G3258, not all equal.

Speed addicts anonymous.

Moderator: Starfalcon

G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:32 am

So I was tasked to update a mAtx base system from the 2007 era. (core2 E6000)

I kind of wanted to use an FX-8350, but I couldn't find any decent matx motherboard.
But then I also couldn't find any Intel option in the budget I had (<250$ total CPU+MB+ram) ... short of scanning ebay for used parts.

So I decided to got with a new Z97 & G3258, even so the G3258 is not a well rounded CPU.
Thinking that in 2 to 3 year time people will dump their i7-2600k on ebay for cheap and it will make for a decent update. (2x compute upgrade)

So I used the countless review, and even so I din't plan for 4.8ghz, I at least wanted 4.4ghz at decent voltage...
Well its much harder to get using a street G3258 then Intel press review samples.

As a reference I saw Anand got 4.4ghz at 1.2v ... well, I was not that 'lucky' , I couldn't' even do 4.2 ghz at 1.2 volts.
Also heat goes up very quickly, so pushing past 1.3 volts is not very rewarding.

In the end this 22nm chip seem stable at 4.2ghz and 1.25v

If you have a G3258, where do you stand ?

http://images.anandtech.com/doci/8232/G ... _575px.png
sschaem
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:05 am

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Fri Aug 01, 2014 2:32 am

The G3258 is an LGA1150 part and the 2600K is LGA1155. I'm sure this just slipped your mind, so I'm just pointing it out. You must mean a future upgrade to a Haswell-based CPU.
The three pillars of my digital life: AMD FX-8350, Google Nexus 7 (Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro), Intel Core i5-2450M
ronch
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:55 am
Location: C:\Program Files\

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Fri Aug 01, 2014 6:07 am

Sounds like you got a dud, but that's to be expected because overclocking = gambling

Sandy bridge was amazing. Even the worst overclocking chips would usually reach 4.4GHz with sensible, air-coolable voltages.
Ivy and Haswell are more variable. I've seen a 3770K that wouldn't do over 4GHz without extra voltage, which is pretty awful.

If you can run your G3258 at 4.2GHz and you're happy with the performance, just leave it alone - otherwise ebay it and try again with another sample - but remember it's still gambling! If you want guaranteed performance you have to pay for it.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Fri Aug 01, 2014 11:57 am

This thread should probably be in the Overclocking, Tweaking, & Cooling section.

Like Chrispy said, overclocking is a gamble, and it looks like you got a dud. The only thing Intel/AMD guarantees is that the CPU will run at the reported "stock" speeds. In the same regard, reviewers only get one chip to test, so they can't reliably conclude that they got a good or bad overclocker. IIRC, Scott bought his review sample from Microcenter (retail)
i5-3570K, ASRock Z77 Pro4-m, Asus GTX660 TOP, 120 GB Vertex 3 Max IOPS, 2 TB Samsung EcoGreen F4, 8GB G-Skill @1.25V, Silverstone PS07B
DPete27
Gerbil Jedi
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1680
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:50 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 4:50 am

I'm aware that not all chips are equal, but I think its worth putting it out there, specially after so many reviews made it seem like ~4.7ghz was common.

Now, I wasn't planning to go beyond 4.4ghz, so speed wise its fine. (But I wanted to keep the voltage at 1.2volt)
But I'm a bit surprised at the voltage requirement, still acceptable as the chip doesn't seem to throttle under full load.

update: Actually Prime95 failed at 1.25, so I had to bump it a little more to have 4.2ghz stable. All seem good for a few hours now.
(its in a room at 96F ambient.. so if this system pass, it should be OK in a normal environment)

Not sure if this can help anyone, but this one came from batch # 3419B298

Its possible Intel binned the 'good' one to be sold first ? (Got to have a conspiracy theory, since I dont believe in good or bad luck :)


For future upgrades and my i7-2600k hope... yea I missed the socket update.
No cheap sandy bridge upgrade for this machine... will have to wait for the i7-4770k to become old hats.
Hopefully skylake will do the trick.
sschaem
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:05 am

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 5:06 am

My G3258 is stable at 4.5 GHz at 1.36v ... It is not the best overclocker ever, but it stays cool enough under load with an H80i to be fine at this overclock. Though mine will do 4 GHz at 1.12v with no problem...

There is a massive voltage-wall at 4.6, that would require over 1.4v to be stable :( I simply cannot get anything over 4.5 stable for 24/7 use.

With this said I am still very happy with its performance, being a £40 part, it handles most of my games just fine and beats out my own 4.4 GHz 2600K in single-threaded performance :D
i7 4790K @ 4.6 | Maximus VII Formula | 16GB Vengeance Pro 2133 | Windforce GTX 670 + GT 630 PhysX | 128GB 850 Pro | 2x 250GB 840 EVO| 2x 1TB WD Black | AX1500i
Wren
Gerbil
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:15 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 5:20 am

DPete27 wrote:This thread should probably be in the Overclocking, Tweaking, & Cooling section.
I've moved it there.

Overclocking is never guaranteed. You're gambling on Intel's manufacturing folks having built the chip significantly better than Intel's marketing folks have sold it.
i7-4770K, H70, Gryphon Z87, 16 GiB, R9-290, SSD, 2 HD, Blu-ray, SB ZX, TJ08-E, SS-660XP², 3007WFP+2001FP, RK-9000BR, MX518
JustAnEngineer
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 15487
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: The Heart of Dixie

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 7:17 am

I get 4.4, no changing voltage, no noticeable heat.
Non-stock cooling tower with two fans + another speeding air out the back.

I have not tried to go higher since I don't need it at all.
climatepete
Gerbil
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 9:00 am

I should mention that I have not done anything to create a heavy load. Gaming if any will probably have a few months and even then I'll probably play a different way with a Raspberry Pi. Indeed since I'm not a "real" overclocker I might just set the speed back some until I learn more about it.
climatepete
Gerbil
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Sat Aug 02, 2014 9:39 am

You should also realize that a 200MHZ speed difference out of over 4GHz is only 5% or less of a speed difference. You would only notice that in benchmarks or tasks that take a long time like video encoding.
MadManOriginal
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: In my head...

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:30 am

MadManOriginal wrote:You should also realize that a 200MHZ speed difference out of over 4GHz is only 5% or less of a speed difference. You would only notice that in benchmarks or tasks that take a long time like video encoding.


This!

I find if funny how people are willing to push their chips right to the raggedy edge when they're practically silent and cool running just a few percent slower.
4.6GHz at OMGVoltage with all fans on full speed
4.4GHz at stock voltage in near-silence.

Even in, say, a two-hour encode, the difference is only two minutes, and for the gaming where it matters (minimum FPS) it'll *maybe* go from 44fps to 46fps *if* your GPU isn't the (far more likely) bottleneck.
This is why I ran my 5GHz-capable 2500K at 4.5GHz 24/7 and why I now run my 3770 at only 4GHz. It's fast enough that the only thing I notice is the peace and quiet ;)
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Mon Aug 04, 2014 10:35 am

sschaem wrote:If you have a G3258, where do you stand ?


I'm not sure, I ended up replacing it before I was fully tuned in, but I was doing about 4.5GHz at something like 1.25V, and it ran nice and cool and quiet under a CM Hyper 212.

Now I have a 4790K, and I haven't even bothered OCing it at all, though it's nice to have the option. Bless Intel for selling a CPU clocked at what it can actually handle, for once. If they could do that all the time, OCing would just plain die out.
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:47 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:This!

I find if funny how people are willing to push their chips right to the raggedy edge when they're practically silent and cool running just a few percent slower.
4.6GHz at OMGVoltage with all fans on full speed
4.4GHz at stock voltage in near-silence.


Indeed. This has never made much sense to me either. I do usually push a new CPU pretty far to understand the voltage/frequency curve, but after that I back off the overclock to a more reasonable level. My 2500K for example seems to hit that "voltage wall" around 4.6ghz, so I keep it at 4.5ghz which runs 20C cooler than it did at 4.8ghz (and almost 10C cooler than at 4.6ghz)
2500K @ 4.5ghz || ASUS P8Z68-V LX || Corsair Vengeance DDR1600 8GB || EVGA GTX660 SC 2GB ||
Topower ZU-550W 550-Watt || M-AUDIO BX5a || Dell U2312HM || Acer H213H || ASUS Xonar DG ||
WDBlack1TB || WDBlack640GB || 2x WDGreen 2TB || Crucial M4 128GB ||
travbrad
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:39 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 2:06 am

you dont seem to have mentioned which heatsink you are using?

if you are using the standard one high temps are to be expected when overclocking
i dont think anand or TR used a standard one when they were overclocking

also as others have said its a chip lottery - you could get a dud or you could get a monster, i have a friend with a 2600k that cant go past 4.2@ 1.35v
f0d
Gerbil
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:07 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:48 am

You are in a room that's 96 degrees Fahrenheit? That may have something to do with it.....
GO CARDINALS!
Rakhmaninov3
Graphmaster Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 2:10 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 6:50 am

hey sschaem! now you got me nervous! i just ordered my g3258 with a asrock z97 formula OC motherboard and i want to get a really nice overclock. i'm curious what heatsink and thermal paste are you using? i plan on re-using my hyper 212 evo with articit silver 5 for overclocking. and try to keep it under 1.3v you never mentioned what heatsink you are using i was curious. and the general temperature of your room. and how many fans are in your case and what not. how's the airflow in your case?
Dariens007
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:10 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 7:00 am

Based on all the reports I've seen on various sites asking the G3258 to do 4.4 or higher and keeping the voltage at 1.2 or lower is asking for a lot. Sure, you might get lucky and manage to win the CPU lottery but it's more likely that you will need to bump the voltage up to 1.3 or so to hit those numbers. At least that seems to be the trend.
nanoflower
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:10 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 8:14 am

My motherboard's auto-overclock thing put my G3258 at 4.3 and 1.25V, so that's probably a very easily achievable target. The Hyper 212 ought to be fine, that's what I used, and my house is not air conditioned, my CPU was hot but never at a dangerous level.
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 8:24 am

Dariens007 wrote:i just ordered my g3258 with a asrock z97 formula OC motherboard

Strapping a $60 - $75 CPU to a $220 mobo seems a bit contradictory.
i5-3570K, ASRock Z77 Pro4-m, Asus GTX660 TOP, 120 GB Vertex 3 Max IOPS, 2 TB Samsung EcoGreen F4, 8GB G-Skill @1.25V, Silverstone PS07B
DPete27
Gerbil Jedi
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1680
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:50 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:10 am

I don't buy fancy motherboards; What's the appeal - Better onboard sound?
I want my motherboards to have a modern chipset and as little 3rd-party rubbish as possible, since all the problems are usually third-party NICs, third-party SATA controllers, third-party USB controllers.
<insert large, flashing, epileptic-fit-inducing signature (based on the latest internet-meme) here>
Chrispy_
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:20 am

DPete27 wrote:
Dariens007 wrote:i just ordered my g3258 with a asrock z97 formula OC motherboard

Strapping a $60 - $75 CPU to a $220 mobo seems a bit contradictory.


220 dollars? um where did you get that from? it's 135$ no tax.... O_O ah maybe because i didn't put the "m" on the z97 thing. it's that one.
Dariens007
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:10 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 2:39 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:I don't buy fancy motherboards; What's the appeal - Better onboard sound?
I want my motherboards to have a modern chipset and as little 3rd-party rubbish as possible, since all the problems are usually third-party NICs, third-party SATA controllers, third-party USB controllers.


I don't always buy high end motherboards, my current MSI Z97 Mate routinely sells for 100$ or less, I got it in a combo with my G3258 for 90$ together. Very much not high end.

What I miss: good onboard ethernet. This one uses Realtek, which for ethernet is tolerable, much better than their audio efforts. My previous Z77 board had dual ethernet, one Qualcomm/Atheros, the other Intel.
What I miss: decent onboard audio. This one uses a Realtek audio chipset, like my previous board, but with very few input/outputs. Without a good digital out, or more jacks in general, I can't connect my 5.1 speakers.
What I miss: no SATA Express or M.2 or mSATA ports. My Z77 had an mSATA port, and I miss that. I was able to get some 32GB mSATA cheap locally, and they worked great with caching.
What I miss: Better/more options for multi-GPU setup. Last mobo could do SLI or Xfire, with up to three double-wide GPUs. Current mobo doesn't support SLI at all and doesn't really support Xfire, and no chance to install more than two GPUs.
What I don't miss: About 100-150$ more in price. That's it, though. I'll probably get something more mid-range in the not-too-distant future, and give my daughter the G3258 and motherboard as the combo I bought them as.
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:23 pm

nanoflower wrote:Based on all the reports I've seen on various sites asking the G3258 to do 4.4 or higher and keeping the voltage at 1.2 or lower is asking for a lot. Sure, you might get lucky and manage to win the CPU lottery but it's more likely that you will need to bump the voltage up to 1.3 or so to hit those numbers. At least that seems to be the trend.


I based my impression on the G3258 from major review sites (Anand, TR, etc..)
Anand voltage chart was encouraging. 4.4ghz at 1.2v : http://images.anandtech.com/doci/8232/G ... _575px.png


As I originally mentioned I never was interested to run Haswell cores >1.2v , so whatever the chip would do at 1.2 volt this is what I would settle at.
I'm sure I could go to 4.4ghz at 1.35v or maybe 4.5ghz with 1.4v, but I would have needed to budget an after market cooler. All that heat/power and extra cost for 5% is not worth it.

I believe the G3258 tjmax is at 100c, where the core start to throttle. The highest recorded during burn in was 93c (remember I tested this system in 96F ambient)
Under gaming the highest was <85c. A third party heat sink/fan was unnecessary... Now at 1.4v and 4.8ghz, no way the stock cooler would mange.

Idle was at ~48c, 900rpm. This worked out great. At this speed the CPU cooling is pretty much silent. This also reduce thermal distances between idle and load.~50c to 85c fluctuation.
Now, I did I want the chip to idle at ~60c, but I couldn't get the fan controller to go below 900rpm .

note: This G3258 system passed all the tests, and its off my hands now.
sschaem
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:05 am

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:19 pm

sschaem wrote:but I would have needed to budget an after market cooler. All that heat/power and extra cost for 5% is not worth it.

I believe the G3258 tjmax is at 100c, where the core start to throttle. The highest recorded during burn in was 93c (remember I tested this system in 96F ambient)
Under gaming the highest was <85c. A third party heat sink/fan was unnecessary... Now at 1.4v and 4.8ghz, no way the stock cooler would mange.

Idle was at ~48c, 900rpm. This worked out great. At this speed the CPU cooling is pretty much silent. This also reduce thermal distances between idle and load.~50c to 85c fluctuation.
Now, I did I want the chip to idle at ~60c, but I couldn't get the fan controller to go below 900rpm .

note: This G3258 system passed all the tests, and its off my hands now.


Ahah! I see the problem here. You fail at Overclocking 101, sorry. Simply hitting 100C and triggering throttling mechanisms does not cause a CPU to fail. HOWEVER, every 1C you rise pushes the CPU closer to the edges of it's tolerance, and increases the risk of computation errors (crashing, failing, etc). Even though you weren't at the thermal limit, you *were* hotter than any of the reviewers, since they didn't use the stock heatsink. The stock heatsink has an absurdly small mass, so a very very small thermal capacity. The CPU spiking to near 100C can quickly turn a stable OC into Prime95 errors, or turn Prime95 errors into a BSOD.

For the TL;DR, you were overclocking on the stock HSF, and nobody else was. None of the reviewers you cite used the stock cooler. I didn't use the stock cooler. I wouldn't be horribly surprised to find out that you were literally the only person ever to attempt to OC the G3258 on the stock HSF. I don't mean that as an insult, I mean it literally.
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:43 pm

Chrispy_ wrote:I don't buy fancy motherboards; What's the appeal - Better onboard sound?
I want my motherboards to have a modern chipset and as little 3rd-party rubbish as possible, since all the problems are usually third-party NICs, third-party SATA controllers, third-party USB controllers.


-Better VRMs, capacitor, and inductor quality
-VRM `sinks that are bolted on, rather than using push pins (sad that this doesn't happen even in the $100-130 spectrum most of the time; IMO it should)
-Better NICs than Realtek (read: Intel)
-Better quality substrate (that is, a thicker PCB less likely to warp with more layers and better trace quality)

There is, however, a diminishing law of returns. At a certain price point, you get all of this and probably shouldn't go further. I just ordered a Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK. I would have gone with the UD3H-BK but for the fact that the VRM/power setup was better, bolt-on `sinks, improved capacitors, and the fact that there was only a $15 price difference since the UD5H was on a considerable sale. With either mainboard, I also got a $25 discount when bundling a Devil's Canyon 4790K.

The things I didn't need on the UD5H? The Atheros NIC (one Intel NIC is enough, and I don't like the E2200 anyway, so I'll disable it), the extra USB3 ports (a couple of which are on a hub), two SATA ports not based on an Intel chipset (which I'll disable, and I honestly wanted the two PS/2 ports of the UD3H. If there hadn't have been a sale, the UD3H-BK would have been my choice.
Core i7-4790K, GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H-BK, 16GB (4x4) G.Skill RipJaws PC1866
Corsair 650D case, Seasonic X750 Gold PSU
WD `Raptor 600GB boot, WD Caviar Black 1TB data, NEC 7200 DVDRW
2x XFX R9 280X Black in Crossfire, X-Fi Titanium, Dell 2408WFP
LoneWolf15
Gerbil XP
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:36 am
Location: SW Meecheegan

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:44 pm

I wouldn't want to run a CPU at +90C even at stock settings. OC settings is just begging for it to degrade and forcing you to decrease clock rate or increase voltage to maintain stability.

On a side note, it would be nice if CPU reviews also included the cost of the motherboards.

It doesn't matter if a CPU is dirt cheap if the required mobo cost a lot.

If there were the resources, someone could design a CPU that has only the very basic functions and let the mobo have the north/southbridge, memory controller, L2 cache, and etc.

Watch that motherboard's cost skyrocket.
UnfriendlyFire
Gerbil
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 7:28 am

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 6:10 pm

He's not the only one to try and OC a G3258 with the stock heat sink. The OP in this thread http://www.overclock.net/t/1500524/intel-pentium-g3258-performance-and-owners-thread was doing much of his testing with the stock cooler but I think has since upgraded. That's probably the best thread on the G3258 and OCing with numerous people reporting their results using different coolers/MBs/RAM.

As for the temps I did hit the low 90s when I first started testing with my Pentium. I think it was a combination of the TIM paste being fresh and perhaps a bit too much being applied to the heat sink. Now it's staying under the low 80s during the same runs of Intel Burn Test. That's with the voltage set at 1.3 and the multiplier set at 44x for a 4.4GHz run on a MSI PC Mate MB. Though I will admit I'm leaving the cache alone as setting it to the same 44x mutiplier causes an instant crash even with a boosted voltage and I'm not willing to spend a lot of time playing around to figure out what OC level it can support since I'm not sure how much of a boost in performance it would provide.
nanoflower
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:10 pm

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 6:52 pm

nanoflower wrote:He's not the only one to try and OC a G3258 with the stock heat sink. The OP in this thread http://www.overclock.net/t/1500524/intel-pentium-g3258-performance-and-owners-thread was doing much of his testing with the stock cooler but I think has since upgraded. That's probably the best thread on the G3258 and OCing with numerous people reporting their results using different coolers/MBs/RAM.

As for the temps I did hit the low 90s when I first started testing with my Pentium. I think it was a combination of the TIM paste being fresh and perhaps a bit too much being applied to the heat sink. Now it's staying under the low 80s during the same runs of Intel Burn Test. That's with the voltage set at 1.3 and the multiplier set at 44x for a 4.4GHz run on a MSI PC Mate MB. Though I will admit I'm leaving the cache alone as setting it to the same 44x mutiplier causes an instant crash even with a boosted voltage and I'm not willing to spend a lot of time playing around to figure out what OC level it can support since I'm not sure how much of a boost in performance it would provide.


80-90C at those settings still sounds too high to me.
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 6:53 pm

UnfriendlyFire wrote:If there were the resources, someone could design a CPU that has only the very basic functions and let the mobo have the north/southbridge, memory controller, L2 cache, and etc.

Watch that motherboard's cost skyrocket.


For a long time, all motherboards were that way. Welcome back to Socket 7!
Siglessness is boring.
Image - M4800-Eight1
Image - Vargr-Z97
Forge
Lord High Gerbil
 
Posts: 8046
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: SouthEast PA

Re: G3258, not all equal.

Postposted on Tue Aug 05, 2014 7:07 pm

Forge wrote:Ahah! I see the problem here. You fail at Overclocking 101, sorry. Simply hitting 100C and triggering throttling mechanisms does not cause a CPU to fail. HOWEVER, every 1C you rise pushes the CPU closer to the edges of it's tolerance, and increases the risk of computation errors (crashing, failing, etc). Even though you weren't at the thermal limit, you *were* hotter than any of the reviewers, since they didn't use the stock heatsink. The stock heatsink has an absurdly small mass, so a very very small thermal capacity. The CPU spiking to near 100C can quickly turn a stable OC into Prime95 errors, or turn Prime95 errors into a BSOD.

For the TL;DR, you were overclocking on the stock HSF, and nobody else was. None of the reviewers you cite used the stock cooler. I didn't use the stock cooler. I wouldn't be horribly surprised to find out that you were literally the only person ever to attempt to OC the G3258 on the stock HSF. I don't mean that as an insult, I mean it literally.


Remember I'm not trying to reach 4.8ghz, but see how far the CPU can go at 1.2v

And frankly, I never heard anyone saying "Get an after market cooler, you can then reduce your CPU voltage"...

The reason to invest in a cooler : a) noise level, b) overclocking close to the tjmax
So If you are well below the tjmax, its a total waste to get an aftermarket cooler.

Again
4.2ghz with 1.2ghz, random bsod
4.2ghz with 1.27v, a few degree hotter then at 1.2v, but 100% stable.

So tell me again how I can reach 4.4ghz at 1.2v with a third party cooler ?
sschaem
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:05 am

Next

Return to Overclocking, Tweaking, & Cooling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests