show your sandy bridge 24/7 clocks and volts

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 14:39

hello

almost every day i see people asking what is the safe volts for a sandybridge chip.

the answer is know one really knows.

so here's my 24/7 clocks and volts

there are risks to clocking as always so do not take what you see in this thread as correct these are just my clocks and volts.

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 14:54

Here is mine:

<-Click here for large screen preview

Not bad for 1.39vcore for 4.80GHz but I am not sure if it was ok for 24/7 in use. (Maybe rjk will telling me off to leave at 4.60GHz instead at 1.37vcore!

)

My cpu-z stamped: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1875731

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 14:58

that look ok to me.

i can get 4.8 at same volts but i wanted to make my ram run closer to stock speeds so ive upped the BLK which i need a little more volts for.

still playing about but im nearly finished. want to keep it at them volts tho i have gone to 1.55v for a few bench marks and clocked it to 5.25ghz

Devrij · 19 Jun 2011 at 17:37

mine

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 17:52

good volts them for 4.7 why not go higher?

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 17:59

koooowweeee said:
hello

almost every day i see people asking what is the safe volts for a sandybridge chip.

the answer is know one really knows.

so here's my 24/7 clocks and volts

What board do you have there ? I don't understand why is my board not reading correct vcore in the cpuz under load. I have to use gigabyte touch bios software and hwmonitor for the correct vcore @ 1.39v under load. (both matched the same vcore, so I use gigabyte software instead for time being until the cpuz fixed soon. You had a nice clock there mate 4.8GHz at 1.4v is about right.

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:03

asus deluxe apparently gigabyte have a problem with cpu-z

EDIT lol was your thread i read it in

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:04

It so strange, when I first time open the sealed box of Intel i7 2600K retail box and new motherboard, I leave it as a default stock speed for the first time, and ran linx 25x and it passed ok, then next one, ran an hour OCCT and passed. Then a memory test ran (all passed and finally last one is run Prime95 and it failed at 3 hours, 46 mins, I re-run again same again Prime95 and again it failed 3 hours, 46 mins! (On the stock speed !) end up BSD code 0x124 twices. Surely Intel should have passed prime95 for 48 hours with stock speed ?

It sound as Prime95 are issues on sandybridge!

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:07

i wouldnt even test for that long.

i do about 20 mins then carry on normal daily use and if i get a crash up the volts a tiny bit.

had it at them volts a few days now no issues

Devrij · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:08

koooowweeee said:
good volts them for 4.7 why not go higher?

4.8GHz isn't entirely stable and 4.9GHz is very unstable at anything I'd consider to be safe 24/7 volts (eg 1.37V) Or I'd be there, temps are great too so quite frustrating.

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:08

Alots of them do test prime95 for 8 hours for maximum stable! I think it sound rather silly. U still get freeze or BSD even if it had passed 24 hours on Prime95. No computer does ever stable is rather frustrated! I remember that Bill Gates use to show off Windows XP to public and end up BSD!

Phenomenologica · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:15

I highly doubt Intel test anything. They probably just set the default voltage to something high enough to keep 99.99% of chips stable and ship them out, and deal with returns on the 0.01% that aren't. Far more economically viable than testing chips for any length of time.

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:21

So, do u think I should RMA to Intel say it failed on prime95 after 3 hours 46 mins with a stock speed default ? Or is it just me being silly.

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:23

bulldog147 said:
So, do u think I should RMA to Intel say it failed on prime95 after 3 hours 46 mins with a stock speed default ? Or is it just me being silly.

lol ye silly your not supposed to add volts and clock really.

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 18:24

Devrij said:
4.8GHz isn't entirely stable and 4.9GHz is very unstable at anything I'd consider to be safe 24/7 volts (eg 1.37V) Or I'd be there, temps are great too so quite frustrating.

get some more volts pumped through it lol

Devrij · 19 Jun 2011 at 20:06

I was tempted, just to get into the 5GHz club, but I can't afford to replace it if anything did go wrong. I'll go for it once I've gotten a couple years out of it and can afford to upgrade. For now, a 4.7GHz 2500k is plenty

Lunawolfy · 19 Jun 2011 at 20:24

Here is mine

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I thought it was good until I seen 4.7GHz at 1.37v

koooowweeee · 19 Jun 2011 at 20:46

From what Ive seen they all clock about the same with same volts.

Well Ive not seen any with really low volts and high clocks.

bulldog147 · 19 Jun 2011 at 21:17

I think i7 920 D0 bloomfield cpu chip is the only one with crazy low vcore with high overclock. I think we stand no chance with sandybridge chip. I haven't seen anyone who had overclocked 4.8GHz below 1.35vcore yet.

I manage to get stable prime blend 4.2 at just 1.27vcore sandybridge. another 0.11v increase in vcore for 4.8

Scon · 19 Jun 2011 at 21:21

bulldog147 said:
I think i7 920 D0 bloomfield cpu chip is the only one with crazy low vcore with high overclock. I think we stand no chance with sandybridge chip. I haven't seen anyone who had overclocked 4.8GHz below 1.35vcore yet.

Find me a Bloomfield that goes 4.8 Ghz with 1.35v .....

I bet a 2600k could use crazy low volts for 4 Ghz