• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

E8400 To Lap or not to Lap

Clairvoyant

Clairvoyant

Clairvoyant

Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
6,496
Location
Torbay, Devon, UK
Hi I have an E8400 @ 450 x 9 = 4050

VID 1.225

Bios 1.405
Idle 1.390
Orthos/Prime 1.36/7

Core Temp 0.99 Real Temp 2.5
Idle Temps C1= 46 C2= 54 C1= 32 C2= 41

Load Temps C1= 64 C2= 69 C1= 54 C2= 60

Now do I try and reseat the TRUE or Lap the E8400 or leave it. Am I likely to get more out of this CPU.

Im happy with 4 GHz, but more would be nice. But If I push more I think my RAM will limit me a bit (DDR800 @ 1080)

When the Board is a year old and out of warrenty I will see if I can do the Vdroop mod.

What would you do if it was you.
 
I wouldn't be happy putting more volts than you already have through your chip, due to the degradation issues with 45nm chips.

If you want it to run cooler, then by all means lap your HS and CPU, but I wouldn't then think "it's still nice and cool, time for more volts" because north of 1.4V is very dodgy territory with these chips.

I think you should be happy with your 4ghz myself, that's pretty damned quick.
 
Last edited:
none of those temps are really an issue so I don't really see the point.

That said, I'd probably lap the cpu just because in my experience intel heatspreaders are so badly made.

Suppose it might let you run the fans lower?? Although you normally only get a big difference at load when lapped.
 
I would lap the TRUE before lapping the CPU.

A 20c idle difference points more towards the heatsink than the CPU.
 
Cob said:
I would lap the TRUE before lapping the CPU.

A 20c idle difference points more towards the heatsink than the CPU.
Click to expand...

20c does seem a lot, I'm only putting 1.225v through my chip atm but the difference between idle and load is only ever 10c.

EDIT: His sig says they TRUE is already lapped, try a reseat!
 
Is your ram set to 1:1? if no you could squeeze a little more maybe....

But as this is about heat you could just see what the temps are like case open and next to a cold windows (so middle of the night sort of test when is about 4 degrees out side) and if its the same then it potentially could be best to give it a go (if you want more than 4ghz...)
 
Cob said:
Looks like you could eat your cornflakes from the dish on that IHS.
Click to expand...

roflquote :P

With such a massive temperature differential across the cores, I'd have lapped it already ;)

If you can make the highest temp match the lowest temp (which should theoretically happen if the surface was perfectly flat), then you'd be looking at a 15 degrees drop, which is shocking!

lap it, quickz0rs!
 
I don't understand the point of lapping. Surely even if the base of a cpu is even slightly rounded the heat conduction doesnt limit the cooling ability to the extent that it reduces clocks.
 
miceormen said:
I don't understand the point of lapping. Surely even if the base of a cpu is even slightly rounded the heat conduction doesnt limit the cooling ability to the extent that it reduces clocks.
Click to expand...

yes it can, the concavesness (is that a word?) stops parts of the heatspreader even touching the heatsink meaning you can have huge differences in temp.

5 to 10 degrees load can make a noticeable difference to a clock.
 
I would have lapped it for sure if it was the old 65nm cpu but the new 45nm one is quite "fragile" so you are better leave it alone IMO in case you need to RMA it :p

4Ghz is a nice number as well and I doubt you could push it a lot further after lapping
 
Regarding coretemp

Now you have coretemp beta and coretemp 0.99 final.

One reports the VID as 1.225(coretemp 0.99 final) and the other reports the VID as 1.1125(coretemp beta).

Which one is correct?
 
I would like to know which has the right tjmax.

But ken1307 is right Im not gonna lap it as I could not afford another £100+ if the chip went pop.
 
I'd just leave it as it is... 4Ghz is a nice overclock imo

I'm really confused about what temperature tool to believe, Real Temp 2.5, Coretemp or Everest :S They all report slightly different temps :p
 
Reality|Bites said:
Regarding coretemp

Now you have coretemp beta and coretemp 0.99 final.

One reports the VID as 1.225(coretemp 0.99 final) and the other reports the VID as 1.1125(coretemp beta).

Which one is correct?
Click to expand...

According to the release notes for 0.99, they VID reading from 45nm chips has been corrected so I'd say it's 1.225v. Mine went up to 1.15v & that's what Realtemp says too so I'm inclined to think that it's correct.

Vir said:
I'd just leave it as it is... 4Ghz is a nice overclock imo

I'm really confused about what temperature tool to believe, Real Temp 2.5, Coretemp or Everest :S They all report slightly different temps :p
Click to expand...

Not sure about Everest but the difference between Coretemp & Realtemp is that the first sets the Tjunction @ 105c & Realtemp sets it at 95c, the difference in temps when I use both to monitor my temps is exactly 10c.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom