OCing without HT (i7)

[Pkirk618]

I've heard alot of this lately paying off with higher clocks and less heat so i tried it. I was able to get 4ghz so easy with no heat problem. Still, i feel like I could be missing something.

Whats your take on this type of ocing. Is the tradeoff worth it? My games seem faster, snappier--the usual. I scored high 26k in 06 in SLI so only positive numbers there.

Just wondering what people are thinking. With HT, I can do about 3.85 without reaching 80 on prime. At 4ghz and higher I hardly see 70 with ht off.

 

[Xenozx]

I look at it like this.

I think when you are running 8 threads, the CPU is pulling more wattage, which = more heat. This is why your temps are lower when running 4 threads vs 8.

However, this is my view on it.

I know running prime 95 8 thread is probably not within good heat levels. I see 80's easy. After about an hours its doing a good 88/84/84/82. Now what you have to keep in mind is, prime 95, is going to tax your CPU more then any program or game you would ever use. What I mean by that is, there is no real world activity your going to do that is going to get your temps that high. When I play COD5, my temps hit about 55c. Watch a HD video about 50c. when I run 8 thread cinebench hit 70's. Im cool with that. I am going to leave HT on, and at 4.0ghz because based on how I use my PC, i know nothing I do is going to get it into the 80's, so no need for me to worry. I think this is safe to say for 95% of PC users.

now, to be honest, there really isnt anything out there that uses a quad core to its fullest potential yet, so having the ability to run 8 threads is really pointless at this point in the game. No game, or program is going to take full advantage of it anyway, so you disabling HT isnt really a big deal. I doubt you would notice any difference anywhere, and your 3.85 to 4.0ghz probably makes up for it anyway.

Ultimately the choice is yours.

 

[Brahmzy]

It's simple. If the software you use can't utilize 8 "cores" then turn the dang crap off. That extra processing power is not free. It comes at a cost - regardless if it is being used. That cost is heat, which equates to lower overclocks. I say disable it. If you are using a rendering program that uses more than 4 cores, or VMWare or any unlimited threading app, that is a very different story. For strictly gaming, disable HT and get the higher, cooler OC.

Same principal as a Dual core CPU vs. a Quad core CPU. Why have a quad if the extra cores never get used? More heat, lower OC's etc. As time goes on, more apps will make use of the HT on the i7...

My 2 cents.

 

[Pkirk618]

I'm considering that. I don't prime all the time except for stability purposes and I get the point that I probably will never max out all threads at the same time under my uses. I'll probably turn it on and leave it at 4ghz.

 

[sliu64]

I just OCed my i7 920 to 3.6GHz w/o HT, I did it in 2 different ways and got very different result.

1st way:
20x multiplier
FSB 180
base clock 3.6 GHz
boots fine into bios and windows vista
AVG temp during intel burn test 80C
intel burn test result: 3 out of 10 - failed test

2nd way:
18x multiplier
FSB 200
base clock 3.6GHz
boots fine into bios (however a weird msg popped up) and windows vista
AVG temp during intel burn test 70C
intel burn test result: 10 out of 10 - successful test

The msg in the bios in the 2nd method worries me. It pops up when i select motherboard intelligent tweaker. The message says the system is experiencing boot failure due to overclocking orr change in voltage. But like i indicated earlier, the computer boots into bios and windows vista absolutely fine and the intel burn test also indicated the opposite. Why is that msg popping up? Should i ignore it and keep the 2nd method's settings?

 

[Pkirk618]

hey, if ur interested, I have a coolermaster v8 u can have for 45 shipped. It's one hell of a cpu cooler. It's practically new in box with everything. Purchased for my 920 and got me what I told u in PM.

BTW, I think you'd seriously benefit from a third party cooler. If not from me, from somewhere. I was stuck at 3.6 (stuck by temps) with stock...

 

[burningrave101]

For gaming and general computing HyperThreading is no benefit to you. You're already running a quad core processor so the extra logical cores aren't needed unless you're doing some serious multitasking or you run apps which are multithreaded and able to handle 8 cores. If you're encoding a large DVD or doing something else very CPU intensive that's multi-core aware I'd suggest you enable it. HT actually lowers gaming performance slightly so it's no benefit in that area.

 

[old skool]

Just wondering why anyone would bother with an i7 when they're just going to disable HT?

 

[Nzo]

Because c2d chips dont run on a x58 mobo.

 

[Pkirk618]

even without HT, they're superior chips working in conjunction with new chipsets and memory.

 

[digital_dreamer]

I just OCed my i7 920 to 3.6GHz w/o HT, I did it in 2 different ways and got very different result.

1st way:
20x multiplier
FSB 180
base clock 3.6 GHz
boots fine into bios and windows vista
AVG temp during intel burn test 80C
intel burn test result: 3 out of 10 - failed test

2nd way:
18x multiplier
FSB 200
base clock 3.6GHz
boots fine into bios (however a weird msg popped up) and windows vista
AVG temp during intel burn test 70C
intel burn test result: 10 out of 10 - successful test

The msg in the bios in the 2nd method worries me. It pops up when i select motherboard intelligent tweaker. The message says the system is experiencing boot failure due to overclocking orr change in voltage. But like i indicated earlier, the computer boots into bios and windows vista absolutely fine and the intel burn test also indicated the opposite. Why is that msg popping up? Should i ignore it and keep the 2nd method's settings?

Are you still using version F3 BIOS? Does it lose your OC settings? You should upgrade to F4 and it will take care of those silly messages. I had the same problem, as the BIOS kept thinking there was instability just because I restarted or did a reset.

regards,
MAJ

 

[mikemodano9c]

video encoding is probably one of the only mainstream instances where you will probably see a good benefit running 4 cores w/HT (8 threads).

it would be a good test to see if 3.6ghz w/ HT enabled was faster than 4ghz w/ HT disabled (using x264).