Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-01-09, 09:55 AM   #1
methimpikehoses
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel Burn-in Test

So I was running my new Q9650 at 4.0 stable in Prime95... but when I tried the Intel Burn in Test, I got errors almost immediately. So, I backed it down some to 3.6 and still got errors... and then down some more to stock speeds and still errors.

So now I'm wondering if my board can even really get this chip stable... Intel Burn in test doesn't even pass at default settings.

The vdroop on my board is probably the culprit. When I was OCing, I set it at 1.39vcore, which reads at about 1.35 on cpu-z. The trouble is that it drops down to 1.27-28 when stress testing, making the system unstable.

Wondering if I should RMA the chip. Any ideas?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 10:03 AM   #2
Logical
Registered User
 
Logical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Try Linx burn in test and compare results. Maybe your system doesnt like intel burn in, also make sure your hard disk is inactive at the time of testing.
Logical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 10:14 AM   #3
methimpikehoses
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrixteH View Post
Try Linx burn in test and compare results. Maybe your system doesnt like intel burn in, also make sure your hard disk is inactive at the time of testing.
Linx or linux? Link?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 11:43 AM   #4
grey_1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

I prefer OCCT now.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 11:48 AM   #5
methimpikehoses
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Quote:
Originally Posted by grey_1 View Post
I prefer OCCT now.
Thanks, I'll give it a shot.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 02:10 PM   #6
bob saget
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, originally Russia
Posts: 23,134
Send a message via MSN to bob saget Send a message via Yahoo to bob saget
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

you are so capable methim
bob saget is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 02:47 PM   #7
Logical
Registered User
 
Logical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Quote:
Originally Posted by methimpikehoses View Post
Linx or linux? Link?
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/12/29/2243633/LinX.7z

I believe its very similar to the intel burn in....linx makes use of all the core I7's cores including the logical cores.
Logical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-09, 06:37 PM   #8
Feyy
Registered User
 
Feyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,160
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Tbh if you are 12 hours prime95 stable, (all cores 100%).

Then you are fine, no game will ever stress it harder.
__________________
________________________________
| CPU: Intel Q6600 B3 @ 3Ghz
| Cooler: Zalman CNPS9700 LED
| Mobo: Intel D975XBX2
| GFX: Inno 3D 8800 GTS 640MB
| PhysX: EVGA 8400 GS 256MB
| Memory: 2x1GB OCZ Platinum Rev2 PC6400
| PSU: OCZ StealthXtreme 600W PSU
| Monitor: Acer G24
| HDD: 320GB Seagate Barracuda
| Case: NZXT Lexa Blackline [Blue]
| Mouse: Steelseries Xai
| Mouse mat: Steelseries 4HD
________________________________
Feyy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-09, 03:25 PM   #9
methimpikehoses
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Well, I can't get this chip stable at the clocks I want on my P35 board, which is too bad... I'm sure it would be fine on a P45 board. Oh well, I'm not buying a new mobo just to OC a little higher. If newegg charges me a restock fee, I'll put it up for sale here.

Looks like I'll go back to the old Q6600.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-09, 04:16 PM   #10
bacon12
Registered User
 
bacon12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,532
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

It may just be a bad clocking chip as well Meth.
bacon12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-09, 07:08 PM   #11
methimpikehoses
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

The vdrop and vdroops on this board is pretty bad... I set vcore at 1.43, it reads at 1.36, and then under load the whole thing drops to 1.29. Pretty much makes it impossible to maintain a good OC.

The Q6600 was better stability wise on this board...
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-09, 08:42 AM   #12
mailman2
Ducking & Dodging
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,948
Default Re: Intel Burn-in Test

Quote:
Originally Posted by methimpikehoses View Post
So I was running my new Q9650 at 4.0 stable in Prime95... but when I tried the Intel Burn in Test, I got errors almost immediately. So, I backed it down some to 3.6 and still got errors... and then down some more to stock speeds and still errors.

So now I'm wondering if my board can even really get this chip stable... Intel Burn in test doesn't even pass at default settings.

The vdroop on my board is probably the culprit. When I was OCing, I set it at 1.39vcore, which reads at about 1.35 on cpu-z. The trouble is that it drops down to 1.27-28 when stress testing, making the system unstable.

Wondering if I should RMA the chip. Any ideas?
I've owned a bunch of 45nm chips, they are flakey at best. Last night I came home, ran a quick 20 pass LinX at my 24/7 OC of 4.0Ghz it failed 9 seconds. Immediately ran it again and passed twice more. Rebooted and passed, then failed twice. I have found similar results using Prime95. It will pass 12 hours, stop it, restart it and fails within a minute.

I've had 5 E8400s C1 and E0s and this Q9550. My 65nm chips, which I also owned a multitude of were either stable or they werent but there wasnt any random instability like the 45nm chips exhibit.

The 45nm are still faster and have more cache, get your 12 hours of prime95 then just use it. Trying to prove it's stable over and over is an adventure in insanity. I've had 6 different 775 motherboard, 4 kits of ram and about 10 CPUs in the last year. The amount of random instability the 45nm chip exhibit is frustrating. However, I've never had issues using it to encode or game, its just the stress tests that cause this to happen.
__________________
i7-2600k @ 4.6Ghz, Zotac GTX 680 (1310/7000), 16GB DDR3 1600, 2 x 1TB Samsung F3 RAID 0, Windows 7 x64, CPU and GPU custom watercooled

Quote:
Originally Posted by General Lee View Post
Oh, if the whole world had only one neck for me to squeeze in my hands...
mailman2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maintain Your Privacy by Manually Accepting and Rejecting "Cookies" (nV News) MikeC Open Forum 2 02-02-13 07:15 PM
German ISP claims to deliver 4.7Gbps download speed in field test News Archived News Items 0 06-01-12 05:50 AM
295.53: the kernel needs "acpi=off", thinkpad T420, nvs 4200M Imbrius NVIDIA Linux 1 05-27-12 06:18 PM
AMD vs Intel druga runda CPUs, Motherboards And Memory 7 08-20-02 01:09 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.