• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

i7 920: what batch yield the most oc?

Cannibal Corpse

Cannibal Corpse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
1,285
I am planning to pick one of these CPUs, and I would like to know which batch/week, etc. to look out for.

I hear the D0 is the desired one. (If the S-Spec is SLBEJ it's a D0 if it's SLBCH it's a C0)


Thanks!
 
It's crazy how much stock people put into batches and steppings. It's still no guarantee that you'll get a good OC out of it. My CO got up to 3.8 GHz stable with not much voltage (had it set to "auto"). It will prolly go a bit further too, but I'd rather not push it given I'm not gonna see any noticable performance increase (in games anyway). I keep it comfy at a modest 3.36 (160 BLCK/ x21) right now. How far do you want to go with it? Virtually any 920 can do 3.6 without a problem. I'm not home to check my box to see what batch it is, sorry.
 
Batches are still not a complete indicator of the type of overclock you should expect. When I was getting my i7, many people with the 3841A batch were not getting above 3.6-3.8GHz and I managed to hit 4.0GHz with few obstacles. That being said, check out the thread over at XtremeSystems.
 
Yeah I used to be a big believer in the batch/stepping thing, but not anymore. Based on my last 2 builds, the motherboard quality makes more of a difference in reaching that extra 5%-10% speed increase than the batch of the CPU does.
 
^^

Definitely have seen some big differences in OC's just based on the type of motherboard used and sometimes even on the firmware.

I was a little worried when I got my D0 that is in my sig, but after messing around with a bit I can say I am happy with here I am. I feel pretty lucky actually, since previous computer builds over the years I have always managed to get horrible OC's.
 
I agree with the motherboard quality being a huge factor.
I also agree that batch/stepping does not guarantee anything.

However, stepping alone can be huge.
By the time INTEL got to the E0 Core 2 Duo/Quad steppings
(for example) they had refined the manufacturing of them,
and the chips were much more mature, efficient, and cool-running.

The first steppings, like with the i7 860 and i5 750 are INTEL's first
manufacturing runs of the chips and are unlikely to be the best, although
it is certainly possible that they could be.

Also, Engineering Samples (ES) are always good when they can be
found, and usually have unlocked multipliers. They go out to reviewers
so INTEL tries to pick really good ones as ES.

Picking a "good" batch number might help, and might not.
There are additional numbers on the chip, which only INTEL folks
could (but won't) tell us what they mean. Some people think that
these numbers indicate the position on the wafer that the chip came from,
and that the chips in the center may be the best ones, but then, there
are other theories.

Bottom line, to me, is that a chip's overclockability is truly the luck of
the draw. It doesn't hurt at all to try a batch number that others have had
great luck with, and you are dumb (generally) to not take the latest stepping
possible.
 
My C0 hits a wall at 3.93, anything after it require large steps in voltage. I know some other C0's to go over the 4Ghz mark and others that have barely got to 3.8. It would appear that the D0 chips are more likely to have a better overclock of 4Ghz+ and rarely less than 4Ghz. Either way you're looking at what roughly 300mhz average more on a D0 than a C0? and also lower voltages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top