1366 x58 Xeon Enthusiast overclocks club

I'm not getting anywhere with this X5677, I just tried 4.4 again with the following volts and it wouldn't even get to windows:

1.16 IOH/ICH
1.56 IOH/ICH PCIe
1.4 PLL
1.35 Core
1.35 QPI

Same voltages are fine if I drop the multi to 21.

Still waiting for the X5670s to arrive, apparently they are in Detroit MI but the tracking is confusing as up top it says it has been "dispatched to the international destination", whatever that means.
 
Deimos said:
I'm not getting anywhere with this X5677, I just tried 4.4 again with the following volts and it wouldn't even get to windows:

1.16 IOH/ICH
1.56 IOH/ICH PCIe
1.4 PLL
1.35 Core
1.35 QPI

Same voltages are fine if I drop the multi to 21.

Still waiting for the X5670s to arrive, apparently they are in Detroit MI but the tracking is confusing as up top it says it has been "dispatched to the international destination", whatever that means.
Click to expand...

fwiw for complete stability I used to run 1.35v at 4.4 but that would crash on full load tests like IBT or even Cinebench I've raised it up to the point where I'm now at 1.38125 in BIOS which cpu-z reports as 1.368. But now crashes are in my rearview.
 
GonzoP said:
fwiw for complete stability I used to run 1.35v at 4.4 but that would crash on full load tests like IBT or even Cinebench I've raised it up to the point where I'm now at 1.38125 in BIOS which cpu-z reports as 1.368. But now crashes are in my rearview.
Click to expand...

I've had it at 1.45v without much luck. I'll give it another go with some more volts.
 
hey guys! jumping on the bandwagon. just ordered a 5660 from ebay. should be here in a few days. What resources should I use for learning how to overclock this chip? I'll be fitting it into my P6x58-D mobo that has been flashed to the latest firmware.
 
FalconSS said:
hey guys! jumping on the bandwagon. just ordered a 5660 from ebay. should be here in a few days. What resources should I use for learning how to overclock this chip? I'll be fitting it into my P6x58-D mobo that has been flashed to the latest firmware.
Click to expand...

I got the same mobo. Well I have the E. Do you have the E or the Premium?

Honestly I'd start at the beginning of this thread and read the whole thing. 4Ghz is guaranteed and if you have decent cooling and are willing to run the voltage most of these guys can run 4.2-4.4 without extreme measures.

Quite frankly if you're coming from an i7 you already have a decent base of knowledge
 
Deimos said:
I'm not getting anywhere with this X5677, I just tried 4.4 again with the following volts and it wouldn't even get to windows:

1.16 IOH/ICH
1.56 IOH/ICH PCIe
1.4 PLL
1.35 Core
1.35 QPI

Same voltages are fine if I drop the multi to 21.

Still waiting for the X5670s to arrive, apparently they are in Detroit MI but the tracking is confusing as up top it says it has been "dispatched to the international destination", whatever that means.
Click to expand...
X5677 is interesting. I'm not quite sure what to make of it. It's a Westmere with two cores disabled and about the same clock as a 990x. With only 4 cores, it should have a lower TDP for the same clockspeed as a 990x, but it doesn't, it's the same 130W. That makes me wonder if the silicon is poor quality and the transistors ended up bad, so they had to disable a few cores and increase TDP. :eek:

Anyway, every cpu has a different PLL, and here's how you test it:
1. Reset your bios to auto, and find the lowest voltage your cpu will run stock speed to pass IBT/LinX 20 runs with max mem or 9126MB for systems with lots of ram.
2. Lower that voltage one notch so it cannot pass.
3. Start at 1.2v PLL and see if it will now pass 20 runs. If it doesn't, raise PLL one notch.
4. If it does pass, lower the core voltage one more notch, and start at 1.2v PLL again
5. Repeat until you find the PLL that allows you to run the lowest voltage at stock speeds while still passing.

One of the benefits to running a low PLL is it also often reduces your core temperatures by a good 2-4C.

Also, remember, you're interested in *REAL* voltage. If you do not have LLC enabled, the voltages reported in bios are probably not accurate under load conditions. use HWMonitor or some other similar software to read the actual SMBUS.
 
As of right now, a 4ghz x56XX will beat out even a stock 4790k in multithreaded benchmarks. Is it just me or does it seem like it would take Intel at least 3 or 4 more years before their quad cores beat out these 6 cores? It almost seems plausible but crazy to think that CPUs that are almost 5 years old might still be relevant for upwards of a decade.
 
novadaemon said:
As of right now, a 4ghz x56XX will beat out even a stock 4790k in multithreaded benchmarks. Is it just me or does it seem like it would take Intel at least 3 or 4 more years before their quad cores beat out these 6 cores? It almost seems plausible but crazy to think that CPUs that are almost 5 years old might still be relevant for upwards of a decade.
Click to expand...

Yeah part of me completely agrees with you. But the other part is mindful that it's kinda an apples and oranges comparison. Dual, quad, hexa, octa are all different classes if you will. Its like saying my older Ferrari beats your newer Mustang. While we can now get these Ferrari-esque cpus for cheap, they are former $1k cpus.
The flip side of the coin is that you could say it took Intel 5 years to make a quad which is a good as a hexa was five years ago.
Its completely accurate to suggest that this cpu might be usable in 2019 10 years after it was first released. Myself and many other intend to stick with the xeon x58 combo at least thru skylake.
 
x58 has other areas that are still better then current platforms. some of the boards have 32 PCI Express lanes for full 16x by 16x Sli or CX as most of the newer boards only do 16x by 8x ..
 
fanboy said:
x58 has other areas that are still better then current platforms. some of the boards have 32 PCI Express lanes for full 16x by 16x Sli or CX as most of the newer boards only do 16x by 8x ..
Click to expand...

Great point, part of the reason I want a second 7970. Having said that almost no card is saturating even an 8x config
 
fanboy said:
x58 has other areas that are still better then current platforms. some of the boards have 32 PCI Express lanes for full 16x by 16x Sli or CX as most of the newer boards only do 16x by 8x ..
Click to expand...

This is a half-truth.
Yes, x58 offers up to two full 16x PCI-E links, but they are PCI-E 2.0.

The new boards offering 16x and 8x are PCI-E 3.0.

I.E. an 8x link on a new board provides the same amount of bandwidth as a 16x link on x58.

You would get equivalent, if not better, performance out of a 16x 8x 3.0 solution than a dual 16x 2.0 solution.
 
Zoson said:
This is a half-truth.
Yes, x58 offers up to two full 16x PCI-E links, but they are PCI-E 2.0.

The new boards offering 16x and 8x are PCI-E 3.0.

I.E. an 8x link on a new board provides the same amount of bandwidth as a 16x link on x58.

You would get equivalent, if not better, performance out of a 16x 8x 3.0 solution than a dual 16x 2.0 solution.
Click to expand...

Which equates to a total of 0-1 FPS in actual gaming performance.

A quick and dirty run down of PCIe performance variances between 8x (2.0) through to 16x (3.0) with a Titan, including SLI+4k tests:

http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Impact-of-PCI-E-Speed-on-Gaming-Performance-518/

The differences were within the margin of error I'd say.
 
Last edited:
Deimos said:
Which equates to a total of 0-1 FPS in actual gaming performance.

A quick and dirty run down of PCIe performance variances between 8x (2.0) through to 16x (3.0) with a Titan, including SLI+4k tests:

http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Impact-of-PCI-E-Speed-on-Gaming-Performance-518/

The differences were within the margin of error I'd say.
Click to expand...

This does show that, in fact, an 8x 3.0 link is faster than a 16x 2.0 link.
Nobody was saying the performance difference would be worthwhile for real world gaming, just that it was faster.
 
Zoson said:
This does show that, in fact, an 8x 3.0 link is faster than a 16x 2.0 link.
Nobody was saying the performance difference would be worthwhile for real world gaming, just that it was faster.
Click to expand...

It doesn't actually show that. There are some odd variances, for example, in one test the 16x 3.0 link was slower than everything else and in one of the 4k tests the dual 8x 2.0 link was faster than 3.0.

The one other thing of note is that many of the tests, frame rates were within 1fps from fastest to slowest which is statistically insignificant, it also shows that if the performance difference is -1 fps, 8x 2.0 links are adequate for SLI Titans.

HardOCP did a similar article with last gen cards, they also found some odd variances, like BF4 being significantly faster on PCIe 2.0 with SLI 680s.

I don't think you can make a blanket statement that "PCIe 3.0 is faster for gaming" because the results are variable and the differences could be considered within the margin of error.
 
Last edited:
Deimos said:
It doesn't actually show that. There are some odd variances, for example, in one test the 16x 3.0 link was slower than everything else and in one of the 4k tests the dual 8x 2.0 link was faster than 3.0.

The one other thing of note is that many of the tests, frame rates were within 1fps from fastest to slowest which is statistically insignificant, it also shows that if the performance difference is -1 fps, 8x 2.0 links are adequate for SLI Titans.

HardOCP did a similar article with last gen cards, they also found some odd variances, like BF4 being significantly faster on PCIe 2.0 with SLI 680s.

I don't think you can make a blanket statement that "PCIe 3.0 is faster for gaming" because the results are variable and the differences could be considered within the margin of error.
Click to expand...
The only person talking about gaming is you. I said performance.
 
Zoson said:
The only person not talking about gaming is me. I said performance.
Click to expand...

FTFY

I think you're just trolling now, you mention gaming and performance in the same breath, then the next post you say "I'm not talking about gaming". AFAIK the only products that have full PCIe 16x 3.0 support are discreet graphics cards designed for, uh, gaming. Even the Xeon Phi is PCIe 2.0 and that is likely to be the only type of product that could potentially use all the available bandwidth.

I posted the link as information only about gaming performance differences between different PCIe links because someone mentioned SLI with 7970s and you immediately stated that the article shows that PCIe 8x 3.0 is faster, but if you read the whole article it doesn't show it to be the case in every instance. You als can't deny that most people in this thread are interested in gaming performance. I have posted links to other benchmarks between old and new before, so yeah, you are the only person not talking about gaming.

I can't understand why you are trying to pick an argument. Just trying to be a know it all? All I'm trying to show is that, for gaming, the difference between old and new is almost nothing, another reason to not upgrade to a newer platform.

Seriously, chill the fuck out.
 
Last edited:
Deimos said:
FTFY

I think you're just trolling now, you mention gaming and performance in the same breath, then the next post you say "I'm not talking about gaming". AFAIK the only products that have full PCIe 16x 3.0 support are discreet graphics cards designed for, uh, gaming. Even the Xeon Phi is PCIe 2.0 and that is likely to be the only type of product that could potentially use all the available bandwidth.

I posted the link as information only about gaming performance differences between different PCIe links because someone mentioned SLI with 7970s and you immediately stated that the article shows that PCIe 8x 3.0 is faster, but if you read the whole article it doesn't show it to be the case in every instance. You als can't deny that most people in this thread are interested in gaming performance. I have posted links to other benchmarks between old and new before, so yeah, you are the only person not talking about gaming.

I can't understand why you are trying to pick an argument. Just trying to be a know it all? All I'm trying to show is that, for gaming, the difference between old and new is almost nothing, another reason to not upgrade to a newer platform.

Seriously, chill the fuck out.
Click to expand...
I was agreeing with your sentiment that the difference wasn't noticeable in real world gaming, then, I went right back to 'just that it's faster.' Sorry the only person trying to pick a fight is you dude. Then you also remembered that people use GPUs for things other than gaming, in fact the gaming market of GPUs is DWARFED by the compute market.

And just to quote your own article:
This isn't to say that PCI-E 3.0 is not faster than PCI-E 2.0, or that x16 is the same as x8, but rather that current video cards and games are simply not able to utilize the additional bandwidth they provide.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly my sentiment and also why I originally said 'half truth'.
 
Last edited:
Zoson said:
I was agreeing with your sentiment that the difference wasn't noticeable in real world gaming, then, I went right back to 'just that it's faster.' Sorry the only person trying to pick a fight is you dude. Then you also remembered that people use GPUs for things other than gaming, in fact the gaming market of GPUs is DWARFED by the compute market.
Click to expand...

Yeah the whole bitcoin thing totally changed the gpu game [pun not intended]. Although speaking as a gamer who doesn't mine for coins I do appreciate the sell off. Picked up a 7970 last month for $120 and have an offer in on a 280x to Crossfire it with for $125. Gotta love it :D
 
I'm about to acquire a large handful of x5650's. Woooooo! All I need is a board now.
 
Just bought a x5650. I have a L5639 available (soon; have to get 5650 first and tested) if anyone is interested. Hopefully I will be able to get 4ghz out of it at least.
 
Last edited:
one thing i really do miss is native usb3......i imagine fresh installs or image restores would be blazing fast
 
Well I had to move my 2nd card to slot 3 as it was to close to the top card and made the fans very loud on top card..now I have about 3" between them and top card is back to normal with sound and temps just like it is running single.. cpu speeds are noted and not accounting for turbo speed..

Slot 1 and 2 was..Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5660 @ 2.80GHz (2786MHz) x6

FPS:
85.5

Score:
2153

Min FPS:
20.4

Max FPS:
170.1

Slot 1 and 3 was.Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5660 @ 2.80GHz (3414MHz) x6

FPS:
88.2

Score:
2222

Min FPS:
25.2

Max FPS:
184.1
 
Last edited:
Out with the new and in with the old.

Sorry for the lack of a before pic. In anticipation of X99 I replaced my Asrock X79 Professional board and i7 3820 with a P6T Deluxe V2 and Xeon X5650 to hold me over while I wait for DDR4 prices to go down. Thee X5650 @ 4ghz beats out my 3820 @ 4.3ghz in multithreaded applications so it's technically an upgrade. This is so I can still get a decent price on my X79 equipment. I might replace the P6T Deluxe with a P6T6 WS Revolution later because I want to go Trifire.

My only issue now is that my graphics card has a serious sagging issue. I need to wait for my other 7950 to come in from RMA and I will switch slots.

Right now I've got 12gb of ECC ddr3 but I've got a 24gb kit coming in next week.

pgBr6Jx.jpg


kznUYLj.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice clean setup!

If you are having issues with motherboard sag you may try running pure helium instead of ambient air.

I hear its lighter!
 
primetime said:
one thing i really do miss is native usb3......i imagine fresh installs or image restores would be blazing fast
Click to expand...

And transferring ripped BluRays to an SSD from 4x Samsung F4s in RAID are likely to take a bit of a hit. Waiting on a Xeon before finishing my X58 setup. Might just make the X58 my main, and move the 2500K build over to HTPC duty for the faster USB/SATA.
 
What speed are you guys running your ram? Have any tips/guides for ram overclocking? I've been wanting to overclock my l5639 that has the Samsung magic ram for the longest time but there's just so much values to the point of intimidation.
 
Hi there all,

I've just bagged myself a X5675 to replace my i920.

I've not noticed anyone else in this thread with a X5675 (unless I've missed it). I've seen plenty of X5670's mentioned, am I right to presume the X5675 is just a slightly faster version of that chip?

I was going to get the 5650 but for not that much more I thought the X5675 would be the better option with the higher multi.

I'm hoping this will breathe new life into my X58 setup and keep me going for longer, it will certainly scratch the hex-core itch!

What do you reckon guys?

:)
 
combat fighter said:
Hi there all,

I've just bagged myself a X5675 to replace my i920.

I've not noticed anyone else in this thread with a X5675 (unless I've missed it). I've seen plenty of X5670's mentioned, am I right to presume the X5675 is just a slightly faster version of that chip?

I was going to get the 5650 but for not that much more I thought the X5675 would be the better option with the higher multi.

I'm hoping this will breathe new life into my X58 setup and keep me going for longer, it will certainly scratch the hex-core itch!

What do you reckon guys?

:)
Click to expand...

yes the x5675 is a newer version and has a higher clockspeed. They usually cost more than x2 as much as a x5650 though
 
ssnyder28 said:
yes the x5675 is a newer version and has a higher clockspeed. They usually cost more than x2 as much as a x5650 though
Click to expand...

Right. the X5675 is around 3x the price of the X5650, and though it's binned higher its not necessarily guaranteed to clock higher, but to each his own.
 
novadaemon said:
Right. the X5675 is around 3x the price of the X5650, and though it's binned higher its not necessarily guaranteed to clock higher, but to each his own.
Click to expand...

Well I got it for not a bad price so thought it would be a better option over the X5650 as I am looking to keep this X58 setup going for quite a while yet!

Its all a lottery when it comes to cpu's but I'll keep positive that it should clock well.

I'll post my finding when I get it.

What's the highest multi on the X5675 by the way?

:)
 
novadaemon said:
Right. the X5675 is around 3x the price of the X5650, and though it's binned higher its not necessarily guaranteed to clock higher, but to each his own.
Click to expand...

What it does guarantee though is that your CPU will run out of gas before the typical X58 board runs out of BCLK. It would aggravate the crap out of me to have a golden CPU only to be thwarted by bumping into my boards BCLK limit.
 
combat fighter said:
Well I got it for not a bad price so thought it would be a better option over the X5650 as I am looking to keep this X58 setup going for quite a while yet!

Its all a lottery when it comes to cpu's but I'll keep positive that it should clock well.

I'll post my finding when I get it.

What's the highest multi on the X5675 by the way?

:)
Click to expand...

26 for single threaded loads and 25 for all core turbo.
 
YBS1 said:
26 for single threaded loads and 25 for all core turbo.
Click to expand...

Good stuff, that's what I thought the multi should be.

YBS1 said:
What it does guarantee though is that your CPU will run out of gas before the typical X58 board runs out of BCLK. It would aggravate the crap out of me to have a golden CPU only to be thwarted by bumping into my boards BCLK limit.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why I thought it better to go with the X5675 as the price was not bad at all and I'm looking to keep this till at least skylakes out (maybe beyond!).

This is nice cheap upgrade path if it overclocks well.

I'm also looking to upgrade my ram to compliment my 'new' cpu as I am only running 6GB, so will be bumping it up to 12GB.

Currently I'm using a pair of 7970's in crossfire which is probably the only other thing I'll upgrade in the foreseeable future when the new gfx cards are out. I'm in no rush though as they run everything I play which is mainly BF4 on max settings@1440p.

Good thing is BF4 makes use of the extra cores which I like too.

It's a nice feeling keeping the X58 platform alive with these Xeon chips.

;)
 
Last edited:
Considering where the clock ceiling seems to be for Westmere, in almost all cases an X5660 should be enough, I went for the better safe than sorry route as well though and grabbed a 5670.
 
ffja555.png


I had a brand new CPU-380I just sitting here and picked up a used EK block for my mobo. So it was time to see what this system could do under water.

I'm yet to do long term stability tests. But on air, the system was mostly stable at 4200MHz. Temps were barely crossing into low 70's, which is really as hot as I like to take my CPU's Now with a water block on, I'm hitting ~45c on my hottest core in LinX.

I've been practically giddy over these temp's. My old 920 was hitting 70c on water with HT off (1.45v @ 4200MHz).

This x5650 seems to be pretty much happy running 1.3-1.35vCore. So that's a major heat reducer in itself. Just bummed i haven't found a way to get this board to break through to higher QPI speeds. Anything above 215 BCLK is instant hard-lock. Not that I've found perfect stability above 205.

Funny thing also....Since my temps were so low, I decided maybe I should turn hyper-threading back on and see what would happen. In the past, I never had such luck as booting with HT at 4+ GHz. This was no problem. I pretty much don't know what to think about it. For me, HT has never been a very valuable feature. So, I'll likely turn it back off.
 
combat fighter said:
Well I got it for not a bad price so thought it would be a better option over the X5650 as I am looking to keep this X58 setup going for quite a while yet!

Its all a lottery when it comes to cpu's but I'll keep positive that it should clock well.

I'll post my finding when I get it.

What's the highest multi on the X5675 by the way?

:)
Click to expand...

How much was not a bad price?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top