Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Could you please post your 45 NM Core Temp Factory VID, Please?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
June 25, 2008 8:56:41 AM

Just like it says, if you are the lucky owner of a new 45 NM chip, please Down Load the newest version of Core Temp, and list here what your VID is, please? Just doing the usual research to see whats up with the lower VIDs. It's already interesting, QX7700, the big boys, get a 45 NM VID of 1.2500?? That's a standard VID.

Most 45 NM chips should be between 1.1000 and 1.2500.

The faster QX series may go a bit higher, and that kinda sucks if they do, because that means intel just ands VID, now that it has the new chip and old chip standard VIDs to choose from.

Guess they wanna do the over clocking for you, and sell it like a faster chip. Obviously if you start high, you get less voltage to over clock with. I am hoping to be proven wrong! That would be great, and mean that intel isn't just being tricky!

ALSO!!

Please just list your chip type, factory VID, and current over clock and LOADED voltage if applicable!

Please don't spam here. This is serious research, believe it or not.

Think it isn't? Look up my Q6x00 series threads on VID and take a peek at what VID can do, if you actually have a range to work with. Because the VIDs varied GREATLY in that series, you could simply get lucky and get a low VID chip, like 1.2000, and you can OC berserkly with it. 3.6 @ 1.312 volts and a bit lower, as I didnt fine tune it. Not bad for a 50% OC. As opposed to a 1.3250 VID that needs 1.45 or more volts to get 3.6 Ghz.

Thanks alot in advance! And thanks for not spamming!

I will gather the data after enough people have replied and we can keep our fingers and circuits crossed that the VID ranges for the chips, especially the faster normal series rangers Greatly! That means you have a shot at a good chip, and not only the bad ones.

--Lupi!
June 25, 2008 9:18:49 AM

Q9450 rev. C1
2.66gHz stock
8x multiplier (locked)
VID 1.2375v
S-Spec.: SLAWR

OC'd to 3.20gHz with core voltage set to 1.3025
(*all 4 cores at 100% brings it down to 1.272v)

OC'd @ 3.54gHz needs a core voltage of ~1.4165

Asus p5e mobo
June 25, 2008 10:45:53 AM

My Proc isn't 45nm. I'm still posting it though,

E4600
VID 1.3250v
12x multiplier (6-12)

Currently overclocked (8x 333 = 2,664 mhz)
from (12x 200 = 2,400 mhz) using 1.3250v w/o stability issues.


ga-p35-ds3l rev. 2.0
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
June 26, 2008 6:44:08 AM

I need lots more! Like 50 of each speed! Come on, guys! You all can fork over the cash, I will collect the Data, and then know what one to get for me!!

:) 

Hehehe!

Naw, but I really need to see alot more!!

--Lupi
June 26, 2008 6:53:51 AM

Q9450 Stepping C1
VID = 1.25 V
Running 3.6ghz (Default speed 2.66ghz)
Vcore with LLC not enabled 1.40 volts, load 1.36.
Vcore with LLC enabled 1.36 volts. Have it one notch lower but one core crapped out in 16hrs.
June 26, 2008 6:56:17 AM

Awesome, thanks alot. That right there told me something. That's the VID of the two QX7700s, and as long as it isnt the highest one, thats good to see a q9450, the little guys bigger bro get the same VID. (Lil' guy being q9300)

No need to reply, thanks!

:) 

--Lupi
June 26, 2008 6:58:44 AM

I think personally the VID for the Q9450 I have is the worse to get. It seems to be the highest, might be Intel setting the VID higher to screw with us, now that Intel knows ppl like lower VID when overclocking.
June 26, 2008 7:07:42 AM

If that was the case, then you'd get a good OC without changing the VCore.

The closer it is to what it actually needs, the less you can OC before having to raise VCore, so that would be a good indication.

So if you go from default 2.66 to like 3.2-3.3 it's not that bad a chip, though its a high VID. If you get beyond that, it's getting more than it should at that VID! And you can suspect that intel may just make em high for GP, since it wouldn't technically hurt it at stock, and they'd get their 3 years for warranty.

Try it and see. Place it at 1.2500 and Find your highest 1 hour prime stable speed with the same VCore.

Just think, if you get only like 200 Mhz before it craps out, it's just $hitty, and no more need to speculate, hehe!

:) 

--Lupi
June 26, 2008 11:36:07 AM

Thanks for the thread, Im assuming I triggered this haha.

E3110

VID = 1.1875v

OC'ed to 4.23 ghz with 1.375 Volts.


Im at work so I cant check load voltage. I will edit my post when I get home.


Thanks again Lupi.
June 26, 2008 11:19:45 PM

Hmmm...
I went back into my BIOS after you suggested try to find out what the max OC a person could get at 1.25v, and figured I had everything to gain by trying it.

I was OC'd to 3.4 (8x425) and had to incrementally bump my core voltage to 1.3315 for it to be stable (that was a day before you started this thread).

I reduced the voltage down to 1.25v (left everything alone except making sure RAM voltage was still set to 2.1v and timings relaxed to 5-5-5-15 for running at DDR2-850, which was also done a few days prior, and incrementally adjusted until stable under load), rebooted and it's been under full load for hours at a time and just chugs along.

Under full load, the CPU voltage drops to 1.192v (flutters between 1.192v and 1.2v, but weighted more to 1.192v)

It's actually stable for me this time at the same 3.4gHz, and running much cooler thanks to the voltage reduction (idles at 35c, maxes out at 48c).

I don't know what changed in the universe between a few days ago and today, but I'm liking it so far. :-)

I'm going to run the heck out of it like this and let you know if it stays stable.
Then I'll find it's max@1.25v and let you know.

Thanks for starting to collect the info.
Will be very interesting to see if any patterns develop for the 45nm CPU's.
June 27, 2008 1:38:22 AM

Q9450
VID: 1.1125v
Running @ 3.4GHz
Core Voltage @ Idle 1.200v, @ 100% load 1.168
June 27, 2008 7:49:22 AM

Ohhhh! A good VID! I believe the lowest natural VID may be 1.1000, which would mean that you have only 1 VID higher than the best one.

1.25000 looks like it's gonna be the top one, so far. And remember, 1.2000 and higher is Normal VID range, so that means for the QX7700 types, they just used the highest VID to get 3.2 or whatever from it.

But what we need to see is a QX7700 that has a lower than 1.2500, and lower than 1.1500 would make one hell of an excellent over clocking chip.

The problem is this, for people buying them, its 1000 bucks or some trash!! And if they are all 1.2500 then they all would overclock to the same speeds at the same voltages.

In other words, not worth it for someone wanting to over clock, because it's technically just a factory OC chip already.

because he has a 1.1125 VID he easily obtains that speed, and alot more. Same with the q6x00 series, that I already studied, hehe!

In other words, for the OCer, if the budget chips VID varies greatly, like it's appearing that it does, and the bigger chips VID doesnt vary much, then they are not worth the cash, period. You will not obtain a bigger OC by much for the money.

So that makes the only good chip for overclocking the Little ones in the series. No q9300!

if we get some low VID QX7700s then that will mean that it is indeed worth it to get one, hoping for that LOW VID, and you would be in OC heaven if you manage to get one of the exceptionally low ones!

Thanks you all. Please try not to add a normal conversation in here, if you get good info, start a thread, I am a poster hog, so a good title grabs me every time!

Thanks, and keep up with those VIDs! Make sure Speed Step and EIST are disabled if you are checking while idle. For you checking loaded voltage and reporting their OCs, no need, because it would jump up while loaded, and obviously you'd know something was amiss! (Only old core temps have that problem, from what I can tell.)

THANKS!!!

So far, the 9450 looks the best, just need VIDs of the other ones. But 1.1125 is great!! I am very happy to see it vary.

--Lupi
June 27, 2008 3:22:37 PM

so you finally interested in the 45nm CPU then!hehe

i never heard of the QX7700.what that?
June 27, 2008 9:29:15 PM

The 1400$ chip. Please PM me or start a new thread for off topic comments! It's the "biggest" chip you can buy now. 3.2 Ghz, 400 x 8 FSB standard... etc.

There is now a 7750, but its only for the Skulltrail junk.

Come on, people, more VIDs!

--Lupi
July 2, 2008 9:13:29 AM

Buy some more new tech processors and list the VIDs here!

Basically a bump.

--Lupi
July 2, 2008 9:45:14 PM

Lupiron said:
The 1400$ chip. Please PM me or start a new thread for off topic comments! It's the "biggest" chip you can buy now. 3.2 Ghz, 400 x 8 FSB standard... etc.

There is now a 7750, but its only for the Skulltrail junk.

Come on, people, more VIDs!

--Lupi

Try QX9700 :) 
July 2, 2008 11:10:10 PM

cjl said:
Try QX9700 :) 

Try QX9770 :) 
July 2, 2008 11:11:31 PM

You guys are great! Google for QX7700 and you get them too! What the hell is the real chip?

Hmmm, they seem to costs the most, too.

--Lupi
July 5, 2008 11:49:09 PM

Bump!
July 13, 2008 8:37:48 AM

Q9450 @ 3.2ghz (400x8)

VID: 1.2125

and holy god level101...your VID is teh roxxor. T_T jealous i am! haha. grats though.

Bios Voltage at : 1.2315 completely stable.
July 13, 2008 10:14:11 AM

I am still trying to find his address... Low VID, only one better. I want... I NEED!!! Muahhahahaha!

--Lupi
July 19, 2008 3:56:01 AM

Bumpity bump!
July 19, 2008 3:44:49 PM

Q9450 @ 3.6ghz (stable) w/ 1.2725 V
Multi x8
VID: 1.25 V
Batch: L817A183

Also, on a side note, if you are going to get a Q9450, i suggest a P45 chipset aswell. Most people get a FSB wall at 450 FSB+, however i can boot at 3.8, and even 4.0ghz into windows. However, i have a "bum" core, (Core 1) and it fails prime within the first minute. Very annoying, i had the rest run at 3.8ghz with 1.3625 V for an hour, then i quit. I swear. Even tweaking VTT/GTL voltages doesn't do much.

In any case, it seems like a P45 chipset is a good idea, i've got the P5Q-E, no complaints so far.

Also, if anybody has any tips on getting my "bum" core to cooperate, that'd be great =P
July 20, 2008 1:46:25 AM

The only suggestion I have is more VCore first, with your VID, hehe, the highest, I am rather amazed that you can get 3.6 Ghz at such a low voltage to begin with.

That could be why it fails, and that could also be why you get 3.6 Ghz at all, on 3 cores!

Also, I assume you are using small FFTs for testing? because if not, that explains your low voltage too!

I am quite interested in your testing and such.

The other guys need over 1.35 for 3.6 Ghz with the same VID. And that is what I would expect you to need as well!

:) 

Gimmie info!!

--Lupi
July 20, 2008 3:53:21 AM

wats lupi been smokin...

EDIT: his email is billbo baggins lawl....off his face that bloke was
July 20, 2008 3:55:35 AM

i got an old crappy 65nm E4400 (2.00GHz) which i overclocked to an AMAZING 2.114GHz!! wow... retarded VID of 1.3250v is the limiting factor im guessing. :( 
July 20, 2008 4:04:41 AM

Quote:
Think it isn't? Look up my Q6x00 series threads on VID and take a peek at what VID can do, if you actually have a range to work with. Because the VIDs varied GREATLY in that series, you could simply get lucky and get a low VID chip, like 1.2000, and you can OC berserkly with it. 3.6 @ 1.312 volts and a bit lower, as I didnt fine tune it. Not bad for a 50% OC. As opposed to a 1.3250 VID that needs 1.45 or more volts to get 3.6 Ghz.


yeah where is that thread Lupi? i read it a while ago when it wass created and now that i actually need it i cant findi t :(  thanks for your threads tho, always very informative :kaola:  bit weird sometimes tho :pt1cable: 

EDIT: no dw LOL i found it.... :p 
July 20, 2008 7:35:56 AM

E8400 @ 3.6 v1.216
VID 1.225
B#808A169
a b K Overclocking
July 20, 2008 9:53:29 PM

hi i got a e8400 on a asus p5e running at 4.23ghz but at 1.5v the vid is 1.225 which is not good for a e8400 :p  i dont know how to reduce temp and keep it stable :p  the load temps in real temp are 55 and 51.
July 20, 2008 11:46:33 PM

You prolly should make a thread with your info in it, so someone can help you! You sure need to list more information than that! Like system information, current voltages, etc that could effect the temps.

Venom, Niiice OC of that thar chip, hehehe!

Thanks for all yer replies, people!

--Lupi
July 21, 2008 6:21:45 AM

lol....getting a little off topic here, but just to prove my overclocking prowess, check out ma GPU overclock!! i know....7600GS old chip....BUT 50% OC WITH STOCK COOLING AND NO FAN SPEED CHANGES IS KICK ASS!!

aww....cant paste a picture? was gonna post a gpu z screenie lol...omg im such a noob...
a b K Overclocking
July 21, 2008 9:23:10 AM

erm im not running at 4.1ghz with 1.45 vcore in windows dram is 2.1 northbridge is at 1.45 southbridge is on auto. the fsb termination voltage is 1.5, the pll voltage is 1.6. this is with a e8400 on a asus p5e and really good water cooling. and psu isnt rubbish. 2x 2gb of corsair dominator 8500c5. erm thats all i an remember
July 21, 2008 10:07:35 AM

FSB Termination voltage at 1.50, huh? Might as well use a 1.50 VCore to go with it! Since the chip is getting that anyways!

--Lupi
a b K Overclocking
July 21, 2008 8:48:08 PM

E8400
VID:1.235
OC @ 3.6Ghz on 1.31v of P45-DS3L


Note: This is my friends rig.
July 21, 2008 8:58:28 PM

So far only 1 Great VID, and 1 good one. Even the mid highs are rare, lol, most are over 1.2250, and alot are the worse, of 1.2500!

A 1.1125 q9450, and an e7200 1.1500 are the best reported.

As soon as the OEMs start tossing them in comps and selling them and major stores, I will be able to get my paws on enough to test.

But I cant buy 10 at 300+ bucks, hehe.

OEM junk I can get new at about half price, and I will see several whole systems pass through that I can VID check!

Come on, HP, jump on the band wagon.

Actually, the have shipped 100 million chips already, so it'll be soon!

--Lupi
a b K Overclocking
July 23, 2008 10:47:53 AM

fsb termination is also the fsb supply voltage has not part in vcore or cpu lifetime
July 23, 2008 10:32:04 PM

Uhhh, ummm, uhh. Sure it doesn't!

Do you know what VTT does? That may help before you blurt out something related to it.

(VTT = FSB termination voltage. or the voltage termination point.)

Any clue why your processor would need the ability to terminate voltage where it wants to?

Surely it's not to prevent the processor from being over volted!

And if you believe that your 45 NM chip is fine at 1.50 VTT, then why isn't everyone doing it, hehehe?

FSB supply voltage? Errr, i hope you don't think that it supplies voltage to the FSB bus, lol!

Because it applies voltage right through the pins on the bottom of your processor! IE, to the processor. You think any part of your 1.3675 volt rated processor likes 1.50 volts?

--Lupi
July 24, 2008 7:22:11 AM

yeah u tell him lupi :p 
July 24, 2008 11:50:24 AM

I got E7200

Stock settings =

266 * 9.5 =2.53ghz
Vcore = 1.175

My settings
333*9.5 = 3.16 ghz
vcore = 1.175
~35C Idle
~58C Prime95 ;P

Just built it yesterday =p
July 25, 2008 12:36:30 AM

:) 

Upper Middle VID, hehee!

1.1750 would be the middle one in his series. Remember, the range is 1.1000 to 1.2500 on the 45 NM chips like his 8400.

For the 65 NM chips like the Q6600, its 1.2000 to 1.3250.

But hell yeah that would have made a good VID for a q6x00! A few steps lower than they come!

So far, looking over all the threads in different forums, the 1.1125 volt Q9450 is the best one! And that was from some where in our forum!

Most of the other forums do not believe in the power of VID. And further, some think its the batch that matters. Funny thing, that, because the chip is just a chip with batch info before it is tested. Only after they test does it get assigned a VID.

I have made sure to look up batch info on the new chips I get, and even my last Q6700. Looked up the batch info, and all was negative, and the lowest VID people reported was a friend of some guy had a 1.2750 VID chip, the rest were 1.3250.

But mine was a 1.2250. ::Shrugs:: Got me!

As far as I can tell, its the exact opposite. VID matters, and batch number is just there to know where the source of the chip was, and when.

--Lupi

July 25, 2008 9:55:18 PM

Q9450 rev. C1
VID = 1.2375V (ugh)

@3.2GHz
Vcore in BIOS = 1.2675
Vload in CPU-Z under small-fft = 1.200V
No LLC, EIST on (not that EIST matters under load)
February 11, 2009 8:29:29 PM

I'm going to restart this thread.

Q9650 Rev. E0

@4GHz
Vcore 1.31875v
temps never above 65c Air cooling

445x9

1780FSB
FSB termination 1.28v
The rest of the info is in my CPUz banner.
a b K Overclocking
February 11, 2009 8:43:39 PM

blackpanther26, restarting an old thread is completely up to you.

The thread is about the chips factory VID setting, you may want to include that in your post.



February 12, 2009 6:26:12 PM

I think my VID is 1.25v. But I know it's more like 1.2v
a b K Overclocking
February 12, 2009 6:54:17 PM

It's real easy to find out, as stated in the other thread and this one, just download Core Temp and see.

Mine: VID =1.250

" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />

!