Lower voltage required after OC 'burnt in'? (E4300)

Tooks

Tooks

Tooks

Associate
Joined
24 Oct 2005
Posts
2,047
Location
Lincolnshire
Just wondered if any of you guys had experienced similar with overclocking the E4300?

Basically, to reach 3.2 ghz on my chip, I had to give it 1.5125v V-core to remain stable, this from when the chip was brand new.

I've been running that clock day in, day out now for 12 weeks (although turning it off every night), and a few days ago (although I can't remember why!) I thought I'd try and see if it would still work with lower voltages, as I was a bit unhappy with my temps.

I'm down to 1.4v V-core now, and it's still Orthos stable for several hours.

The temps have fallen from 39c/65c idle/load to 34c/56c.

Has the chip now 'burnt in' so requires less V-core? Anyone else had similar? What's happening here?!
 
Tooks said:
Has the chip now 'burnt in' so requires less V-core?
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as 'Burn-in'.

Have you been adjusting other settings in your BIOS during the last 12 weeks because there is no logical reason why your CPU would need 1.5v to run stably while overclocked and then suddenly only need 1.4v.

Your thermal grease would have settled in nicely, especially since you been running your CPu through a lot of thermal cycles (on and off giving it time to cool down).
 
Yeah, never been a fan of the 'burn in' theory myself, hence why I've always overclocked my CPU's from day 1!

I did upgrade the bios on my P5B about 5 weeks ago, but I left everything the same, including v-core, as I thought I'd found where my system was at.

I haven't changed anything else at all, just nudged the v-core down a bit at a time to see what happens.

I'm not complaining, as lower volts has to be better, just wondering why it wasn't orthos stable before, and now it is?
 
I've had RAM and a CPU that have overclocked better after about a year of use, so I've no reason to suspect that burn-in isn't a real phenomenon.

Burn-in was a recognised feature of BH5 RAM that myself and many other people have experienced. CPUs are slightly different but it's the only reasonable explanation I have of my old FX57 hitting 3.6GHz.

Jokester
 
Jokester said:
I've had RAM and a CPU that have overclocked better after about a year of use, so I've no reason to suspect that burn-in isn't a real phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Again, in that time you probably learnt how to tweak the BIOS, adjusted your cooling etc, a lot of other factors involved.

Burn-In is a term referring to the heating-up of the thermal paste, there is no doubt that after a few days/weeks the cooling improved slightly.

You can't burn in memory and you can't burn in a CPU, its not a car engine? :rolleyes:
 
Big.Wayne said:
Again, in that time you probably learnt how to tweak the BIOS, adjusted your cooling etc, a lot of other factors involved.

Burn-In is a term referring to the heating-up of the thermal paste, there is no doubt that after a few days/weeks the cooling improved slightly.

You can't burn in memory and you can't burn in a CPU, its not a car engine? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I suggest doing a tad more research first before you roll eyes at people that clearly have way more experience than you.


At OP read my thread I started about this here
 
Last edited:
Maybe the material becomes more conductive somehow and lowers resistence by a very very slight but enough amount to drop slightly the voltage req? Very vague assumptions we can make on this, and only confirmable by experimentation really IMO.
 
Cheers easy, thanks for the link.

So, there could be something in it, or maybe not?!

Either way, my CPU, with no other changes that I've made, is now running the same clock stable at a lower voltage than it did before.

Clearly, something has changed within my setup, maybe the mobo (although this was some months old by the time the E4300 went in), but maybe not the CPU...

:)
 
easyrider said:
I suggest doing a tad more research first before you roll eyes at people that clearly have way more experience than you.
Click to expand...
I think your confusing post count with experience? :rolleyes:

Burn in lol, yes I can see the second hand market full of chips advertised as 'Burnt-in', hmm shall I buy a new chip? nah I hunt for a good old burnt in chip :D
 
Tooks said:
Cheers easy, thanks for the link.

So, there could be something in it, or maybe not?!

Either way, my CPU, with no other changes that I've made, is now running the same clock stable at a lower voltage than it did before.

Clearly, something has changed within my setup, maybe the mobo (although this was some months old by the time the E4300 went in), but maybe not the CPU...

:)
Click to expand...

IF you can establish that your current clock is indeed stable, perhaps by a 24hour orthos priority 10 run (maybe less, more?), then the "burn-in" (however is defined, we do not precisely know) exists and has SOME affect on clock.
 
Big.Wayne said:
I think your confusing post count with experience? :rolleyes:

Burn in lol, yes I can see the second hand market full of chips advertised as 'Burnt-in', hmm shall I buy a new chip? nah I hunt for a good old burnt in chip :D
Click to expand...

I will have to disagree with you on this, since he presented his observations and personal opinions on a very vague term such as "burn-in".
 
drak3 said:
I will have to disagree with you on this, since he presented his observations and personal opinions on a very vague term such as "burn-in".
Click to expand...
Sorry Drak I don't undstand what you are saying?

Any PC hardware wears out, whether its a CPU, Memory etc, the longer you run it the weaker it becomes, slowly, slowly until it dies. The best hardware is brand new factory fresh not something thats been running out of spec for months years, in some examples having a large amount of voltage pumped through it.

There are waay to many gullable people on the web these days, these read something written by someone, they tell their mates and before you know it another web-rumour is born.

Anyway I don't think its such a big deal and I'm certainly not passionate enough about this to get involved in a personal slagging match with anyone.

Believe what you want, just don't expect 'not' to be challenged every time you make a statement, in this case the burden is on you guys to 'prove' it :p
 
I only accept as fact that there have been some "observations" by some people. (I trust they do not lie) However, as I said, nothing can be prooved without proper experimentation were all other factors are kept identical and only the CPU "mileage" is varied.

Thats all :)
 
Big.Wayne said:
Again, in that time you probably learnt how to tweak the BIOS, adjusted your cooling etc, a lot of other factors involved.

Burn-In is a term referring to the heating-up of the thermal paste, there is no doubt that after a few days/weeks the cooling improved slightly.

You can't burn in memory and you can't burn in a CPU, its not a car engine? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

BIOS was the same, cooling was the same and certainly thermal paste isn't an issue as to get a 100MHz increase in speed needs a very large temperature drop to achieve.

You should do some research into BH5 RAM, it's pretty much legendary for running at higher speeds after being run in at 3.6V for a while. I have experienced it myself.

Jokester
 
Jokester said:
BIOS was the same, cooling was the same and certainly thermal paste isn't an issue as to get a 100MHz increase in speed needs a very large temperature drop to achieve.

You should do some research into BH5 RAM, it's pretty much legendary for running at higher speeds after being run in at 3.6V for a while. I have experienced it myself.

Jokester
Click to expand...

Here here :)
 
Jokester said:
BIOS was the same, cooling was the same and certainly thermal paste isn't an issue as to get a 100MHz increase in speed needs a very large temperature drop to achieve.

You should do some research into BH5 RAM, it's pretty much legendary for running at higher speeds after being run in at 3.6V for a while. I have experienced it myself.

Jokester
Click to expand...

3.6v! good lord!
 
If I can just step over the argument for a moment, yep, there we go.... ;)

It would appear from this thread, the linked thread, and some Google searching I've done myself, that this 'burn in' theory is one that lots of people disagree on!!

All I know is, I'm running less volts for the same clock now than previously, and nothing has changed in my system, apart from the passage of time.

I was only asking if anybody had experienced similar in their setups, and maybe if they knew what was causing it!

There is no doubt in my mind that things like my Hi Fi amplifier definately sound better after a few 10s of hours of use, and the manual even said as much. Whether that applies to CPUs or not, I don't know.

Maybe it was just the Bios update that has changed things for the better?

Thanks for the contributions all.
 
markyp23 said:
Research does not equate to you looking it up on google and copying loads of words that you don't understand... (In that thread).
Click to expand...


Thats exactly why I started the thread...

As I didn't have a clue about it.

sheesh :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom