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!

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

Q9450
VID: 1.1125v
Running @ 3.4GHz
Core Voltage @ Idle 1.200v, @ 100% load 1.168

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

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

i never heard of the QX7700.what that?