Only you can prevent forest fires

Try it

you are not hurting anything as long as you are stable and remain in spec with voltages

i7 4Ghz clocking was best designed for DDR3 2000 however that memory is not available at this stage in the game

You purchased a 965 which gives you an advantage others do not have. The goal is the same in any clocking.. highest CPU speed, highest memory speed on the lowest memory timing stable and safe

learning what works and does not work comes with experience. Part of that has to do with 'try it and see'

If you do, or, do not observe a positive difference in FSX then you have learned something new

sounds like it is working correctly

ok, lets look at it from my perspective

you say 3.33GHz on i7 DDR3 ran the sim as good but smoother than 4.1Ghz DDR2

OK, not taking into account the 'smoother' part that means at 3.33GHz you are seeing a 24% increase in perf which is in line with the approx 35-40% you should see in a full clock


So it seems to me you runnin that system perfectly and I suspect you must be a happy camper about now...  

I know it cost being the extreme but dang it, there ain't nuthin like the 'good stuff' when you are running FSX


and by the way.. those idiots on websites that post the 965 can be matched by the 920 are just that...   cheap bastards who dont know their a$$ from a hole in the ground and are there to intrigue the 'budget' user to read and listen..


they look at the GHz speed and say  "Ohhhhhh goodness... that 965 is such a ripoff"!


I love it

there are more 'wannabe' engineers on tech sites than real techs. Most of them belong at behind the 'geek-squad counter.


The internet tech sites are nothing but one big infomercial eventually people will realize the internet (baring educational systems which most are on internet II now anyway)

is just a big TV world with ALL commercials, ALL the time

ROFL!!


Really glad you went that route too... you be set for a loooooong time now. You can upgrade the memory as it is released and get even more outta that puppy

NickN wrote on Jan 6^th, 2009 at 5:58pm:



What experts? I don’t think you’re going to find many hardware/OS “experts” in any “sim” forum period, the closest to that you’re going to get is in a real hardware forum.

I’ve noticed in this forum that most people refuse to do any research on their own and just take the advice of a select few and go with it without question.

Sorry to hear that you “done” over at AVSIM, if your experience disputes someone else’s claims I think you should respond.  

NickN wrote on Jan 6^th, 2009 at 5:58pm:



Nick,

It's getting really hard to track you down. Have been following your advice very quietly for years and it has made a world of difference in my simming. It seems to me that "we" , the tech challenged of MSFS, need to find someplace for you to hang out without the interferance of that "windy" expert that comes barging in with his comments and pronouncements. (Back in the pre-web days, it was said that the only thing you had to do to become an expert was to drive 35 miles away from home. Now with the web, you can just sit in your easy chair and be an expert.)

So how about setting up shop in a separate forum on GEX. It certainly would bring traffic to that website; give it a little free "advertising". And the location would get out very fast with e-mail and link swapping. You could ban, can, or lock out that idiot.

And we would know where to find you.....................

Kingfish

kingfish42 wrote on Jan 7^th, 2009 at 5:56am:



See this post: http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=29041

you may visit me in the GEX forum at anytime

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_topics.asp?FID=38


Im not looking for traffic or sales gimmicks. I do what I do because I enjoy it and not because of any compensation. I have never been paid a dime for anything related to MSFS to date.

raptorx wrote on Jan 7^th, 2009 at 10:40am:




I will post when they finally get OCCT and RealTemp/CoreTemp in line with i7


Most of what you are seeing is not from the CPU 'core' changes, its from the changes in communication paths between the CPU and the memory subsystem. There were innovations in the processor itself however most of those MSFS really does not take advantage of

If there was any solid proof the clocking I post about with memory speed/timing/latency works with FSX, i7 is the best scientific example of it.

The next iteration of Nehalem is where the CPU changes will kick in for FSX

Quote:



You are darn toot’in skippy..

see, I know what I am taking about when I post and although I do pass off Vista questions quite often I do understand and know the OS very well.

What? Did you see what I said in the past around Vista as an opportunity to post the way you did?

Sure sounds like it with what you posted above

I don’t give a rats a$$ what you or anyone else thinks about what I did at AVSIM! I was insulted and chastised by that person and in the process he attempted to discredit me, over and over again.. not just once

That has nothing to do with being 'king chit' you smart mouth little boy.. that has to do with

and I will do it again if someone decides they wish to try and discredit or harrass me using slick moves

He got exactly what was coming to him


and by the way.. I dont agree with you very often however when you shoot off your mouth I will not ignore it and will address it as it should be addressed as I would address any smart mouth student who attempted that crap in my lectures

there is a huge difference between asking a question/having an opinion about something technical and stating something technical as a fact with a smart attitude to the people around who are better experienced


all you had to do is ask 'why' and I would have been glad to respond

you chose to be a 'know-it-all' instead


Instead of demading I answer you because you are 'all-ears' now, I suggest you may wish to

shove-it

djt wrote on Jan 7^th, 2009 at 12:01pm:



Dude, get off my thread!

You're not welcomed here.  What'cha do, sign up here so you can spit in the face of someone who's helped more folks with this hobby than you'll ever know?

Go back to Avsim.  Or at least post a while on something valuable rather than immature spewage.

I don't want to start another thread about this same subject.  Get the hell out.

-Jim

If I can return to the topic.

Nick, I wimped out on overclocking my i7 940.  Instead I have used the in-built TurboV and settled with an increase of 6%.  I understand that is not a clock speed as such, but like a turbine cuts in when the load comes on.

With the GTX280 it is giving a very good performance with the Matrox TH2Go and is closer to all over smooth than I have ever enjoyed before.

I would be grateful for a 'cookbook' recipe to overclocking to say 3.2ghz - no more as at this stage I don't want to buy a new case and additional cooling.

macca22au wrote on Jan 18^th, 2009 at 5:58am:



There is no cookbook really

jwenham is correct. i7 is the easiest proc to overclock on the market

Simply enter the BIOS and find the setting BCLOCK. Its default is 133

Raise it

As you raise BCLOCK it will MULTIPLY by the CPU multiplier in use. At 133 your multiplier on a 2930MHz CPU is 22

So if you raise BCLOCk to 150 your CPU speed (x22) is now 3.3GHz or 3300MHz

What you must watch for is the memory speed. The memory speed increases with BCLOCK as well based on its multiplier. You do not want to exceed (unstable) the memory speed. Unstable memory or CPU speed wont hurt anything it will just be unstable or wont boot and run Windows.

Typically when you clock the user will shut down the turbo feature in the BIOS under the Advanced CPU menu in order to avoid the processor exceeding its thermal spec and start reducing its multiplier to compensate.

You will not damage the processor as long as you do not raise DRAM VOLTAGE higher than 1.65 (actaully 1.69 is the limit.. 1.65/1.66 is just fine) and do not exceed the CPU VOLTAGE of 1.5 (something you will not touch anyway) AND do not exceed 100c

80c is the max temp for running stable, above that the proc starts shutting down to protect itself. In a basic clock (3.3-3.4GHz) and not rasing the CPU voltage I doubt you would ever have to worry about that.



Hyperthreading or Intel HT Technology should be DISABED in the Advanced CPU settings as it has absolutely no value to FSX and will run the processor hotter at the same time.


So in a very basic and simplistic clock all you need to do is shut down Intel HT and TURBO, raise BCLOCK and make sure the memory does not run unstable at the higher speed.. if it does then you must set the memory speed to


Now.. unfortunately in your case as I recall you purchased 1066 memory and that MAY be a problem here. All you can do is experiment and see how it goes.

To get your feet wet, do not change anything other than Intel HT Technology (shut it down) and then find BCLOCK in the BIOS. Just nudge it up to 140 and see what the CPU speed reads and how the system runs... then nudge it up again.

If you shut down Intel HT first that will give you good headroom on the temps to work with.


With Asus boards if a Overclock fails you wi get that warning on boot... it will ask you to press F1 to enter the BIOS or F2 to load setup defaults.... Press F1 ONLY.. enter the BIOS and make a change to correct the settings problem..  and then F-10 save and exit



Before you make any changes in the BIOS.. write down any BIOS setting default value before you make your change.. that way you have a list of what to return to to place it back to its previous state

HT is enabled/disabled in the BIOS under the ADVANCED CPU CONFIGURATON features

Typically when a user intends to clock the following items are all DISABLED


Intel SpeedStep Tech Disabled
Intel Turbo Mode Tech Disabled
CPU Spread Spectrum Disabled
PCI Spread Spectrum Disabled
C1E Support Disabled
Intel Virtualization Tech Disabled
CPU TM Function Disabled
Intel HT Technology Disabled <--- Hyperthreading (Note: Enabled for video encoding., disabled for coolest temp in clock as FSX has no i7 type HT support)
Intel C-State Technology: Disable




The only issue I see you may need to deal with is memory speed. As I recall you said that you purchased DDR3 1066 memory (if I am not mistaken). Most people who clock purchase 1600 memory so they can clock and run higher mem speed at the same time.


As you increase the BCLOCK the memory speed will increase and you will need to adjust it so it is not unstable and running as close to 1066 as possible

In example.. if the CPU MULTIPLIER is 21 and BCLOCK is set to 155 that would produce a CPU speed of 155 x 21 or rounded 3260MHz (3.26GHz) at the same time the base memory multiplier is more than likely 8 because 8 x 133 (default BCLOCK) = 1066 <--- your DDR3 memory speed

NOTE: Default BCLOCK is actually 133.25 but you do not see the fraction in the BIOS


OK so if you went to 155 x21 for CPU then the memory would run 155 x 8 or 1242 which is too high for those sticks so you must DROP the memory speed (multiplier) to obtain a speed that would be stable for your 1066 memory. It can probably be a bit higher than 1066 and sometimes you must accept lower

So in the case of 155 we drop memory multiplier to 7 and get a memory speed of 1087. That may or may not be unstable since its over 1066

Since that pushes out memory speed up over what may be unstable (you must test to see if it is or not) Another direction would be to see if the CPU multiplier of 22 is available.. if it is use it instead and DROP BCLOCk

so at 22 x 150 BCLOCK our CPU speed is now about 3300 or 3.3GHz and our memory speed if we go to the 7 multiplier would be 150 x7 or about 1050 which is UNDER 1066 and should be perfectly stable at the same time



Understand?



You will no longer be using TURBO functions

DDR3 1600?

OK, now thats different... !!

If you have the heatsink replaced with a Thermalright 120 Extreme 1366 or something equal to that you can run 4GHZ (4050MHz) and DDR3 1600 on that system



TEMPS require you LOAD TEST the system and monitor for 1 hour

Use this BETA program called OCCT

http://www.ocbase.com/download.php?fileext=beta

install

the CPU OCCT 1 hour automatic test is fine

do not mess with any other test in the list.,.. its a beta program and those are new.. just the first option CPU: OCCT

In the OPTIONS click the yellow settings icon and see if the temp is set to 80c.. if it is you are ready

Click the ON button... a 1 minute pause will occur then the stress test will begin

It will crash and halt the test if there is

A: Instability

B. You hit 80c

you have to check the GRAPHS (should be in the OCCT folder in your Documents) if you crash and not sitting right there to see what the temp was when it crashed.. if it was not 80c then it was instability that caused the crash.. that would indicate Vcore most likely

If it hits 80c but was stable you either have Vcore too high or your cooling is not sufficient for the speed/vcore you are trying to run, one of the two

In your case if you hit 80c since you did not change Vcore (CPU VOLTAGE) and only changed BCLOCK then the BCLOCK is too high. You need a better CPU heatsink to run higher BCLOCk

If you crash and temps did NOT exceed 80c then the QPI/DRAM VOLTAGE needs to be set to 1.35v and the DRAM VOLTAGE to 1.65v and try the test again

Those are 2 different BIOS settings, DONT mix them up...

Use RealTemp v 2.90 or above to watch temps at the same time you run OCCT or jsut to check the system from time to time

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/RealTempBeta.zip

just make sure TJMAX is set to 100 in RealTemp and it will do the rest in displaying your temps

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=859600&postcount=1



Keep in mind, you CAN NOT damage the processor unless temps hit 100c and 80c is where the thermal limit system kicks in to slow the processor so we dont want to do 80c or higher.


If you do not hit 80c running OCCT you will never hit 80c running FSX.. probably 15-20c LOWER. We use OCCT to ensure we cant go over 80.


Use CPUz 1.49 or above to verify CPU and memory speed/timing

http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_149.zip

its just unzip and run CPUz.exe.. check the CPU and MEMORY  tabs





hey COnGRATS! you overclocked!  You are no longer a virgin!

raise BCLOCK again to 160 and check temps in the load test. As long as it does not hit 80 you good to go

Based on BCLOCK 155 @ 3.41 the multiplier is 22



The CPUz tab MEMORY should show you your memory speed and memory timings. Check those and tell me what they are



TBM 70 should be fine but it can come up to 80 as well. That is a test and see situation

Bufferpools can go either way... Some can not use the reserved amount, others can however BP is not a cure all for every type of stutter in the sim. It typically only deals with large amounts of autogen trees and buildings and making turns over them.

I assume you saw the tuning guide

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=29041


With the Matrox you are still pushing the limits but at least now you have the muscle behind the screen resolution to drive it


You can also clock the video card a bit too. I am not sure what the base clocks are on the model card you have right now. GPUz will display those

http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/

who twisted your arm to buy the 965?

where did you see that there was any promise of getting anything out of the chip over 4Ghz? There is nothing promised to anyone using i7 they will get that far either.

are you aware those who bought a 920 and 940 dont get to see 1600+ and 1700 memory speeds?

it may be a combination of motherboard and memory or it could be thats just the luck of the draw on the slug you purchased.

One thing is for certain.. you ask the average 920/940 owner what temp they are seeing @ 4GHz and it isnt 65c

not sure exactly what you are unsatisfied with at this point..  OK, what if you made it to 4.2? what does that mean? does that mean 10 more frames in FSX? Would we be satisfied with 4.2 and be upset 4.5 was not obtainable?

raptorx wrote on Jan 25^th, 2009 at 11:39am:






Woah!

Now back up

That post above was not a woodshed post!

I post to other people now stable and cool. If I had anything to add for you which I felt safe to suggest I would have. My 965 has seen up to 4.5 and let me tell you.. it was not safe at that speed and I took a huge risk in pushing that. Even 4.3 was too hot and pushing voltages too far for normal safe use. If I want to play in those areas I will need to change my cooling solution and risk damage over time so right now I stay at just over 4GHz but not by much.

If I was telling you to shut up and go away… I would have said:

Quit bitching and go enjoy your system

OK?

So do not put words in my post that do not exist Jim, please.

You expressed disappointment in the 965 model slug you purchased and that would indicate you expected more for the money. I was simply pointing out that what you see may be all you are going to get. Did you jack the Vcore up to 1.55 like I did? Go ahead, but you won’t be flying at that temp and I am not responsible for anything that may happen.

So what is it that you expected me to post? A miracle set of variables that would stabilize your proc and push another 2-300MHz out of it at below 80c? If I had that information Jim and I thought it would be safe for you to do I would have posted it.

Now, I am not sitting in front of your system and looking at the BIOS and how it is set up, and, I am not looking at the result of changes being made to attempt higher CPU speeds so I have no frame of reference to say if you are simply missing something or if the slug you have just happens to be a bit of a dog above 4GHz, but one thing is certain.. if you are not qualified to take that chip up above safe voltage limits and work out the clock based on the uber-clocking approach, you should not do it.


In that.. what I posted was in your best interest which is what I do for everyone here, equally

NIck, I wasn't trying to put words into your mouth or twist what you said.  I was just trying to express how I felt when I read what you said, I hope that makes sense.

I am very attuned to the chip's limits.  I have no desire to push anything beyond cool, stable limits.  I stopped at 1.4v on the core because I'm unsure how higher vcore will affect the useful life (for me 2 years tops).  I see uberclockers pushing way beyond that but I'm not going there.  Sure, 1.55v is the absolute max but how will it handle 1.45v provided temps stay under 80 deg C?  Am I too conservative at 1.40v?

And I've noticed things change in Everest when I try different multiplier/bclock combinations.  When the Bclock is higher, the latencies drop by as much as 15-20%.  For instance, going from 30x133 to 29x140 and latency drops by 5ns!  But when I start to raise the Bclock It's really hard to get stable.  Am I just not pushing my voltages enough?  I know I should not use Everest as much of a guide but it does show differences with different settings.

Do you run a default Bclock or do you drop your cpu multiplier one or two steps and raise the Bclock a little?  How about the uncore clock, can I raise that a little (3200 up to 3333)?

As far as my BIOS, For 4.0GHz I use the XMP profile @ DDR2 1600 with 30x133, 1.375 vcore, 1.356 vQPI, 1.66 vDIMM, loadline enabled, SS disabled.  Everything else on Auto.

And another thing:  I have C1E disabled but C-state enabled because the Everest memory bandwidth jump so much when C-state tech is enabled.  It goes up by 2500mb/s!  Is that real?  Or an artifact of Everest?  

I'm NOT one of the clueless who's looking for irrational settings to squeeze every last MHz out of things.  I know you didn't call me that but I want you to know I can be trusted to recognize the right way to test this stuff...that's why I'm asking all these questions.  If I wanted to thrash I'd just start pushing voltage limits like the guys on Extreme Systems.  But I know better.  So I come here and ask you.  I'm just looking to find out some of the things you've found out, even if it's not anything dramatic.

Sorry for being so sensitive.

-Jim

Quote:


I know, I don't want to be ungrateful here.  I was able to get this platform because of a very generous Christmas bonus given to me by my company.  I've got no complaints on how my system performs right now. 

I'm letting my desire to find the working limits of this chip (moderate limits that is) overshadow its present capabilities. 

-Jim

One other thing too...

Look at the link above and check the THERMAL SPECIFICATION

its blank

Intel, although has hinted.. never posted the safe thermal limit for the i7 9x series so be quite aware that what has been posted on the net and in the clocking fourms is in fact a GUESS @ 100c and a top end of 80c for proper operation


There is no science in this at this point... we are all functioning on reverse engineering testing and trial



http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/320834.pdf


look at page 79

@ 130w that places the max CASE temp at 67.9c

The case is NOT the internal diode temp and that is typically 10c higher (average)

which places the ESTIMATED or GUESSED TJMAX at between 95-105c

we took 100 to hit both

The safe temps that have been posted are purely an educated GUESS and we may ALL be wrong    


cuz a QX9770 has a 136w spec and its max is 70c!

you gotta give the platform some time.. by the time the Q9650 was out in full swing on the market we already knew almost 5 months before how that was going to unfold in tweaking and limits based on the established tech

there is no established tech for any of this in i7


Look at page 23 in that link above

Processor I/O supply voltage for DDR3:  1.575  and you are using 1.65..   we know that is a safe limit because Intel spilled the beans to the motherboad companies.. what we DONT know is all the safe limits in that spec sheet but are working them out.

nope

them's some dang nice numbers!

Most would kill to get that...

You do get what you pay for