133 here) OR outside the specified voltage (aint seen it official, but I suspect 1.3625V like all their other 45 nm chips.

But that isn't what caught my interest here, you used a TRUE? Thats a socket 775 heatsink, and this is a socket 1366 board, please share.

 

[anartik]

Indeed... great job at clearing up the confusion. I'll definitely be interested to see what the relationship is between power and temp throttling as they manifest board to board. Ideally I would like to to be able to disable the power limits and keep thermal throttling in place. The tjunction suspend at ~100C probably saved my Core 2 on several early clocking attempts running Prime.

 

[jckrieger]

Thanks for the update. I always worry about reviews that are unclear, as many of the readers on this site do not think for themselves.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]scook9[/nom]To void the warranty, you have to run outside the intel specified frequency (133 here) OR outside the specified voltage (aint seen it official, but I suspect 1.3625V like all their other 45 nm chips.But that isn't what caught my interest here, you used a TRUE? Thats a socket 775 heatsink, and this is a socket 1366 board, please share.[/citation]

Yes, as a result of Thermalright's design, it's able to bundle a different mounting bracket with the Ultra 120 and immediately support LGA1366 processors. If you have an old one, it won't work, but if you buy a new one, the necessary mounting hardware should be included if it says "LGA1366-compatible."

 

[saintones]

Why not use a software monitor or even a hardware monitor to watch your heat if your going to overclock and take of the saftey(s) in place...