1366 x58 Xeon Enthusiast overclocks club

so my X5675 friend fell through, I'm eying up a pair of X5675's on ebay for like 20 quid more and with some dell server heatsink things i can try sell on after the fact, What's a rough average to expect from X5675's? or would i be better off grabbing a pair of W3670s for a little less do we reckon? I'd prefer to buy pairs though, that way i can at least just pump a silly amount of voltage into it if i get a lemon and what have you, or just in the hopes that i get one above average chip, either way i'd prefer to have something of a backup in any case, but, i can grab 2 W3670s for about 50 quid, or a pair of X5675's for 60 but with some heatsinks i could sell on after the fact
 
so my X5675 friend fell through, I'm eying up a pair of X5675's on ebay for like 20 quid more and with some dell server heatsink things i can try sell on after the fact, What's a rough average to expect from X5675's? or would i be better off grabbing a pair of W3670s for a little less do we reckon? I'd prefer to buy pairs though, that way i can at least just pump a silly amount of voltage into it if i get a lemon and what have you, or just in the hopes that i get one above average chip, either way i'd prefer to have something of a backup in any case, but, i can grab 2 W3670s for about 50 quid, or a pair of X5675's for 60 but with some heatsinks i could sell on after the fact

My 5675 did 4.0 on reasonable voltage. Never pushed it further, but I started getting blue screens randomly. I think it may be my mish mash of RAM. That computer is my wife's and is just running at default settings now. I think most people shoot for 4.2 to 4.4 on a x5675.
 
My 5675 did 4.0 on reasonable voltage. Never pushed it further, but I started getting blue screens randomly. I think it may be my mish mash of RAM. That computer is my wife's and is just running at default settings now. I think most people shoot for 4.2 to 4.4 on a x5675.

Ahh, was hoping a little higher than that, I've been able to get 4.5GHz out of every X5670 i've had at 1.4v or lower (best i had was 1.32v for 4.5) I tend to push mine pretty much as far as they can go at 1.4v for my daily chips since cooling and ram isn't really a problem and what have you, will be ordering my chips on monday so hopefully I can decide between X5670/X5675 and W3670 before then, my board isn't great for bclk though so i'd prefer to stay under 190 so the X5670 is about as low as i can go too
 
I used to have a 980X on Asus R3E at 4.4 with 1.325 v. The chip was degrading pretty quickly and one day it would not boot. Both the mobo and the chip died. I guess I had been a bit unlucky there. I bought a used R3E and a few L5640 and 5660X. Here is mine https://valid.x86.fr/mnxvcm and seems like this is one of those above average chips, but I have the Cooler Master 212. It does boot 4.4 no problem. Gotta install the Corsair H100 on this thing and play some more with it.
 

Attachments

  • 2.png
    2.png
    140.4 KB · Views: 0
  • 2.png
    2.png
    140.4 KB · Views: 0
I used to have a 980X on Asus R3E at 4.4 with 1.325 v. The chip was degrading pretty quickly and one day it would not boot. Both the mobo and the chip died. I guess I had been a bit unlucky there. I bought a used R3E and a few L5640 and 5660X. Here is mine https://valid.x86.fr/mnxvcm and seems like this is one of those above average chips, but I have the Cooler Master 212. It does boot 4.4 no problem. Gotta install the Corsair H100 on this thing and play some more with it.

That's a pretty good X5660, mine needs about 1.35v for 4.2ghz and 1.4v for 4.4GHz and even that's not fully stable :(
 
Looks like anything above 4.2 / 4.4 requires a really beefy cooling. I just tried mine at 4.4 and 1.3v does the trick, but in AIDA64 stability test with two really loud 140mm fans in push / pull the temp is high 70's.
I know CM 212 is crappy, but will you really see a significant difference between 4.2 and 4.4. On the other hand its only a few dollars and you may get lucky.
This thing must be pulling in excess of 300 watts at 4.2 in prime95. You get the idea what it takes to cool it fairly quickly...:D
 
The D14 did it with a breeze and yeah like the h100...but yeah some chips were badddd and needed like 1.35-1.4v....and one died on that Asus killed it.
 
Looks like anything above 4.2 / 4.4 requires a really beefy cooling. I just tried mine at 4.4 and 1.3v does the trick, but in AIDA64 stability test with two really loud 140mm fans in push / pull the temp is high 70's.
I know CM 212 is crappy, but will you really see a significant difference between 4.2 and 4.4. On the other hand its only a few dollars and you may get lucky.
This thing must be pulling in excess of 300 watts at 4.2 in prime95. You get the idea what it takes to cool it fairly quickly...:D

yeah beefy cooling isn't an issue :p I have a H100i pro currently though I'm stepping back to a dark rock pro 3 shortly, I've had X5670's running 4.5GHz 1.4v daily on the DRP3 though without any issues so cooling isn't a problem on that front, I think I'm going to grab that pair of X5675's for 60 quid and have done with it, hopefully i can get 4.5 at a decent voltage but if i can even just get 4.5 for 1.4v then that's good enough for my needs, unlike my X5660 which tops out at 4.3GHz stable with 1.42v (can do 1.4v for 4.4 bench stable mind you)
 
So, in two minds here, bought two X5670's off of ebay, on one hand i got a god tier bin for one of them, on the other hand, the second was DOA, in any case though the working one does 4.5GHz with 1.32v (1.33v ish under load), here's my cinebench and cpuz thing
 

Attachments

  • 2019-08-15 12_37_59-Window.png
    2019-08-15 12_37_59-Window.png
    63.1 KB · Views: 0
I finally took the jump! I got a W3680 for $37 on Ebay. I'm just running things at 4.0 (160 Bclk X 25 multi). Its running a lot cooler than my I7 920, and I'm happy with the increase in performance.
 
I finally took the jump! I got a W3680 for $37 on Ebay. I'm just running things at 4.0 (160 Bclk X 25 multi). Its running a lot cooler than my I7 920, and I'm happy with the increase in performance.
It's good to see the prices have softened again. W3680 were down below $30 then spiked over $80 when it became widely known they are unlocked and not 45nm Bloomfields as many thought.
 
Can you adjust the multiplier on the Dell T3500?
Yes, with either ThrottleStop or IXTU. Multi change is the only OCing option on these boxes. Mine is flawless at 30x133.3 = 4.0ghz. >> https://valid.x86.fr/ryds0z
I believe the W3690 are unlocked as well but not worth extra price since they top about the same.

Have seen some W3680 running at 4.4ghz (33x133.3) in T3500 but that would be a serious silicone lottery win given no voltage adjustments are available. Suspect only good for a screen shot.
 
Last edited:
Using Intel XTU, I can get a higher single core, around 4.2 on a T3500 with W3680. But it's rock solid at 4.0. I suspect all of them could do 4.0 on a T3500 using XTU

I could never get throttlestop to work. Can downclock but not overclock
 
Using Intel XTU, I can get a higher single core, around 4.2 on a T3500 with W3680. But it's rock solid at 4.0. I suspect all of them could do 4.0 on a T3500 using XTU

I could never get throttlestop to work. Can downclock but not overclock
Interesting. I find them to work equally well for me. But do go for XTU for testing because of the built in graphs.
 
Have any of you guys tried to fit M.2 hard drives to their X58 Boards? If so could you give me some help with this, and maybe tell me how it is working with you? Thanks.
 
Have any of you guys tried to fit M.2 hard drives to their X58 Boards? If so could you give me some help with this, and maybe tell me how it is working with you? Thanks.

Get a PCIe adapter card.

If you want to boot from it, the easiest way to do that is to buy a NVMe drive with a legacy boot rom like a Samsung 950 Pro (or some older Plextor drives). You can also mod your bios or use 3rd party tools, but you'd have to google how to do that.

The downside is you're only running at PCIe 2.0 x4 speed, so about half the bandwidth of what the drives are capable of. I still got north of 1000MB transfer speeds on my 950 Pro though.
 
Get a PCIe adapter card.

If you want to boot from it, the easiest way to do that is to buy a NVMe drive with a legacy boot rom like a Samsung 950 Pro (or some older Plextor drives). You can also mod your bios or use 3rd party tools, but you'd have to google how to do that.

The downside is you're only running at PCIe 2.0 x4 speed, so about half the bandwidth of what the drives are capable of. I still got north of 1000MB transfer speeds on my 950 Pro though.


that's exactly what I did, only wrinkle was I have to make sure my storage is set to AHCI mode in BIOS, works great
 
The Rampage II boards that I previously said cannot boot Turing graphics cards, actually can!

However you need an older graphics board to do it, as the issue is Turing relies on ACPI 2.0 features (yes, that setting in the bios that is disabled by default)

Switch that on and you can boot from a Turing card.
 
X58 loves tight timings, try to find some old ddr3 if you don't need a ton of capacity.

View attachment 173677

I remember I be able to achieve this timing with my mushkin 3x2GB, however currently one of the stick is dead, so I only have 2 of them.

I currently run my system with triple channel but with different capacity of RAM 2x8GB + 2GB just for triple channel.
Memtest shows no error for a full day, however, Windows shows strange respond occasionally like BSOD or error identifying memory clock interrupt

Here is the comparison between triple channel and dual channel
DUAL vs TRIPLE CHannel.jpg

Btw, if I want to run in Bus Speed 200, is there any specific voltage I have to increase?
 
After 10.5-years of running on an Intel i7-920 4C 2.6 GHz @ 3.6 GHz Air I am finally upgrading to the Intel Xeon X5690 6C 3.46 GHz and will try for the 4.2 GHz overclock that seems to be pretty standard overclock on Air after spending all of $85 USD on eBay for it.

Getting 2 extra Cores and ~600 MHz more per core seems like a good gain for such a cheap price. I could have gotten an Intel Xeon X5680 6C 3.33 GHz for $40 USD, half price but $40 USD is not a huge difference and perhaps the binning on the X5690 will be better?

I've had problems overclocking that 920 and could only get fully stable 3.6 GHz at only 1.2V (more voltage didn't help). I was able to get 2D stable at 3.8 GHz and 3.7 GHz but never reach the 3.8-4.0 that other people were getting on 920's since I would not reach full 3D video game stability and would get memory corruption and PunkBuster kicked from Battlefield 2 games of that era on anything higher than 3.6. Even 3.65 didn't work for 3D game stability.

PS: Thanks to Dillon from this weekend's party for telling me about the cheap eBay prices on CPUs now for the LGA 1366 on Intel X58 chipset and compatibility between the Intel Core i7-9xx series and Xeon X56xx series.

PPS: This is my first post in 8-years since I've been using the same machine with video card upgrades for STALKER, Oblivion, and Skyrim, SSD and HDD upgrades throughout, and recently a 12 to 24 GB memory upgrade for Fallout 4 high texture pack requirements. This Intel Core i7-920 @ 3.6 GHz X58 chipset and LGA 1366 rig has been rock solid and going strong and this X5690 hopefully will make it better and keep it going. Frankly this one is perfect and quick enough for me that I don't want to build a new rig!!!
 
Last edited:
After 10.5-years of running on an Intel i7-920 4C 2.6 GHz @ 3.6 GHz Air I am finally upgrading to the Intel Xeon X5690 6C 3.46 GHz and will try for the 4.2 GHz overclock that seems to be pretty standard overclock on Air after spending all of $85 USD on eBay for it.

Alright, finally an update. I replaced the old i7 920 CPU with a new one X5690 and set the BCLK to 165 from 180 and set the voltage levels in the BIOS back to Auto, which cranked up the CPU to 1.35 V from 1.2 V and the RAM from 1.5 V to 1.56 V which is a bit lot more than the old system running on manually set 1.2 V and 1.5 V but what the hell at this point in time. The new CPU X5690 from stock 3.47 GHZ is at 4.29 GHz (165 MHz x 26-Multi). I haven't run any long-term stability tests but the quick one-run CPU and GPU benchmarks run fine. I set the BCLK to 175 MHz and I get instant blue-screen so I hope that the lower 165 MHz with the higher voltages set by the BIOS Auto settings are fine. I tried running it at 170 MHz but CineBench R20 crashes quickly.

At this point in time I don't have the patience to eek out more performance on the bus clock speed since I'm very happy with 4.29 GHz on Air XigmaTek single 120mm Fan even though I would have been happy with 4.2 GHz.

Not sure if it's stable, will play some 3D games to test since the real test is 3D Gaming and all the other 2D and 3D benchmarks can go to hell for all that I care since I learned that stability is only certain in 3D games such as the old Battlefield 2 (2009) after 15-minutes of no crashes and no PunkBuster kicks.

If this works then I am done! Only things I did was CPU replacement with cleaning off old heat spread and applying new one and changing BCLK to 165 from 180 and voltages setting to Auto for CPU and DRAM. Easiest upgrade ever it seems and cheaper than an Intel Core i7 990X which is going for $250 USD right now on eBay and $120 USD for 980X also.

I played a bit with the memory DIMMs DDR3 at 1600 MHz at 1,654 MHz (2:8) at 1.8 V Auto voltage setting and then at 1,322 MHz (2:10) at 1.56 V Auto voltage and settled on the slower setting since there was no performance increase and the Auto voltage setting bumped the memory up too high in voltage since it used to run stable at 1.5 V for 10-years, and the new 24 GB at ~ 3-years or so. I'd rather have lower voltage on the memory than slightly more speed, especially since at the higher speed the Row Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC) is at 208 clocks at 1,654 MHz (2:10) versus 139 clock on the slower 1,322 (2:8) multi so the performance takes a hit at the higher speed and doesn't yield any faster results. (As we also know from testing memory speeds for decades now.)

Updated: I posted pictures and stability at BCLK 170 MHz but it wasn't stable in CineBench R20, so lowered it to 165 MHz and am testing it now. Same deal as before with this motherboard and the old 920 CPU which would run and work fine at BCLK 190 MHz but wasn't fully 3D long-term stable until I lowered it all the way to 180 MHz. I tried to get that old CPU stable at 187, 185, 183, but No-Go until 180 MHz, no matter the voltage I would push through it.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20200201_183003.jpg
    IMG_20200201_183003.jpg
    309.8 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_190316.jpg
    IMG_20200201_190316.jpg
    279.8 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_190456.jpg
    IMG_20200201_190456.jpg
    406.4 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_190801.jpg
    IMG_20200201_190801.jpg
    783.6 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_190113.jpg
    IMG_20200201_190113.jpg
    400.9 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_191449.jpg
    IMG_20200201_191449.jpg
    534.6 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200201_191630.jpg
    IMG_20200201_191630.jpg
    414.6 KB · Views: 0
  • CPU-Z - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    CPU-Z - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    51.8 KB · Views: 0
  • CPU-Z - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    CPU-Z - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    59.2 KB · Views: 0
  • CPU-Z - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz - Memory.png
    CPU-Z - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz - Memory.png
    42.7 KB · Views: 0
  • HWiNFO64 v6.22 - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    HWiNFO64 v6.22 - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    78 KB · Views: 0
  • HWiNFO64 v6.22 - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    HWiNFO64 v6.22 - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    76.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Prime95 - Benchmark - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    Prime95 - Benchmark - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz.png
    97.7 KB · Views: 0
  • Prime95 - Benchmark - Intel Xeon x5690 3.46 GHz & 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    Prime95 - Benchmark - Intel Xeon x5690 3.46 GHz & 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz.png
    77.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 3DMark06 - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz = 8,883.png
    3DMark06 - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz = 8,883.png
    43.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 3DMark06 - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz = 10,428.png
    3DMark06 - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz = 10,428.png
    43.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 3DMark - Fire Strike - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz = 14,623.png
    3DMark - Fire Strike - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26), 1,322 MHz = 14,623.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 0
  • 3DMark - Fire Strike - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz = 12,227.png
    3DMark - Fire Strike - Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz = 12,227.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 0
  • ASUS TurboV - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26) - 165, 1.35, 1.56, 1.3.png
    ASUS TurboV - Intel Xeon x5690 3.47 GHz @ 4.29 GHz (165 x 26) - 165, 1.35, 1.56, 1.3.png
    337.3 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200202_013719.jpg
    IMG_20200202_013719.jpg
    357.3 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200202_013733.jpg
    IMG_20200202_013733.jpg
    565.9 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_20200202_013745.jpg
    IMG_20200202_013745.jpg
    550.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
^^^ Looks good to me. That's about how I ran my setup when I had it. The only difference was I had a X5660 which would run at an even 200Mhz bus speed to get 4.2Ghz (X58 Sabertooth).
 
I just built an i5-4670k machine for work from used parts, figured I'd compare it to my trusty daily 5670@4GHz. Same 1600MHz 16GB DDR3 (different brand/timings, but close enough).

5670:
Cinebench R15: 908
Cinebench R20: 1857
HyperPi 0.99 1M 19x: 22.x seconds
LinX 0.6.5 8192MB, problem size 32717: 72 GFlops (approx 6 minutes per run)

Stock 4670k:
Cinebench R15: 571
Cinebench R20: 1409
HyperPi 0.99 1M 19x: 12.x seconds
LinX 0.6.5 8192MB, problem size 32717: 173 GFlops

I wasn't expecting the little i5 to be so strong against my relic! The HyperPi and Linx throughput are still a shock to me, I figured they'd be a titch faster from IPC but not like this.
 
have you turned off the spectre/meltdown patches? those really gimp 1366 machines in certain stuff
 
Alright, finally an update. I replaced the old i7 920 CPU with a new one X5690 and set the BCLK to 165 from 180 and set the voltage levels in the BIOS back to Auto, which cranked up the CPU to 1.35 V from 1.2 V and the RAM from 1.5 V to 1.56 V which is a bit lot more than the old system running on manually set 1.2 V and 1.5 V but what the hell at this point in time. The new CPU X5690 from stock 3.47 GHZ is at 4.29 GHz (165 MHz x 26-Multi). I haven't run any long-term stability tests but the quick one-run CPU and GPU benchmarks run fine. I set the BCLK to 175 MHz and I get instant blue-screen so I hope that the lower 165 MHz with the higher voltages set by the BIOS Auto settings are fine. I tried running it at 170 MHz but CineBench R20 crashes quickly.

At this point in time I don't have the patience to eek out more performance on the bus clock speed since I'm very happy with 4.29 GHz on Air XigmaTek single 120mm Fan even though I would have been happy with 4.2 GHz.

Not sure if it's stable, will play some 3D games to test since the real test is 3D Gaming and all the other 2D and 3D benchmarks can go to hell for all that I care since I learned that stability is only certain in 3D games such as the old Battlefield 2 (2009) after 15-minutes of no crashes and no PunkBuster kicks.

If this works then I am done! Only things I did was CPU replacement with cleaning off old heat spread and applying new one and changing BCLK to 165 from 180 and voltages setting to Auto for CPU and DRAM. Easiest upgrade ever it seems and cheaper than an Intel Core i7 990X which is going for $250 USD right now on eBay and $120 USD for 980X also.

I played a bit with the memory DIMMs DDR3 at 1600 MHz at 1,654 MHz (2:8) at 1.8 V Auto voltage setting and then at 1,322 MHz (2:10) at 1.56 V Auto voltage and settled on the slower setting since there was no performance increase and the Auto voltage setting bumped the memory up too high in voltage since it used to run stable at 1.5 V for 10-years, and the new 24 GB at ~ 3-years or so. I'd rather have lower voltage on the memory than slightly more speed, especially since at the higher speed the Row Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC) is at 208 clocks at 1,654 MHz (2:10) versus 139 clock on the slower 1,322 (2:8) multi so the performance takes a hit at the higher speed and doesn't yield any faster results. (As we also know from testing memory speeds for decades now.)

Updated: I posted pictures and stability at BCLK 170 MHz but it wasn't stable in CineBench R20, so lowered it to 165 MHz and am testing it now. Same deal as before with this motherboard and the old 920 CPU which would run and work fine at BCLK 190 MHz but wasn't fully 3D long-term stable until I lowered it all the way to 180 MHz. I tried to get that old CPU stable at 187, 185, 183, but No-Go until 180 MHz, no matter the voltage I would push through it.
I agree that 1366 X58 lives – also with Windows 10 as with Windows 7 and XP.
I thought Windows 10 was not possible on this ‘long dead’ platform, but this was not the case.
Checking things out lately, I found that drivers are available and when installing Windows 10 I experienced no problems.
I use Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC (a reduced version compared with 10 Pro, with no MSFT Store, no Edge browser and a more limited telemetry set-up). Windows 10 Ent. LTSC is available at very low prices at several sites on the Internet – no advertising here, but anyone can surely find a good offer.
That said, security customization is still necessary, if you are focused on a ‘safer workstation’ and have a need for Microsoft Office, as I do. I run a somewhat resource-hungry AV/FW/IDS/IPS system also, which the X58 copes with, surprisingly well. In daily office work, there is not much difference to the other workstation, an X99/i7-6950X, also mildly OC’ed – that’s a bit embarrassing in a way. A bit later, now, the X99 was ditched in favor of an EVGA X299/i9-10890 (w. mild tuning) - exactly 3.0 times faster than the X58/i7990X when running 18 cores w/out HyperThreading. A bit more of a decent difference. Still makes the X58 impressive enough by comparison.

The really interesting thing is, how responsive the platform is, based on:
CPU: Core i7-990X (mildly OC’ed, One core at max 4.1 GHz, all core max at 3.965 GHz, using air cooling)
MB: Gigabyte X58A-OC (Many years since that went out of production, but still stable)
RAM: 24 GB Ballistics Elite (Only at 1565 MHz, but tight timings).

It was an experiment at first, but since it is so good, I do not need to purchase a new CPU, MB and RAM.
That is, of course, because I do not do much regarding video conversion or other large batch jobs.

So, this was my experience – I definitely agree, that 1366 x58 is far from dead. And with Windows 10 Ent. LTSC 2019 updates are secured until January 2029. . . It has now been running perfectly for a month and an Hauppauge TV tuner card (from 2012) has also been running perfectly (no scratching sound, jumping pictures or hickups). And MS-Office is fully stable as expected. It really seems fully stable. With an EVGA RTX2060 XC (3-slot cooler) it also fully supports nVidia Broadcast :cool:

Hope someone else can make use of my experience.
 
Last edited:
Testing the board now, all seems to work well. Strange thing on this board it pushes all cores on these x5670's to 3200mhz at full load while running p95 or Cinebench, so I'm quite happy about that. :D

Currently running single channel 2x2gb, got about 1430 in Cinebench, expecting 1500-1600 in tri-channel.
Max temps under load sits at around 58c with the bios set to "Whisper" mode, and it is very quiet, the hard drive I'm testing with is louder. I may have to set it higher when it's in a case, depending how airflow ends up.

The voltage regulators get too hot for comfort, I think I'll drop a few small heat sinks on them.
The chipset heatsink gets VERY hot without a fan, currently have a 120mm Noctua fan on there and it stays nice and cool, will probably end up with an 80mm fan once it's in a case.

Hi, I know this is old but I am using a Z8NA-D6 and the heatsink does get very very hot.... how did you manage to install a fan on it?? I don't see any "bracket" to install a fan on it.. I mean the large heatsink on the chipset.
 
I've been rocking LGA 1366 since it came out, I recently upgraded to a x5670 after years of slugging it out with a w3670 (man I miss that unlocked multi) and then a x5650 that wasn't a good 4+ overclocker.

I'm currently running 4.2 GHz with my x5670, 200bclk and 1.27v. I've done up to 4.6 for benches but didn't settle on a stable voltage, nor had enough time to see if I can trim more off at 4.2 GHz. I kept having to chase QPI and VTT. I'm also running DDR3-2000 CL8 3x4GB Mushkin RAM, been wanting to add 3x8 with comparable speed. We'll see. I love this platform, I wish Intel would have stuck with it a little longer, but at least they didn't do like they did with LGA 1150. Using an R9 290X, I can still play pretty much everything at higher settings on 2560x1600 resolution. I'd like to upgrade the GPU some day too, perhaps a GTX 1660 Ti.


I've been looking into adding NVME support to the bios on my Asus P6X58D-E, I think that would spruce things up nicely. I wanted to do a PCIe adapter, but unless I find a rare drive with legacy support I'll have to mod the bios or do a bootloader or something else janky. I haven't sat down long enough to see if the BIOS would be too big for the CMOS with the additional information or not. My goal is to do this over a patched BIOS for meltdown/spectre if applicable, ala https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...tre-patched-bios-for-x58-motherboards.246101/

Here is the resource I was looking at for potentially adding NVME. https://www.win-raid.com/t871f50-Gu...rt-for-all-Systems-with-an-AMI-UEFI-BIOS.html , it sounds like a no-go due to not being UEFI though. I could also go the Clover route perhaps https://www.win-raid.com/t2375f50-G...r-UEFI-BIOS-Clover-EFI-bootloader-method.html . Anyone else here played around with this stuff? I'm using a 500gb SATA SSD right now so it's not bad, but the newer rigs with NVME are insanely responsive.
 
There is also the option of using a used Fusion-io pcie ssd. You cant boot from it, and they are a touch slower than NVME. But a huge improvement.

I think the Samsung 950 has support for legacy BIOS, pair that with a pcie card, and you will be all set.
 
no,only 950 pro will work.

those seems that work :
Plextor M8PEY
Plextor M6e
Kingston HyperX Predator
(contact manufactarer to be sure,i have not tested them ,just found online other members use them on legacy bios)
 
I have 48GB - 6 x (8gb DDR3-1866 Ripjaw X's) and a W3690 running at 4.0ghz without a hiccup on a Asrock X58 Extreme. Just wanted to let you know that you can probably do 48gb on your board if you wanted to max it out.. It has become my secondary computer now, but it has been a workhorse for 10+ years and going.. Longest computer I've ever had running and was a beast of a platform.. Take care..
 
Last edited:
I have 48GB - 6 x (8gb DDR3-1866 Ripjaw X's) and a W3690 running at 4.0ghz without a hiccup on a Asrock X58 Extreme. Just wanted to let you know that you can probably do 48gb on your board if you wanted to max it out.. It has become my secondary computer now, but it has been a workhorse for 10+ years and going.. Longest computer I've ever had running and was a beast of a platform.. Take care..
I've thought about doing 48, might settle for 36gb just because of budget but I really love this old platform. I just wish it had a few more features!
 
Back
Top