X9100 Results on 7815u!

P7350 2.0ghz
GPU 699/1747/900

Overall 8782
SM2.0 3974
SM 3.0 4427
CPU Score 1822.

GPU Non overclocked it score 8592 so the CPU was bottleneck. Peak framerate was 60 on proxycon.

X9100 Stock settings but gpu at 699/1747/900
Overall 11710
SM2.0 5435
SM3.0 5199
2797
peak framerate was 84 proxycon. I scored 10,584 with no overclocks and saw 74fps at peak fps. thats 20%+ increase. minimum instead of 21 was 29 on proxycon. once i overclocked gpu then score really jumped up again.

Let me thank all those who convinced me to upgrade to X9100 despite price because its AWESOME! in gaming GPU makes most of the difference as long as the CPU can keep up. its obvious that the P7350 was not cutting it. Most games were playable but i had to sacrafice quite a bit of quality. I dont have time to test games now, but im pretty sure my FPS issues should be resolved.

T9400 might have been good enough , ill slow my X9100 down to 2.53ghz and doing some testing but im glad i got the X9100 because it gives me a lot more headroom for future gaming.

 

Wow that was fast. Glad you like the results.

 

I was able to get the processor for $220 shipped after bing cashback -- otherwise i was going to settle for a T9400 for $110 shipped. hopefully i can sell my P7350 for $50 or something to help offset the cost.

While running 3dmark06 my gateway fan didnt come on very often either 10 seconds every two minutes or so. (granted I do use a coolermaster notebook cooler) I think the with P7350 the gateway fan was never audible

 

I am pretty disappointed i cannot overclock at all. some people report with X9000/x9100 chips they get multiplier options in bios. I do not have this option. throttle stop wont let me go over 11.5 multiplier. im bummed that i cant overclock to beat some people on hwbot.org but the stock setting of 3.06ghz makes cod mw2 play so NICE! I got my 3dmark06 score up to 11,866 so far and havent had problems with temps yet either.

 

Did you right click on throttlestop and click "unlock max fid/vid"?

Also you wont get a bios option because you are at the 3.0 GHz limit. The X7xxx and X9000 are able to overclock through the bios but only to 3.0 GHz

 

buttons252: You're going to be a happy camper when you unlock your new X9100 and find another 500 MHz or 600 MHz hiding in there.

Nice to see some more results that clearly show that some more CPU muscle really does make a difference to gaming performance.

 

Just got my X9100 and started to test it. Here are the GTA IV results using the GTA benchmark. (I will post some more later)

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz)
Texture Quality: High
Shadow Quality: High
Reflection Resolution: High
Water Quality: Very High
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x4
Night Shadows: Off
View Distance: 22
Detail Distance: 11

Factory
32.82
Factory CPU & Video Card OC
34.97
CPU Upgrade
37.96
CPU Upgrade & Video Card OC
39.76
CPU OC & Factory Video Card
40.01
CPU OC & Video Card OC (13% OC on both)
43.92 (34% performance gain over factory)

 

I did some gaming last night and im sooo happy with my new framerates call of duty plays like butter now, i even tried red faction guerilla and crysis and MUCH to my surprized they played wonderful. Red Faction is a pretty intense game when your blowing up buildings and stuff and i was extremely impressed with the performance. I didnt even try the game with P7350 because i figured it would be a bad slide show.

Crysis was playable with all settings on high, AA=off and 1440x900 resolution. i prefered settings on medium to keep minimum framerate up though.

 

Oh, i was doing it wrong i was trying to change the multiplier to a number higher then 11.5. when you change FSB to 333 doesnt that overclock your memory?

 

yes it does but as far as i'm aware, Throttlestop works its magic solely on the CPU. It doesnt touch the RAM.

EDIT: xxxEriKxxx has a X9000, not a X9100. Although it should be 200MHz, not 333MHz which is confusing me too lol.

 

I bumped my cpu up to 12.5x266 for a 3325mhz and reran 3dmark06. 12327. its not really fair though because its defaulting to 1280x800 instead of 1280x1024 which bumps my score up. but still ive gained 4000 points by just swapping out the CPU...

 

3DMark06
Graphics and Settings: Default (1280x800)

Factory
Overall: 9903
SM2: 4645
SM3: 4519
CPU: 2246

Factory CPU & Video Card OC
Overall: 10633
SM2: 5017
SM3: 5070
CPU: 2254

CPU Upgrade
Overall: 10504
SM2: 4766
SM3: 4521
CPU: 2729

CPU OC & Video Card OC
Overall: 12299
SM2: 5588
SM3: 5269
CPU: 3212

 

i bet I could get darn close to 13,000 if i kept pushing it. what overclocks did you use to reach your 12k score? my 12,327 score was 3.325ghz cpu and gpu was like 732/1850/922 i think. i posted my screenshot on hwbot.org.

 

Yeah I just took that pic from unclewebb to show what I was talking about.

 

The one on my signature

 

Oh i bet your video card would go much higher. ive had mine at 732/1847/922 and no trouble/artifacting yet.

 

Mine stable bests at 720/1850/930. I prefer a safe 700/1750/900.......

I am so wanting this CPU, with the newer ES you see 3.6 stable or do you have to OV for it?

 

When you unlock an Extreme CPU with ThrottleStop, it unlocks the multiplier and the VID voltage so if you need some more voltage to be stable, it's easy enough to give it a bump up. The maximum setting is 1.500 volts so there is lots of room to play.

The screen shot posted earlier was from my QX9650 desktop CPU which has a 333 MHz bus speed. I don't have an Extreme CPU in my laptop, yet, so that's the best I could do.

 

My X9100 ES E0 just got shipped. Have the tracking etc but coming in from China it will be a while I would guess. Can't wait to join the club and play a little.

I am not sure I want to bump above 1.250v though. At stock voltage rating what are you guys getting stable and then what vcores do you need to get above that? I ask as I am interested in longevity more than bleeding edge performance........

 

3.2GHz on 1.237v stock

3.4GHz on 1.275v

3.6GHz on 1.300v

3.7GHz on 1.363v

all are stable on my E0 X9100 from shirleyfu (although you'll need to be aware of temps when doing things at 3.7GHz).

3.8GHz/3.9GHz is a bit of a pipe-dream unless i can come up with some crazy cooling mod but i'm giving it a shot!

 

I was hoping 3.4 on stock voltage, maybe I'll have to start thinking going over stock. 3.6 1.300 sounds reasonable but how are the temps?

 

i idle around 51C on 1.300v on 3.6GHz but that's after my cooling mods:

- copper shimmed the northbridge chipset

- drilled extra ventilation holes in backpanel over CPU & chipset heatink & RAM

- expoxied 12 mini copper heatsinks on CPU heatsink with AS5 thermal adhesive

- copper heat spreaders on RAM

- overvolted Cryo LX

what i've done is overkill and partially because i was bored too. I'm sure you can get 50C or even less perhaps without half the mods i did.

 

Idle at 51 seems good - I am idling at 46 at 3.6/1.3. But when I run Prime95 I shoot up to 85, and BSOD pretty soon after. What are your high temps with that setup?

 

under load, i experience the same temps as you although i dont BSOD.

TANware managed 3.6GHz on 1.275v stable. Gonna try replicate that; last time i tried, I BSODed at that particular voltage.

 

Is burning in/working your way up to an OC like that something to consider, or does the fact that I BSOD at that point mean my rig cannot and will not handle it, period?

One thing to mention, I run the 7811FX, so I am using that fabled 120W power brick. I assume it is possible that is my brick wall?

 

Are you adding more voltage? All FX's come with the 120w PSU and don't seem to be holding people back.

 

I get a variety of crashes. When I tried running prime95 at 3.6 with 1.325v, I crashed and the PC no longer recognized that it was plugged in. I had to unplug the adapter and plug it back in to get my computer to recognize it. This makes me think 1.325v is too much for my PSU.

At 3.6 with 1.3v I get a BSOD once Prime95 gets my CPU over 90c. This makes me think I need more voltage, though it could also be a heat shutdown.

Though, I think the heat shutdown is when the computer just turns off. I think this is what happened at 3.6 with 1.3125v.

So, I have gotten all 3 flavors of crash at various configurations. I do not have a good cooling pad, so once that comes in the mail I think that may make a difference.

I will reiterate my question: will a longer, more thorough burn-in period possibly yield different results? Also, is there a way to monitor my chipset temps? Maybe I didn't get enough ICD7 on it...would that cause crashes?

Is it weird that I idle at 50c but shoot up over 90 when running Prime?

Sorry for all the questions -just very new to the concept of OCing on a laptop!

 

Can you post some pictures because i'm looking to make chopper mod to my 6860, but i have to look for thermal paste to bring it in kosovo so that will take time.

 

Yippie, me too. I want the raked forks, chrome, monkey bars and totally rad paint too..........................

Seriously Prime 95 makes me over heat easily, going to test it out a bit and will report back............

 

pics as requested. Modification missing the heat spreaders on RAM because i am still waiting for them in the post

Mdded heatsink



Drilled CPU backpanel (some holes dont look clean cut due to excess plastic flash that i didnt spend too long trying to trim down)


Copper shim mod on NB chipset involved sandwiching a 11mm x 11mm x 0.9m shim in AS5 and layering it inbetween chipset and heatsink.

 

Guess with Prime95x 64 My cooling just can't cut it. The problem seems to be the more heat the more voltage to maintain stability. I can for normal runs even with Coresmark and other benchs run way lower voltages but this must be almost all in the L1 and kills the CPU

Cooling only modified by ICD on both the CPU and Northbridge and sitting atop my NC2000.
Prime95 x64 100% stable and no errors with small FTT
x12.0 3.200 GHz @ 1.1750 CPU = 69C TSZx= 79C @ 15 minutes
x12.5 3.325 GHz @ 1.2125 CPU = 72C TSZx= 82C @ 15 minutes
x13.0 3.458 GHz @ 1.2750 CPU = 85C TSZx= 94C @ 15 minutes
x13.5 3.600 GHz @ 1.3125 CPU = 90C TSZx= 100C @ 4 minutes in stopped to avoid shutdown

Edit; At the lower voltages I was running the CPU was fine until it hit certain heat levels and the only way for no errors at the heat was to increase voltage also increasing heat, never ending self defeating cycle.............

3.6 @ 1.300 seems best, it went 9 minute before getting to 96C on the TSZx but that heat level threw in an error. I'll never torture the CPU to that point. and for normal running I'll probably use the 3.2 Ghz. I set up a profile for each with Throttle stop.....

 

That's interesting that it takes 9 minutes to reach max temp. Most of my tests get up to max temp within 3-4 minutes. Is that weird?

Also, that's some nice undervolting you achieved.

 

No it was hovering 95-96 then it was holding at 96c, I figured it would hit 97c at some point but that may have been the triger and before I could see it hit 97 the one worker died and it started cooling off. This is just a guess though.

Wierd though. Now running 3D apps I get the TSZ0 too lock at 98C when I over clock the video card. It doesn't seem to affect performance but HWMonitor shows it locked at 98C. At 3.2 GHz it takes a bit longer to get there but it always does. At stock clocks so raf with FF benchmark and 3DMark06 I haven't been able to get the 98C lock, not that it can't happen as it may I just haven't been able too yet.

 

So, finally got my X9100 from Shirley's and installed it to my P-7811FX, here are my results from the testing:

Cooling: ICD7 on both the CPU and Northbridge + NC2000.

Prime95 x64 100% stable and no errors with small FTT
x11.5 3.060 GHz @ 1.1250 CPU = 65C TSZx= 75C @ 15 minutes
x12.0 3.200 GHz @ 1.1750 CPU = 69C TSZx= 79C @ 15 minutes
x12.5 3.325 GHz @ 1.2125 CPU = 74C TSZx= 85C @ 15 minutes
x13.0 3.458 GHz @ 1.2500 CPU = 80C TSZx= 90C @ 15 minutes
x13.5 3.600 GHz @ 1.3000 CPU = 88C TSZx= 98C @ 12 minutes (threw an error at this point)

So pretty much the same results as with TANware's X9100. Nice!

 

A question, do you have the same HS? I have the one with the smaller plate, where as the old has the larger one.

Mine

Other

Edit; I just ran Crysis Warhead Demo on 3.6 GHz @1920x1200 with medium settings. It is definately playable, actually pretty smooth..........

 

I think mine was the same as yours, but cannot be 100 % sure as I didn't pay too much attention on HS itself during the disassembly.

Oh, and I run 3DMark2006 and got score of 11049 with GPU OC:d at 700/900/1750 and CPU at 3458 MHz. I guess the lower GPU memory (mine only 512 Mb) has something to do with the lower score?

Oh, nice thing for the Crysis, TAN. I think I need also to test it now again with higher settings...

BTW, while at it, I replaced the stock thermal paste on GPU with ICD7 as well and in the end, the max GPU temps seem to have dropped by approximately 10 degrees. The idle GPU temps seem to be more stable now so the fan does not kick in as often as before and the NC2000 seems to be sufficient to keep it cool.

 

For those wondering I ran 3DMark06 in various configurations. I should note for the selected resolutions you could see no difference when rendering the 3D sections........

3DMark06 @ 1280x1024
3.060 GHz = 10832
3.200 GHz = 10958
3.458 GHz = 11139
3.600 GHz = 11236
3.725 GHz = 11323

3DMark06 @ 1280x800
3.060 GHz = 11707
3.200 GHz = 11863
3.458 GHz = 12108
3.600 GHz = 12217
3.725 GHz = 12315

 

what voltage did you use for 3.725GHz?

Left mine on 1.363v but interested to see what you using please.

 

I was there as well but when I ran Coresmark2010 it was acting wierd. He apparently is playing with the programing but just to be safe I went too 1.3750. Now when I was on 1.3625 Prime95 didn't error but was overheating within a minute so it may just not have been able to run long enough to error.

Since 1.3750 isn't really seeming to generate more heat I figure it is safe for now. If I rememeber people were good getting up to about 1.5000 with these but with my cooling solution there is no way I'd even try 1.4000.

The way I figure it I can run profile 1 and 2 at 3.2 and 3.4 respectively and not even worry about the burning utilities but then profile 3 and 4 at 3.6 and 3.7 but be sure to stay away from the burners.

One thing I noticed is while the GPU fan seems to be able to get some real air movemement the CPU fan does not. This to me is one of the biggest problems. You need to get that cool air over those fins. I lowerd the temps about 2C under load by taking tape and covering the gap from the fan to the fins to the back cover so that there is no air escaping there and circling back to the fan intake. You can feel a slight difference in the added volume of air output too.

I am debating pulling the HS one more time just to make sure there are no other pathways to leak air and maybe build a box to make sure all air coming from the fan channels through the fins. I however am not sure if it is worth all that work, the tape was an easy partial fix............

Edit; Just to try it out I ran 3dMark05 and got 20,176. Then 3DMark03 and 35,383..............

 

For you guys that need to keep a close eye on your CPU/GPU temperatures, I added some system tray temperature icons to ThrottleStop as well as some Min/Max data to the pop up area in the system tray. It's always great stopping by here and seeing the latest results.

 

Great work unclewebb with the throttlestop! I'm so not using the RMClock anymore with throttlestop and its excellent features...

 

that is so true!! i thought it was a defective fan at first; glad i'm now not the only one to notice this.

 

I think it has to do with the CPU exhaust vent. It is just too small compared to the GPU vent. Also when looking into the GPU vent all I can see is copper and I cant see anything in the CPU vent.

 

Agreed the vent is smaller. With the same fan runing at the same speed at the larger and smaller vents you would expect the smaller vent to have a narrower stream of air. The probelm here is those two streams in their respective size should blow out air just as hard if not actually harder from the narrower vent. You just don't get that here. the air seped if anything is extreemly weak.

The heat pipe looks to be aluminum coated running in the CPU's heat spreader fins. you can see it there if you look closely with the light at the correct angle.

Great JOB UW, will have to check thost out in a bit.............

 

So, did some more squeezing and managed to get following results on 3DMark2006 (the temps during 3DMark2006 in brackets):
- stable GPU OC: 725/950/1825 (74 C)
- stable CPU OC 3458 MHz (13x multiplier, 1.25 V, 72 C)
= 11 449 points (1280x1024, no AA)

I guess that's about the limit to go with this setup, some higher OC would require extra cooling mod in addition to ICD7 that is already in place. I guess I'll have to suffice to this for the time being..

 

Thanks, the 5-7 minute mark bounced between 95-96C at 8-9 it was mostly 96C then at 9 it was holding at 96C before the error.

We need to get more air over that HS.........

I can't touch those clocks for the video with my 1GB video memory.............

 

I think we need to come up with a fin mod if we can. I want my CPU exhaust vent to look like the GPU exhaust vent .

 

Something weird is hapening after instalationa of the x9100.

I ovckld to 3.6 ghz at 1,3 with throttlestop and was checking the temps with everest and it is sayng that the clock is 4,2 ghz!!!!

Can someone tell me what is going wrong?

 

Everest is giving you the wrong clocks. Throttlestop will give you accurate info when you start to overclock. 4.2ghz at 1.3v would bsod.

 

Ok, thanks for the reply.

Another doubt,, throttlestop gives me one cpu temp, about 76C, but everest give me 3 temps, processor (80 C) core 1 (74 C) and core 2, (78 C).

Wich of these temps I supose to follow, as the right one?

Once more, tks in advance.