CPU Vids

[Guest2]

Can coretemp reported vids on Q6600 chips differ from motherboard to motherboard? A while back I tried a Q6600 on an Nvidia based board and then an Intel one and the VID stayed the same.

I bought one that was supposed to be 1.265, got it fitted and is reported as 1.35. The seller had this to say

"Hi. Like you asked me to I used the core temp program to find the vid of the chip. It stated 1.26 on my old board. This board was an xfx 780i. Would this make any difference? I don't know! In real temp it said its lowest was 1.25 and highest as 1.32 like you have said. But I have given you the one from core temp which seemed right being inbetween the low and high"

With VID there is no going inbetween any low or high? Do you think the seller has possibly got mixed up with the voltage as it lowers and increases based on load? I would like to think this instead of him trying to sell me a higher VID on purpose, in the hope that I do not find out.

 

[Guest2]

no-one have a cpu vid then, or know if they change?

 

[Guest2]

Based on his claim that Real Temp went from 1.25 - 1.32... sounds like they were looking at current voltage instead of the VID

Yeh thats what I think he has done

It clearly says 'VID' in coretemp. It also says core voltage, but I didnt ask for this

 

[Guest2]

What you have to decide now is, do you think the seller was mistaken (noob), or a chancer, if a noob, you may want to let them off, perhaps a part refund?
If the latter, then you should be looking to return for a Full refund.

I had a new case arrive at the same time so when I got home I spend a good hour and half lapping the CPU before installing it. Once installed I noticed it was 1.35vid and not 1.26. It wouldnt boot at 3.6ghz as my other one does with 1.56 volts in load. I increased upped the vcore a bit and it booted and primed for 5 mins at 3.2ghz

So, viable options are to either send it back for a full refund, however as its lapped he could think I am sending back a different chip.

Either way, I will probably be leaving something negative in feedback stating he send me an incorrect product as its been a waste of my time

 

[Guest2]

Ouch! you lapped it before you even tested it was working?
Shame, looks like your stuck with it or sell it on, hopefully not lose to much in selling it on?

Yeh, I presumed it would be what he said it would be. Like buying a ferrari and getting all the clothes and then a metro being delivered to me! (not that I would ever buy ferrari clothes, or any other make of car)

More annoyed at the seller, I presume hes not a numpty but cant see how he didnt notice 'VID'

Dont think he is a business seller, it was on here

 

[Guest2]

Maybe give the option for a £25 refund based on the fact its not the VID stated, or ask for a full refund?

I dont like leaving negative but this has already wasted my time. If neither of these are met then maybe I will

 

[Guest2]

VID will be reported lower when speedstep (or EIST, C1E, or whatever kicks in on these 775 boards) is downclocking the CPU.

My 1.2125 VID Q6600 reports as 1.1525 when speedstep drops the multi to 6x.

Of course, you're only really interested in the VID at proper stock, not when speedstep is downclocking your chip.

I have just enabled speedstep, EIST and C1E, booted my computer and it clearly shows the VID in Core Temp as 1.35. It does not move when you enable C1E and EIST

edit - I received a couple of replies from the seller...


Seller - I'm not taking it back as you have lapped it. Sorry no way! I will give you a tenner refund. That's my only offer on that I'm afraid. I did what you asked. Core temp etc. Its a genuine mistake. And seeing as though you have in all damaged it by lapping it I think it then should be your responsibility to move it on. Stick it on the bay! Check my trust out its all positive all my transactions have come in the last couple of months really and there is no suspicion of any dodgy dealings there. Its up to you mate but my stance is quite clear. You have been very honest about the lapping which I appreciate. Its one of those things I'm afraid.

My Reply - Yeah, I understand about not wanting it back because its been lapped. Would
you be willing to refund £15 then I could at least try and get £70 for it
(plus about £6 in fees) meaning I would have only lost a few pounds. I
know you have good trust and it will have been a genuine mistake

Seller - No ten it is! I'm trusting you here that my chip is actually what you say it is! I would have taken it back for a full refund if it hadn't been lapped. I run a multi million turnover supermarket so I know about customer service but in my eyes the chip is damaged now so I wash my hands of it.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Me - please sent £10 paypal gift to .......
I will leave feedback after the money has gone in

Seller - As you can see after reading your thread I'm vindicated so no payment I'm afraid! Read strumpusplunkets post. Sorry Alex but I knew what I sent you was correct. I'm glad I just read it or I would have beern a tenner lighter.

Me - I have just enabled speedstep, EIST and C1E, booted my computer and it
clearly shows the VID in Core Temp as 1.35.

The more emails I recieve from him, the more I feel that he has sold me a chip with a higher VID when he knew about it.

 

[Guest2]

Lapping wouldnt make any difference to the VID. The VID is build into the chip.

I know I should have tested it before lapping but at the end of the day I still bought it presuming it was 1.26 VID and not 1.35

 

[Guest2]

Exactly, who runs their Q6600 at 1.6ghz or 2.1ghz??

The stock setting of the Q6600 is 266 x 9. This will show the the normal VID, not 266 x 6. I never bought an underclocked CPU!

 

[Guest2]

The 2 screenshots above are of 2 different versions of coretemp which does not help. Speedstep/eist/c1e are all disabled in bios. Depending on your motherboard it will be in different places, on mine its in advanced

I read about a known bug in 0.99.6 too

**The seller is basing not refunding me ANY money at all solely on this post**

Well, not entirely sure which of the default features it was on my BIOS (assuming it was the speedstep), but when I first booted up with this CPU after clearing CMOS, I saw 1.1525 VID in Coretemp, and my processor was being downclocked as well, with a 6x multiplier at idle.

On doing my usual pre-overclocking routine of disabling EIST, C1E, Executive Disable Bit, Virtualisation, Limit CPUID, it then showed 1.2125 VID (which is what the seller advertised it as) and normal stock clocks of 2.4GHz at idle.

Edit: seems to be confirmed in this post from elsewhere, too.
Fuller explanation here.

1. speedstep should be on if you are overclocking and it was sold saying it was overclocked to 3.2ghz
2. bug in core-temp 0.99.6.
3. 9 x 266 is the stock multi and speed of the Q6600. not 6

Its not just about the £10. Its email replies like "Sorry Alex but I knew what I sent you was correct" that are annoying. It was clearly not correct at all.

If he had said something on the lines of "Sorry Alex, I read the core voltage from coretemp, but cannot refund you because it has now been lapped and you could be sending me back a different chip" I would be a lot less annoyed

edit - also that random guff about his owning a multimillion pound supermarket so knows about good customer service

 

[Guest2]

IMO because you have modified the chip and voided any warranty it might have had the problem is yours, not the sellers. If it was tested before you lapped it then you would have been able to get a refund as seller has stated.

I don't believe a partial refund should be given either.

Test it before doing anything. Live and learn and move on.

I know that...read above post

 

[Guest2]

This is even more irritating, knowing that he knew the VID and sold me a duffer. A quick search finds this...

My old Q6600 had a horribly high vid like your chip and the highest stable clock I got out of mine was the 3.4 your reporting. Personally I wouldnt move those voltages anymore as they are set very high for my liking but I do remember having mine set around 1.45v. I think you have done well with the clock you have achieved. I ended up wanting more ( as you always do ) and I ended up getting a Q9550 which I can clock to 3.8 stable but have it backed off to 3.6

from this thread, post #6

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18110064

After reading this I will be leaving negative feedback unless I get some sort of refund - It sounds like he knew it had a high or 'horribly high' VID. I will of course say in the feedback about lapping it before testing (which i know was my fault)

 

[Guest2]

Wounded. The mans clearly a ****, it happens. On the bright side, he may have just been really crap at overclocking, 3.4ghz out of a q6600 certainly suggests that. I reckon negative feedback then clock it anyway. I stick by high vid <> bad overclocking.

Sorry to hear it man

Yeah I think you are right. Dont know why he's being a tool about it for the sake of £10, as he has positive feedbacks (until now) Maybe he just thought he could get one over on me and I wouldnt be bothered

Ive stuck my old Q6600 back in that has a vid of 1.3125, so its at 3.6 again

 

[Guest2]

Give the new one a try, it takes a good couple of hours to lap the damned things so it's a shame not to see what it can do.

I'd guess he's been caught out knowing less than he'd like to believe he does, so pride is getting in the way of common sense. He does have a point r.e. lapping, loads of people seem to think that's a bad thing to do to a processor. This neatly reinforces the ignorance theory, good odds it was a "honest mistake" (until I read your link).

I did try it but my current one is lapped and sits at 3.6ghz

I tried the one I bought for a couple of hours but was not stable at 3.6ghz. It was at 3.4, which by all accounts is better than why he was able to get it to. Lapping seemed to have helped (if most do, when i did it i could see it was rounded as it left metal on the middle part of the chip)

 

[Guest2]

The one thing that people need to ask the question is, is this" Is Guest telling the truth?" I have no proof and he cant supply any that the chip he claims is mine is actually the one I sent and for that major reason after a lot of thought is why I wont offer any type of refund.

Couldnt you say the same thing about any second hand product that you sell?

 

[Guest2]

feedback left. Think I have been fair and honest. No loss, I have since sold it on for the same price