Soldato
joke man. 
Poll: I5 - Lets Get Clocking!!!
- Thread starter rjk
- Start date
I wondered when the chilled PC lot would show up
you called?
whats all the fuss about?
i tell you what, if it wasn't for the fact I had 6gb of ram sat here I would probably be after an i5..
had a play with the 860 again today
the second one i used...
still no higher than 3.9 stable
it benches but wont pass prime. im starting to wonder what im doing wrong
anyway
tried the geil and the Gskill 2000mhz/2133mhz kits
both hit 2000mhz with a 750
i tried to hit 2133 on the geil and it wasnt happening on either the 750 or 860
ran it slack, ran it tight - nothing
i got the timings of the geil down a bit but not by much
the gskill is better for that, dropped to cas7 and all was good
its really just a personal preference issue i think
there really is nothing in it in my opinion, the geil goes a little further [but we are only talking mhz here]
i have cinebench results as requested coming monday for the following
I7 920 on a ud5 with 1600mhz patriot
I7 920 on a classified with three sticks of Geil 2000Mhz
Phenom II X4 955 on a crosshair III with 1600mhz dominator
Phenom II X3 720 on a 790fx UD4P with 1600mhz XMS3
I5 750 on a p55 deluxe with geil 2000mhz
I7 860 on a p55 evo with gskill 2000mhz
i may do a run with a 775 core2 chip if i can find a q6600 or something similar to bench
the second one i used...
still no higher than 3.9 stable
it benches but wont pass prime. im starting to wonder what im doing wrong
anyway
tried the geil and the Gskill 2000mhz/2133mhz kits
both hit 2000mhz with a 750
i tried to hit 2133 on the geil and it wasnt happening on either the 750 or 860
ran it slack, ran it tight - nothing
i got the timings of the geil down a bit but not by much
the gskill is better for that, dropped to cas7 and all was good
its really just a personal preference issue i think
there really is nothing in it in my opinion, the geil goes a little further [but we are only talking mhz here]
i have cinebench results as requested coming monday for the following
I7 920 on a ud5 with 1600mhz patriot
I7 920 on a classified with three sticks of Geil 2000Mhz
Phenom II X4 955 on a crosshair III with 1600mhz dominator
Phenom II X3 720 on a 790fx UD4P with 1600mhz XMS3
I5 750 on a p55 deluxe with geil 2000mhz
I7 860 on a p55 evo with gskill 2000mhz
i may do a run with a 775 core2 chip if i can find a q6600 or something similar to bench
Soldato
why presume your doing something wrong, when ever theres a new chip/socket released, the initial stepping is allways inconsistent in it's results is it not.
Thanks for the update!
I don't think your doing anything wrong, I mean its a brand new plaform, new processor etc so give yourself time to adjust. I suspect you got your LGA1366 overclocking head on and maybe not considering the LGA1156 Lynnfield i7 860 to be a different beast, which from everything I'm reading it is!
I'm personally more interested in the memory overclocking than pure CPU GHz so appreciate your feedback on that side of things, from what you said before and what I've been reading DDR3-1600 appears to be the sweetspot and is supported out-the-box on a stock 860 system.
I don't know much about the older LGA1366 Bloomfield i7 but am learning about it through proxy while reading up on Lynnfield, I see something called uncore which was adjustable on the Bloomfield but is fixed on the Lynnfield, is this causing you a problem?
On the 860 what BLCK and Memory multiplier are you using when trying to get that Geil running at 2133MHz?
uncore is basically everything on the chip that isnt a core [easiest way of explaining it]
most of the time its best left on auto or double the memory speed with bloomfields
the asus boards i have used have had a rudimentary uncore feature but its kind of locked down.
its not a feature that would put you at any major disadvantage imo
its only for high clocks [4.4+ on 1366] that it becomes a beneficial option
like i said before, my reasoning behind the memory reccomendation is only because its best bang for buck, but also works well when you run bclk up to 200mhz
im kind of getting to the opinion that the price of the 860 makes it a bit of a waste of time as you start heading towards 920 money
cant remember what settings i used [it was a quick run]
i know i put the bclk up to 182X22 then ran a multi for 2000mhz memory
the stock run was just a divider change up to 2133 and an IMC voltage increase until memtest became stable
most of the time its best left on auto or double the memory speed with bloomfields
the asus boards i have used have had a rudimentary uncore feature but its kind of locked down.
its not a feature that would put you at any major disadvantage imo
its only for high clocks [4.4+ on 1366] that it becomes a beneficial option
like i said before, my reasoning behind the memory reccomendation is only because its best bang for buck, but also works well when you run bclk up to 200mhz
im kind of getting to the opinion that the price of the 860 makes it a bit of a waste of time as you start heading towards 920 money
cant remember what settings i used [it was a quick run]
i know i put the bclk up to 182X22 then ran a multi for 2000mhz memory
the stock run was just a divider change up to 2133 and an IMC voltage increase until memtest became stable
Associate
I'll look forward to the results of that
Soldato
Glad l went i7 920, still KING of the hill.
Thanks rjkoneill, that's a real close shout between the two Oct threaded chips although the results are a bit scewed due to mismatch in clocks. You would expect the 920's extra channel of memory to be a lot more noticeable!
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 41
mnnnn
i7 920 @4000 = 23338 CB-CPU 8 Threads
i5 750 @3600 = 20202 CB-CPU 4 Threads
in other words i5 @4000 surpass or Match the i7 920 in Power? Mnnn hard to belive but possible. or maybe cinebench 10 is not very effective in the use of Threads.
Any chance do you have a 3D application or trial like 3d Max or Cinema 4d? in the Content Browser Example Scenes of of Cinema 4D there is one Called:
"New Glass.c4d" it takes me 29seconds to render in i7 [email protected] and 1m37sec in q6600 @3Ghz
i7 920 @4000 = 23338 CB-CPU 8 Threads
i5 750 @3600 = 20202 CB-CPU 4 Threads
in other words i5 @4000 surpass or Match the i7 920 in Power? Mnnn hard to belive but possible. or maybe cinebench 10 is not very effective in the use of Threads.
Any chance do you have a 3D application or trial like 3d Max or Cinema 4d? in the Content Browser Example Scenes of of Cinema 4D there is one Called:
"New Glass.c4d" it takes me 29seconds to render in i7 [email protected] and 1m37sec in q6600 @3Ghz
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
Thanks Rich.
I did mine as a proper overclock setting, cinebench 1 and 2 with first one is 200x20 4.0ghz and second one is 191x21 3.82ghz (Turbo enabled):
It appear that 191x21 (3.82ghz in turbo) got the fastest cinebench mark than the 200x20 (at 4.00ghz default without turbo)
5817 CB-CPU [Rich testing)
23338-CPU [Rich testing)
5857 CB-CPU (Bulldog testing)
23349-CPU (Bulldog testing)
That a pretty tight and close!
I did mine as a proper overclock setting, cinebench 1 and 2 with first one is 200x20 4.0ghz and second one is 191x21 3.82ghz (Turbo enabled):
It appear that 191x21 (3.82ghz in turbo) got the fastest cinebench mark than the 200x20 (at 4.00ghz default without turbo)
5817 CB-CPU [Rich testing)
23338-CPU [Rich testing)
5857 CB-CPU (Bulldog testing)
23349-CPU (Bulldog testing)
That a pretty tight and close!
Last edited:
Indeed and I appreciate the time you took to produce the results and then get them all published!
I wasn't being picky but rather just pointing out that *perhaps* if the clocks were locked down and matched within 1% there is a good chance the Bloomfield 920 vs Lynnfield 860 Cinebench results would be identical
I can't think of a good 64-bit test then that would flush out the extra performance that Tri-Channel and QPI brings (in theory at least).
The Lynnfield 860 looks to be a very capable bit of silicon, a one size fits all if you will, self overclocking, extremely power efficient, 8-threads if you need it, faster memory controller than the 750, in fact for the vast majority of people that don't overclock the 860 is a better purchase, and for those that do overclock the early results are starting to creep up to 4.5GHz which is great!
My last thought for the night, aside from management & marketing reasons whats to stop Intel revamping the LGA1156 processor in the future with a better PCI-E 2.0 controller that offers full x16/x16
right sleep . . . . zzzZZZ
Crikey, these things run hot don't then?
After having a absolute nightmare with my first cooler (Alpine 11 pro - long story, basically it was so difficult to get heatsink contact that the poorly made retention bracket snapped when I was rescrewing the top on!) I now have the Freezer 7 Pro rev2 which is much better made. But under load the temps go through the roof!
In over 10 years of building systems this is the first time I've had a situation where I'm sure temperature has been the limiting factor. In the past, I've always hit a wall when it comes to the limit of the cpu, chipset, voltage, FSB options etc. But this time it seems like I'm going to have to settle for something in the mid-high 3.x ghz range on my i5-750.
Looking around it seems my experiences aren't that unusual, I think this really is a case where air cooling is hampering the potential of a chip. Even a modest overclock and voltage bump gives me high 80s when all 4 cores are going full pelt (fortunately a situation that doesn't arise that often outside of stress testing!).
After having a absolute nightmare with my first cooler (Alpine 11 pro - long story, basically it was so difficult to get heatsink contact that the poorly made retention bracket snapped when I was rescrewing the top on!) I now have the Freezer 7 Pro rev2 which is much better made. But under load the temps go through the roof!
In over 10 years of building systems this is the first time I've had a situation where I'm sure temperature has been the limiting factor. In the past, I've always hit a wall when it comes to the limit of the cpu, chipset, voltage, FSB options etc. But this time it seems like I'm going to have to settle for something in the mid-high 3.x ghz range on my i5-750.
Looking around it seems my experiences aren't that unusual, I think this really is a case where air cooling is hampering the potential of a chip. Even a modest overclock and voltage bump gives me high 80s when all 4 cores are going full pelt (fortunately a situation that doesn't arise that often outside of stress testing!).
Associate
Thanks this help me change my mind AGAIN!!!
Associate
- Joined
- 26 May 2008
- Posts
- 1,774
Interesting, as I am tempted to build a new rig, and cannot for the life of me decide what I want
, after reading this thread I was wondering if i7 920 was the way, but I had read many of the other online reviews and the 860 sounded good, now I just don't know sigh....I was interested in using the Corsair Dominator GT DDR3 PC3-12800(1600), 240 Pin, NonECC Unbuff, CAS 7-7-7-20, XMP +Fan due to the low C7 rating, plus thought the fan would help in cooling if a Corsair H50 was used.
I was wondering what space these p55 mobo's had for the dominator fan, but have been told Dominator GT is a waste of money? And after reading teh thread, is crosshair with two cards at 16x only available with an i7 920 platform?
Last edited:
Soldato
RJkoneill if your still alive here have you tried the i7 860 on the maximus formula III.
Im seeing people hitting 4ghz-4.2 on the 860 using the msi gd80 but im curious as to how the MF III does.
Im seeing people hitting 4ghz-4.2 on the 860 using the msi gd80 but im curious as to how the MF III does.