Intel Stock Fan Question

[orangeblue]

I just installed a Core i5-750 in a new computer. Everything seems to work, but the fan I wanted to use wouldn't fit so I was stuck with installing the stock Intel fan (at least until I can buy a new one). While I've heard that these things pretty much suck temp wise, I'm having another issue with mine. It is making an incredibly loud clicking sound as though it is hitting a wire, though I've confirmed it isn't hitting anything. Is this normal? If not, what could be giving it problems?

On a side note, in Speed Fan at Temp2 (not sure where this sensor is), it is giving a reading of 128C, which isn't possible. The individual core temps seem normal, ranging from 34-42C at idle (I'm hoping they'll be lower once I get a good heatsink in).

 

[orangeblue]

Never mind, I think something must have been hitting it. But the noise has gone away now.

 

[heatlesssun]

I built an i7-750 a couple of weeks ago for a friend and the 750 still ships with that push-pin heat sink which is easy to install but a piece of junk otherwise. Great little CPU. For $850 it's a very nice rig. i5-750, 5750 (great budget card), BD ROM/DVD writter in a GigaByte P55-UD2 mATX board,

 

[orangeblue]

Is there any particular LGA1156 CPU fan/heat sink you guys would recommend here?

Yeah, the stock fan was definitely easy to install. I had an Artic fan on my old Core2Duo computer, and it was a pain to get on, despite the same push-pin setup. I'm also looking forward to attempting to OC this chip. My motherboard has a feature called "OC Genie", but that only took the CPU to 3.1ghz. I'm hoping to get at least 3.5ghz out of a manual overclock.

 

[gwarren007]

Coolermaster 212+ (28.99FS on NE)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103065

 

[rflcptr]

If you aren't overclocking, then the stock heatsink is perfectly fine.

 

[heatlesssun]

If you aren't overclocking, then the stock heatsink is perfectly fine.

Even if you are doing some minor overclocking the stock cooler can work ok. But with a custom built i5/i7 system there's really no reason not too oc the heck out of it unless power and heat are the controlling factors in the equation.

 

[rflcptr]

But with a custom built i5/i7 system there's really no reason not too oc the heck out of it unless power and heat are the controlling factors in the equation.

That really depends on the application of the system and how stable the user wants it to remain.

 

[heatlesssun]

That really depends on the application of the system and how stable the user wants it to remain.

True, but just about ANY i5/i7 is going to be good for a 30% oc and remain rock stable. I was going to play around with oc'ing my friends rig but never got around to it. For what he's using it for and only with a 5750 there really wasn't any real need.

Oc'ing my sig rig was by FAR the easiest overclock I've ever done, even including the QX9650/790i system I put together Q2 last year. I only had to disable the Intel power technology, raise the CPU voltage to 1.3 and the BCLK to 185 and viola. 1GHz oc in less than five minutes. I did start with a 191 oc but I had one game crash and the temps were a little high so I back it down to 185 and it's been rock solid since, about a week.

I just can't think of a reason why anyone who puts together a custom rig with an i5/i7 shouldn't at least TRY an oc, unless of course power and heat are the focus. If you don't oc these CPUs you really aren't getting your money's worth.

 

[Mr. Bluntman]

Coolermaster 212+ (28.99FS on NE)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103065

This. The stock heatsinks are junk for quads. Prime95 load temps on the stock heatsink with my Q9550 peaked over 73C. I have the 212's little brother, the Hyper TX3 and load temps dropped to 48C on the hottest core. 51C at 8x400 (3.2GHz).

 

[rflcptr]

True, but just about ANY i5/i7 is going to be good for a 30% oc and remain rock stable.

A stable OC isn't dependent on the CPU, alone, though. There's plenty of other factors that need to be considered.

Oc'ing my sig rig was by FAR the easiest overclock I've ever done, even including the QX9650/790i system I put together Q2 last year. I only had to disable the Intel power technology, raise the CPU voltage to 1.3 and the BCLK to 185 and viola. 1GHz oc in less than five minutes. I did start with a 191 oc but I had one game crash and the temps were a little high so I back it down to 185 and it's been rock solid since, about a week.

This is anecdotal, of course.

I just can't think of a reason why anyone who puts together a custom rig with an i5/i7 shouldn't at least TRY an oc, unless of course power and heat are the focus.

For some people, stability and reliability are critical.

If you don't oc these CPUs you really aren't getting your money's worth.

I disagree, here, as well. If you're looking for the best stock CPU performance, this is where your money should be. If you're gaming alone, looking at an AMD build isn't far off base, where the GPU is going to play a much larger role (most of the time) than the CPU, performance-wise, anyway.

 

[orangeblue]

Ok, the ram I have is rated as DDR3 1600, but when I put it in my motherboard (MSI P55-GD65), it only shows up as 1333mhz. Does anyone with this motherboard know how to overclock the ram in the bios?

Also, does anyone know how to turn off Intel Turbo Boost?

 

[heatlesssun]

Ok, the ram I have is rated as DDR3 1600, but when I put it in my motherboard (MSI P55-GD65), it only shows up as 1333mhz. Does anyone with this motherboard know how to overclock the ram in the bios?

Also, does anyone know how to turn off Intel Turbo Boost?

To oc an i5 you'll need to raise the BCLK which will also raise the memory speed so start with the BCLK and see how high you can go with that. You'll be running close to 1600Mhz on the memory by the time you're done probably.

Chapter 3 of the P55-GD65 goes over the BIOS very well and specifically page 3-19 shows the Intel Turbo Boost option. Set it to DISABLED of course.

 

[orangeblue]

I think I figured some of it out. I set the BCLK to 170mhz to get a 3.4 ghz overclock. This put the ram at 1700 mhz, or a 100 mhz overclock over the factory specs. I really don't know much about ram overclocking, but is this too much?

By setting Intel ESID setting to AUTO, I had the option to turn off Turbo Boost, which I did. I'd now like to fine tune my overclock. The voltage, according to CPU-Z is 1.4v. Can I go lower?

 

[heatlesssun]

A stable OC isn't dependent on the CPU, alone, though. There's plenty of other factors that need to be considered.

Of course but for a custom built rig with decent parts this isn't an issue. The OP's P55-GD65 motherboard is a great overclocker and with 1600Mhz RAM he's probably good to go to at least 3.5GHz with that 750.

This is anecdotal, of course.

Oc'ing my sig rig was by FAR the easiest overclock I've ever done, even including the QX9650/790i system I put together Q2 last year. I only had to disable the Intel power technology, raise the CPU voltage to 1.3 and the BCLK to 185 and viola. 1GHz oc in less than five minutes. I did start with a 191 oc but I had one game crash and the temps were a little high so I back it down to 185 and it's been rock solid since, about a week.

Every oc'ing story is anecdotal. But when EVERYONE has the same anecdote (i5/i7 overclock like crazy) is becomes more than anecdotal. i5/i7 CPUs are drop dead simple to overclock and are rock solid at 3.5Ghz+. Of course YMMV but for most people its just isn't an issue. But just look at this forum. Just about EVERYONE running an i5/i7 CPU here has it overclocked. That's just more than anecdotal.

For some people, stability and reliability are critical.

Stability and reliability are LESS important for overclockers? Practically EVERYONE who has these CPU's and is overclocking them is reporting excellent results and NO issues. So sure, you might get a "bad" chip and only overclock to 3.2. You do understand that these chips are DESIGNED to run at higher that stock speeds automatically with Turbo Boost?

I disagree, here, as well. If you're looking for the best stock CPU performance, this is where your money should be. If you're gaming alone, looking at an AMD build isn't far off base, where the GPU is going to play a much larger role (most of the time) than the CPU, performance-wise, anyway.

For gaming I would agree that Intel and AMD's chips under most circumstances will give you similar performance. But you're missing my point. Why give up a 40% or 50% increase in in CPU performance with full stability and reliability when all it takes for most people with custom rigs is about five minutes and a some automated testing? That makes ZERO sense unless you have other considerations heat and power.

With the i5/i7 stability isn't one of them. If you don't even try to oc these CPU's you're just not getting all you should of these chips. That's practically a fact.

 

[heatlesssun]

I think I figured some of it out. I set the BCLK to 170mhz to get a 3.4 ghz overclock. This put the ram at 1700 mhz, or a 100 mhz overclock over the factory specs. I really don't know much about ram overclocking, but is this too much?

By setting Intel ESID setting to AUTO, I had the option to turn off Turbo Boost, which I did. I'd now like to fine tune my overclock. The voltage, according to CPU-Z is 1.4v. Can I go lower?

Here's a good guide on i7-750 oc'ing: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/21/overclocking-intel-s-core-i5-750/1

I think you need to drop your memory multiplier to 8x or 6x as you have it at 10 right now (10 x 170 = 1700) and you should be able to go a bit higher on the BCLK.

 

[rflcptr]

Stability and reliability are LESS important for overclockers?

I don't recall stating that.

You do understand that these chips are DESIGNED to run at higher that stock speeds automatically with Turbo Boost?

Higher than stock speeds, yes, but only under certain circumstances and it's more conservative than an outright overclock of all cores.

For gaming I would agree that Intel and AMD's chips under most circumstances will give you similar performance. But you're missing my point. Why give up a 40% or 50% increase in in CPU performance with full stability and reliability when all it takes for most people with custom rigs is about five minutes and a some automated testing? That makes ZERO sense unless you have other considerations heat and power.

Of course it makes sense. Perhaps one doesn't have the time to tune each setting, test, set optimal power settings, test, upgrade hardware, re-tune things, test, etc. They need something to get the work done, now. Further, overclocking does not equate to free performance; you have to cool the processor somehow, account for higher energy consumption, have available parts more geared towards overclocking (higher clocked memory, for example), which add to the expense.

With the i5/i7 stability isn't one of them.

Stability is an important consideration of all systems.

If you don't even try to oc these CPU's you're just not getting all you should of these chips. That's practically a fact.

Agree to disagree. But anyway, when I made my original post here, I missed that the OP, in post 4, expressed their intent to overclock.

I'm hoping to get at least 3.5ghz out of a manual overclock.

Hence my comment about the stock sink being more than sufficient for stock settings.

 

[heatlesssun]

Of course it makes sense. Perhaps one doesn't have the time to tune each setting, test, set optimal power settings, test, upgrade hardware, re-tune things, test, etc. They need something to get the work done, now. Further, overclocking does not equate to free performance; you have to cool the processor somehow, account for higher energy consumption, have available parts more geared towards overclocking (higher clocked memory, for example), which add to the expense.

You're making oc'ing the i5/i7 sound FAR more complicated and less robust than it is. You are correct about heat and power and I mentioned that as a factor against oc'ing. But as far the actual exspense and trouble, there's just isn't much. If you are going to take the time to build an i5/i7 rig, the oc will probably take you 1/10th the work time (not counting testing but you should do the same testing IMHO even WITHOUT oc'ing) as putting the rig together in the first place.

The only expense above quality components for the average overclocker would be a good 3rd party cooler. $50 to increase performance by 50% on a $200 part is a great ROI. That $50 could save you from having to upgrade earlier with the added performance so an oc could potentially save one money on new hardware in the future.

My point is simple. i5/i7 overclock so easily and so reliably that not overclocking them wastes their true potential. It's not hard, time consuming nor expensive and could save you money in future hardware by extending the useful life of the CPU.

 

[orangeblue]

Here's a good guide on i7-750 oc'ing: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/09/21/overclocking-intel-s-core-i5-750/1

I think you need to drop your memory multiplier to 8x or 6x as you have it at 10 right now (10 x 170 = 1700) and you should be able to go a bit higher on the BCLK.

I think I got it OCed now as far as I want to go on stock cooling (I've ordered the new cooler you guys recommended). In order for me to drop the multiplier and still maintain at least 1600mhz on the RAM, I think I'd have to have the CPU OCed to around 3.8ghz, which I may give a try latter.

I've also dropped the voltage back down closer to stock (1.28v). Temps seem a little better now, and I may still even be able to go lower.

 

[heatlesssun]

Awesome. You should should be able to easily hit 3.8 but I would keep the memory at or below 1600.

 

[polydiol]

unless you're overclocking - stock hsf works fine.