Sandy 2500K Or Asus P8P67 Pro looks to be dying

Should have run the test on that dodgy 2600k i had. Same blue screen and general degradation until no POST, only difference is that it was not overclocked yet and about 3hrs old with 1.5v RAM at that, best case scenario for NOT dying :D :D . Extremely fragile IMC? :eek: Other 2600k is still going strong and now about 6hrs prime at 4.5Ghz stock volts, also being as its not my rig, its staying at stock volts :D
 
Last edited:
Justintime said:
Should have run the test on that dodgy 2600k i had. Same blue screen and general degradation until no POST, only difference is that it was not overclocked yet and about 3hrs old. Extremely fragile IMC? :eek:
Click to expand...

You can't do much if it wont post. The faulty 2500K of mine will still post and works fine until the OS applies some driver or other. Now I can't say its the IMC its a real mystery to explain what is wrong with it. Although someone else did say the BSOD related to IMC.

Also now i think about it, several installers (including the Asus Suite) would not run when i installed XP... I think it was an error running kernal32.dll but cant be 100% sure. At the time i thought the files were either not XP comparable or corrupted... but I have installed the same files today on the new CPU in windows 7
 
Todge said:
I wouldn't go that far. We have no idea which of those or all of those contributed to it. As Gibbo has posted several time, OCUK have been testing ram at 1.65v prime for over a day with no problems at all.

It's entirely possible it was a faulty chip in the first place and that the addition of sticking some volts up it caused it to fail. It was going to do that anyway.
Click to expand...

Ofcourse it could have been just a bad chip... but remember it's 32nm chip pushing any high volts threw it seems to end in disaster... best to stick to


1.35v max for vcore.

1.5-1.55v for memory.

PLL never higher then 1.9v.

Base clock never higher then 100.


If you keep reading the forums and you will find many people are getting amazing overclocks with a lot less volts then what is stated above .. As an overclocker you should always be looking to set the lowest voltages against the actual overclock.. so if you get 4.7Ghz but have to have it at a vcore of 1.35v or would you just be happy with a 4.6Ghz with a vcore of 1.25v ? my vote is 4.6Ghz and many people are getting great overclocks on low voltage settings now they know not to go crazy with the volts.. VOLTS + 32nm = Dead Chip... I saw many i7 980X get fried this way... ;)
 
If this experience reminds people to be more cautious and take their time while overclocking then it's all for the good.

When I started overclocking 14 or so years ago you had to work really hard to overclock.... Since Conroe its been rather easy and maybe we, me included, have become rather blasé.
 
Purgatory said:
If you keep reading the forums and you will find many people are getting amazing overclocks with a lot less volts then what is stated above .. As an overclocker you should always be looking to set the lowest voltages against the actual overclock.. so if you get 4.7Ghz but have to have it at a vcore of 1.35v or would you just be happy with a 4.6Ghz with a vcore of 1.25v ? my vote is 4.6Ghz and many people are getting great overclocks on low voltage settings now they know not to go crazy with the volts.. VOLTS + 32nm = Dead Chip... I saw many i7 980X get fried this way... ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing any of that, of course you want the best clock you can get on the lowest voltage. But you can't say we know what killed it FACT unless you actually do. And we simply don't. 1.65v on the memory doesn't appear to actually be an issue, others have been putting 1.6v through the vcore without an issue. Yes I agree that people should stick to the voltages you mentioned in your post but that doesn't get away from the actual real fact that we have no idea what killed that chip or if was even healthy to begin with.

20/20 hindsight suggests not overclocking at all until you have tested at stock but lets be honest with all the reviews getting 4.8 and over it was always likely that the first people who got these chips were going to clock them immediately.

I'm not trying to start a ruckass, but the forum is awash with people panicing about Sandy Bridge being fragile saying things like "lots are dying" when again in fact that just isn't the case.
 
Last edited:
Todge i'm not disagreeing with you mate.. It could have been any of the variables that caused it or again as stated could have just been a bad chip. What i'm stating is high Volts kill 32nm chips easily.
 
Yes and with larger dies, getting enough volts to the CPU was not an issue, pressure was on the mobo manufacturers to provide a good overhead for overclocking. Perhaps now with 32nm and less this should be rowed back a bit.
 
Justintime said:
lol yea sorry, you're not the only one. My spelling and grammar are terrible but i'm trying to stop dieing from becoming a new word :p
Click to expand...

I'm usually quite good. I even go back and change most of my i's to I's lol. Just occasionally I'll type something and look at it and go "that's the wrong one" and change it. Somehow I missed Chromes red squiggle under it.
 
I'd put money on the RAM. OCZ are crap for their memory. I had 2 sticks of OCZ Platinum ram... it'd blue screen like hell. Stuck a pair of Geil's in there and I've not had a problem.
Now I use the OCZ ram in my 2nd computer.... that blue screens like a biatch lol

Could you borrow another stick of DDR3 ram to check/rule out?
 
coldfused said:
I'd put money on the RAM. OCZ are crap for their memory. I had 2 sticks of OCZ Platinum ram... it'd blue screen like hell. Stuck a pair of Geil's in there and I've not had a problem.
Now I use the OCZ ram in my 2nd computer.... that blue screens like a biatch lol

Could you borrow another stick of DDR3 ram to check/rule out?
Click to expand...

I have OCZ and Patriot RAM both do the same.... But I stress again there is NO issue here with my new CPU. The Intel CPU Diagostic Software does not work with SB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom