# Wolfdale and Yorkfield watch thread and performance thread



## trt740 (Jan 9, 2008)

If you see them or find them at a decent price post here, then let us know your result with your new chip showing benchmarks and overclocking results when you get it installed. Here is the first one I have seen in stock but it is a crazy price. Still if you were gonna buy a e6850, e6750 your crazy cause this bad boy does 4.0ghz 24/7 as long as your motherboard will do FSB 450.


http://www.allstarshop.com/shop/pro...id=19181&sid=EDLFH0H6NR808N41KJ3J3HLQWMD51L58


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 9, 2008)

trt740 said:


> If you see them or find them at a decent price post here, then let us know your result with your new chip showing benchmarks and overclocking results when you get it installed. Here is the first one I have seen in stock but it is a crazy price. Still if you were gonna buy a e6850, e6750 your crazy cause this bad boy does 4.0ghz 24/7 as long as your motherboard will do FSB 450.
> 
> 
> http://www.allstarshop.com/shop/pro...id=19181&sid=EDLFH0H6NR808N41KJ3J3HLQWMD51L58



You want preorder pricing listed?


----------



## mandelore (Jan 9, 2008)

Well ive had my QX9650 for a lill while, not long got my tec cooling installed etc and working out teething probs, but here are some results i did when i first got it and these are on stock cooler and untweaked ram settings


----------



## trt740 (Jan 9, 2008)

mandelore said:


> Well ive had my QX9650 for a lill while, not long got my tec cooling installed etc and working out teething probs, but here are some results i did when i first got it and these are on stock cooler and untweaked ram settings



can you post where ya bought it and what ya payed for it, for people who are looking for a deal near you.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 9, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> You want preorder pricing listed?



sure that might help aswell.


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 9, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> Heres some for Canada:
> E8200$190
> E8400$210
> E8500$295
> ...



As posted from hot deals thread.


----------



## mandelore (Jan 9, 2008)

I got it from www.dabs.com

http://www.dabs.com/productview.asp...&SearchKey=All&SearchMode=All&NavigationKey=0

I got it via the finance option, so im paying ~ £20 a month for it, which i can forget about since its direct debit.


----------



## DOM (Jan 10, 2008)

*Active
*
Dual-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8400 3.00GHz 1333FSB 6MB Cache $249.00+ S/H

*Coming Soon
( ETA: March 3rd )*

Dual-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8200 2.66GHz 1333FSB 6MB Cache $209.00+ S/H 

Dual-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz 1333FSB 6MB Cache $319.00+ S/H

Quad-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q9300 2.50GHz 1333FSB 6MB Cache $309.00 + S/H

Quad-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q9450 2.66GHz 1333FSB 12MB Cache $369.00 + S/H

Quad-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q9550 2.83GHz 1333FSB 12MB Cache $609.00 + S/H

*In Stock*
Quad-Core Intel® Core™ 2 Extreme QX9650 3.00GHz 1333FSB 12MB Cache $1149.00 + S/H


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jan 10, 2008)

Hmmm, wheres the e8190 (cheap version of e8200)?


----------



## DOM (Jan 10, 2008)

JrRacinFan said:


> Hmmm, wheres the e8190 (cheap version of e8200)?



cant find it but found this about it 



> Core 2 Duo E8190 – will run at 2.66 GHz, have 6MB of L2 cache and FSB speed of 1333 MHz. Power consumption - 65 watt. This is the low end of the new series and will not support virtualisation or Intel's Trusted Execution Technology.


----------



## BloodTotal (Jan 10, 2008)

dam this stuff is just way too expensive right now, now im probably going to have to postpone my new computer to may or something, when the prices really drop ~ like the q6600 when it came out $1800 ~ in a couple of months it was $400


----------



## DOM (Jan 10, 2008)

BloodTotal said:


> dam this stuff is just way too expensive right now, now im probably going to have to postpone my new computer to may or something, when the prices really drop ~ like the q6600 when it came out $1800 ~ in a couple of months it was $400



yeah lil high but not to bad 

this is what X-bit labs posted link



> The pricing info on the new Intel processors is a very important addition to the technical briefs given in this table:
> 
> Core 2 Duo E8500 - $266;
> Core 2 Duo E8400 - $183;
> ...



cuz that place was lil more then some but with S/H was less

the Q9650 is less then newegg and thats with S/H like lil under $40


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

BloodTotal said:


> dam this stuff is just way too expensive right now, now im probably going to have to postpone my new computer to may or something, when the prices really drop ~ like the q6600 when it came out $1800 ~ in a couple of months it was $400



get a e8200 it will beat a e6850


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

Guys for the record i'm going to try to hold back and not buy a Q9450 at 369.00 it's out of my cpu  price range and since all the other chips have less on chip memory I'm not sure anything less is truely a upgrade. What do you think. On that note my mouth is already watering and my mind planning a ebay sale one week ahead of time. Fxxxcking intel like waving some pxssy infront of a  inmate


----------



## BloodTotal (Jan 10, 2008)

> Guys for the record i'm going to try to hold back and not buy a Q9450 at 369.00 it's out of my cpu price range and since all the other chips have less on chip memory I'm not sure anything less is truely a upgrade. what do youn think. On that not my mouth is already watering and planning a ebay sale one week ahead of time.



my mouth is also watering


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jan 10, 2008)

trt, IMHO, the rig you have currently should hold you over until Nehalem and possibly then some.


----------



## BloodTotal (Jan 10, 2008)

> Fxxxcking intel like waving some pxssy infront of a inmate



didnt read the last part of your comment there

just made my day


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

JrRacinFan said:


> trt, IMHO, the rig you have currently should hold you over until Nehalem and possibly then some.



Oh yes your right it is the need for speed lol


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 10, 2008)

in a few hours or in the worst case senario tomorrow i`ll have my 8400-8500....
it depends which will come first...


----------



## y2kbugger (Jan 10, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> in a few hours or in the worst case senario tomorrow i`ll have my 8400-8500....
> it depends which will come first...


sweeet!


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> in a few hours or in the worst case senario tomorrow i`ll have my 8400-8500....
> it depends which will come first...



can you post where you bought it then . might help someone near you.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

trt740 said:


> get a e8200 it will beat a e6850



I am not so sure, the E6850 regularily acheives 4.2gig with it's 9 multi, you and I used to be able to bench around those speeds with ours, to acheive that with the 8200 users need a motherboard capable of stably delivering an FSB of 525Mhz, I would guess near on 80% of our members would not be able to acheive that stably.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 10, 2008)

trt740 said:


> can you post where you bought it then . might help someone near you.



in Greece?he can send me a pm if he is interested..


----------



## Wile E (Jan 10, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> in Greece?he can send me a pm if he is interested..



Why wouldn't you post it here? Tho I don't know your intentions, it does come across as you just being a jerk. (Note: I am not calling you a jerk. It's just how this seems)


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanx you....
Things are not clear yet about the arrival and the distribution of the cpus..
a pm would be nice..
ask before answer..


----------



## Wile E (Jan 10, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> Thanx you....
> Things are not clear yet about the arrival and the distribution of the cpus..
> a pm would be nice..
> ask before answer..


I was just curious. I didn't think you were intentionally being that way, nor did I mean any offense. I just didn't want to see anyone get upset at you, thinking you were hiding something.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 10, 2008)

I am hiding sth but it`s not in my hand to reveal it...
i dont see a reason why someone might be upset with me...
end of story..


----------



## trog100 (Jan 10, 2008)

the E8400 is the only one worth waiting for.. without the 9 x multiplier there wont be much to be gained from the lesser ones..

9 x 450 (4 gig-ish) should be easy the rest will be down to the mobo..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> in Greece?he can send me a pm if he is interested..



Therer are many people  on this forum from different parts of the world so post it.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> I am not so sure, the E6850 regularily acheives 4.2gig with it's 9 multi, you and I used to be able to bench around those speeds with ours, to acheive that with the 8200 users need a motherboard capable of stably delivering an FSB of 525Mhz, I would guess near on 80% of our members would not be able to acheive that stably.



Yes the e8200 only does around 3.8 at a 24/7 clock but a e 8500 will do 4.3 ghz 24/7 on air and as far as I know no e6850 can't do that maybe 4.0ghz on water. A e8500 will bench on air at about 4.8ghz. I was mainly talking quads, because of the less on chip memory they are not that big a jump unless you buy a  12mb version which is going to cost about 169.00 more than say a Xeon 3220 which will do 4.0ghz on air. I think that might be a waste. We will see


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Yes the e8200 only does around 3.8 at a 24/7 clock but a e 8500 will do 4.3 ghz 24/7 on air and as far as I know no e6850 can't do that maybe 4.0ghz on water. A e8500 will bench on air at about 4.8ghz. I was mainly talking quads, because of the less on chip memory they are not that big a jump unless you buy a  12mb version which is going to cost about 169.00 more than say a Xeon 3220 which will do 4.0ghz on air. I think that might be a waste. We will see



I agree completely about the 8500, I only commented because I thought we were talking specifically about the 8200 which I feel is a bit of a diminishing return because of the multi.  I thought your 6850 did 4gig 24/7?  mine did on air at 1.5V.


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2008)

I love the exhange rate.

E8400 - $183

Less than £100  I am so getting one as soon as they are available (regardless of actual UK price)


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

Hi all, 
just thought I'd let everyone know that I have in stock both the E8400 and the E8500. I have a Ebay store over here.
Currently I have listed the E8400. I had 3, sold 1,  with 1 offering Express Post International from here in Sydney.
I can't wait to test one of these as they look pretty awesome.
I managed to pickup some stock yesterday, as they seemed to have launched here first!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

Darknova said:


> I love the exhange rate.
> 
> E8400 - $183
> 
> Less than £100  I am so getting one as soon as they are available (regardless of actual UK price)



Do you really think it will cost less than £100 here?  Looking at current retail price currency cross overs from the US, I would estimate that based on a US retail price of $183 that would probably translate to £130!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> Hi all,
> just thought I'd let everyone know that I have in stock both the E8400 and the E8500. I have a Ebay store over here.
> Currently I have listed the E8400. I had 3, sold 1,  with 1 offering Express Post International from here in Sydney.
> I can't wait to test one of these as they look pretty awesome.
> I managed to pickup some stock yesterday, as they seemed to have launched here first!



$325 Aus at "buy it now" but you dont ship to the UK.  Thats £150.


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Do you really think it will cost less than £100 here?  Looking at current retail price currency cross overs from the US, I would estimate that based on a US retail price of $183 that would probably translate to £130!



Even so. £130 is pretty damn good for a brand new 45nm 3Ghz chip don't you think?


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

I can if you would like me to.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

Darknova said:


> Even so. £130 is pretty damn good for a brand new 45nm 3Ghz chip don't you think?



I do, I just feel inclined to be a little less excited when sombody else is getting it for 30% cheaper!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> I can if you would like me to.



Not for me thanks I only play with 4 cores these days but thanx for the offer.


----------



## erocker (Jan 10, 2008)

Just got word from a Newegg rep.  January 21st is the magic date!  I begged him to sell me one (even tried to sweeten the deal for him)... he wouldn't do it.:shadedshu


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

quite frankly I am amazed that newegg gets it so late compared to here. I now we are close to Asia etc, but things sure are different these days.


----------



## erocker (Jan 10, 2008)

You can purchase one here, but they are all "sold out" at the moment.  Just google e8500 and click shopping.


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

IMO the e8400 though, is the best because it's way cheaper....$85 differnce here
(for 100+mhz!) and is the only one that will clock to the same sort of heights as the e8500


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> Hi all,
> just thought I'd let everyone know that I have in stock both the E8400 and the E8500. I have a Ebay store over here.
> Currently I have listed the E8400. I had 3, sold 1,  with 1 offering Express Post International from here in Sydney.
> I can't wait to test one of these as they look pretty awesome.
> I managed to pickup some stock yesterday, as they seemed to have launched here first!



Advertising?


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> IMO the e8400 though, is the best because it's way cheaper....$85 differnce here
> (for 100+mhz!) and is the only one that will clock to the same sort of heights as the e8500



Yes but it has the lower multi, many motherboards wont do 500FSB+ if you want those magic 4.4gigs+ on air.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Advertising?



Yup!


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

no link...just a bit of news from the 'land down under'


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> no link...just a bit of news from the 'land down under'



Lol, so you didnt just register as a user to tell us you had some for sale? you dont need the link, you already said it was Aus E Bay, I found your chips in 30 seconds.  TBH, noone is going to buy a chip from a guy they dont know off e bay from Australia, nothing against you of course but there is a risk invloved.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 10, 2008)

erocker said:


> You can purchase one here, but they are all "sold out" at the moment.  Just google e8500 and click shopping.



This "sold out" is BS. It means "we don't have them yet"


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 10, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Lol, so you didnt just register as a user to tell us you had some for sale? you dont need the link, you already said it was Aus E Bay, I found your chips in 30 seconds.



LOL, just one big coincidence I bet...


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 10, 2008)

Now, if you were an active user and came here saying "I know where I can get my good friends at TPU a great deal on an e8400" (if it was a good deal), then left it to others to PM, that wouldn't be a problem. You are advertising, and at a grossly inflated price!


----------



## erocker (Jan 10, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> This "sold out" is BS. It means "we don't have them yet"



Yeah, I know... hence the quotes.


----------



## platinumexpress (Jan 10, 2008)

I would like to appologise as I was just being a little cheeky..no offence intended.
Yes I would like to keep posting on other threads..or perhaps when I try these chips for myself. I am a bit of an enthusiast myself.


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 10, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> This "sold out" is BS. It means "we don't have them yet"



Or that they have them but cant list them for sale yet


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> You want preorder pricing listed?



this store has lost it's mind check out there prices on the wolfdales and yorkfields http://www.allstarshop.com/shop/subsection.asp?dept_id=181&sid=N4S2GV5WXV539HNH0GCHPQNLW3SADKPB


----------



## erocker (Jan 10, 2008)

trt740 said:


> this store has lost it's mind check out there prices on the wolfdales and yorkfields http://www.allstarshop.com/shop/subsection.asp?dept_id=181&sid=N4S2GV5WXV539HNH0GCHPQNLW3SADKPB



You can get the 8200 from there NOW!


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

erocker said:


> You can get the 8200 from there NOW!



yes and you would be better off at that price getting a e6420 or e6750 thats chip doesn't overclock well.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 10, 2008)

anyone finds a preoder site post them we have a few already. I want to laugh at these crazy inflated prices.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 10, 2008)

platinumexpress said:


> I would like to appologise as I was just being a little cheeky..no offence intended.
> Yes I would like to keep posting on other threads..or perhaps when I try these chips for myself. I am a bit of an enthusiast myself.



Thats fair enuff, the comments are only made because we have pretty fair but stringent guidlines on this stuff which applies to all of us.


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 11, 2008)

Heres where you Canucks who like a good raping can get an e8500 for $400

The E8200 is "only" $260

Edit: Oh, and if your really in the mood for some S&M, you can get their Q9550


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 11, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> Heres where you Canucks who like a good raping can get an e8500 for $400
> 
> The E8200 is "only" $260



Man, what are these store owners smoking?:shadedshu


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jan 11, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> Heres where you Canucks who like a good raping can get an e8500 for $400
> 
> The E8200 is "only" $260



Can I buy them 100 unit quantities?


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 11, 2008)

Still pretty bad but certainly better than the other clowns above.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 11, 2008)

erocker said:


> Yeah, I know... hence the quotes.



 My bad. A little slow today!


----------



## trt740 (Jan 12, 2008)

man no ones selling these anymore?


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 12, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Man, what are these store owners smoking?:shadedshu



Can I have a pack?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 13, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> I agree completely about the 8500, I only commented because I thought we were talking specifically about the 8200 which I feel is a bit of a diminishing return because of the multi.  I thought your 6850 did 4gig 24/7?  mine did on air at 1.5V.





Well looking at the Quads only the Q9540 will outperform my chip and it will do it by a bunch but you will also pay about 180.00 more than mine shipped, after reading the reviews on the 
Q9300 it will sell for the same price as a 3220 but won't overclock as high as my 3120 will it looks to do only 3.7 for a everyday clock. Mine does over 3.8ghz so a 3220 should beat it by a bunch. I think your right Tatty unless you buy a e8500 or Q9540 it won't be worth it and then your gonna spend a bunch. i bet your x3220 ends up beat a Q9300 and falls just behind a Q9540 and cost less.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 13, 2008)

Tankguys said:
			
		

> Due to popular demand, we will be offering a Wolfdale "Pre-order".
> 
> Q9450 - 2.66Ghz, 12Mb L2. Approximate Pricing: $349.99
> E8500 - 3.16Ghz, 6Mb L2. Approximate Pricing: $304.99
> ...



MSRP is just a rough figure.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 13, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> MSRP is just a rough figure.



see the dual cores don't look so bad to me it's the quads that are over priced why buy a Q9540 for 349.00 when you can buy a x3220 for 279.00. The 3220 won't be as fast but will be faster than a Q9300 and E8500, and will do 4.0ghz. On the other hand why buy a e6850 for 279.00 when you can buy a e8400 with more on chip memory and slightly better performance.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 13, 2008)

i'd say the 45nm quads are a marginal increase in performance over the 65nm quads. they CAN overclock well but not on the current boards that most people are using. the high FSB and low multi's of the 45nm quads will not OC as easily as the older 65nm quads.

NOW .... i strongly believe the e8400 is the new e6600. everyone wants it/will get one and it WILL overclock very well on most boards that everyone currently owns and will do even better on next gen boards. i think the e8400 will be able to do 4ghz on air very easily and 4.6-5ghz on water. 

this is just what i have gathered from the 400+ pages of reviews, OC's, tech pages, etc i have read on the 45nm chips.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 13, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> i'd say the 45nm quads are a marginal increase in performance over the 65nm quads. they CAN overclock well but not on the current boards that most people are using. the high FSB and low multi's of the 45nm quads will not OC as easily as the older 65nm quads.
> 
> NOW .... i strongly believe the e8400 is the new e6600. everyone wants it/will get one and it WILL overclock very well on most boards that everyone currently owns and will do even better on next gen boards. i think the e8400 will be able to do 4ghz on air very easily and 4.6-5ghz on water.
> 
> this is just what i have gathered from the 400+ pages of reviews, OC's, tech pages, etc i have read on the 45nm chips.



it and the e8500 are both going to be fast


----------



## strick94u (Jan 13, 2008)

Any reveiws and test out there on these chips?


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 13, 2008)

strick94u said:


> Any reveiws and test out there on these chips?



TONS, just look for them. search e8500, e8400, etc.


----------



## strick94u (Jan 13, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> TONS, just look for them. search e8500, e8400, etc.



Can't find one in english seems to a few japanise


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 13, 2008)

i'll get them... back in a few....

EDIT:

e8200, e8400, e8500
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-wolfdale_12.html
e8400
http://en.expreview.com/?p=68&amp;page=4


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 13, 2008)

Here's a decent review..
http://en.expreview.com/?p=68&page=1


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 13, 2008)

this has been around for a long while....

http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/259106-intel-penryn-45nm-information-discussion-thread.html


----------



## smartphone (Jan 13, 2008)

wow some e8400 can't even do 4 GHz orthos stable...


----------



## Wile E (Jan 13, 2008)

smartphone said:


> wow some e8400 can't even do 4 GHz orthos stable...


Of course. There's some E8500s that won't be able to do 4GHz stable. Not all chips are good clockers. Sometimes you just get a dud.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 13, 2008)

Wile E said:


> Of course. There's some E8500s that won't be able to do 4GHz stable. Not all chips are good clockers. Sometimes you just get a dud.



And I have had my share of them! ............but to be fair........some good ones as well.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 14, 2008)

any more sightings or performance links , benches etc.... post them boy's


----------



## trt740 (Jan 15, 2008)

not one person has one these B-otches yet not a single e8200 e8400 e8500 etc...


----------



## trog100 (Jan 15, 2008)

i have one on pre order.. an 8400.. exactly when they arrive in stock i dont know.. shouldnt be long thow..

trog


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 16, 2008)

i read somewhere that Intel europe has prevented retail selling until 20 of January....
so,be patient...


----------



## trog100 (Jan 16, 2008)

yes the 20th being a sunday it might be shipped on the monday meaning i might get it get it on the tuesday.. with a bit of luck.. he he

and if the bloody thing dont cruise 4 gig it will be a waste of space.. 

trog


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 16, 2008)

or,like here in Greece,they have them in storage but cannot sell them yet..


----------



## tzitzibp (Jan 16, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> or,like here in Greece,they have them in storage but cannot sell them yet..



Its' not just intel....
many local shops just keep them in storage, so that they can get rid of as many as possible of their older stock.....

And all leftovers are put into cheap pcs, in which, usually, the only thing worth anything is the cpu... and they actually promote this!:shadedshu


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 16, 2008)

no no no...only one shop has them here...
BUT it`s an official Intel anouncement that no one sells until the 20th.


----------



## tzitzibp (Jan 16, 2008)

thats good to know....

I just hope that after the 20th, they will actually sell...


----------



## trog100 (Jan 16, 2008)

giorgos.. i know the extra .5 multiplier will be essential for record breaking.. but do u recon they have speed binned them.. ??

i am hoping they havnt.. i cant see the need for such a small increase.. i couldnt bring myself to fork out the extra price premium for the 8500..

£144 to £202 was a little too much..  

trog


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 16, 2008)

yes i know....the .5 extra will help me a lot by not pushing the mobo to its limits,and by having tighter ram config....essential as you said indeed...
From few retail 8500 that i`ve seen over XS,the results are very promising....~4.9ghz with water...
what else could you desire??hehehe...


----------



## trog100 (Jan 16, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> yes i know....the .5 extra will help me a lot by not pushing the mobo to its limits,and by having tighter ram config....essential as you said indeed...
> From few retail 8500 that i`ve seen over XS,the results are very promising....~4.9ghz with water...
> what else could you desire??hehehe...



4.6 from the £60 cheaper 8400 in my case.. he he he

record breaking is too expensive for me.. i settle for nearly there.. it costs less.. he he he

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 17, 2008)

are we sure the q9450 won't come out Jan 21


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 17, 2008)

trt740 said:


> are we sure the q9450 won't come out Jan 21



Yes, we are sure


----------



## trt740 (Jan 17, 2008)

Hawk1 said:


> Yes, we are sure



well i'm sure now


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 17, 2008)

There are some errata issues with some of Intel's new quad cores.  The bug affects the launch of the quad-core Q9300, Q9450 and Q9550 processors


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 18, 2008)

Well,today i got my E8500 Q740A493...
with only an hour of testing i stopped orthos at 471*8.5 = 4003mhz with 1.28Vcore idle - load..seems promising...temps ~39C load.
also i did a quick super pi 1m at 4.2ghz with 1.3Vcore...
Stay tuned..


----------



## Hawk1 (Jan 18, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> Well,today i got my E8500 Q740A493...
> with only an hour of testing i stopped orthos at 471*8.5 = 4003mhz with 1.28Vcore idle - load..seems promising...temps ~39C load.
> also i did a quick super pi 1m at 4.2ghz with 1.3Vcore...
> Stay tuned..



Excellent OC and temp. I'm still on the fence wether to get one or not, as I can take my current e6600 to 3.6. Still have to think about it. 

Great job Giorgos!


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 18, 2008)

thanx..
the only two things i`m concerned are the ~10C difference between the 2 cores (probably a monitoring thing) and the minor issues with the multi and the mobo...
with clear multi f.e. 8-9 i had problems,with .5 f.e. 8.5-9.5 everything was good..


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 18, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> Well,today i got my E8500 Q740A493...
> with only an hour of testing i stopped orthos at 471*8.5 = 4003mhz with 1.28Vcore idle - load..seems promising...temps ~39C load.
> also i did a quick super pi 1m at 4.2ghz with 1.3Vcore...
> Stay tuned..



Nice! I just got notification that mine will ship out on 1/22. I got 2 day shipping, so I should have it 1/24!


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 18, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> thanx..
> the only two things i`m concerned are the ~10C difference between the 2 cores (probably a monitoring thing) and the minor issues with the multi and the mobo...
> with clear multi f.e. 8-9 i had problems,with .5 f.e. 8.5-9.5 everything was good..



With those differences in temps, you may want to see if you could re-seat the hsf.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 18, 2008)

i`ve got it under water..i`ll try remounting the block but i guess it`s a simple monitoring thing..


----------



## trog100 (Jan 18, 2008)

i am hoping mine will arrive next tuesday..

trog


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 19, 2008)

Second minor update is a lot of pi 1m runs at 4345 @ 1.35Vcore.
My E6850 needed 1.68V for that speed....


----------



## erocker (Jan 19, 2008)

Someone is selling an E8500 on the [H] right now.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 19, 2008)

i just got 35 e8400's in stock today. PM me if you want one. 

i paid $6120 for 35. do the math.

EDIT: these are retail box with cooler. brand new and sealed.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 19, 2008)

a small teaser........without the slightest tweaking..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> a small teaser........without the slightest tweaking..



anyone have a e8400


----------



## trog100 (Jan 19, 2008)

what we all want to know is.. does the 8400 go where the 8500 goes.. he he he

are the 500's the same as the 400's or are they cherry picked.. ??

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

reports are the e8200 are doing 570fsb and breaking 4.0ghz way into 4.0ghz


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 19, 2008)

well after i sell 3 of my e8400's i'll open one and OC the hell out of it on my new maximus formula unless someone wants it. 

from what i've heard the E8400 should be able to do 4.2ghz pretty easy. i hope to get 4.2ghz 24/7 stable.


----------



## ElWapo973 (Jan 19, 2008)

Hmm, fitseries3 you have PM.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 19, 2008)

trt740 said:


> reports are the e8200 are doing 570fsb and breaking 4.0ghz way into 4.0ghz



Can you just imagine? 2 dual core chips that will do over 4 Ghz per core, run cool on low vcore, and cost less than $200. Please don't wake me if I'm dreaming....


----------



## EddxPT (Jan 19, 2008)

This new line of core 2 duos are going to throw quite a punch on amd. I think it is a pitty that amd is now doing not so good on the desktop. We have seen amd really down before, but each time intel strikes ( like now )...well it just seems that amd is not gonna be back as desktop cpu speed leader at least for another year or so. At least intel priced this core2duos at a very competitive price, they pretty much kill the previous core 2 duo line.

Can't wait to get my hands on one of those. Which board do u guys advice to pair it up with P35 ? X38 ?


----------



## erocker (Jan 19, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> i just got 35 e8400's in stock today. PM me if you want one.
> 
> i paid $6120 for 35. do the math.
> 
> EDIT: these are retail box with cooler. brand new and sealed.



Man!  I just bought my Asus Maximus and Transcend DDR2 1200 ram today!  I'm broke untill next week, or if I sell a car tomorrow...


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 19, 2008)

luckily i just sold my e6700 last week. i got $170 out of it. my e8400 cost me $174.50. i had to buy 35 to get it for that price though. i've now sold 7 of them since 3pm CST.

i would say, if you have a p35 board or can get one rather cheap... use it. the x38 seems only marginally better. the x48 will be pretty good though.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> luckily i just sold my e6700 last week. i got $170 out of it. my e8400 cost me $174.50. i had to buy 35 to get it for that price though. i've now sold 7 of them since 3pm CST.
> 
> i would say, if you have a p35 board or can get one rather cheap... use it. the x38 seems only marginally better. the x48 will be pretty good though.



Heck if my quad sells on ebay I might even buy one. most likely I won't but maybe. i'm gonna try a x3220


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 19, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Heck if my quad sells on ebay I might even buy one. most likely I won't but maybe. i'm gonna try a x3220



yeah... i've heard the xeon's have better tolerances due to the server environment. i think they are hand picked or something. they can take more voltage and have a higher max temp.... 82c i believe. correct me if im wrong.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 19, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> yeah... i've heard the xeon's have better tolerances due to the server environment. i think they are hand picked or something. they can take more voltage and have a higher max temp.... 82c i believe. correct me if im wrong.



I believe all Kentsfields have a core tjunction of 100c


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 19, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> I believe all Kentsfields have a core tjunction of 100c



duh, im stupid. the dual core xeons are like 82c and quads are 108c for xeons. both are a little higher than the C2D/C2Q's are. 

thanks paulieg for pointing out my mistake.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 19, 2008)

No problem..


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 19, 2008)

a few results testing at 1.48Vcore.3dmark01 is with 1.55V.
Aquamark is at 4450mhz.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> a few results testing at 1.48Vcore.3dmark01 is with 1.55V.
> Aquamark is at 4450mhz.



What do you  think you could achieve 24/7 on air with one of these bad boy's?


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 19, 2008)

~4000-4100mhz i guess..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> ~4000-4100mhz i guess..



okay thats pretty good was kinda hoping to see 4.3ghz could you do that 24./7 on water


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 19, 2008)

i`m orthos stable at 4420mhz with 1.49Vcore..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> i`m orthos stable at 4420mhz with 1.49Vcore..



wow very good I'm playing with the e8200 Idea at the moment I am seeing them do 570 fsb on air. If thats true  I might buy it, I'm also looking at a x3220 and a e8400. Im mulling it over. My X3210 is doing 3.8ghz on air all 4 cores at 1.40v so with a higher x9 multipler I could do 4.0ghz on on air with a x3220 I'm betting.


----------



## Holly (Jan 19, 2008)

Folks, any rough guess how high stable speed could I squeeze out from Asus Blitz Formula, E8400, Corsair TwinX8500 (1066MHz)? The system is water cooled with Zalman Reserator 2 (northbridge, cpu). Is it realistic to hope for 4GHz 24/7 ?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

E8400 on the way Ahhh held out but finally couldn't resist, not sure if i'm gonna keep it after I play with it a while or keep my xeon quad. I'm so ashamed I'm intels crack whore


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 19, 2008)

trt740 said:


> E8400 on the way Ahhh held out but finally couldn't resist, not sure if i'm gonna keep it after I play with it a while or keep my xeon quad. I'm so ashamed I'm intels crack whore



+1. We need a support group.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 19, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> +1. We need a support group.




Damn just Lmao


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 20, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> ~4000-4100mhz i guess..



Surely more?  I did 4gig 24/7 on my 6850 @ 1.5V.


----------



## erocker (Jan 20, 2008)

So.. where do I find the Wolfdale and Yorkfield watches?  *drumroll*


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 20, 2008)

erocker said:


> So.. where do I find the Wolfdale and Yorkfield watches?  *drumroll*



Cute..


----------



## ElWapo973 (Jan 20, 2008)

Weeeeeee!  I just got my hands on an E8400 this morning(thinks: gotta change my sig).  Too bad I still need a couple more parts to finish my new rig.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 20, 2008)

E8400 available at

zzf
tankguys


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 20, 2008)

damn, mine are $10 cheaper than ZZF and $8 cheaper than tankguys. 7 left.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 20, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Surely more?  I did 4gig 24/7 on my 6850 @ 1.5V.



the first batch of the wolfdales seem to be a bit hot...
so i`m saying 4-4.1 with low Vcore...
right now i choose the 24/7 clocks of 4.2ghz @ 1.4Vcore..


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 20, 2008)

and some 3D one run results testing at 1.496Vcore load..
Safe frequency was 4405mhz for the big ones and 4504mhz for aquamark.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 20, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> damn, mine are $10 cheaper than ZZF and $8 cheaper than tankguys. 7 left.



fit, can you keep these posts in the buy/sell section please.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 20, 2008)

one thing i seem to have gathered from reading the aussie threads.. they seem to come with a lesser stock cooler than the 6xxx series chips.. more celery like..

trog


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 20, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> the first batch of the wolfdales seem to be a bit hot...
> so i`m saying 4-4.1 with low Vcore...
> right now i choose the 24/7 clocks of 4.2ghz @ 1.4Vcore..



Gotta say thats amazing at 1.4V ...very nice!


----------



## trog100 (Jan 21, 2008)

i have just read a suggestion that intel will limit the availability of the new 45nm parts for quite some time so as not to knock the sales of the older parts.. in essence they peform too well and intel will only be competing against its self so to speak..

i have one on pre-order.. those holding back waiting for price drops are gonna be disappointed i recon..  it aint gonna happen as long as intel wish to keep selling the older parts..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 21, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i have just read a suggestion that intel will limit the availability of the new 45nm parts for quite some time so as not to knock the sales of the older parts.. in essence they peform too well and intel will only be competing against its self so to speak..
> 
> i have one on pre-order.. those holding back waiting for price drops are gonna be disappointed i recon..  it aint gonna happen as long as intel wish to keep selling the older parts..
> 
> trog




Now we are getting glimps of what the world with just intel  will be like with no AMD


----------



## trog100 (Jan 21, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Now we are getting glimps of what the world with just intel  will be like with no AMD



absolutely.. i also believe the not entirely substantiated "news" i just mentioned.. 

we already know they are holding back the quads.. now it seems the duals will be in short supply..

trog


----------



## trog100 (Jan 21, 2008)

so what do we know so far..

they clock well.. over 4 gig easy on air..

the 8200.. why bother.. the 6750 will do just as well..

the 8400 is the sweet spot for most people..

the 8500 is probably worth it to extreme overclockers.. benchers..

they run a little hotter when volted than perhaps hoped for..

they come with a micky mouse celeron type cooler..

they might well be in short supply for quite some time..

the price aint likely to drop..

trog


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 21, 2008)

trog100 said:


> so what do we know so far..
> 
> they clock well.. over 4 gig easy on air..
> 
> ...



I reckon you have it spot on there.....just one thing I think I would add, perhaps the Wolfdale prices will drop a little once the Yorkfields are released March/April time so as there is no conflict between the two, if you look at the recommended price for the lowest Yorkfiled and compare that with the 8500 it's close stuff (well pretty close).


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 21, 2008)

Gave away my first 8500,awaiting for the second (and better lets hope..)
And some final results playing with the Q740A493T.


----------



## Holly (Jan 21, 2008)

Whatever, I'd change my E6300 for this E8400 any time.
TBH Let's hope AMD shows some competitive CPUs very soon (price drops wise) otherwise they might get into serious troubles (after spending lots $$$ for ATI) and we won't be able to get neither cheap CPUs neither cheap GPUs...

giorgos: what was wrong with your 1st one?


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 21, 2008)

Lets say i was expecting some more...........


----------



## trog100 (Jan 22, 2008)

my E8400 has been shipped.. i should have it tomorrow.. hope it does what i expect it to.. he he

there does seem to be a supply problem.. i only got one cos i pre-ordered a week ago.. they are now listed as overdue..

also it seems there are less 8500 chips available than 8400 ones.. not because of extra demand for the 8400.. they are just in very short supply..

trog


----------



## MikeJeng (Jan 22, 2008)

Does Overclocking void the warranty?


----------



## niko084 (Jan 22, 2008)

MikeJeng said:


> Does Overclocking void the warranty?



No sir, as long as there is not physical damage to the chip so you can't let it massively overheat and burn real bad.


----------



## Holly (Jan 22, 2008)

Well according to warranty deals in my country overclocking voids the warranty. BUT... unless you turn your CPU into the fry pan there is no way how the shop could tell your CPU was OCed.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 22, 2008)

Holly said:


> Well according to warranty deals in my country overclocking voids the warranty. BUT... unless you turn your CPU into the fry pan there is no way how the shop could tell your CPU was OCed.



Yes, it's very hard to tell if a overclock has killed your cpu unless it's physically burned. Actually though, I've never had to use the warranty on any cpu I've owned, nor has anyone I personally know. Modern day processors are hard to kill. Hell, it's even incredibly difficult to crack a core with the heatspreaders on top.


----------



## candle_86 (Jan 22, 2008)

ive killed them, ran a newcastle 3200 s754 @ 2.8ghz with 1.75V for a few weeks before it croaked, AMD shipped me a new one shorty there after


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 22, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> ive killed them, ran a newcastle 3200 s754 @ 2.8ghz with 1.75V for a few weeks before it croaked, AMD shipped me a new one shorty there after



Well, no offense, but runnin' that much vcore through that chip wasn't smart...and really, AMD shouldn't have to pay for anyone's stupidity.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 22, 2008)

candle_86 said:


> ive killed them, ran a newcastle 3200 s754 @ 2.8ghz with 1.75V for a few weeks before it croaked, AMD shipped me a new one shorty there after



Unlkely to do that these days, thermal shutdown is so much more efficient now.......unless of course you diasable it in bios


----------



## trt740 (Jan 23, 2008)

*Paul your killing me*



Paulieg said:


> Well, no offense, but runnin' that much vcore through that chip wasn't smart...and really, AMD shouldn't have to pay for anyone's stupidity.



LMAO


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 23, 2008)

I'm all for taking things to the limit, but damn, don't make manufacturers pay for it. It just drives up the cost of components. Then all of us suffer.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 23, 2008)

damn... e8400 is great! running 4.1ghz @ 1.275v vcore. 31c idle and 38c orthos load.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 23, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> damn... e8400 is great! running 4.1ghz @ 1.275v vcore. 31c idle and 38c orthos load.



Nice. Can you post a screenie, fit?


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 23, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Nice. Can you post a screenie, fit?



as soon as i find the MAX on this 680i.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 23, 2008)

here you go.... it's funny... this e8400/8800gt SLI combo beats my q6600/8800ultra SLI combo. 
WTF?!?


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 23, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> here you go.... it's funny... this e8400/8800gt SLI combo beats my q6600/8800ultra SLI combo.
> WTF?!?



It should do shouldnt it?  I thought 8800GT's were a fair bit quicker in 2006 than the Ultra's??

Theoretically, in 2006 you need to acheive a 4.75Gig run on a dual core to match a quad core at 3.9Gig according to Tom's hardware.....not sure if thats right but I am sure they know more than me on the subject

Very nice score by the way...Once my rig is up and running again, I am hoping to hit 18000 in 2006 on a voltmodded single 8800GTS 512MB....well thats the aim......wether I acheive it or not remains to be seen.....we all need challenges!


----------



## trog100 (Jan 23, 2008)

> Theoretically, in 2006 you need to acheive a 4.75Gig run on a dual core to match a quad core at 3.9Gig according to Tom's hardware.....not sure if thats right but I am sure they know more than me on the subject



is that what they say.. still grafix cards being equal i spose it sounds about right being as u would be trying to boost what in essence is a grafix card (gaming) bench by way of a couple more cpu core scores.. or to put it another way make up for a missing two cpu core scores..

mind u its thing like this which make me hate the now out dated 2006 run at its default resolution.. relative to real like gaming it lies thru its f-cking teeth.. 

and the more powerfull the hardware the bigger the lie gets..

still back to the wolfdale thing.. i now have mine sat on the table.. but it might not work properly with my abit ip35 pro mobo i now read.. he he he..

i gather there is issues with temps readings and such.. the bios isnt entirely compatible with the new chips..

still i am soon gonna find out.. 

trog


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 23, 2008)

trog100 said:


> is that what they say.. still grafix cards being equal i spose it sounds about right being as u would be trying to boost what in essence is a grafix card (gaming) bench by way of a couple more cpu core scores.. or to put it another way make up for a missing two cpu core scores..
> 
> mind u its thing like this which make me hate the now out dated 2006 run at its default resolution.. relative to real like gaming it lies thru its f-cking teeth..
> 
> ...



yes... the GT's and the GTS's bench very close to the GTX BUT>>> try benching at higher resolutions and see who wins. hands down, the GTX is still king. 

as for the bios thing.... the e8400 runs great(obviously) on my evga 680i a1 board with the p31 bios, NOT THE NEW ONE THAT CAME OUT TODAY. it does however have a few small problems like inccorrect detection of cpu clock speed, temps are off, .5x multi's aren't supported, speedstep/c1e are stuck on even if disbled, nothing that really effects the performance though. 

there should be a bios update for your board, if not, soon.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 23, 2008)

well i have it installed.. it does at least work so far.. he he






all at stock setting..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 23, 2008)

I still have a extra e8400 that gonna get rmaed today with no home. Hate to waste the chip


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 23, 2008)

trt740 said:


> I still have a extra e8400 that gonna get rmaed today with no home. Hate to waste the chip



Tom, if I didn't have two already on the way, I'd grab it from you. I'd know I was getting it fast and in perfect condition.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 23, 2008)

i have started a wolfdale overclocking thread in the other forum.. after a false start its looking good.. 

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=50515

trog

ps.. my evening spent with the middle wolf has been interesting.. it does exactly what i wanted it too.. plus a bit.. the extra bit must come from the bigger cache and perhaps the odd extra instruction.. i now hit the same mobo/memory wall i hit before but 400mhz higher than with my E6750 chip.. 4.3 gig is as far as i can go..


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 23, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> yes... the GT's and the GTS's bench very close to the GTX BUT>>> try benching at higher resolutions and see who wins. hands down, the GTX is still king.
> 
> as for the bios thing.... the e8400 runs great(obviously) on my evga 680i a1 board with the p31 bios, NOT THE NEW ONE THAT CAME OUT TODAY. it does however have a few small problems like inccorrect detection of cpu clock speed, temps are off, .5x multi's aren't supported, speedstep/c1e are stuck on even if disbled, nothing that really effects the performance though.
> 
> there should be a bios update for your board, if not, soon.




Yeah i agree but I was talking 2006


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 23, 2008)

only a few minutes with my second 8500..seems better than the first one..
tons of 06 cpu loops at 3820mhz @ 1.176Vcore..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 24, 2008)

*my first stable clock tweaking dropping the voltages as we speak*






those temps are while surfing the net and using Thermalright Chill factor ran out of AS5


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 24, 2008)

trt740 said:


> those temps are while surfing the net and using Thermalright Chill factor ran out of AS5



Tom, do you know the batch number for your chip? My 2 e8400's get here tomorrow, and I'm trying to find out what week etc. is best, since I told the guy I'm selling the other one to that it was still sealed.


----------



## Franklinwallbrown (Jan 24, 2008)

Nice!


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

for these 8400,the best batches out there are Q748A102 and Q750A039 i guess...


----------



## trt740 (Jan 24, 2008)

Batch on mine Q740A473T


----------



## trt740 (Jan 24, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Batch on mine Q740A473T



update bios and this should get even better get back to you soon


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

its clear from reading around that nothing reads the temps and or voltages properly on these chips.. so take whatever u see with a large pinch of salt..

i have an abit ip35 pro mobo.. it has abit guru.. it now locks at 4 C and dosnt move.. i set the voltage at 1.225 and see a read out of 1.14.. which is correct i dont know..

i used to see with my e6750 chip temps in the low twenties at idle and low forties under load.. i think it was probably low but at least it went up and down in a sensible way..

i now see useing the only thing that seems to vaguely work (coretemp) some weird temp read outs.. 47 C at idle only going up to 50 C under load.. 

coretemp has now decided to only read with one core.. the other has stuck at 49 C and dosnt move.. i am sure it did do.. he he he

now i know my cooler has to be way better than the intel celeron type thing.. but not having voltage or temp read outs that i can trust is a nuisance.. 

i am assuming a new bios will come soon from abit that puts right my problems but from the silly temps people are reporting i think its best to not take them too seriousely..

as for the vcore voltage i am assuming the lower read out is the correct one.. not the actual setting but i dont know for sure.. 

trog

ps.. its not vdroop by the way just a difference between what i set and what i see..


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 24, 2008)

For people living in the UK...

Scan and OcUK have some Yorkfields for pre-order. (Can't get OcUK to load - linkage to follow).


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

OC/UK have this £693 extreme yorkfield in stock.. been there a while i think.. a bit out of my league so i havnt taken much notice of it..

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-183-IN&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=

trog


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 24, 2008)

trog100 said:


> OC/UK have this £693 extreme yorkfield in stock.. been there a while i think.. a bit out of my league so i havnt taken much notice of it..
> 
> http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-183-IN&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=
> 
> trog



Yeah I saw that, you can pick them up for around £600 elsewhere.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Yeah I saw that, you can pick them up for around £600 elsewhere.



two side by side e8400s i recon.. more heat and bound to go well but a little expensive.. he he

trog


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 24, 2008)

I dislike OcUK as they skankt me out of my £10. I won't bitch and moan, because I sometimes still shop there (I know I'm a chump) but their service and prices have gone down hill in recent years.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 24, 2008)

InnocentCriminal said:


> I dislike OcUK as they skankt me out of my £10. I won't bitch and moan, because I sometimes still shop there (I know I'm a chump) but they're service and prices have gone down hill in recent years.



Agreed, and if you have an RMA....watch out!


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 24, 2008)

They blocked my email address and stopped my forum account. Great customer service.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 24, 2008)

*P5kE owners with e8400 looks here new bios 1002*



trog100 said:


> its clear from reading around that nothing reads the temps and or voltages properly on these chips.. so take whatever u see with a large pinch of salt..
> 
> i have an abit ip35 pro mobo.. it has abit guru.. it now locks at 4 C and dosnt move.. i set the voltage at 1.225 and see a read out of 1.14.. which is correct i dont know..
> 
> ...





Not true a new version of Core temps is out  http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/Core-Temp-Download-74793.html    and it reads the temps correctly and Asus probe reads the surface of the chip correctly look here. I upgraded my bios which was a year old imagine what I could have done with my Xeon. I thought I has 906 but had 806 OOPs and now there is a even newer bios 1002 but you have to know where to look for it and it works better than 906 but won't let you turn off speeds step (it has a error) so after benching you cannot post a real Cpuz screen shot because it drops the voltage and multuipler. Still it fixed the voltage droop making it go from .125 to .25 . Here is my 4.0ghz voltage with ram at ddr1200 24/7 clock.

bios can be found here ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/socket775/P5K-E/ My top benching speed is 9x489 or 4.4ghz but I canot post a screen because the speed step bug down clocks it lol. It's at 1.552v on air


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

a second orthos try with 1.28Vcore and 20C room temp..


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

getting further... this damn x38 board is a PITA to figure out.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

which board do you have?


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 24, 2008)

All this talk makes me want a Q9450... :/


----------



## Duxx (Jan 24, 2008)

fitseries.. i swear you have more high end parts than you know what to do with. hah  4.3, quite impressive.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Not true a new version of Core temps is out  http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/Core-Temp-Download-74793.html    and it reads the temps correctly and Asus probe reads the surface of the chip correctly look here. I upgraded my bios which was a year old imagine what I could have done with my Xeon. I thought I has 906 but had 806 OOPs and now there is a even newer bios 1002 but you have to know where to look for it and it works better than 906 but won't let you turn off speeds step (it has a error) so after benching you cannot post a real Cpuz screen shot because it drops the voltage and multuipler. Still it fixed the voltage droop making it go from .125 to .25 . Here is my 4.0ghz voltage with ram at ddr1200 24/7 clock.
> 
> bios can be found here ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/socket775/P5K-E/ My top benching speed is 9x489 or 4.4ghz but I canot post a screen because the speed step bug down clocks it lol. It's at 1.552v on air



the coretemp i am using i only downloaded last.. and my speed step is off.. i simply see a lower voltage than what i ask for.. my bios is the latest abit have released for the board.. not super new thow but its the latest official bios thats available..

something is wrong at my end.. having said that the chip works okay.. i also see that many different temps reported by folks from various forums  i dont believe any of em..

so what might not seem true for u is certainly true for me.. i will check again to see if i can find another coretemp thow.. but if i do why should i believe it..

the fact my abit guru dosnt read the chip temps at all tells me something is wrong.. guru is part of the abit pro set up.. abit quite clearly dont have things sorted yet for this board and this chip..

trog


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

checked my coretemp.. it is the latest and it dosnt work.. or it dosnt work properly at least.. 

it reads just the one core and shows 47 C idle 50 C load.. now if anybody wants to convince me what i am seeing is correct.. feel free to try.. he he he

course i could just believe it like most seem to..

trog


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> which board do you have?



gigabyte x38-dq6


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

Duxx said:


> fitseries.. i swear you have more high end parts than you know what to do with. hah  4.3, quite impressive.



that's the best part about running a shop.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

anyways.. a little hope for those that dont run shops just buy from them.. 

its at the end of the road for me mobo/memory limitations.. its also at the point the chip starts to need unrealistic voltages.. more volts would take the chip higher i think.. but i cant put it to the test.. i am at the point the extra half multiplier the 8500 chip has would be usefull.. 






trog


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> gigabyte x38-dq6



go grab an Abit QuadGT IX38..........marvelous.....we took it at 595 fsb unmodded....
here is my final 24/7 config with 24C room temp and the rad fans lowered to minimum rpm (1100).


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Jan 24, 2008)

trog100 said:


> anyways.. a little hope for those that dont run shops just buy from them..
> 
> its at the end of the road for me mobo/memory limitations.. its also at the point the chip starts to need unrealistic voltages.. more volts would take the chip higher i think.. but i cant put it to the test.. i am at the point the extra half multiplier the 8500 chip has would be usefull..
> 
> ...




whatr bored?


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

i spose i aint a real overclocker.. i know exactly what my current set up will do.. so short of ripping it all apart and buying a whole new bunch of stuff thats it..

in less than two months i have gone thru three new mobos.. amd to intel.. e6750 to e8400.. crossfire and back to single.. tweaked the best out of everything.. so boredom might be setting in.. he he he

learning what things can do is part of the fun. i now know exactly what i have will do.. whats else is there to do except use it.. he he

i would be disappointed if i threw it out.. nothing much out there is gonna go better for quite some time.. except praps the odd grafix card or two..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 24, 2008)

trog100 said:


> anyways.. a little hope for those that dont run shops just buy from them..
> 
> its at the end of the road for me mobo/memory limitations.. its also at the point the chip starts to need unrealistic voltages.. more volts would take the chip higher i think.. but i cant put it to the test.. i am at the point the extra half multiplier the 8500 chip has would be usefull..
> 
> ...



looks like you chip is slightly better than mine great job I can boot at 4.6ghz but not bench. Whats your max Fsb use a 7 multipler to see.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

if i knew the x38 better im sure i could do better but this bios has too many features.


----------



## erocker (Jan 24, 2008)

There a couple people here that know x38's pretty well.  I know I'm probablly going to need some help with mine soon.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

Anytime M8.........


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

erocker said:


> There a couple people here that know x38's pretty well.  I know I'm probablly going to need some help with mine soon.



it's all the different voltage settings that confuse me.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 24, 2008)

dont worry about volts.........
the multi-divider-boost settings will blow your mind away until they`ll work...


----------



## trog100 (Jan 24, 2008)

trt740 said:


> looks like you chip is slightly better than mine great job I can boot at 4.6ghz but not bench. Whats your max Fsb use a 7 multipler to see.



i hit a wall around the 500 mark.. probably my memory which is running at 1000mhz..

i dont have to bother about what it boots at i use abit guru.. in some ways it makes it too easy.. far far easier to play when u dont have to keep hitting the clear cmos button.. plus at the press of mouse button i can run on the edge speeds and just as easily swop back to a more a more sensible one..

i swopped the 6750 chip mainly to get the 9 x multiplier that came with the e8400.. i wanted the nice round 4 gig figure for 24/7 running.. i have what i wanted so i am happy.. but a bit bored cos i aint got anything to play with now.. just a PC that goes nicely.. he he

now i know it runs 4.5 i can run 4 and know its stable.. 

trog


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 24, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> dont worry about volts.........
> the multi-divider-boost settings will blow your mind away until they`ll work...



no... it's definitely time for some voltage. i've already got the vcore at 1.425v. ram is at 2.3v(that's what it runs stock though) all the other voltages need some tweaking.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i hit a wall around the 500 mark.. probably my memory which is running at 1000mhz..
> 
> i dont have to bother about what it boots at i use abit guru.. in some ways it makes it too easy.. far far easier to play when u dont have to keep hitting the clear cmos button.. plus at the press of mouse button i can run on the edge speeds and just as easily swop back to a more a more sensible one..
> 
> ...




if you use 1.472v you can run 24/7 at 4.2ghz and it won't get hotter than 53c. try it and see
9x467


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

*My new e8400. I'm happy so far. Vcore in bios is 1.328v. *


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 25, 2008)

looks good M8..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> *My new e8400. I'm happy so far. Vcore in bios is 1.328v. *



very good batch number? to reach that I would be at 1.4v. Second cpu testing to begin soon. I will use you exact setting to let you know what I need to reach that. speed


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

Now at 4.2ghz. 1.4v. 






Batch #Q745A553


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Now at 4.2ghz. 1.4v.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



looks like I'm gonna need 1.448v to match that you got a keeper there, will post  my results next to yours after it primes a while. Your looks like it is older than my second chip and newer than the one i'm testing now. Whats the date packaged? my first chip (testing now) Q740A473T packaged 12/27/07
 second chip is batch Q746A502 pakaged 1/11/07


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

you know... they say the 680i isn't a very good overclocker but i think thats entirely wrong. the e8400 runs better(more stable) and OC's further on my 680i than my x38. a lot of the wold records are from cpu's OCed on 680i boards.... who can argue with that? 

i will say though... the intel boards are very nice!


and so this post isn't entirely pointless.... my chip is e8400 batch q740a523 and my max oc is 4320mhz


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> you know... they say the 680i isn't a very good overclocker but i think thats entirely wrong. the e8400 runs better(more stable) and OC's further on my 680i than my x38. a lot of the wold records are from cpu's OCed on 680i boards.... who can argue with that?
> 
> i will say though... the intel boards are very nice!
> 
> ...



thats because they handle memory better than just about any boards made . what they lack In fsb is made up with memory.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> you know... they say the 680i isn't a very good overclocker but i think thats entirely wrong. the e8400 runs better(more stable) and OC's further on my 680i than my x38. a lot of the wold records are from cpu's OCed on 680i boards.... who can argue with that?
> 
> i will say though... the intel boards are very nice!
> 
> ...



 is that a 24/7 clock?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*Great paul you got a E8500 by mistake LOL I cannot come close to that*



Paulieg said:


> *My new e8400. I'm happy so far. Vcore in bios is 1.328v. *


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> thats because they handle memory better than just about any boards made . what they lack In fsb is made up with memory.



680i handle memory better? i'd say so... my 1066mhz sticks run up to 1290mhz on my 680i and only 1120mhz on my x38 and about the same on my p35.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> [/B]
> is that a 24/7 clock?



i haven't ran it full load for 24hours yet but i'd say so. it ran orthos for 8 hours without error. im using it right now and it hasn't been shut down or rebooted since yesturday at about 8:30am.

i could go further but i don't want to get into ridiculously high voltages. temps aren't a problem at all with the d-tek fusion/PA120.2/D5 setup i've got.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

well my first cpu something is slightly wrong with it I thought it was my motherboard but it's the chip. It wouldn't reset right and would hang if you pushed ther reset button but this second chip doesn't chip have the same problem. I also had jerky multitasking but I was thinking that it was from  losing two cores but this chip isn't having any of those troubles. I was also getting a bunch of blue screens. Which i though was a bios issue. The second chip is very close to Pauls. I think it not the batch on the first chip I think the chips faulty, because this chip is a month newer than the first one I tested and it runs better, doesn't have the reset problem, blue screens etc. That the first truely bad chip I have ever bought.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> i haven't ran it full load for 24hours yet but i'd say so. it ran orthos for 8 hours without error. im using it right now and it hasn't been shut down or rebooted since yesturday at about 8:30am.
> 
> i could go further but i don't want to get into ridiculously high voltages. temps aren't a problem at all with the d-tek fusion/PA120.2/D5 setup i've got.



very nice very nice


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> very nice very nice



thank you sir. sorry to hear about your chip. going to send it in?


----------



## hat (Jan 25, 2008)

Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

hat said:


> Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.



One of my cores is running 8 degress hotter than the other on this chip but i have seen that before gonnalet the heatp[ast set and reseat it


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

hat said:


> Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.



yeah...that's BS. although mines on a really good water setup... i haven't seen over 40c yet even at 1.425v @ 4320mhz


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

hat said:


> Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.



Well, if it is 56c on the cores, it's just fine. That means the cpu temp is around 40c. No problems there at all. I wish people would pay attention and discriminate between core temps and cpu temps. For the e8400, the tjunction is 105. So, at 56c there is no heat issue at all.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Well, if it is 56c on the cores, it's just fine. That means the cpu temp is around 40c. No problems there at all. I wish people would pay attention and discriminate between core temps and cpu temps. For the e8400, the tjunction is 105. So, at 56c there is no heat issue at all.



yeah... thats my only complaint about MY chip... the core seems to be at least 10c hotter than the cpu temp.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

hat said:


> Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.



Oh, and I just primed for an hour at 4ghz 1.32v. perfectly stable, and my cores were in the low 50's. Only a couple of degrees b/t each core. I'm going to start testing with 4.3ghz tomorrow.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> yeah... thats my only complaint about MY chip... the core seems to be at least 10c hotter than the cpu temp.



Well, it's supposed to be that way. The core is the hottest area of the chip, and it will always be 10-15c higher than the cpu temp. That is why you want to focus on how close your core temps are to the tjunction maximum. If your cores stay in the 50's or even lower 60's youre more than fine. Promise.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> One of my cores is running 8 to 10 degress degress hotter than the other on this chip but I have seen that before gonna let the heat past set or reseat it. reseat it


I think there might be a small dip in the heatshield because the zerotherm is as flat as can be. This chip is much better i'm at 4.283ghz at 1.368v but one cores at

40c and one at 50C, but the cores are fluctating sometimes for a second or more they are a degree appart, must be some air trapped. I'm to lazy to take it off I just loosened it and retightened it buy going around the horn at idle they are exactly the same


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> well my first cpu something is slightly wrong with it I thought it was my motherboard but it's the chip. It wouldn't reset right and would hang if you pushed ther reset button but this second chip doesn't chip have the same problem. I also had jerky multitasking but I was thinking that it was from  losing two cores but this chip isn't having any of those troubles. I was also getting a bunch of blue screens. Which i though was a bios issue. The second chip is very close to Pauls. I think it not the batch on the first chip I think the chips faulty, because this chip is a month newer than the first one I tested and it runs better, doesn't have the reset problem, blue screens etc. That the first truely bad chip I have ever bought.



 Yeah, I'd be RMA'ing that chip asap. Damn, I'm sorry. At least your other chip is good. Oh, and it's about time I get a chip that clocks better than yours. You've always been lucky with this.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

mine with an artic pro cooler at 1.3 volt at 4 gig shows 54 C load now.. what puzzles me is it shows 47 C at idle.. 

thats with both cores loaded.. not a great deal of sense here.. when i set it to show delta to tjunction max temp its shows 60 C at idle then drops to 55 C under load..

trog


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

trog100 said:


> mine with an artic pro cooler at 1.3 volt at 4 gig shows 54 C load now.. what puzzles me is it shows 47 C at idle..
> 
> thats with both cores loaded.. not a great deal of sense here.. when i set it to show delta to tjunction max temp its shows 60 C at idle then drops to 55 C under load..
> 
> trog



hmm, what version of coretemp are you using?


----------



## erocker (Jan 25, 2008)

Anyone try this newer speedfan beta for thier chips yet?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Yeah, I'd be RMA'ing that chip asap. Damn, I'm sorry. At least your other chip is good. Oh, and it's about time I get a chip that clocks better than yours. You've always been lucky with this.



Yes this ones going back and the second one might get sold I don't like these cores like this. may call intel 10 degrees is a bunch. I'm gonna wait tried reinstalling the heatsink 3 times. Maybe the heat paste can fill any gap. I'm not impressed so far my Xeon was a better chip. overclocked to 3.6ghz one cores at 50c. The more voltage I give it and the other core catches it.


----------



## Franklinwallbrown (Jan 25, 2008)

Xeons!!! FTW!!!


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> hmm, what version of coretemp are you using?



the latest one.. he he

its an abit pro bios problem i am sure.. the latest abit release bios isnt fully working as yet with this chip.. it sets the core voltages wrong (lower) and wont read the temps.. 

in a sense i am guessing both with the core voltage and the temps..

the abit guru simply locks at 4 C and dosnt move.. coretemp kinda half works but what i see dosnt entirely make sense..

still life is never perfect..

trog


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Yes this ones going back and the second one might get sold I don't like these cores like this. may call intel 10 degrees is a bunch. I'm gonna wait tried reinstalling the heatsink 3 times. Maybe the heat paste can fill any gap. I'm not impressed so far my Xeon was a better chip. overclocked to 3.6ghz one cores at 50c. The more voltage I give it and the other core catches it.



50c is not all that hot. I guess I'm more impressed with this chip than you. Think about it. We have a 45nm chip that will clock 1200mhz+ over stock on 1.4v or just a bit over. I find it difficult not being impressed by this. . I'm going to start testing on 4.3ghz. tonight.


----------



## calvary1980 (Jan 25, 2008)

I always refer Dual Cores to Porsche and Quad Core to Cadillac, I'm also impressed with the Wolfdale 50'c isn't much on air.

- Christine


----------



## DOM (Jan 25, 2008)

has any one looked at the specs intel gave the new dual cores ?

Thermal Specification: 72.4°C

VID Voltage Range: 0.85V – 1.3625V

kind of low for the volt range not up to 1.5v like the 65nm cpuz are


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 25, 2008)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> has any one looked at the specs intel gave the new dual cores ?
> 
> Thermal Specification: 72.4°C
> 
> ...



I think Intel is just being very conservative here. I trust core temp, and it states this chips tjunction is 105.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

the suggestion or theory is the smaller 45nm chip wont tolerate the same voltage as the bigger 65nm chip.. this has a certain logic to it with me.. it makes sense..

the good point is the chip dosnt need as much voltage to do its stuff.. but the downside is trying to bung the same voltage thru it as the bigger chip could damage it..

i think 1.4 should be considered high for these chips.. not 1.6 which was considerd high for the bigger chips.. but nobody (except perhaps intel) knows for sure we are all guessing..

trog

ps.. we are playing in a new (smaller) ballpark.. we need to learn some new rules..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> 50c is not all that hot. I guess I'm more impressed with this chip than you. Think about it. We have a 45nm chip that will clock 1200mhz+ over stock on 1.4v or just a bit over. I find it difficult not being impressed by this. . I'm going to start testing on 4.3ghz. tonight.



Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*Example*



trt740 said:


> Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one









This is fine nothing wrong with the chip and it is fine for even 3.8ghz as long as yopu don't go past 1.225v (still not bad really just not as good as other chips)


If you up the voltage more like say 1.36v the second core will jump to 10 degrees higher than the first core


----------



## erocker (Jan 25, 2008)

Sounds exactly like poor contact between the IHS and the core.  It could be something more complicated though.  Either way it's a manufacturing defect.  Plead with them to give you a better chip for wasting your time.  They can afford it.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

trt740 said:


> Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one




dude u really are assuming tooo much.. u know it dosnt overclock that well.. what u dont know is "why"..

reading around the xtreme overlcocking threads folks are getting all sorts of weird temp readings with these chips.. i certainly am..

it follows a standard pattern.. they first reseat the cooler only to find exactly the same temp reading.. they all seem to do this.. it never seems to work..

i go for this explanation.. i lifted it cos i cant be arsed to type it all out..

####

*As someone posted in another thread, Intel designed these core sensors to read extremley high core temps to throttle down the cpu when overheated. They apparantly were not designed to be used as thermometers or necessarily be accurate at lower temperatures. While some enterprising software designers have brought out programs to read these core sensors, Intel is probably not obligated to ensure their accuracy at low temps. Intel's own Thermal Analysis Tool does not work with the Wolfdale cpus.*

####

i am gonna take this as a good enough explanation as to why i see a seemingly high idle temp of 48 C and a seemingly low both cores loaded temp of 54 C..

its the only explanation that makes sense so far..

trog


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> gigabyte x38-dq6



Easypeasy lemon squeezy...... you want a DQ6 guide?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*trog check this out*



trt740 said:


> This is fine nothing wrong with the chip and it is fine for even 3.8ghz as long as yopu don't go past 1.225v (still not bad really just not as good as other chips)
> 
> 
> If you up the voltage more like say 1.36v the second core will jump to 10 degrees higher than the first core


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 25, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> 680i handle memory better? i'd say so... my 1066mhz sticks run up to 1290mhz on my 680i and only 1120mhz on my x38 and about the same on my p35.



You need the right BIOS for memory with the DQ6, my home PC is knackered at the moment but if you are not running BIOS F6 you will not be getting the best out of either memory or CPU, this BIOS is the best balanced of the lot and prety much bug free, that cannot be said for the rest of them, trust me on this one, I tried 5 of them!  But TBH things may work different for the Wolfdale.

Unfortunatly, the best BIOS of them all is pre 45nm support but the F6 should be better than the F7.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*Tatty Xeon 3320 ?*



Tatty_One said:


> You need the right BIOS for memory with the DQ6, my home PC is knackered at the moment but if you are not running BIOS F6 you will not be getting the best out of either memory or CPU, this BIOS is the best balanced of the lot and prety much bug free, that cannot be said for the rest of them, trust me on this one, I tried 5 of them!  But TBH things may work different for the Wolfdale.
> 
> Unfortunatly, the best BIOS of them all is pre 45nm support but the F6 should be better than the F7.



well when that bad boy gonna be up


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 25, 2008)

the quest for the best 24/7 config continues....(warm room,low rpm fans etc etc)


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*Did you also have cores thats had different*



giorgos th. said:


> the quest for the best 24/7 config continues....(warm room,low rpm fans etc etc)



temps


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> thanx..
> the only two things i`m concerned are the ~10C difference between the 2 cores (probably a monitoring thing) and the minor issues with the multi and the mobo...
> with clear multi f.e. 8-9 i had problems,with .5 f.e. 8.5-9.5 everything was good..



this is what I mean


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 25, 2008)

no not in this one.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

i have settled for 4 gig at roughly 1.3 vcore.. 450 x 9.. memory at 900.. i just like nice round figures.. he he he

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> no not in this one.



I ment that you did have a chip with a similar problem to mine correct?


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 25, 2008)

yeap,but no performance issue..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> yeap,but no performance issue..



Well this one performs very well just won't overclock aswell as I exspected but it will do over 4.0ghz .


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2008)

coretemp really isnt reading these bloody wolfdale chip temps correctly.. i am now running the sandra cpu burn in wizzard in the background while browsing and doing whatever..

why people are taking so much notice of what its telling em i have no idea..

looking at the taskbar  i see one core going between 62 and 68 C.. the other one sits there showing 60 C and never moves.. 

at idle one core show 45 C-ish and moves about.. the other one is locked at 49 C and again never moves.. if i load the cores the one locked at 49 jumps to 60 then never moves.. 

my bloody bios wont even read the chip temp so why should coretemp be able to..

my bios is locked at 4 C..  others have reported all sorts of silly figures.. some as high as 129 C.. 

something is odd about how these chips work as regarding the temp sensor.. 

i dont know what coretemp reads to produce its figures but it should not be relied upon to even be vaguely accurate.. 

it might be hard for some to not know what temp their chip is running at.. but i recon thats the reality of the situation..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

trog100 said:


> coretemp really isnt reading these bloody wolfdale chip temps correctly.. i am now running the sandra cpu burn in wizzard in the background while browsing and doing whatever..
> 
> why people are taking so much notice of what its telling em i have no idea..
> 
> ...




Your right trog my core temps reads my cpu's at 40c idle not sure why it hit me so late that not possible my Quad core xeon didn't idle at those temps. that way too high and the prior chip was reading 25C ish. Right now check this out. This is at idle with a Zerotherm 120 at 80 percent fan 







I think that Asus probe temp is right and core temps is reading this second chip wrong and I wonder why. The prior chip was matching probes temps. I wonder why chip one would read fine but chip two doesn't


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 25, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> You need the right BIOS for memory with the DQ6, my home PC is knackered at the moment but if you are not running BIOS F6 you will not be getting the best out of either memory or CPU, this BIOS is the best balanced of the lot and prety much bug free, that cannot be said for the rest of them, trust me on this one, I tried 5 of them!  But TBH things may work different for the Wolfdale.
> 
> Unfortunatly, the best BIOS of them all is pre 45nm support but the F6 should be better than the F7.



ok... i sold the dq6.. can anyone help me with a maximus formula? i've got it to 4.32ghz but it stops there.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 25, 2008)

*Xeon quad 105 watt chip 65nm under full load compared to a 45nm chip with speed step*



trt740 said:


> Your right trog my core temps reads my cpu's at 40c idle not sure why it hit me so late that not possible my Quad core xeon didn't idle at those temps. that way too high and the prior chip was reading 25C ish. Right now check this out. This is at idle with a Zerotherm 120 at 80 percent fan
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is no way under load that the Xeon 105 watt chip 65nm could run almost as cool as a 45nm chip at idle.  No way only 6 degree difference


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

*chip one overclocked idle/ chip two not overclocked idle*

same system same cooler both E8400






 how is this chip cooler


----------



## DOM (Jan 26, 2008)

^^ Barbie lol

I would RMA it seems you'll have trouble with it later


----------



## Wile E (Jan 26, 2008)

Yeah, I'd say there is definitely something amiss with the Wolfdale temp readouts. Kinda reminds me of the goofy readouts CoreTemp woould give me on my Brisbane. Core Temp just doesn't seem to like some chips.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

one other thing i have noticed about coretemp.. its not actually reading both cores.. it shows a figure for both cores.. but when i load both cores i see.. say 65 C with one core the other kinda similar but fixed..

when i only load one core i should still see 65 C on the working core and way way less on the none working core.. least my logic tells me i should..

what do see is about 55 C on the fully working core and a fixed something similar on the none working core..

i think it might be correct or somewhere near correct  at high temps just on one core the other read out means nothing.. 

at lower temps it just loses the plot and show a temp way higher than it really is..

if it really was reading two cores separately with one fully working and the other at idle the temps should be different for both cores.. they are not.. they are always roughly the same.. just lower with one core working than they are with two..

trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> ^^ Barbie lol
> 
> I would RMA it seems you'll have trouble with it later



yes once again I have 4 small children 3 are girls under 12


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

the dude who wrote coretemp seems to think the problem is the chip itself.. hmmm..

backed up perhaps by this.. bit of plagiarism on my part but who cares.. one has to be on the ball.. he he

http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=6317

trog


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 26, 2008)

i agree... every bit of software i've used to monitor temps has show a 10-15 degree Celcius difference between the core and the cpu and one core is at least 5c higher than the other and seems to hang around that temp no mater what. really weird.... only the cpu temp changes on my e8400.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

do we send em all back.. he he he

the problem is a bit worse for me cos it buggers up my nice abit guru fan control.. if poor old guru thinks my cpu temp never alters form 4 C he cant do much fan controling can he.. he he

trog


----------



## Franklinwallbrown (Jan 26, 2008)

trog100 said:


> i have settled for 4 gig at roughly 1.3 vcore.. 450 x 9.. memory at 900.. i just like nice round figures.. he he he
> 
> trog



I like to sqeeze those extra bits out! +.14 FTW! lol


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

*it's not the chip it's the programs*



trog100 said:


> do we send em all back.. he he he
> 
> the problem is a bit worse for me cos it buggers up my nice abit guru fan control.. if poor old guru thinks my cpu temp never alters form 4 C he cant do much fan controling can he.. he he
> 
> trog



 read this on this thread  http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173999&page=8

It seems many E8400's have core temp sensors which report incorrect low temperature readings. These false readings are being reported in all software monitoring programs.

I had a E8400 which reported idle temps of 17C in one core and 34C in the other. Under load, the 34C core readings were frozen until it exceeded 34C.
I exchanged that processor a new one, albeit from the exact same batch, but the new cpu more correctly has core temps of 38C/36C (4.0Ghz with 1.34v).

Programs like CoreTemp read the diode right in the cpu, so software updates or bios upgrades will have no effect on these false readings.

Some E8400 purchasers are being told to just ignore these false core readings and instead rely on the "cpu temp" reading, rather than core temps.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

*it's not the chip it's the programs*



trog100 said:


> do we send em all back.. he he he
> 
> the problem is a bit worse for me cos it buggers up my nice abit guru fan control.. if poor old guru thinks my cpu temp never alters form 4 C he cant do much fan controling can he.. he he
> 
> trog



 read this on this thread  http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173999&page=8

It seems many E8400's have core temp sensors which report incorrect low temperature readings. These false readings are being reported in all software monitoring programs.

I had a E8400 which reported idle temps of 17C in one core and 34C in the other. Under load, the 34C core readings were frozen until it exceeded 34C.
I exchanged that processor a new one, albeit from the exact same batch, but the new cpu more correctly has core temps of 38C/36C (4.0Ghz with 1.34v).

Programs like CoreTemp read the diode right in the cpu, so software updates or bios upgrades will have no effect on these false readings.

Some E8400 purchasers are being told to just ignore these false core readings and instead rely on the "cpu temp" reading, rather than core temps.



another intresting statement

As someone posted in another thread, Intel designed these core sensors to read extremley high core temps to throttle down the cpu when overheated. They apparantly were not designed to be used as thermometers or necessarily be accurate at lower temperatures. While some enterprising software designers have brought out programs to read these core sensors, Intel is probably not obligated to ensure their accuracy at low temps. Intel's own Thermal Analysis Tool does not work with the Wolfdale cpus.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

*this chip is getting better*


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

there is danger element here.. if my bios fan control throttles down my cpu fan speed  cos it thinks my cpu is always at 4 C.. as of course it did.. with that silly mickey mouse cooler intel sent me i recon even at stock speeds i would have real overheating problems..

throttling down my artic pro to a permament 1200 rpm aint a problem but with the pissy little intel cooler i recon it would have been..

i have have now set it at a permanent 1700 rpm.. it will do there..

i recon intel dont care about the dodgy temp readings (fan control) with desktop cpus.. laptops are a different kettle of fish.. hence the possible hold backs where they are concerned..

but even if intel thinks we dont need to know what temps our cpu is at.. the bloody mobos fan control does..

trog


----------



## hat (Jan 26, 2008)

Try cutting the PWM wire and the fan speed sensing wire.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 26, 2008)

trog100 said:


> there is danger element here.. if my bios fan control throttles down my cpu fan speed  cos it thinks my cpu is always at 4 C.. as of course it did.. with that silly mickey mouse cooler intel sent me i recon even at stock speeds i would have real overheating problems..
> 
> throttling down my artic pro to a permament 1200 rpm aint a problem but with the pissy little intel cooler i recon it would have been..
> 
> ...



+1. Well, Intel has never really focused much on what the enthusiast needs to get more performance out of their chips. They'd rather we'd just buy a more expensive and higher clocked chip and leave it alone.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

you know this chip could be run passive and remain cool at default (even oced really)with a moderatly large heatsink, and I have never seen that before in any chip in recent memory. For a silent system this would rock


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 26, 2008)

trt740 said:


> you know this chip could be run passive and remain cool at default (even oced really)with a moderatly large heatsink, and I have never seen that before in any chip in recent memory. For a silent system is would rock



+1. I'm currently testing 4.2ghz on 1.4v on LOW CPU fan speeds. Looks pretty good so far.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 26, 2008)

*Here's a short prime test at 4.23ghz on 1.4v (bios). When looking at core temps, keep in mind I'm running this on very low cpu fan speeds*


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> *Here's a short prime test at 4.23ghz on 1.4v (bios). When looking at core temps, keep in mind I'm running this on very low cpu fan speeds*



So you know paul there saying these chips are reporting too low and too high temps in core temps so don't  go by those go by your motherboards cpu sensor.


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 26, 2008)

trt740 said:


> So you know paul there saying these chips are reporting too low and too high temps in core temps so don't  go by those go by your motherboards cpu sensor.



yeah, but coretemp seems to be consistent with my mobo temps.


----------



## erocker (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm sure in a week or so there will be a new core-temp and speedfan for these chips.


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

if the chip itself is faulty there wont be a new anything.. some of u guys havnt read the thread or are completely missing the point.. 

defective.. inaccurate.. wildly erratic.. thermal diodes built into the chip cant be corrected by anything..  except a new chip..

things read the chip sensors.. if they are away with the fairies as seems the case.. thats it.. no answer and a big cock up by intel..

the guy who writes coretemp has said there is nothing he can do.. coretemp reads the chip sensors and as far as he is concerned there should be no difference between the penryns and earlier chips.. coretemp should work but it is dependent on what the chip tells it.. if the chip feeds it bullshit it reads bullshit..


trog


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

trog100 said:


> if the chip itself is faulty there wont be a new anything.. some of u guys havnt read the thread or are completely missing the point..
> 
> defective.. inaccurate.. wildly erratic.. thermal diodes built into the chip cant be corrected by anything..  except a new chip..
> 
> ...




thats could be thats why I put two different E8400s in the same motherboard and one seemed to read the core temps right and the other hads either a bad sensor or coretemps is not reading it right.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 26, 2008)

*look at the eta on this LOL*

Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 Dual Core Processor LGA775 2.66GHZ Wolfdale 1333FSB 6MB Retail *Eta April*  







http://www.ncixus.com/products/27783/BX80570E8200/Intel/

Our Price:  $171.10  USD  

Availability: Special Order     

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This product is available but currently we do not have stock - order it today and we will ship when it's available.
ETA: April  

Avg. Rating: 0 Customer Reviews | Write a Review


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 26, 2008)

quick testing with high V...
Aquamark is with the E8500 at 4806mhz!!!! with 1.65Vcore..


----------



## trog100 (Jan 26, 2008)

take this for what its worth.. just my observations and conclusions concerning the real temps the wolf runs at..

first my abit pro bios temp reading.. with my e6750 chip it read 20-sh at ilde and 40-ish under load.. this was with a high 1.5 voltage to the cpu and at 3.8 gig..

now i have reason to think this was about 15 C or 20 C lower than reality.. lets say it should have read 35 idle and 60 under load..

with my new wolfdale the bios seemed to be stuck at 4 C.. i thought it never moved.. in fact at stock and with an average overclock it dosnt move idle or load..

now i am running at 4.4 gig at 1.45 actual core voltage surprize surprize it moves.. it aint dead..he he

it is still at 4 C at idle but rockets up to 20 C when i load the chip..

now allowing for the pathetic cooler intel ship with these chips.. perhaps they really do run super cool..  perhaps allowing for my bios reading 15 C or 20 C low.. my old 6750 20 C would be around that 4 C i am now seeing with the wolfdale..

the low 20 C i get now i am really loading the wolf with 1.45 volts at 4.4 gig would be the same as the low 40 C i saw with my 6750 chip..

so i now have two things giving wolfdale cpu temps.. coretemp going between say 50 and 70 and my bios going between minus 4 and 22.. 

so what do i think.. i recon relativley speaking my new wolf is running 20 C less than my old 6750 both at idle and at load..

i never ran coretemp with my 6750 chip so i cant compare one chip with the other using the same software.. but i can compare my bios.. this tells me these chips run very cool at stock and even with 1.45 volts going thru em they run 20 C less than my 6750 chip did..

simply my conclusions based on what i see.. take em for what they are worth.. 

trog

ps.. add the missing 20 C to my bios reading and it would be low 20s at idle and low 40s under load.. and thats at 4.4 gig with 1.45 core voltage..

ps.. 2.. whats changed my conclusions is i thought my bios wouldnt read the chip at all.. now i know it does read the chip but at so low an idle temp it dosnt even trigger past its baseline 4 C i think these things really do run cool..


----------



## trt740 (Jan 27, 2008)

*E8200 doing 600x8 on air with 1.488V*

check this out holy hell

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2728545#post2728545


----------



## erocker (Jan 27, 2008)

He has a freak of a motherboard!


----------



## trt740 (Jan 27, 2008)

*stable 4.3ghz*


----------



## mandelore (Jan 27, 2008)

trt740 said:


>



so you are now just using the cpu temp, not any core temps for reading what your cpu is running at.

I think thats what im going to have to do, this is at idle @ 4ghz:


----------



## trog100 (Jan 27, 2008)

assuming that 9 C is at idle or u are water cooled .. relative to what the same software used to read i think its correct..

my abit guu and bios read my wolfdale more than 20 C cooler than it read my e6750.. 

i actually now believe it..  now if the intel mini cooler was fitted to these chips we all might see some more sensible temps..

basically with my artic pro sat on it the temps are that low at stock that my bios dosnt even pick the thing up..

trog


----------



## trog100 (Jan 27, 2008)

just some more wolfdale temp observations.. artic pro cooler..

3.8 gig seems a sweet spot.. 1.22 vcore stable and cool.. 

4 gig seems reasonable at 1.3 vcore perhaps 5 C hotter than at 3.8.. system seems stable

4.5 gig system reasonably stable at 1.45 vcore.. but runs 18 C hotter than at the 3.8 gig sweet spot.. 

i cant quote actual temps simply relative ones.. 

i am reasonably certain the new chip runs about 20 C cooler thru out its range than my E6750 chip did.. 

i think much more than 1.5 vcore will send the temps up thru the roof.. and possibly damage the chip.. 

core temp reads about 30 C higher than my bios and guru.. at higher temps (volts) both go up and down in a sensible fashion.. say 20 C between idle and load..

at lower volts there dosnt seem to be any down just a very small amount of up.. i think both coretemp and my bios dont read below a temp certain level..

i am thinking these chips at idle run near case ambient.. nothing can go cooler than ambient.. my bios for example on low volts goes from a fixed 4 C to only about 7 C under load.. coretemp moves from 47 C to 53 C under load..

at high volts the picture make more sense.. by bios goes from 4 C idle to 26 C load and coretemp goes from 47 C idle to nearly 70 C load..

trog


----------



## xmountainxlionx (Jan 28, 2008)

so the 45nm quad's should be in around feb18th?

thread tl;dr


----------



## trt740 (Jan 28, 2008)

xmountainxlionx said:


> so the 45nm quad's should be in around feb18th?
> 
> thread tl;dr



I don't think intels telling it might be as late as march


----------



## xmountainxlionx (Jan 28, 2008)

http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/Product/Intel/BX80569Q9450

this website and a few others i have seen say ETA feb 18th. 

but im not getting my hopes up


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 28, 2008)

xmountainxlionx said:


> http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/Product/Intel/BX80569Q9450
> 
> this website and a few others i have seen say ETA feb 18th.
> 
> but im not getting my hopes up



Intel will start shipping them to their distributors in Feb, we will actually be lucky to see them on retail shelves in March TBH, I still think they will put them back even further, until the whole world stops buying Q6600 kentsfields...... Yorkfield delays will be a continuing risk IMO.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 28, 2008)

All I know is, I need a better clocking quad. lol. I really want to get the QX9650 with my tax return, but I also have to buy a vehicle. If I can't swing the QX, you guys think the Q6700 (or Xeon equivalent) would be a worthy purchase?


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 28, 2008)

Wile E said:


> All I know is, I need a better clocking quad. lol. I really want to get the QX9650 with my tax return, but I also have to buy a vehicle. If I can't swing the QX, you guys think the Q6700 (or Xeon equivalent) would be a worthy purchase?



No I dont IMO, many Q6700 dont clock any better than the Q6600's....I would simply go for the top Yorkfield when they arrive, I am sure you will get 4.1 - 4.2Gig out of that, especially on decent water.


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 28, 2008)

Guys besides from the talking....show us some results.....


----------



## trt740 (Jan 29, 2008)

*new best for me*


----------



## erocker (Jan 29, 2008)

Finally, got one!!


----------



## PaulieG (Jan 29, 2008)

trt740 said:


>



Tom, I see the vcore under load at 1.475v. What do you have it set at in the bios?


----------



## erocker (Jan 29, 2008)

*I got this post off of another forum:*
 I need approximately 1.45 volts to be Prime stable at 3.5 GHz. The temp on both cores was equal at 75C. Tjunction in the pic is what CoreTemp now correctly refers to as TjMax or the maximum temperature before throttling begins which for the original Conroe processors was 85C.

Just trying to show that there is no need to worry when you see a big temperature number as long as things are running stable. The new E8400 has even more headroom than the previous generation, Conroe, desktop processors.

If you are crazy enough you can run them right on past their rated 85C maximum. The digital thermal sensor is a 7 bit number so after it gets to zero it wraps around and becomes 1111111 binary which is 127. SpeedFan and TAT do the calculation of TjMax - 127 or 85 - 127 and comes up with -42. When these programs start reporting negative numbers your processor is definitely getting HOT!  

You can see from the graph that it continued to get hotter and kept right on running. When I put the heatsink back on things cooled down again and everything was fine. I think it hit an honest 97C without a nuclear meltdown.

*I have yet to play with my new rig, does this make any sense to sny of you?*


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 29, 2008)

a quick 32m without alot of searching cause i didnt believe my memory would run that good..


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 29, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> a quick 32m without alot of searching cause i didnt believe my memory would run that good..



And you were telling Trt not to run high volts for long when he was at 1.6V!


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 29, 2008)

i was talking about 24/7 usage M8,not benching...


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 29, 2008)

giorgos th. said:


> i was talking about 24/7 usage M8,not benching...



Ahhhhh right


----------



## trt740 (Jan 29, 2008)

Paulieg said:


> Tom, I see the vcore under load at 1.475v. What do you have it set at in the bios?



it's at 1.5v .25v droop


----------



## trt740 (Jan 29, 2008)




----------



## PaulieG (Jan 29, 2008)

trt740 said:


>



Nice OC, but that's some crazy high vcore. You're braver than me.  I'll post some screenies later, but I've got 4.3ghz stable on 1.42v


----------



## trt740 (Jan 30, 2008)

*I have this not as good as yours but still good*



Paulieg said:


> Nice OC, but that's some crazy high vcore. You're braver than me.  I'll post some screenies later, but I've got 4.3ghz stable on 1.42v


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 31, 2008)

any idea how much the yorkies will cost and what day they be out?


----------



## trt740 (Jan 31, 2008)

fitseries3 said:


> any idea how much the yorkies will cost and what day they be out?



most likely feb since the new q9650 will be out in march. Watch they will be 350.00 or more.


----------



## erocker (Jan 31, 2008)

trt740 said:


>



OMG, dude!  That is awesome!  I will have some screens up friday night if everything works well.  I pray my Infinity will fit on my motherboard.


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jan 31, 2008)

im looking to get rid of both my q6600's and getting a new quad. i'd really like a 9x (or higher) multi though. the q9450 is not gonna cut it in my book. the q9650  may be what i need.


----------



## erocker (Jan 31, 2008)

I'm sure Intel will price them a bit higher than we all first thought, but I figure this e8400 will last me a good 3 - 4 months untill I get that stupid "itch" that tells me to upgrade.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 31, 2008)

My e8400 is selling not sure what to get . I think i'm gonna get a Xeon x3220. Ayone know what are e8500 going for, aren't they way over priced. Also anyone even see a store selling a e8200


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 31, 2008)

trt740 said:


> My e8400 is selling not sure what to get . I think i'm gonna get a Xeon x3220. Ayone know what are e8500 going for, aren't they way over priced. Also anyone even see a store selling a e8200



Mine is starting to play a little nicer now, I am pretty sure it is compatibility issues with this motherboard and a Xeon, I have just reflashed with a different BIOS and am testing now.


----------



## trt740 (Jan 31, 2008)

My my motherboard is super similar(mines based off yours)  and I didn't have any trouble you know there is a bios 504 for your board here the link 
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...m/P5KP0504.zip i'm told you should always use easy flash in the bios not from windows aswell.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jan 31, 2008)

trt740 said:


> My my motherboard is super similar(mines based off yours)  and I didn't have any trouble you know there is a bios 504 for your board here the link
> ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...m/P5KP0504.zip i'm told you should always use easy flash in the bios not from windows aswell.



Yeah I have flashed that BIOS earlier tonight, was having issues with it before so went back to 0404, had more issues with that so am esting 0504 again now, will keep you posted!  You getting yours from same place?


----------



## trt740 (Feb 1, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Yeah I have flashed that BIOS earlier tonight, was having issues with it before so went back to 0404, had more issues with that so am esting 0504 again now, will keep you posted!  You getting yours from same place?



I wonder why your board is having trouble but mine wasn't? They are basically the same yours is just the upgraded version. Make your you flash from the bios it seem that some issues disappear when you do that.


----------



## Tatty_One (Feb 1, 2008)

trt740 said:


> I wonder why your board is having trouble but mine wasn't? They are basically the same yours is just the upgraded version. Make your you flash from the bios it seem that some issues disappear when you do that.



It's firing on all cylinders now! Check your Xeon thread


----------



## VroomBang (Apr 4, 2008)

Wolfie E8400 first impressions:

I've just upgraded from a Pentium D 925 3.6GHz OC, purely for gaming . 

First of all, I'm surprised with how cool this chip runs, I'm idling at 24C (with fan on auto at 28%), 5C less than old cpu. Core temps are 41C and 45C. When I OC'd the wolfdale to 3.6GHz (9x400), the main temp went up by 2C. I can live with that .

Also, power consumption is ridiculously low, 3W idle (yes, 3W..), 6x less than my old cpu. I
I took the plunge cause I thought my cpu was a bottleneck to the 7950GT. The truth is now I don't think it was! Let me explain: I haven't seen any gain with the Wolfdale when running games, honestly. I've played Crysis, Doom 3, Test Drive, NFS Carbon, C&C Tiberium and I can't feel any difference compared to the good old pentium. This is only an impression, as I haven't measured the fps. I wasn't blown away the way I was when I upgraded from a 7600GT to a 7950GT.

Benchmark wise, there's a difference clock for clock. Super Pi is a lot quicker, 1M: 12s vs. 37s with PentiumD, 3DMark went from 4924 to 5557 and CPU score almost doubled. 

Apps wise, WinRar didn't feel quicker but... Nero decoding (DivX to DVD) is 5x faster: a divx file of 1 hour takes me 12 min to decode as opposed to a whole hour.

So, overall, the chip is faster BUT so far not with what I intended to use it for, again purely based on impressions.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 4, 2008)

VroomBang said:


> Wolfie E8400 first impressions:
> 
> I've just upgraded from a Pentium D 925 3.6GHz OC, purely for gaming .
> 
> ...



the chip is two or three times faster.. u dont notice cos the power isnt needed or used by much.. games are still pretty much gpu limitted.. load times are hardrive limited.. u would see a difference with supreme commmander or fritz chess perhaps.. he he

u have made a huge leap in performance thow.. if u dont notice much it proves one thing.. most of us have way more cpu power then we need..

trog


----------



## VroomBang (Apr 4, 2008)

trog100 said:


> if u dont notice much it proves one thing.. most of us have way more cpu power then we need..
> 
> trog



agreed, overkill

EDIT
overkill for the stuff I don't need, not overkill for gaming unfortunately :-(


----------



## trog100 (Apr 5, 2008)

VroomBang said:


> agreed, overkill
> 
> EDIT
> overkill for the stuff I don't need, not overkill for gaming unfortunately :-(



i can play all my games with one core switched off.. even sup/com.. in fact one core or two working its hard to tell the difference.. 

trog


----------



## Tatty_One (Apr 18, 2008)

Just got the E8200 baby wolfdale in the PC tonite, a stopgap until me Yorkie arrives, may not want the yorkie now, this was my second boot with the chip in, guessed all the settings on this 790i thingy board  No tweaks at all yet, will push a bit more tomorrow...it's late


----------



## trog100 (Apr 19, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Just got the E8200 baby wolfdale in the PC tonite, a stopgap until me Yorkie arrives, may not want the yorkie now, this was my second boot with the chip in, guessed all the settings on this 790i thingy board  No tweaks at all yet, will push a bit more tomorrow...it's late



thats a nice fsb u have there dude.. 

trog


----------



## Wile E (Apr 19, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Just got the E8200 baby wolfdale in the PC tonite, a stopgap until me Yorkie arrives, may not want the yorkie now, this was my second boot with the chip in, guessed all the settings on this 790i thingy board  No tweaks at all yet, will push a bit more tomorrow...it's late



Yeah, but what if you get a Yorkie to 4GHz?


----------



## Tatty_One (Apr 19, 2008)

Wile E said:


> Yeah, but what if you get a Yorkie to 4GHz?



Very Fair point, but thing is, I appreciate not all chips are equal and not all motherboards will do 550-600mhz fsb but this  E8200 is serious bang for buck, I will definatly keep the Q9450 if it gets anywhere near 4gig (and it should on a 790i, these boards go so high in FSB some have gotten 4.2gig off a 9450 apparently) purely because for the things I do I find the quad handy.


----------

