# Keep upgrading a 7 year old PC, or build new?



## gravedgr (Nov 12, 2015)

I built my current PC for raiding WotLK in Jan or Feb of 2009.  I've since added more memory, swapped in a GTX 560, and changed the OS/game drive to a Samsung 840 SSD.  It still performs very well in daily tasks and games I'm playing right now (WoWS, SWTOR, etc.).

I'm debating continuing to upgrade the GPU vs. building an all new PC.  I don't mind spending the $ for new, but don't want it to be a complete waste.

Here is my current build, which I was considering adding a GTX 970 to:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/mHjZpg

And here the spec I was thinking of building:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/dZyKwP

Thoughts?

Forgot to mention my monitors are a 24" 1920 x 1200 and a 22" 1920 x 1080.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

Id upgrade personally... 

That said, I wouldn't upgrade to a X99 platform... just go skylake and 6700K.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2015)

I would upgrade too. 5 years is a very good run for a PC. 7 years is really pushing it if you are trying to take advantage of numerous newer technologies like USB3.1 and M.2. The problem materializes when you go to drop in expansion cards for these technologies and you are already rocking cards for audio or an Intel NIC card as example. By the time you keep trying to add these in via PCIe, you simply run out of slots/space. Seven years old means you are probably using a motherboard with PCI slots so that further compounds the problem...

Do yourself a favor and upgrade, and then repurpose it as a file server for XBMC or to backup all of your data redundantly.


----------



## Folterknecht (Nov 12, 2015)

Upgrade including the PSU if you bought it with the board/cpu, these also age over time. 

I 'd go Skylake (Z170).

-------------------------------------------

Sidenote - the Samsung 840 has issue, where data that wasnt touched for months can only be read very slowly. There is a fix for the 840 Evo, but none for the regular 840. The 840 Pro doesn't have that problem.


----------



## qubit (Nov 12, 2015)

Definitely build new. Those are aging parts which will start to fail, miss out on the latest features and above all, give much poorer performance.

A 6700K CPU, 8 or 16GB RAM and a GTX 980 or GTX 980 Ti will see you right.


----------



## basco (Nov 12, 2015)

if your pc is still good enough for you now then only buy new video card.
you can overclock your i7-920.
you can still upgrade after the graphicscard if you are not satisfied


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Id upgrade personally...
> 
> That said, I wouldn't upgrade to a X99 platform... just go skylake and 6700K.


 Though the difference in price is not much from either platform (Meaning i7 6700K, motherboard, and ram vs i7 5820k, motherboard, and ram) so it might be better to go Haswell-E.

Like I said earlier, your system is fine still even by todays standards though its starting to get a tad dated.  I would say for what you do its probably still going to be fine but the age can be a deciding factor as well.  If your willing to spend the money, I would go for this:

i7 5820K
MSI SLI Plus X99
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16gb 2400
Rosewill Valens 600 watt Gold
Noctua NDH14
EVGA GTX 970 or MSI R9 390
Just keep your old SSD, would not see a reason to get rid of it personally.

That comes to about $1038 and comes with either choice having a better cooler on the card (And a better price).


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Nov 12, 2015)

not sure why people are saying to upgrade the full system when the OP says that it "still performs very well". A video card upgrade would breath much life back into that system. I seriously doubt there would be much "noticed" performance gains with a full upgrade compared to a video card upgrade.

Just get the 970, if you aren't happy then, do a full system upgrade. I think you will be ok with just adding a 970 for now.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

Yea id go with what was said above, save yourself the hassle and upgrade now, but there is not really much of a need for a 5820k right now. Go with a Skylake 6700k. 
Although If it runs well now and your not planning on doing any crazy games a Graphics card change may be all you find yourself needing.


----------



## ASOT (Nov 12, 2015)

Why not AMD,is on a budget..500$ or Euro,as i see 

Not all ppl throw money on PC parts,be more responsable guys!


----------



## Toothless (Nov 12, 2015)

ASOT said:


> Why not AMD,is on a budget..500$ or Euro,as i see
> 
> Not all ppl throw money on PC parts,be more responsable guys!


AMD has horrid processors at the moment and their GPUs are power hogs. 

Just get the 970 and overclock the CPU.


----------



## ASOT (Nov 12, 2015)

Total: $1386.45   in my opinion is waste of money..

sorry for the 500 bucks  that i mention before

If u make intense editing,streaming,play a lot of game's is worth,also will be good later(2-3 years)


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

Toothless said:


> AMD has horrid processors at the moment and their GPUs are power hogs.
> 
> Just get the 970 and overclock the CPU.


 But they have more full speed ram and for ~70 watt difference the 390 also outperforms the 970 at the same price point...Thought the CPU's are definitely a bad idea in this case considering the OP already has an i7 920.



GigabyteFanBoy said:


> Yea id go with what was said above, save yourself the hassle and upgrade now, but there is not really much of a need for a 5820k right now. Go with a Skylake 6700k.
> Although If it runs well now and your not planning on doing any crazy games a Graphics card change may be all you find yourself needing.


 The price difference says otherwise, for an extra 2 cores (4 threads) its not much of a price hike considering how much a 6700K and motherboard cost right now (Z170).

I think the OP should buy himself a GPU and see what happens for now.  Either way their getting a new GPU so why not start there and see how well it performs then move on to new parts if they feel they need it.


----------



## ASOT (Nov 12, 2015)

Toothless said:


> AMD has horrid processors at the moment and their GPUs are power hogs.
> 
> Just get the 970 and overclock the CPU.



If he's a gamer


Toothless said:


> AMD has horrid processors at the moment and their GPUs are power hogs.
> 
> Just get the 970 and overclock the CPU.



I have AMD and i play all game's on ultra at 1080p is that so bad ?!


----------



## peche (Nov 12, 2015)

skylake complete build...
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Peche/saved/#view=vZnV3C
just needs some time to assemble and format... enjoi ... no need of Extreme system.... 
unless you:
Design... heavy work... virtual machines, video encode... and many other heavy tasks...


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> But they have more full speed ram and for ~70 watt difference the 390 also outperforms the 970 at the same price point...Thought the CPU's are definitely a bad idea in this case considering the OP already has an i7 920.
> 
> 
> The price difference says otherwise, for an extra 2 cores (4 threads) its not much of a price hike considering how much a 6700K and motherboard cost right now (Z170).
> ...


Thats why i said if it runs what he wants right now then maybe all the OP needs is a gpu upgrade



ASOT said:


> Total: $1386.45   in my opinion is waste of money..
> 
> sorry for the 500 bucks  that i mention before
> 
> If u make intense editing,streaming,play a lot of game's is worth,also will be good later(2-3 years)


I wouldnt say its a waste of money some people want good computers and it isnt a waste of money to drop $1400 on and lets be honest an intel cpu will be wayy better in the long run than an AMD


----------



## peche (Nov 12, 2015)

GigabyteFanBoy said:


> Thats why i said if it runs what he wants right now then maybe all the OP needs is a gpu upgrade


well thats another option...  i7's 920's still capable of pretty much tasks...
i work everyday on an i7 870.. not OC'd.... and this old soldier can easily handle everyday tasks and abuse... plus the being in the old enterprise domain that comsumes pretty much sources with several network and crappy domain protocols... but well is Up to the OP to decide about upgrade or simple add a 970 to the existing rig!

Regards,


----------



## ASOT (Nov 12, 2015)

GigabyteFanBoy said:


> Thats why i said if it runs what he wants right now then maybe all the OP needs is a gpu upgrade
> 
> 
> I wouldnt say its a waste of money some people want good computers and it isnt a waste of money to drop $1400 on



Yes u want good computer,but keep in mind also if u r going to use all that power to perform..or u will use light games,web,movies or music only


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

GigabyteFanBoy said:


> Thats why i said if it runs what he wants right now then maybe all the OP needs is a gpu upgrade
> 
> 
> I wouldnt say its a waste of money some people want good computers and it isnt a waste of money to drop $1400 on


 I was not questioning that part, more questioning the 6700K recommendations by you and everyone.  At the current prices (Besides budget boards which are pretty meh) the price difference is not much considering you get more cores which is better for future proofing.



peche said:


> skylake complete build...
> https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Peche/saved/#view=vZnV3C
> just needs some time to assemble and format... enjoi ... no need of Extreme system....
> unless you:
> Design... heavy work... virtual machines, video encode... and many other heavy tasks...


 But why do Skylake, not trying to sound like a broken record but at those prices you might as well get a 5820K and X99 board for a tiny bit more to get much more power.

Either way OP, the consensus is to just grab yourself a video card for now and then see how it performs before replacing everything.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> I was not questioning that part, more questioning the 6700K recommendations by you and everyone. At the current prices (Besides budget boards which are pretty meh) the price difference is not much considering you get more cores which is better for future proofing.


I was only recommending skylake because i didnt see that its price had gone up a bit and that its only a few dollars less than a 5820k. My apologies


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2015)

Toothless said:


> AMD has horrid processors at the moment and their GPUs are power hogs.
> 
> Just get the 970 and overclock the CPU.



Negative. Been rocking a 8350 for some time now without complaint. I game, decompress, photoshop and encode all within expectations. Intel of course has superior CPUs but they aren't required for reasonable performance; especially when you primarily just need a good graphics card these days. Overall, Nvidia is the better option here, but again, AMD will do just fine as well.

For perspective, I also have two Haswell Xeons, eg... 1231 v3 and 1276 v3 as well as an i7-6700K.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

Fx said:


> Negative. Been rocking a 8350 for some time now without complaint. I game, decompress, photoshop and encode all within expectations. Intel of course has superior CPUs but they aren't required for reasonable performance; especially when you primarily just need a good graphics card. Overall, Nvidia is the better option here, but again, AMD will do just fine as well.


No offense but i had a chance to upgrade to a FX 8350 and the gaming Moderator here told me that it wasnt a smart idea and that even my current cpu the performance change just isnt worth it. I honestly think the OP would be more pleased with an intel CPU it will last him more time than a AMD CPU.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Nov 12, 2015)

Buy a cheap Socket 1366 Xeon processor to put in that board then spend all the rest of your money on a really good GPU.
Have a look at my specs....ive got an ace pc, for next to nothing.

alternatively sell your mobo to one of the several members of TPU who are looking for one right now.
Socket 1366 motherboards are like golddust.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2015)

GigabyteFanBoy said:


> No offense but i had a chance to upgrade to a FX 8350 and the gaming Moderator here told me that it wasnt a smart idea and that even my current cpu the performance change just isnt worth it. I honestly think the OP would be more pleased with an intel CPU it will last him more time than a AMD CPU.



No offense taken. Generally, that will be true, but other factors come into play. Such as how long he expects the CPU to last, his regional pricing for parts, his personal economy status, and if he wants to pick up perfectly good used PC parts which can be had for nice discounts.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

Fx said:


> No offense taken. Generally, that will be true, but other factors come into play. Such as how long he expects the CPU to last, his regional pricing for parts, his personal economy status, and if he wants to pick up perfectly good used PC parts which can be had for nice discounts.


I understand where your coming from and i agree with it. Which goes into what me and others said and that he should upgrade to a gtx 970 and see if he gets the performance that he is looking for.


----------



## peche (Nov 12, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> But why do Skylake, not trying to sound like a broken record but at those prices you might as well get a 5820K and X99 board for a tiny bit more to get much more power.
> 
> Either way OP, the consensus is to just grab yourself a video card for now and then see how it performs before replacing everything.


when you have to buy a drink for maybe a walk you get a 12onz bottle or take 3l big ass bottle?
why the f*ck advising something more that he really needs or will use.... no sense.... Extreme systems are made for heavy working... tasking and moar abuse... also a i5 can easily handle tasks... but op may want an i7 because is using already one...


----------



## Ubersonic (Nov 12, 2015)

IMO don't waste money upgrading unless you really want to, first gen i7 systems and DDR3 are still highly formidable, especially when paired with the latest GPU's.  To top it off if you do want to boost it you can buy a used hex core W series E5 Xeon which when overclocked will beat any Skylake i7 CPU in multithreaded applications.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

peche said:


> when you have to buy a drink for maybe a walk you get a 12onz bottle or take 3l big ass bottle?
> why the f*ck advising something more that he really needs or will use.... no sense.... Extreme systems are made for heavy working... tasking and moar abuse... also a i5 can easily handle tasks... but op may want an i7 because is using already one...


He might just wanna repeat the past in a way and get a great system now and keep building off of it 7 years later. Also thats quite the interesting thing to compare it too.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2015)

You will go through GPUs faster than you will CPUs, thus, it is far more important to put more money there to address longevity for your system. I suggest a Nvidia 980Ti or AMD Fury X with 16GBs of memory.


----------



## Estaric (Nov 12, 2015)

Fx said:


> You will go through GPUs faster than you will CPUs, thus, it is far more important to put your money there to address longevity for your system. I suggest a Nvidia 980Ti or AMD Fury X with 16GBs of memory.


As both are great cards they just arnt completely necessary right now for him. If he wants a gtx 970 he obviously has at least a base idea of what kinda performance he wants.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

peche said:


> when you have to buy a drink for maybe a walk you get a 12onz bottle or take 3l big ass bottle?
> why the f*ck advising something more that he really needs or will use.... no sense.... Extreme systems are made for heavy working... tasking and moar abuse... also a i5 can easily handle tasks... but op may want an i7 because is using already one...


 But if you can get the V6 Mustang for the same price as the V8 or a very minute amount more, why not???

Yes, an i5 would be plenty but as you said the OP already has an i7 so it maybe better to stay with an i7.  That being said, the 6700k versus 5820k is a mere 5 dollars difference on newegg (Up to about 20 ive seen) and the motherboards are also very similarly priced...So why wouldn't you buy a higher end system with 2 more cores and threads for that small a difference in price.  Even if it would be overkill, we can already tell based on his past he keeps them for awhile so its not as bad an idea plus its a better value (Especially since Skylake is barely better than Haswell on a core to core basis).


----------



## peche (Nov 12, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> But if you can get the V6 Mustang for the same price as the V8 or a very minute amount more, why not???
> 
> Yes, an i5 would be plenty but as you said the OP already has an i7 so it maybe better to stay with an i7.  That being said, the 6700k versus 5820k is a mere 5 dollars difference on newegg (Up to about 20 ive seen) and the motherboards are also very similarly priced...So why wouldn't you buy a higher end system with 2 more cores and threads for that small a difference in price.  Even if it would be overkill, we can already tell based on his past he keeps them for awhile so its not as bad an idea plus its a better value (Especially since Skylake is barely better than Haswell on a core to core basis).


not gonna argue with you ... if makes you happy you are on the point... 
good day....


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

ASOT said:


> I have AMD and i play all game's on ultra at 1080p is that so bad ?!


You should read some reviews.... 

In a lot cases, it doesn't matter, you are correct. In some, it sure does. That is single card. If you have multiple GPUs, I wouldn't touch an AMD CPU with a 10' pole, unless you are good with placing a glass ceiling on your cards.


----------



## ASOT (Nov 12, 2015)

So is bad,understand )))


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Though the difference in price is not much from either platform (Meaning i7 6700K, motherboard, and ram vs i7 5820k, motherboard, and ram) so it might be better to go Haswell-E.


I disagree. Haswell-E is about 5-10% slower IPC wise in most testing, so you are already a bit slower there. Then you have the 3.5GHz versus 4Ghz starting point so its already faster than that. The Z170 motherboards are cheaper than X99 in most cases. Good luck finding a $130 X99 board, the cheapest is $190 and its mATX. Not to mention you need quad channel ram for X99 vs dual for Z170. So in reality its likely a $100 difference, if not more for a slower CPU clock for clock that needs more cooling to reach mid 4GHz than a 6700K. 

If you don't need the cores, there isn't a point for X99.


----------



## peche (Nov 12, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> I disagree. Haswell-E is about 5-10% slower IPC wise in most testing, so you are already a bit slower there. Then you have the 3.5GHz versus 4Ghz starting point so its already faster than that. The Z170 motherboards are cheaper than X99 in most cases. Good luck finding a $130 X99 board, the cheapest is $190 and its mATX. Not to mention you need quad channel ram for X99 vs dual for Z170. So in reality its likely a $100 difference, if not more for a slower CPU clock for clock that needs more cooling to reach mid 4GHz than a 6700K.
> 
> If you don't need the cores, there isn't a point for X99.


thanks god, finally someone understood my point.... finally .....


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

Yeah, he was quite a bit off on the difference in pricing between the two platforms...(though, that is subjective... who knows what he was thinking, but almost $100 isn't "minimal" to me).

We can call the CPUs a wash (assuming 6700K and 5820K)... I agree with that.

Motherboard wise, the LEAST expensive X99 ATX size board is $194 at newegg. For Z170, the cheapest board I would use and overclock with is ASRock Z170 Pro4 @ $118. Also, that is the CHEAPEST board for X99... a comparable board would be over $210 (ASRock Extreme 4).

So for ram's sake. I will use 2x8GB DDR4 3000 CL15 and 4x4GB DDR4 3000 CL15... Cheapest there is $120. 4x4GB = $125. Not so much on the memory for whatever reason, but that still adds up to over $80. Oddly enough, I bought my 2x8GB DDR4 sticks for $90 upon release... And holy crap is newegg gouging on the 6700K... damn.

I don't think $80+ is worth it for cores that are not used. We have no idea what DX12 and its use of cores will bring. More cores was the call since 2006 and only within the last two years or so has a quad core mattered in gaming.

EDIT: Don't forget the cooling needed as well... still VERY close to $100 for a slower system... not a choice I would make for the OPs listed uses.

EDIT2: Last edit......maybe.....LOL!!! I don't believe there was a consensus here to just get a GPU/SSD or whatever. I would say it was pretty even a full upgrade versus incremental... we are talking about this thread, correct? Ok, yeah... wow Ghosty.... 5 people said build new 2 said minor upgrades, good call. LOL.

ANd for the record, I don't see a point in getting 2133/2400 Mhz memory on DDR4. Why? Those are DDR3 speeds which have much lower latency. Its not until you hit 2800/3000 with CL15 that things performance wise are the same as slower speed and tighter timings. Why buy DDR3 speeds on a DDR4 platform?


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

peche said:


> not gonna argue with you ... if makes you happy you are on the point...
> good day....


Because I am using logic for my reasoning?


peche said:


> thanks god, finally someone understood my point.... finally .....


So 5%-10% and stock clocks (Which since were buying unlocked we assume overclocking, if not why suggest unlocked?) versus 2 more cores and threads?  If the point of the i7 over i5 is the Hyperthreading then why wouldn't having more Hyperthreads and cores be even better especially if you say having 8threads is better then 6 cores will be better than that.



EarthDog said:


> I disagree. Haswell-E is about 5-10% slower IPC wise in most testing, so you are already a bit slower there. Then you have the 3.5GHz versus 4Ghz starting point so its already faster than that. The Z170 motherboards are cheaper than X99 in most cases. Good luck finding a $130 X99 board, the cheapest is $190 and its mATX. Not to mention you need quad channel ram for X99 vs dual for Z170. So in reality its likely a $100 difference, if not more for a slower CPU clock for clock that needs more cooling to reach mid 4GHz than a 6700K.
> 
> If you don't need the cores, there isn't a point for X99.


5% is not really enough to justify which in most gaming cases is that area for 2 less cores.  If were on the subject of the usability of 2 more cores then why even suggest the i7 for Hyperthreading when the i5 will perform just as well and cost much less.  Wouldn't 2 more cores instead of 2 Hyperthreaded be better in the end considering the OP keeps his machines for quite along time?

As for the price, all the people on here are suggesting 180+ dollar boards including peche so the price difference is irrelevant.  If you really want to drop to the cheap Z170 boards most of them are pretty devoid of features compared to all the other boards in the lineup which is why they are so much cheaper than the majority of the Z170 boards out there.  The chip itself is so close in price that to get a good board and with the DDR4 prices being the same theres really no difference.  Even including needing a cooler (Which most of the coolers out there can get some decent overclocks).  The DH14 suggested by the OP himself would be able to push 4.2ghz+ with ease.  If stock speeds are what matter the 4790K is a much cheaper platform overall and according to some reviewers is slightly higher in games due to the higher turbo or at least matching.

As for the Asrock Pro4 board...Yea that is a better deal then motherboard wise, that one got missed by me.  However, again most of the suggestions and most of the good boards are all close to $200 (Not sure why this board is so cheap still, I guess because of the lack of SLI support) so the point remains valid for most of the suggestions.

Edit:


EarthDog said:


> EDIT2: Last edit......maybe.....LOL!!! I don't believe there was a consensus here to just get a GPU/SSD or whatever. I would say it was pretty even a full upgrade versus incremental... we are talking about this thread, correct? Ok, yeah... wow Ghosty.... 5 people said build new 2 said minor upgrades, good call. LOL.


Uhh...More people said just a minor upgrade with GPU than two???  Plus this is his second thread on the subject.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

There isn't a need for X99 for $100 difference. None. I wasn't remotely convinced by your reply.

What other people suggest isn't relevant because they have no clue a $130 board like I picked would work just fine for the OP's listed needs. People must be stuck in what I call "amd mindset" and that they need some expensive arse robust board to overclock Intel... doens't work that way.

He didn't mention SLI/CFx. It has an M.2 slot USB3.1... what features are 'devoid' on that board that an average user would need?

I can use a $25 cooler to reach 4.2Ghz+ on 6700K (212 Evo). No need for an $80 cooler. 

I just don't think your talking points are valid in the least (well some might, not all).. sorry. We will just agree to disagree.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> There isn't a need for X99 for $100 difference. None. I wasn't remotely convinced by your reply.
> 
> What other people suggest isn't relevant because they have no clue a $130 board like I picked would work just fine for the OP's listed needs. He didn't mention SLI/CFx. It has an M.2 slot USB3.1... what features are 'devoid' on that board that an average user would need?


That's why I said



GhostRyder said:


> As for the Asrock Pro4 board...Yea that is a better deal then motherboard wise, that one got missed by me.  However, again most of the suggestions and most of the good boards are all close to $200 (Not sure why this board is so cheap still, I guess because of the lack of SLI support) so the point remains valid for most of the suggestions.


The others are pretty devoid and look cheap to begin with *except that one* which seems to just sub in no SLI and I guess a lower end audio card (Though still a good one).

With that price difference, probably not a reason to spend the extra but only because that's a decent board.

However, the OP said he's had that desktop for a very long time (Since 2009) and said hes going to do the same thing so I would assume in this case that the extra cores might be better for the long run over the 5-10% core to core difference.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 12, 2015)

There are many decent boards around $130 to $150 on the Z170 platform. Some of which handle SLI and CFx. Its not just a single entity as you mentioned (2x).

Still, I wouldn't spend $100 more for 2 more cores and threads in _hopes_ that it will be more effective in the long run. As I said, dual cores were fine up until ~two years ago, so its going to take another few years to exploit more than 4c/8t. 

... that is unless DX12 suddenly turns into a core monger improving things by leaps and bounds (which, we haven't seen it do yet).


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 12, 2015)

Wow you guys are fast at replies!  I was in the other thread (sorry for two with similar subjects) playing with OC setting while this one blew up.

Let me see if I can clarify a few things...


I will not lose a minute's sleep over $100 either way.
As a couple of you said, the X99 (or an Z170) would be overkill for what I do now/what I plan to do tomorrow, but my current PC still works great for daily tasks because I overbuilt it back in 2009 (it was about $1200 in parts at the time).  I don't mind paying to do that again, but I don't generally throw money away if it is unneeded either.
As mentioned in the other thread I generally run everything stock.  I just tried turning my 920 up to 3.8 Ghz and idle temps jumped from about 36-38C to 85C, with loads spiking up to 109C.   I'm assuming I set something up wrong, as performance was worse on Cinebench.  I might buy something factory OC'd, but would tend to not do it on my own without some more education.
Most of my gaming is online and infrequent (work, kids), so you're all right that I could probably manage "as is" or with a GPU upgrade for a while.
I'm also interested to see where DX12 goes and that might tempt me to wait, even if I was going to build a whole new system.

But I do appreciate all the comments so far (including the back and forth) and welcome any more you have.


----------



## Dethroy (Nov 12, 2015)

Simple. Build new as soon as Pascal & Arctic Islands arrive.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 12, 2015)

<deleted>

Ignore this post, I'm evidently a moron.  More digging shows this is all DDR-1333 using the P6T triple memory config.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 12, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> Wow you guys are fast at replies!  I was in the other thread (sorry for two with similar subjects) playing with OC setting while this one blew up.
> 
> Let me see if I can clarify a few things...
> 
> ...


 You may not have a good enough cooler to support it, what cooler do you have currently?

If you want to overclock and test how much it can improve, try something like a Cooler Master Hyper 212 for testing.  Its cheap and performs very well which should allow for decent overclocking.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> You may not have a good enough cooler to support it, what cooler do you have currently?
> 
> If you want to overclock and test how much it can improve, try something like a Cooler Master Hyper 212 for testing.  Its cheap and performs very well which should allow for decent overclocking.


It's a Noctua (single fan, huge heat sink), but I'll have to look and see if I can figure the model. It's possible I didn't do a good job with the thermal paste as I understand that is important. I didn't exactly follow a guide.

Edit: found it in my newegg order history

http://www.noctua.at/main.php?show=productview&products_id=24&lng=en

Evidently I only mounted one of the two fans.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 13, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> It's a Noctua (single fan, huge heat sink), but I'll have to look and see if I can figure the model. It's possible I didn't do a good job with the thermal paste as I understand that is important. I didn't exactly follow a guide.
> 
> Edit: found it in my newegg order history
> 
> ...


Try small gains first.  Shoot for 3.2ghz and see what happens from there.


----------



## Melvis (Nov 13, 2015)

OC your current i7 it will still do a great job in "gaming" honestly, I have the older i7 970 and its a beast of a CPU even for todays standards and it will still run everything fine from now till 2020 id say lol Put ya money into a new GPU first THEN see what you think and a GTX 970 would be a good choice as I plan to get one to


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

That's probably what I'll do, although I'm frustrated with OC attempts. Guess I was not doing anything wrong earlier and my cooling is just not up to snuff. 

I can run the bclock up past 180 at a 12x multiplier, but once I put it back to 20x I can't pass even 5 minutes of OCCT at 150 bclock. 

I have the side of my case open, so that may be reducing the usefulness of the case fans. I have front / rear that pull into the case and a huge too fan that pushes out. Plus the CPU cooler that is probably not working to specs. 

If I can't get this to run without overheating, am I losing anything from the 970? I think the consensus from the other thread was "no", but I need to look again.


----------



## xvi (Nov 13, 2015)

Skimmed the thread and didn't see this posted. Wow likes CPU performance a lot and will see gains favoring single threaded performance (I think. Two beers aren't helping my memory. )
Wow also favors nVidia GPUs. I think they favor them enough to give them better fps/$ than amd.

Sounds like your main concern is WoW performance. If that's the case, I definitely recommend looking up benchmarks for wow specifically (TPU has wow benchmarks, if I recall correctly) and seeing what performs the best.


----------



## johnspack (Nov 13, 2015)

Get a 970 for god sakes....  my system rapes any 2+ yr old game at ultra settings.  I get pissed if I see under 60 fps in any game,  and that's usually if I'm using dsr 4x on it.  That's at 1080 mind you.
Even newer games run pretty dam good.


----------



## basco (Nov 13, 2015)

did you change the thermal paste in the 7 years? noctua should be easy capable of cooling even with oc.
some multipliers are more easy to overclock like 21.
keep care of your ram + qpi frequenzy
dont forget that 180x20 = 3600mhz so nearly a 1000mhz overclock-go slow with oc if ya have no experience.-i am glad to help and other tpu members for sure too.
get cpu-z and look for your stepping if ya got a D0 sample-these oc little better then the older C0

there are a lot of oc guides on the net


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

xvi said:


> Skimmed the thread and didn't see this posted. Wow likes CPU performance a lot and will see gains favoring single threaded performance (I think. Two beers aren't helping my memory. )
> Wow also favors nVidia GPUs. I think they favor them enough to give them better fps/$ than amd.
> 
> Sounds like your main concern is WoW performance. If that's the case, I definitely recommend looking up benchmarks for wow specifically (TPU has wow benchmarks, if I recall correctly) and seeing what performs the best.


Sorry for the acronyms... WoWS is World of Warships.  Played WoW after the last expansion came up, but gave up after running out of things to do at cap.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

basco said:


> did you change the thermal paste in the 7 years? noctua should be easy capable of cooling even with oc.
> some multipliers are more easy to overclock like 21.
> keep care of your ram + qpi frequenzy
> dont forget that 180x20 = 3600mhz so nearly a 1000mhz overclock-go slow with oc if ya have no experience.-i am glad to help and other tpu members for sure too.
> ...


I played with a lot of setting last night.  With the IOH manually set to 1.3v per this guide (http://www.overclockers.com/3-step-guide-overclock-core-i3-i5-i7/), I couldn't get OCCT to run for 15 minutes at anything higher than 140 x 20.  Temps spike above the allowed 85C limit for the test.  Stability is fine, although I did have it crash once with VTT (QPI/DRAM) set at 1.35v (ran fine at 1.3).

I ended up going back in and turning everything to auto except BCLK (150), multiplier (manually set to 20) and DRAM freq (backed down to 2:8 gets me right at 600Mhz).  OCCT ran successfully for an hour; although core 0 appears to have hit 86C, it didn't trip the limiter and stop the test.

Edit - forgot to answer about the paste, I have not changed it in 7 years


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Nov 13, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Yeah, he was quite a bit off on the difference in pricing between the two platforms...(though, that is subjective... who knows what he was thinking, but almost $100 isn't "minimal" to me).
> 
> We can call the CPUs a wash (assuming 6700K and 5820K)... I agree with that.
> 
> ...




Were you getting your prices from @EarthDog , using the same heat sink (which I have used to handle a 4.3GHz OC'ed i7 3930k crunching), same series MB  (AsRock Extreme4) and same brand/model RAM (Corsair LPX DDR4 3000MHz), the 5820k build is actually less expensive with rebates-

5820k- http://pcpartpicker.com/p/YTjGQ7
6700k- http://pcpartpicker.com/p/DZqdLk


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 13, 2015)

newegg.com only. Where all my links went...

You have a different motherboard, a much more costly one, on the 6700K rig. 

Also, when I searched yesterday, the cheapest X99 2011-v3 board was a mATX model. Today when I looked that Extreme 4 you chose popped up (its also currently on a pretty massive sale - It was $210 yesterday). So with sales, its a little closer, of course. However, our parts can go on sale too. 

You also have a more expensive cooler than what would be needed for the 6700K used on both. A 6700K could reach 4.5GHz+(depending on the chip) with a Hyper 212 EVO. It doesn't need a $55 heatsink like the 5820K would to overclock 1.2GHz over stock. I mean 300Mhz on a 91W chip, or 1.2GHz on a 125W chip. Does that make sense?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Nov 13, 2015)

My bad, I thought you listed the Extreme 4 for the Z710 build.

According to Newegg's listing, the 2011 Extreme 4 is regularly $169, not $210. At least that is what is showing today.

The heat sink is actually overkill for a 5820 under "regular" circumstances also, unless you intend a very high OC, or like I do with my 3930k, run a +1GHz OC while running the CPU at full load 24/7. I wouldn't be surprised if the Hyper could handle a +4 GHz 5820 under normal gaming conditions, but yes, the Hyper would handle the 6700k better than it would handle the 5820k.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 13, 2015)

No... its on sale. Notice how $210 has a strike through and $169 is now there??? It is also, for some reason, still $210 on newegg business. And for the record, it was a $240 board MSRP when it released.



BarbaricSoul said:


> The heat sink is actually overkill for a 5820 under "regular" circumstances also, unless you intend a very high OC, or like I do with my 3930k, run a +1GHz OC while running the CPU at full load 24/7. I wouldn't be surprised if the Hyper could handle a +4 GHz 5820 under normal gaming conditions, but yes, the Hyper would handle the 6700k better than it would handle the 5820k.


I know.. that was my entire point. We are assuming overclocking to around 4.5Ghz give or take. A hyper 212+ wont handle a 5820K much over 4-4.2GHz. But since we can easily push the 6700K to 4.5GHz, and the 5820K should do it too.... its apples to apples. Otherwise, a $10 would be fine for the 6700K at stock.


----------



## Liquid Cool (Nov 13, 2015)

I'm just chiming in to say...ASUS P6T?  Now THAT...is a beautiful motherboard.  Personally, you'd have to pry it out of my dead hands.

So...if you upgrade you know who to contact to dispense of that old tech.  

Best Regards,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Tartaros (Nov 13, 2015)

I would wait for the next generation, it isn't that far and you have a solid base to upgrade. Get the 970 and learn how to oc that cpu (of course, buy a good thermal paste and replace yours, I don't want to know how it is your actual paste after 7 years xD).


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

Well, OP could do this… get the new skylake system…

or … repaste and add a second fan to its original cooler… get GTX 970 and try new Overclock on that system, 
Also adding his system specs here! will be nice…



Liquid Cool said:


> So...if you upgrade you know who to contact to dispense of that old tech.


new crunching machine?

Regards....


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

Liquid Cool said:


> I'm just chiming in to say...ASUS P6T?  Now THAT...is a beautiful motherboard.  Personally, you'd have to pry it out of my dead hands.
> 
> So...if you upgrade you know who to contact to dispense of that old tech.
> 
> ...




It's all dusty now.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

peche said:


> Well, OP could do this… get the new skylake system…
> 
> or … repaste and add a second fan to its original cooler… get GTX 970 and try new Overclock on that system,
> Also adding his system specs here! will be nice…
> ...


I promise I'll update my specs after lunch.  Just taking a quick peek with a flashlight (case is under my desk), I only see one plug for CPU fan on the motherboard.  Wondering if it really only supports one and that's why I didn't install the second.

I'll look some more when I get back.


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> I promise I'll update my specs after lunch.  Just taking a quick peek with a flashlight (case is under my desk), I only see one plug for CPU fan on the motherboard.  Wondering if it really only supports one and that's why I didn't install the second.
> 
> I'll look some more when I get back.


all i can say its that old i7 still capables...beasts for OC and also great in temps.... with the proper cooler!


----------



## Tartaros (Nov 13, 2015)

peche said:


> all i can say its that old i7 still capables...beasts for OC and also great in temps.... with the proper cooler!


He said he had a noctua cooler, so I'm sure it's fine for oc.

The only thing in that regard that needs to be checked is the psu. How old is your psu?


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

Tartaros said:


> He said he had a noctua cooler, so I'm sure it's fine for oc.


with new fans maybe ... and also a fresh application of hihgh quality TIM such as AC MX4 or MX2 could do miracles...
personally i dont like Air coolers... i rather AIO watercoolers... 

PSU is pretty important...


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

Tartaros said:


> He said he had a noctua cooler, so I'm sure it's fine for oc.
> 
> The only thing in that regard that needs to be checked is the psu. How old is your psu?


Also 7 years old.  I've added memory, added extra drives (and moved OS/apps to the SSD), and replaced the GPU (GTX 285 to 560).  Otherwise, it is the same as the day I assembled it.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

peche said:


> with new fans maybe ... and also a fresh application of hihgh quality TIM such as AC MX4 or MX2 could do miracles...
> personally i dont like Air coolers... i rather AIO watercoolers...
> 
> PSU is pretty important...


I was actually just shopping thermal compounds and stuck some MX4 in my basket.  I could swap a H90 in place of the Noctua, but I'm not sure if a $90 cooler upgrade is worth is.  I suppose if I could crank another 1Ghz out of the CPU and add the GTX 970 it could last another 2-3 years.  

BUT, if I'm waiting for the new architecture, I'm thinking I might just add the GPU and then move it to a new system and put the 560 back and rebuild this as a file server / backup.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

Here is a review on the PSU: http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/corsair-tx750w-power-supply-review/

Including a quote:

This unit also has all the basic stuff everyone is looking for nowadays: high efficiency, active PFC, excellent cooling solution, enough power to feed high-end video cards, five-year warranty and the best of all: it can really deliver its rated 750 W at 50° C. Not only that. During our tests we could pull up to 900 W at 45° C. So you will be basically buying a 900 W power supply paying the price of a 750 W one. What is sweeter than that?​


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> Also 7 years old.  I've added memory, added extra drives (and moved OS/apps to the SSD), and replaced the GPU (GTX 285 to 560).  Otherwise, it is the same as the day I assembled it.


dammit ... post your specs... otherwise we have to wonder and guess what you already have in the rig .... 



gravedgr said:


> I was actually just shopping thermal compounds and stuck some MX4 in my basket.  I could swap a H90 in place of the Noctua, but I'm not sure if a $90 cooler upgrade is worth is.  I suppose if I could crank another 1Ghz out of the CPU and add the GTX 970 it could last another 2-3 years.
> 
> BUT, if I'm waiting for the new architecture, I'm thinking I might just add the GPU and then move it to a new system and put the 560 back and rebuild this as a file server / backup.


stay away from corsair... those aio have several well known issues... 
i have a thermaltake water 3.0 pro with Tt riing 12 fans .. delidded chip and my temps never gone over 59C on hot hot hot days....
MX4 is the best TIM i have tried so far, can't go wrong with it !


PSU seems to be fine... just try to test it with one of these... for being sure still in decent condition :







Regards,


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

peche said:


> dammit ... post your specs... otherwise we have to wonder and guess what you already have in the rig ....


I posted my specs a couple of hours ago.


----------



## stinger608 (Nov 13, 2015)

I actually still sport an Asus P6T motherboard! I've got to say; Personally I would grab the GTX970 as many have stated @gravedgr , and I would also find a deal on either a hex core extreme processor or a hex core Xeon processor. I would then find a 12 gig triple channel ram kit and run at the boards full potential. 

Heck, I have motherboards that are 10 to 12 years old still going strong.


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> I posted my specs a couple of hours ago.


 ....



stinger608 said:


> Heck, I have motherboards that are 10 to 12 years old still going strong.


+1 here.... also video cards...



stinger608 said:


> I actually still sport an Asus P6T motherboard! I've got to say; Personally I would grab the GTX970 as many have stated @gravedgr , and I would also find a deal on either a hex core extreme processor or a hex core Xeon processor. I would then find a 12 gig triple channel ram kit and run at the boards full potential.


no need for xeons... but decent cooling and a GTX 970 could be a win!

Regards,


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 13, 2015)

Well the I7 920 is old 7 years now. Does that make it a bad CPU? no not if overclokked to around 4 GHz and the I7 920 DO version like my own is are known for there oc capability and most are good for at least 4 GHz and some cooled whit water can hit 4.5 GHz (my own on air cooling can run 4.33 GHz but does get pretty hot, for 24/7 i run my own at 4 GHz).

To OP you have 3 choices.

1. Do as i did overclock the crap out of your CPU (and if you are using a stock cpu cooler now, get a better cooler before you oc) and get a better GPU like a GTX 970. If you op til now can live whit a stock I7 920 and a GTX 560 TI. I think you will be pretty satisfied whit a I7 920 at 3,8-4 GHz and a GTX 970 or something around that GPU power. Dont worry the CPU will no die on you unless og giving it way to much voltage or letting it get to hot. Mine has run OC for the past 3 years now and is still chugging its way in games.

2. replace your I7 920 whit a I7 970/980/980X/990X or a Xeon CPU and oc it to your hearts desire and enjoy your new "used" but cheat 6 core power house.

3. Slaughter the piggy bank and burn some money on new shinny stuff. Like a I7 6700K.

But before you make your final decision, take a look at my own machine first. This same CPU has run triple SLI GTX 285, sli GTX 570, SLI GTX 660 TI and now SLI GTX 970 over the time. Point is the I7 920 can handle much more powerful GPU than your current GTX 560 TI. Dont let you be blinded by its age. If you have the guts to try oc it, you will se how much hitten power and I7 920 can give you.

Here are some 3dmark firestrike scores of my own pc, so you have something to compare whit Agains other/newer machines. please note the clock´s in these test is the maximum i can get my machine stable at for benchmark. under 24/7 use i run the clocks lower. CPU at 4 GHz as already told and GPU´s about 80 MHz under the max clocks.

First whit my old GTX 660 Ti cards (Remember even one GTX 660 TI is more power full than a GTX 570 that again is more power full than a GTX 560 TI card. Just to put things in perspective).






Single GTX 970 (sli deaktivated in driver)






Two GTX 970 in sli.






And as you can se a system whit two GTX 560 TI cards and a much newer but stock clocks I7 4790K cpu is realy not a match for my old pc. Only physics score is higher
and it is because that is the CPU raw power is measure in that test. But se again The old I7 920 is not that far behind a much never i7 4790K cpu at stock speed.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4893317

And a little tip for you. In the link you posted of your old system it looks like your are running 4 memory sticks or only dual channel memory. X58 has triple channel support so for you to use the systems full potential you shut run your system whit 3 or 6 memory sticks. I run my own system whit 6 x 2 GB modules or 12 GB ram in total.

If you have the need for sata 3 and USB 3, you cut try and find a used ASUS U3S6 PCI controller. Im using one my self and it is genius pease of hardware. But be in mind the controller dosent give true sata 3 speed it max out in read at 375 MB/s (sata 2 is 285 MB/s) and in ride is 200 MB/s it is slower than sata 2 that max at 285 MB/s. besides that it is genius and the USB 3 part offers full speed. Tip do not use software for the sata part i windows, let windows controle that par. driver just slows it down aleats if you use a SSD on one of the two sata 3 ports.

https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboard-Accessories/U3S6/

I hope this give you a helping hand to make a final choice. If i where you, i would OC the i7 920 or get 6 core X58 cpu and a new GPU. Oh and yes i will recommend a SSD for your system as well.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 13, 2015)

Went by Best Buy after kids got home and picked up a couple of cans of compressed air (gas) and some paste. Took the cooler off, removed the fan, blew the heat sink, psu, fans and case out and vacuumed the area. 

New paste (had to lol at what was left), heat sink reinstalled, fan added, a little cable mgmt and fired it up. Got an overclock error right off the bat so I set it to stock speeds, rebooted, checked temps in bios, set it to 180x20 with everything else on auto and fired it up.

Appears to be running stable and cool (71-72C) last time I checked OCCT. Have it on an hour test and will check after the gym. If it stays in the 70s, I'll try 190x20 and 190x21 later. 

Fingers crossed.


----------



## SonicZap (Nov 13, 2015)

I'd just get the GTX 970 in your situation, you're going to see a huge improvement even if it will be bottlenecked by your CPU in some situations, at least without a large overclock. If you aren't satisfied then, you could also upgrade the rest of the parts, but I'm certain you'll be happy with the GTX 970 upgrade alone, it's a massive improvement compared to a GTX 560.

I'm running a system of fairly similar performance except that I have a somewhat more powerful GPU, and I'm rarely seeing a CPU bottleneck in games. With a decent overclock your CPU can be quite a bit faster too.


----------



## peche (Nov 13, 2015)

SonicZap said:


> it's a massive improvement compared to a GTX 560.


just want to tell that those fermi GPU's are brave ones!


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 14, 2015)

Successful 1 hour OCCT test.  Graphs look like temp was getting up around 85 so I probably can't go much higher than 3.6Ghz without a better cooler, unless a lower BCLK/higher multiplier runs cooler.  Raising the BCLK shot the temps up yesterday, although I suppose I could try them again with a lower multiplier now that I've done some maintenance on the cooler.


----------



## basco (Nov 14, 2015)

i would try 170x21=3,600mhz with 1,30volt- on most mainboards ya need to play with the voltages for higher bclk then 180\190.
if this works try to lower vcore as low as possible. my 920 had high temps too from 1,3+ volts-every chip has a sweet spot that only you can test.
keep an eye out for auto voltage with hwmonitor maybe it raises it higher then ya want and look for loadline calibration.
and remember that this stress test is not real world so in normal day to day use you will never see such temps.


----------



## Tomgang (Nov 14, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> Successful 1 hour OCCT test.  Graphs look like temp was getting up around 85 so I probably can't go much higher than 3.6Ghz without a better cooler, unless a lower BCLK/higher multiplier runs cooler.  Raising the BCLK shot the temps up yesterday, although I suppose I could try them again with a lower multiplier now that I've done some maintenance on the cooler.



85 is way to much for a I7 920 if you want it to live long and safe under OC. around 85-90 is where its gets critical for that cpu and the cpu begins to throttle down to prevent permanent damage on your cpu. I keep my own cpu at max 70 for 24/7 use and so far it has lastet 3 years whit oc. How much voltage do you give it? My own DO would go up to 3,8 GHz at stock volt (1,25 volt) and at 4 GHz i give it 1,28 volts.

Dont forget to not go over 1,65 volt on memory because if you do. According to Intels spec you are when in risk of frying the CPU's memory controller and by that make it use less.

How many RPM are your fans durring under load? In bios there some times diffenrent fan profiles as silent, normal and performance. Try tjeck what profile the fans are set to and if silent so try normal or performance.
Or get some fans whit more RPM. more noisy yes but you do want to keep your cpu cool and a to hot CPU also tend to be more unstable and by that being harder to get a good OC on the CPU. So keep it cool.

I use fans that can take op to 2400 RPM. Noisy but keep CPU cool and under gamming a cant hire the fans any way and in ilde the fans off cause rums at much lower rpm.

Else read this oc guide. I used it my self to oc my own I7 920 back when.

http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/rmp_i7_920_overclocking


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 14, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> Successful 1 hour OCCT test.  Graphs look like temp was getting up around 85 so I probably can't go much higher than 3.6Ghz without a better cooler, unless a lower BCLK/higher multiplier runs cooler.  Raising the BCLK shot the temps up yesterday, although I suppose I could try them again with a lower multiplier now that I've done some maintenance on the cooler.


That's great, stick with that and just grab a GTX 970 as you will probably already see an improvement with your current card!


----------



## peche (Nov 14, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> That's great, stick with that and just grab a GTX 970 as you will probably already see an improvement with your current card!


not probably ... its confirmed!



Tomgang said:


> 85 is way to much for a I7 920 if you want it to live long and safe under OC. around 85-90 is where its gets critical for that cpu and the cpu begins to throttle down to prevent permanent damage on your cpu. I keep my own cpu at max 70 for 24/7 use and so far it has lastet 3 years whit oc. How much voltage do you give it? My own DO would go up to 3,8 GHz at stock volt (1,25 volt) and at 4 GHz i give it 1,28 volts.


had an i7 2700K ...
4.8ghz @1.28 v and 5ghz @ 1.40


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 15, 2015)

Okay, some more updates.  First, system has been stable for normal stuff (browsing, etc.) for 24 hours running @ 4Ghz.  As noted above, running Prime95 (using small FFT to really stress the CPU) pushes the temps into the upper 80s (89C was highest on core 0), although if I turn off HT it never gets above 75C.

So, I'm not sure whether to turn it back down to 3.6 or 3.8Ghz, or turn HT off.  Or just leave it "as is" since I don't have anything to stress the CPU like that in normal use.  Idle temps are 44-45C.

I also copied my BIOS settings (cobbled together from a number of sites/articles - everyone has a different opinion on what values to use, what settings to tweak/leave alone, etc., so I looked for settings that were consistently recommended or at least listed as "safe".  I'm sure they are not optimized, and hoping you guys can help.  Here goes ....

Freq:

Ratio 21
BCLK 191
PCIE 100
DRAM DDR3-1149 Mhz
UCLK Auto
QPI LINK Auto

Voltage:

CPU 1.24375
PLL 1.88
QPI/DRAM 1.3
IOH 1.2
IOH PCIE Auto
ICH 1.2
ICH PCIE Auto
DRAM 1.64

And I just want to say how much I appreciate everyone's help so far.  I'm on a number of forums and have been for -literally- decades, and its nice to get feedback and advice with out all the usual BS and social commentary.  

Oh, and I have an MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G on the way.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 15, 2015)

I forgot to mention - although I have fiddled with other settings, it seems to run cooler on x21 than x20, even with higher BCLK.  I read in several places that it liked 21 or 19 better than 20, but I'm not sure I read they affected temps - just performance.  Could be a complete coincidence or just some other setting that helped.

Edit - Cinebench R15 CPU test results @ 4.0 Ghz is 41% faster than at stock 2.67 Ghz


----------



## AsRock (Nov 15, 2015)

basco said:


> if your pc is still good enough for you now then only buy new video card.
> you can overclock your i7-920.
> you can still upgrade after the graphicscard if you are not satisfied



Just what i was thinking,  just add a new v card + a new PSU and see if it runs well enough and go from there.


----------



## basco (Nov 15, 2015)

congrats for that nice overclock+ the msi 970
just look out as auto volt does not mean normal\standard -some mainboards give too much on auto.

i only do very short period of stresstools like 10 min and after i try a game or 2.  if i got no probs for a few days then its stable for me.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 15, 2015)

basco said:


> congrats for that nice overclock+ the msi 970
> just look out as auto volt does not mean normal\standard -some mainboards give too much on auto.
> 
> i only do very short period of stresstools like 10 min and after i try a game or 2.  if i got no probs for a few days then its stable for me.


Yeah, lots of guides either suggested leaving IOH/IOH PCIE/ICH/ICH PCIE on Auto or didn't mention fooling with them at all.  One guide said it was important to NOT leave them on Auto as the MB can provide too much voltage, but instead of providing a recommended setting it said "standard setting".  WTF is that?    All the IOH/ICH settings are where I'm the least comfortable.

IOH and ICH are 1.2v per one guide I read, although another said 1.13 for IOH and nothing for ICH so I erred on the side the guide with the most details.  PLL and DRAM settings seem to be mostly the same on every guide.  VTT (QPI/DRAM) is nearly the same everywhere (most say 1.3 to 1.35).  CPU voltage seems to vary a lot - most places say to go as low as you can, which make sense except that I'm not a big fan of crashing the system until I find a setting high enough.  

CPUv @ 1.24 seemed to be "safe" on pretty much every guide, with higher values recommended for higher OC.  Since mine seems to run stable if a bit hot at full test load (with HT on) at 1.24375, I don't see any reason to go higher and I don't think I've seen any 4.0 Ghz configs below this so I'll probably stay where I'm at or move down just a notch to 1.24000 unless I turn the BCLK down.

I know most folks tweak the DDR stick settings, but since I have two different kinds I'm planning to leave that alone and just use the 2:6 ratio to keep it near stock frequency.  If I were to swap in a full 6 sticks of PC-12800, I might try to nail some some settings, but whereas I thought the board supported 16GB it appears to only support 12GB.


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 18, 2015)

This thread seems to have died off.  I'll give one last appeal for help reviewing my voltage settings (see above and here) before I stop updating the thread with cries for help.  

Well, at least until I get my 970 today and give it a spin.  Then there may be all kinds of new questions.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 18, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> This thread seems to have died off.  I'll give one last appeal for help reviewing my voltage settings (see above and here) before I stop updating the thread with cries for help.
> 
> Well, at least until I get my 970 today and give it a spin.  Then there may be all kinds of new questions.


 Your fine, the voltage is not crazy for that chip though I would try to keep peak temps in the low 80's or below (Lower the better).


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 19, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Your fine, the voltage is not crazy for that chip though I would try to keep peak temps in the low 80's or below (Lower the better).


Too high or too low?  Highest temps I've seen today (installed the GTX 970) have been 74C.


----------



## GhostRyder (Nov 19, 2015)

gravedgr said:


> Too high or too low?  Highest temps I've seen today (installed the GTX 970) have been 74C.


 That's fine, 74c is plenty low enough to keep the chip running well!


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 19, 2015)

I did have something weird happen last night.  I was running SWTOR and I starting getting this non-stop tone from the computer.  Like a beep that never stops.

Muting the sound in the OS did nothing, so I thought maybe it was chip or MB related, but when I killed off SWTOR it stopped.  Restarting the program and playing for hours did not make it reoccur.


----------



## stinger608 (Nov 20, 2015)

Sounds like a sound card issue @gravedgr


----------



## gravedgr (Nov 20, 2015)

stinger608 said:


> Sounds like a sound card issue @gravedgr


I'm using the onboard sound, and if it was a sound card issue wouldn't it have muted when I turned the sound off in the OS?

Pretty sure this was the kind of sound you get from the MB when you power it on and something is not right.  Often you hear a series of beeps or tones to let you know what is wrong when you can't get to BIOS.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Nov 20, 2015)

non-stop tone? that's coil whine


----------

