Why YOU need LLC!!

[borisvodofsky]

Okay, you're right. Go ahead with LLC.

You clearly know more than Intel engineers about their processors.

Your ignorance is astounding.

Have you ever even used LLC?

Pics! of "Your alleged" vdroop behavior

 

[palladium]

Question: Does AMD motherboards have this LLC setting?

 

[borisvodofsky]

Question: Does AMD motherboards have this LLC setting?

Yes, they have LLC option.

 

[Kenmitch]

You have no clue what you're talking about. It is you who's spreading mis-information.

I "target" 1.33 minimum. Using whatever offset voltage to guarantee that number.

The minimum at full load without memory controller engaged, happens in Prime 95 small FTT.

So no matter what, I have to hit 1.33, otherwise it'll be unstable at low loads 4.8ghz.

NOW, from there I have 2 option,

Use LLC or Don't use LLC



If i use LLC, I need a -0.25v offset to get the stable 1.33v in prime small ftt

my IBT/Halo/Movie voltage is a "CONSTANT" 1.35, this has no entering or exiting, attached. As the movie is playing, as halo is running, as IBT is burning, I GET 1.35v under CPUz


If i do NOT use LLC, I need a +0.6v offset to get stable 1.33v in prime small ftt

my IBT/Halo/Movie voltage is a "CONSTANT" 1.37v, again, this has nothing to do with entering or exiting load. AS THESE TASKS are running, I SEE 1.37v in CPUz.


MY ONLY CHOICE is to use LLC, because otherwise, My two voltage brackets are 1.33 and 1.37, the 1.37 is during simple movie playback, which is way to high.

However, if I use LLC, it feeds a constant 1.35v to my CPU during low load 4.8ghz.

The reason your single core load climbs higher than your 4 core load is because you disabled c3 and c6 states. Using offset vcore has it's trade offs to some extent. Higher 1-2 core loaded vcore is one of them.

When you disable c3 and c6 you kill the chips ability to controll vcore by core(s) loaded so what you get is kinda one constant voltage with 1-4 core load. The reason your voltage is lower under 4 core load is because it's drinking more juice!

 

[borisvodofsky]

The reason your single core load climbs higher than your 4 core load is because you disabled c3 and c6 states. Using offset vcore has it's trade offs to some extent. Higher 1-2 core loaded vcore is one of them.

When you disable c3 and c6 you kill the chips ability to controll vcore by core(s) loaded so what you get is kinda one constant voltage with 1-4 core load. The reason your voltage is lower under 4 core load is because it's drinking more juice!

The c3 and c6 crashes the shiznit on high multipliers, Unless you set an absurd voltage.

Drinking more juice might be it, but the point is, my 1-2 core loads cause 1.37v, which is way over what I need.

I'm not against "not" using LLC, it just happens to be the ONLY way I can get voltages to Stay lower under light loads. :'(

I played with nearly every combination. This is the only way to do it.

 

[JAG87]

Your ignorance is astounding.

Have you ever even used LLC?

Pics! of "Your alleged" vdroop behavior

I used to make my own LLC by penciling resistors on motherboards, before it was even implemented in the BIOS by manufacturers.

And when your mouth still stunk like milk.

So please.

 

[borisvodofsky]

I used to make my own LLC by penciling resistors on motherboards, before it was even implemented in the BIOS by manufacturers.

And when your mouth still stunk like milk.

So please.

Stop making things up. and post some solid evidence D:.

And only idiot n00bs would ever pencil resistors.

 

[Kenmitch]

Stop making things up. and post some solid evidence D:.

And only idiot n00bs would ever pencil resistors.

In the early days things like that made overclocking possible. Guess it wasn't even that long ago really.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-p5w-dh-deluxe-simple-pencil-mods--/3876.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/voltmods/151/2

 

[borisvodofsky]

In the early days things like that made overclocking possible. Guess it wasn't even that long ago really.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-p5w-dh-deluxe-simple-pencil-mods--/3876.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/voltmods/151/2

I'm talking about using pencil specifically, which is a bad idea.

conductive paint is the only way to go.

 

[Haserath]

LLC= less stable overclock.

I only care about full load power when the most stress is on the CPU and stability of the overclock.

The small increase, if there is one, from the increase in low load voltage/power is worth the extra stability.

 

[borisvodofsky]

LLC= less stable overclock.

I only care about full load power when the most stress is on the CPU and stability of the overclock.

The small increase, if there is one, from the increase in low load voltage/power is worth the extra stability.

Um.... prove that it's LESS stable.

 

[Meghan54]

I'm talking about using pencil specifically, which is a bad idea.

conductive paint is the only way to go.

You have no freaking idea what you're blathering about, do you?


Didn't think so.

 

[Chiropteran]

You have no freaking idea what you're blathering about, do you?


Didn't think so.

It looks to me like he responded to an attempt to change the subject and now you are flaming him for, what reason, I can't figure it out.

Regulars on this forum don't take kindly to logical arguments, you either follow the pack like a sheep or you get flamed.

 

[Kenmitch]

The c3 and c6 crashes the shiznit on high multipliers, Unless you set an absurd voltage.

Drinking more juice might be it, but the point is, my 1-2 core loads cause 1.37v, which is way over what I need.

I'm not against "not" using LLC, it just happens to be the ONLY way I can get voltages to Stay lower under light loads. :'(

I played with nearly every combination. This is the only way to do it.

If that's what your chip likes then so be it....Just saying that not all chips are the same and may or may not require LLC.

No LLC and c3 and c6 enabled should be good up to around 4.3-4.5ghz or possibly more depending on the chip.

In the past I've been able to stabalize with lower vcore with LLC on the lowest setting possible.

 

[borisvodofsky]

It looks to me like he responded to an attempt to change the subject and now you are flaming him for, what reason, I can't figure it out.

Regulars on this forum don't take kindly to logical arguments, you either follow the pack like a sheep or you get flamed.

That hurts my feelings Chiropteran, so I'm just a piece of mutton to ya eh?

 

[borisvodofsky]

If that's what your chip likes then so be it....Just saying that not all chips are the same and may or may not require LLC.

No LLC and c3 and c6 enabled should be good up to around 4.3-4.5ghz or possibly more depending on the chip.

In the past I've been able to stabalize with lower vcore with LLC on the lowest setting possible.

Yes this is correct. I can also use the "level 2" or "standard/25%" LLC setting and be perfectly stable, which gives me the voltages below "which are stable

+ 0.03v offset setting

1.320v-1.328v prime 95 small ftt
1.336v-1.344v Intel Burn Test
Problem is
1.378v on Halo/Video Decode


However, I use the "High" setting because that gives me a 5% more voltage than I need. And that's for headroom.

 

[Kenmitch]

Yes this is correct. I can also use the "level 2" or "standard/25%" LLC setting and be perfectly stable, which gives me the voltages below "which are stable

+ 0.03v offset setting

1.320v-1.328v prime 95 small ftt
1.336v-1.344v Intel Burn Test
Problem is
1.378v on Halo/Video Decode


However, I use the "High" setting because that gives me a 5% more voltage than I need. And that's for headroom.

I wouldn't worry about the little xtra vcore under lightly loaded things if it was me.

I've had my chip up to 5.6ghz @ 1.7v's and it lives still....Did buy the protecton plan just in case tho

 

[borisvodofsky]

I wouldn't worry about the little xtra vcore under lightly loaded things if it was me.

I've had my chip up to 5.6ghz @ 1.7v's and it lives still....Did buy the protecton plan just in case tho

The Intel Math people are each over 9000. There's no way they built that plan such that your CPU will fail within that amount of time, even with moderate abuse.

I look at that plan as a testament from intel that I have "at least 3 years" of time to tinker, even without buying the plan; because ultimately the plan is a hedge, and it's kind of silly to hedge $150 for 14% of it's total value, with no other leverages involved.

My take on the light load, is that, that's the "most" common load.

While my Full-FULL-load, is hardly ever seen. Why optimize for something that never ever happens?

There is also the "rumor" that Sandy should never exceed 1.35v for long term usage.

Given that light load is essentially "my" long term usage, it's pretty much 1.35 all the time.

If I ever had to fold or run some highly optimized renderer, I could easily switch to a different power configuration for that task if needed.