On my Q6600 system with GigMB-X38-DQ6, I had to send back my bad memory to OCZ for replacement of the 4 X 1 gig. PC1100 RAM. I had had a 9 X 380 FSB O/C = 3.42 Gig Hz clock speed.
Temporarily the system builder gave me 3 X 1 gig of stock PC 667 memory. At 1.375 Vcore, I can get FSB of 330, but the multiplier refuses to budge from 6 X, though I keep setting it at 9 X, so I end up with 1.98 GHz clock speed, far below the Q6600 stock speed of 2.40 Ghz.
Any ideas on how to get the 9 X multiplier or is this caused by the slow memory?
Thanks, CMA
Temporarily the system builder gave me 3 X 1 gig of stock PC 667 memory. At 1.375 Vcore, I can get FSB of 330, but the multiplier refuses to budge from 6 X, though I keep setting it at 9 X, so I end up with 1.98 GHz clock speed, far below the Q6600 stock speed of 2.40 Ghz.
Any ideas on how to get the 9 X multiplier or is this caused by the slow memory?
Thanks, CMA
![[gb]](/mwf/v2/flags/gb.png "United Kingdom")
It's a while since I used that board, but from what I remember it seems to be going to it's failsafe defaults after posting.
From what you describe that could be due to using a memory divider that makes the RAM run faster than it's capable of. Try setting the RAM speed to the slowest option available in the Memory divider.
Another way to test this is to try choosing optimised defaults in the last BIOS page, this should allow for a 9 times CPU multiplier.
From what you describe that could be due to using a memory divider that makes the RAM run faster than it's capable of. Try setting the RAM speed to the slowest option available in the Memory divider.
Another way to test this is to try choosing optimised defaults in the last BIOS page, this should allow for a 9 times CPU multiplier.
By "Memory divider", do you mean System Memory Multiplier (SPD)? It has settings like 2.00A, 2.00B, etc. I set it at 2.00A. The Item Help says that A means (G)MCH strapping of FSB 266 MHz.
The odd part of this is that on re-entry into BIOS, CPU Clock Ratio is shown as 9 X, yet in GUI, CPU-Z shows 6 X.
Neither "Optimized" nor "Fail safe" BIOS settings got more than 1.6 GigHz.
However, weirdly for this low-end memory, I was able to achieve a 6 X 400 = 2.4 Gig Hz (stock) clock speed.
So you got me thinking, which is the important thing!
BTW, I get 164 KN/s in typical middlegame position at 55C temp.
Thanks, Phil.
The odd part of this is that on re-entry into BIOS, CPU Clock Ratio is shown as 9 X, yet in GUI, CPU-Z shows 6 X.
Neither "Optimized" nor "Fail safe" BIOS settings got more than 1.6 GigHz.
However, weirdly for this low-end memory, I was able to achieve a 6 X 400 = 2.4 Gig Hz (stock) clock speed.
So you got me thinking, which is the important thing!
BTW, I get 164 KN/s in typical middlegame position at 55C temp.
Thanks, Phil.
![[kw]](/mwf/v2/flags/kw.png "Kuwait")
Try clearing CMOS and running default settings, then work from there. It has been a while since I played around with 2 D6Q's I have but if I remember correctly there is a way in the BIOS to access many of the memory options which is not documented something like Ctrl F1 (can't exactly remember). Also the memory multiplier is not setup intuitively or in order, so you many get the multiplier to go 2 then 4 then 2.5 in that order which makes no sense but that is how it is. So if you don't find the memory multiplier you want you should try scrolling the full list of options. New memory is dirt cheap now and so it should be not expensive to restock your memory with good stuff.
Hi,
I still have one of those boards and I certainly would not use 3x1GB sticks of Ram as that will make it run in single channel mode (if I remember correctly) ...
Regards
I still have one of those boards and I certainly would not use 3x1GB sticks of Ram as that will make it run in single channel mode (if I remember correctly) ...
Regards
Thanks to M. Ansari and Wizard. I'm using the 3 low-end memory sticks only as a temporary fill in until I get back new OCZ sticks.
OCZ finally got back to me today. With regard to the 4 X 1 gig. RAM I sent back under an RMA for replacement, OCZ said it no longer has the same RAM but would replace with 2 X 2gig RAM.
Does anyone know if the proposed OCZ replacement would work with my Gigabyte X38-DQ6 MB?
Does anyone know if the proposed OCZ replacement would work with my Gigabyte X38-DQ6 MB?
Ocz will supply DDR2 of a similar speed rating as you had previously I'm sure. Having 4gb in 2 sticks does make a stable over clock slightly easier to achieve in most cases, and will usually run a little bit better, so there is some benefit to you there. Make sure you put them in the right sockets when they arrive, that is the one nearest the CPU and then a gap then the second stick.
I would suggest you do a BIOS reset to optimum values before removing the current RAM, then start your over clocking from scratch with the new RAM fitted.
I would suggest you do a BIOS reset to optimum values before removing the current RAM, then start your over clocking from scratch with the new RAM fitted.
I missed the 3 memory sticks thing...
You should try it with 2 sticks as 2gb in dual channel mode should be as good or better than 3gb in single channel anyway, and it will certainly affect the overclocking potential having 3 there.
This might sound obvious but have you disabled the CPU Enhanced halt feature? This would be causing the multiplier to revert to 6 when the CPU is not under load. The most obvious test for this is to run Rybka with CPU-z on the screen. It maybe that it got set back to default (on) during one of the resets.
You should try it with 2 sticks as 2gb in dual channel mode should be as good or better than 3gb in single channel anyway, and it will certainly affect the overclocking potential having 3 there.
This might sound obvious but have you disabled the CPU Enhanced halt feature? This would be causing the multiplier to revert to 6 when the CPU is not under load. The most obvious test for this is to run Rybka with CPU-z on the screen. It maybe that it got set back to default (on) during one of the resets.
Phil, as usual you hit the bullseye! The problem was CPU Enhanced Halt. It was enabled when Gigabyte tested the board before sending it back. I think they set all the parameters back to default. So I disabled CPU Enhanced Halt.
So now with the lowest of low end memory I have booted successfully into Windows at 9 X 390 = 3.51 Gig Hz clock speed (better than my best stable OC with OCZ memory of 9 X 380 = 3.42 Gig Hz clock speed).
Go figure! Maybe low end memory is better than high end PC1100 OCZ memory?!
Of course, I will have to spend some time in Rybka to see how stable this OC is. I have my doubts, as temp is 60 C after 4 minutes (too high?)
Thanks for your expertise.
So now with the lowest of low end memory I have booted successfully into Windows at 9 X 390 = 3.51 Gig Hz clock speed (better than my best stable OC with OCZ memory of 9 X 380 = 3.42 Gig Hz clock speed).
Go figure! Maybe low end memory is better than high end PC1100 OCZ memory?!
Of course, I will have to spend some time in Rybka to see how stable this OC is. I have my doubts, as temp is 60 C after 4 minutes (too high?)
Thanks for your expertise.
As a general rule, would the experts say that core temp is most directly (linearly) related to the Vcore setting or to chip clock speed?
![[nl]](/mwf/v2/flags/nl.png "Netherlands")
Power consumption on a cpu is roughly linearly related to clock speed and quadratic to Vcore.
So P = Vcore^2 * clock speed * constant
So, the same cpu using a 5% higher Vcore and an 10% higher clockspeed will consume (1.05^2*1.1) 21% more power.
Ahhh, and now I see you are looking for Core temp and not power usage... :-(
Well, the temp all depends on how good your cooler is capable getting rid of the heat generated by the equation above. :-)
So P = Vcore^2 * clock speed * constant
So, the same cpu using a 5% higher Vcore and an 10% higher clockspeed will consume (1.05^2*1.1) 21% more power.
Ahhh, and now I see you are looking for Core temp and not power usage... :-(
Well, the temp all depends on how good your cooler is capable getting rid of the heat generated by the equation above. :-)
![[fi]](/mwf/v2/flags/fi.png "Finland")
> quadratic to Vcore.
AMD's overclocking guide says exponential.
Maybe it's the all-caps that makes people write stupid things?
Exponential?. That's new to me, but after some googling found a different quote "It is common that as you approach your maximum overclock, the voltage needed to maintain stability tends to become exponential"
> Exponential?
PLEASE NOTE THAT CPU POWER AND THERMAL
REQUIREMENTS INCREASE EXPONENTIALLY WHEN
THE VOLTAGE IS INCREASED.
I find it very hard to understand why CPU power use would grow exponentially with core voltage.
We have P= V * I for the power dissipation of the processor and I = V/R as the amount of current through the CPU
Combining both we get P = V^2 / R
So power usage of a CPU should be quadratic to the Voltage unless the internal resistance of the CPU (R) decreases (exponentially?) with higher voltage.
We have P= V * I for the power dissipation of the processor and I = V/R as the amount of current through the CPU
Combining both we get P = V^2 / R
So power usage of a CPU should be quadratic to the Voltage unless the internal resistance of the CPU (R) decreases (exponentially?) with higher voltage.
1) Maybe the temperature required to operate decreases a lot with increasing voltage,
2) turning parts of the processor superconductive.
It's either that, or somebody incompetent was put in charge of writing the warning messages. :)
2) turning parts of the processor superconductive.
It's either that, or somebody incompetent was put in charge of writing the warning messages. :)
Maybe the person does not know the difference between quadratic and exponential, I have seen stranger things ;-)
Thanks for a very useful equation. My simplistic conclusion is that keeping Vcore down is most important for achieving stable OC , i.e., we are told to to bring Vcore down to lowest level one can to achieve maximum FSB (and clock speed).
![[ca]](/mwf/v2/flags/ca.png "Canada")
I use AMD and the heat in my old CPU definitely rises quick when its running hard. I have been on AMD's page a lot and its manuals suggest to be very cautious with voltages to avoid destroying the CPU completely. In brief, do not get greedy.
My old X2 4200+ is rock stable, and that is worth more than some crash prone overclocked rig. Windows 7 rates the CPU at 4.9 which is the weakest on the table. I am in no rush for a new machine, want an EFI boot option so I can use bigger disks to boot, USB3 would be nice, and lots of PCIe slots.
My old X2 4200+ is rock stable, and that is worth more than some crash prone overclocked rig. Windows 7 rates the CPU at 4.9 which is the weakest on the table. I am in no rush for a new machine, want an EFI boot option so I can use bigger disks to boot, USB3 would be nice, and lots of PCIe slots.
I have the boot at 9 X 380 MHz working fairly well but occasionally the system defaults back to stock at 9 X 2.66 MHz. I wonder if some of my Advanced BIOS settings are wrong (or perhaps the low-end memory rebels from time to time):
HDD S.M.A.R.T. (Enabled); CPU Multi-threading (Enabled); Llimit CPUID Max to 3 (Disabled); No-Execute memory protect (Enabled); CPU Enhance Halt (Disabled); CPU Thread Monitor (Disabled); CPU EIST Function ( Disabled); Virtualization technology (Disabled).
Thanks, CMA
HDD S.M.A.R.T. (Enabled); CPU Multi-threading (Enabled); Llimit CPUID Max to 3 (Disabled); No-Execute memory protect (Enabled); CPU Enhance Halt (Disabled); CPU Thread Monitor (Disabled); CPU EIST Function ( Disabled); Virtualization technology (Disabled).
Thanks, CMA
Hi CMA,
Have a read over at http://www.clunk.org.uk/forums/reviews/3201-gigabyte-x48t-dq6-living-review.html and http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=163168 ....
There are plenty of other places to look at but when I first got the board some time ago I spent time reading through what was around at the time.
You can also check that the voltage supplied to the memory is correct as it maybe the board undervolts at default settings which is not unusual for a lot of mobos
Regards
Tony
Have a read over at http://www.clunk.org.uk/forums/reviews/3201-gigabyte-x48t-dq6-living-review.html and http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=163168 ....
There are plenty of other places to look at but when I first got the board some time ago I spent time reading through what was around at the time.
You can also check that the voltage supplied to the memory is correct as it maybe the board undervolts at default settings which is not unusual for a lot of mobos
Regards
Tony
Thanks, Tony, but what do you mean that the MB "undervolts at default settings"?
>Thanks, Tony, but what do you mean that the MB "undervolts at default settings"?
Hi,
It maybe the motherboard default voltage for the memory is 1.8V (it could be 1.6V etc I cannot remember off the top of my head) and the memory you install could be 1.9V or 2V so unless you go into the BIOS or use Gigabytes easytune the memory will be undervolted. It may be totally fine but like the CPU watch for voltage droop when under load especially if overclocking.
Go over to http://www.tweakers.fr/ and grab memset ...
Regards
I would be careful with overvoltage as it can trash the CPU if you are not careful.
Vegan, thanks for the warning. Were you referring to the setting "DDR2 Overvoltage control"?
Powered by mwForum 2.22.1 © 1999-2010 Markus Wichitill