• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Xeon Owners Club

Zyll Goliath said:
Not sure if you made mistake in writing or you get confused but "uncore" clock must be at least 2x the speed of the RAM not under that speed ....
Click to expand...

I indeed thought the same. Though I read somewhere you could lower to 1.8/1.9 but probably misread that.
Thanks you than i remembered it right :-)
Still my uncore is stuck by anything above 2.6-2.8ish could that also be the cpu?
 
You can go lower than 2:1 for 32nm (ie. 3:2).
Basicly : 1600MHz DDR3 will require minimum of 2,4GHz (and 2000MHz will need 3GHz UnCore or more).
Also, both UnCore and QPI Speed are related to BCLK you set.
So, going from 133 to 200 MHz on BCLK, will force QPI speed of 7200MHz, if 4800MHz was the default.
 
X58 based socket 1366 boards are expensive. Seems to be a supply/demand thing. Most manufactures stopped making them years ago but they are still popular and fairly relevant by today's standards with the right components.

I am a fan of the Dell T3500 workstation boxes. They are X58 based and pretty reasonable. With some searching you can get an entire system for about the same price as a new X58 board. Nothing overclock friendly in the BIOS but you can up the multiplier on certain 1366 Xeon with Throttlestop. A few threads about this in these forums.
 
hay i get the Feeling any one whit a X58 board that bought one back in the day is now Reaping the benefits of a LOW cost server xeon that was = to a I7 Extreme in some cases
at a Price point to Performance that makes ppl question is upgrading or switching worth it i can say i was running a I7-920 and groin to a x5650 is a MAJOR change in performance and Power consumption
after a week of running and using CPU related tasks for a bit my TEMP was within specs 70ºc and i never got a big clock of 4ghz .......
behold i know i should have use Fresh Terminal past from the start but i was egger to get the Xeon running and posting after modding the board to accept the chip
so got some cheep 5 pack of some decedent past nutting Grand just 3.17W/(m-K) and set to a puling the board out of the case and remove all heat sinks cleaned each ship using clean sheet of pepper played a pea of past to the chips attached the heat sinks rebooted set bios to defaults and autos and the Chip on its own started clocking up to 4.2 whit turbo on its own accord spiking all about
i got my 4Ghz .....
back to the bois and lock some stings to keep it from that sketching jumping clock up and down when idling now i sit at a modest 3.1Ghz and 1600mhz on the ram
but i know i can hit 4 and 2000 and be at a chill 50ºc now
 
agent_x007 said:
You can go lower than 2:1 for 32nm (ie. 3:2).
Basicly : 1600MHz DDR3 will require minimum of 2,4GHz (and 2000MHz will need 3GHz UnCore or more).
Also, both UnCore and QPI Speed are related to BCLK you set.
So, going from 133 to 200 MHz on BCLK, will force QPI speed of 7200MHz, if 4800MHz was the default.
Click to expand...

I might have found the problem there are some little switches on the bottom of this board (did not pay attention to well) and those are for setting blck. When i turned those off and set the blck to 200 in the bios the system seemed a lot more stable (i know really weird). Using aida64 (only for 30 min) i stressed the cpu and ram at 3.6 or something (pretty low I know this 920 goes to 4.2 no problem) and the ram seemed stable at 1.6v @1600 9-9-9-24 timings (it is rated at 7-8-7-something 1.65v). Although something weird happened aida would say the ram was unstable after 10 sec or something and i started the test again and it would be perfectly stable after that every time i tried (I tried 4/5 times 10-15 min and one longer run of 30 min) did not try any really long runs because I suposse these ram sticks will need some better active cooling because they got pretty hot when stressed for 15-30 min. is lowering the uncore helpful for getting higher overclocks because my board has some kind of glitch with x56xx xeon that the uncore will be locked at 2x memory. the e56xx and L56xx dont have that trouble if i'm correct.

Thanks!
 
for for annoy who this may help and 4.0.jpgScreenshot_3.jpg4.0 weee .. the Voltage settings in OS are Not what is set in bios however it can bump from within never did like that
Screenshot_1.jpgnormal
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_4.jpg
    Screenshot_4.jpg
    148.4 KB · Views: 421
  • Screenshot_5.jpg
    Screenshot_5.jpg
    102 KB · Views: 308
So, way back on page 86 (you guys post a lot), this happened:

Nicoleise said:
[...]Completely new here - and not even a Xeon owner (!!) [...] The reason for my membership and post is, that I think I would like to become a Xeon owner, but being completely new to me, I'd like your very competent advice.[...]
Click to expand...

Knoxx29 said:
[...]X5675, a X5690 would be a better option but they are expensive.
[...]
ARCTIC Freezer XTREME Rev. 2
[...]
Click to expand...


Nicoleise said:
Thanks for the post, @Knoxx29. The pictures definitely highlight a preference of the Arctic cooler.[...]
- X5675 runs at 3.06 GHz, but is cheaper, especially since I can buy one from within the EU, removing toll, VAT and expensive shipping. For arguments sake, let's say US$110
- X5679 runs at 3.20 GHz, and is slightly more expensive. This was my initial suggestion. This seems to run at US$135 shipped.
- X5690 runs at 3.46 GHz and is significantly more expensive. This seems to run at US$230-270 shipped depending on origin.
[...]
Click to expand...


Since my post, I upgraded to the suggested cooler (and am very happy with it), and as a result was able to overclock my i7 920 2,66 GHz to 3,4 GHz. It hardly qualifies as overclocking though, I just increased BCLK and rebooted, never looked back. That obviously helped the CPU be "workable" and it ran fine, but curiosity killed the cat, so I finally pulled the trigger on an X5690 3,46 GHz 6C12T at ~US$100 shipped on eBay.


I tried a much more methodic approach to overclocking that calls for isolating factors. So with the CPU multiplier locked at 20 (lowest in BIOS), I learned that my system will happily run at a BCLK of 200. Probably more as well, but didn't feel comfortable going further. I realized something that basically became a question that I hope you can help me answer:

I can reach 4 GHz through 200 x 20, but also e.g. through 148 x 27. Both seem to have advantages and disadvantages, so I'd like clarification on which to prefer. I haven't been able to find a decent reply to this anywhere - only replies that basically scream 'hearsay'. So where else to turn, but the experts?
  • BCLK 200 should in theory make the rest of my system faster. In return, I loose the automatic ramping up and down of CPU speed (good for thermals and power bill?)
  • BCLK 148 allows me to leave the CPU multiplier setting on Auto, letting the multiplier ramp up and down by demand. In return, obviously the BCLK is slower.

So what I don't seem to be able to find a decent answer to is; which parameter should I give priority? I am unsure if a higher BCLK is actually going to result in a faster system, or if it's cancelled out by the ratios adjusting things back down (I did notice the QPI link speed increase A LOT though)? And also I am unsure if the lower BCLK which allows for automatic multipliers helps my system run cooler and also reduces energy costs? The temperatures I saw were similar with both setups, so I don't know?

Current settings are 155 x Auto resulting in 4,185 GHz. During normal desktop use, this results in core temps 29-42°C (there are fairly big differences between cores), while under full load temperatures go as high as 84 °C on 4/6 cores, but doesn't seem to go higher ever. It's being cooled by an active air cooler in a relatively poor case. All of this is without tweaking voltages, since I don't really feel that I understand those enough.

Specs; ASUS P6T DELUXE (X58), X5690 @ 4,185 GHz, 24 GB DDR3 Triple Channel, nVidia GTX 660.

If it matters, my general plans are to build a new complete system in the fall/winter, as I expect GPU prices to drop. I guess I'd do my research in Autumn and hope for some really good deals on Black Friday. This has been really interesting though; I've built plenty of PCs, but never cared about e.g. cases. I now look forward to finding cases with proper thermal management and maybe even mod them to improve it even further.

Thanks to @Knoxx29 in particular for the great recommendations! :)
 
Nicoleise said:
So, way back on page 86 (you guys post a lot), this happened:









Since my post, I upgraded to the suggested cooler (and am very happy with it), and as a result was able to overclock my i7 920 2,66 GHz to 3,4 GHz. It hardly qualifies as overclocking though, I just increased BCLK and rebooted, never looked back. That obviously helped the CPU be "workable" and it ran fine, but curiosity killed the cat, so I finally pulled the trigger on an X5690 3,46 GHz 6C12T at ~US$100 shipped on eBay.


I tried a much more methodic approach to overclocking that calls for isolating factors. So with the CPU multiplier locked at 20 (lowest in BIOS), I learned that my system will happily run at a BCLK of 200. Probably more as well, but didn't feel comfortable going further. I realized something that basically became a question that I hope you can help me answer:

I can reach 4 GHz through 200 x 20, but also e.g. through 148 x 27. Both seem to have advantages and disadvantages, so I'd like clarification on which to prefer. I haven't been able to find a decent reply to this anywhere - only replies that basically scream 'hearsay'. So where else to turn, but the experts?
  • BCLK 200 should in theory make the rest of my system faster. In return, I loose the automatic ramping up and down of CPU speed (good for thermals and power bill?)
  • BCLK 148 allows me to leave the CPU multiplier setting on Auto, letting the multiplier ramp up and down by demand. In return, obviously the BCLK is slower.

So what I don't seem to be able to find a decent answer to is; which parameter should I give priority? I am unsure if a higher BCLK is actually going to result in a faster system, or if it's cancelled out by the ratios adjusting things back down (I did notice the QPI link speed increase A LOT though)? And also I am unsure if the lower BCLK which allows for automatic multipliers helps my system run cooler and also reduces energy costs? The temperatures I saw were similar with both setups, so I don't know?

Current settings are 155 x Auto resulting in 4,185 GHz. During normal desktop use, this results in core temps 29-42°C (there are fairly big differences between cores), while under full load temperatures go as high as 84 °C on 4/6 cores, but doesn't seem to go higher ever. It's being cooled by an active air cooler in a relatively poor case. All of this is without tweaking voltages, since I don't really feel that I understand those enough.

Specs; ASUS P6T DELUXE (X58), X5690 @ 4,185 GHz, 24 GB DDR3 Triple Channel, nVidia GTX 660.

If it matters, my general plans are to build a new complete system in the fall/winter, as I expect GPU prices to drop. I guess I'd do my research in Autumn and hope for some really good deals on Black Friday. This has been really interesting though; I've built plenty of PCs, but never cared about e.g. cases. I now look forward to finding cases with proper thermal management and maybe even mod them to improve it even further.

Thanks to @Knoxx29 in particular for the great recommendations! :)
Click to expand...


As far as my experience goes, you're pretty Lucky with a x5690 :-), having many options regarding multiplier and blck.
I suppose this question is hard to anwser because i don't know how you use you system mostly. If you use it for gaming I would suggest getting the blck and multiplier so you could max out you ram speed. Though the gtx 660 will most likely hold you back and you won't feel much of the increased ramspeed. If you're planning to upgrade your gpu and use you pc for gaming that would possibly be the best way in my opinion. If you use you pc a lot for word/documents and webbrowsing the lower blck and auto multiplier might help with power consumption but I'm not sure if you locked you multiplier with 200 blck and turned off any power saving featers. you might want to use cpu-z to see your voltage and frequencies at idle for both settings. regarding uncore and Qpi frequencies you will be able to clock them at the same level most of the time but it depends on your ramspeed stability and the option you have in your bios. In my experience the QPI can be set to 4.8
4.800 GT/s (- 18x 133 x 2)
5.866 GT/s (- 22x 133 x 2)
6.400 GT/s (- 24x 133 x 2)
(also stated by agent 007x) The blck of 200 would be around (18 x200 x2) 7200 gt/s and with 148 you might be able to set (22 x 148 x 2) 6500ish. if it gives you any inprovement im not sure though as far as I've seen it will be low but i hope the really knowladgeble people will correct me if im wrong. the same can be done for ram/uncore by multipliers in the bios. I suppose the lower the blck the more flexibility in multipliers you have and in my experience you can get away with lower voltage (correct me if im wrong). So I dont have a clear anwser im afraid.
 
Bit of an upgrade from the dual core Xeon I had in a Socket 775 system.
This beauty is an e5-2560 8C/16T @ 2.0GHz put to good use crunching for WCG.
Untitled.png
 
Very nice @Caring1 :) Do you have an idea of what the rig pulls watts wise? :)
 
I wonder if I can pick your collective brains.

I've got a Dell Precision T3500 that came with a W3565 that I've since swapped out for an X5675. They have the same maximum boost of up to 3.46GHz. When gaming (Tomb Raider, the Bioshock/Witcher series everything at max settings - I stuck a GTX 1060 in it) the W3565 would boost to 3.33GHz up from 3.2GHz and stay there. The X5675 seems somewhat chilled out and stays at its base 3.07GHz, occasionally going to 3.20GHz. I assume this is because it just doesn't feel the need to boost, as it is overall more powerful? If it were to go to its max boost it would only do so on 1 or 2 of it's 6 cores right? I'm getting these values from the Afterburner/Riva Tuner OSD.
 
T3500 said:
I wonder if I can pick your collective brains.

I've got a Dell Precision T3500 that came with a W3565 that I've since swapped out for an X5675. They have the same maximum boost of up to 3.46GHz. When gaming (Tomb Raider, the Bioshock/Witcher series everything at max settings - I stuck a GTX 1060 in it) the W3565 would boost to 3.33GHz up from 3.2GHz and stay there. The X5675 seems somewhat chilled out and stays at its base 3.07GHz, occasionally going to 3.20GHz. I assume this is because it just doesn't feel the need to boost, as it is overall more powerful? If it were to go to its max boost it would only do so on 1 or 2 of it's 6 cores right? I'm getting these values from the Afterburner/Riva Tuner OSD.
Click to expand...
When it comes to the X58 platform and the Famous 6 core Xeon CPU´s the most important thing is the solid motherboard with possibility to do OC.....unfortunately you can´t do much about that with yours mobo.....you are basically limited ONLY on stocked CPU speeds&settings the good thing is that X5675 ain´t that slow for that GTX 1060 but than again almost any Westmere can easily hit 3,8Ghz and more with any other decent mobo......about your question/on default turbo boost should be enabled and then 2 cores always hit higher speeds.....
 
Zyll Goliath said:
When it comes to the X58 platform and the Famous 6 core Xeon CPU´s the most important thing is the solid motherboard with possibility to do OC.....unfortunately you can´t do much about that with yours mobo.....you are basically limited ONLY on stocked CPU speeds&settings the good thing is that X5675 ain´t that slow for that GTX 1060 but than again almost any Westmere can easily hit 3,8Ghz and more with any other decent mobo......about your question/on default turbo boost should be enabled and then 2 cores always hit higher speeds.....
Click to expand...

Yeah the BIOS on the Dell is totally locked down so you can't do anything in that respect.

I realised that the OSD value must be the average of all cores as ((3.46 x2) + (3.07 x4))/6 is 3.2
 
phill said:
Very nice @Caring1 :) Do you have an idea of what the rig pulls watts wise? :)
Click to expand...
Posted this earlier in this thread.
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/how-efficient-is-your-cruncher.210974/page-6

T3500 said:
I wonder if I can pick your collective brains.

I've got a Dell Precision T3500 that came with a W3565 that I've since swapped out for an X5675.
Click to expand...
You might get some more answers in this thread:
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/dell-workstation-owners-club.243124/
 
One thing I found is GPU's suck a lot of power even when not in use, so utilizing the lowest wattage unit that does the job is the way to go.
As it is, mine only has to output a display as I don't game etc.
 
The R710 doesn't have any external GPU so to speak, it's all on board, but I think the problem is the 5 1Tb enterprise disks and such that really aren't needed in there, which are just sucking power.. Not that it matters too much on a sunny day like today, as the solar is working rather nicely!! :D So glad I bought that... lol
 
What wrong with the X299 Dark? Has nice looking aesthetics to me.

X299_E299_Dark_article_header_EN.jpg
 
biffzinker said:
What wrong with the X299 Dark? Has nice looking aesthetics to me.

X299_E299_Dark_article_header_EN.jpg
Click to expand...

Of course soon or later i will buy one but what i meant is that i won't exchange a SR-2 for one of those.
 
So the SR-2 is a collectors item not be exchanged?
 
How's the DDR4 overclock coming along?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top