35 replies to this topic

[Catamount]

Ego, that's honestly a typical Haswell OC. Keep in mind that the reviewers who get the ridiculous 4.6-4.8ghz OCs got handpicked Intel chips intended for reviewers to do OCs on, just like reviewers always get in with their hardware samples. Toms Hardware examined OCs from an actual retail sample and found results consistent with what you're getting.

And yes, Haswell does run hot, partly because of the ****** IHS, and partly because of the high TDP. Still, a Haswell chip at 4.4 is NOTHING to complain about

Edited by Catamount, 16 October 2013 - 03:32 PM.

[Egomane]

v4skunk, on 16 October 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

Your cpu has high max temps.
I have a 2600k @ 4.5ghz and it never goes over 55c on full load. I would lower clocks or get a better cooler.

A Haswell typically runs hotter then a Sandy. They are also more resistant to heat. Those temperatures are pretty normal and extremly low for an overclocked example. I have seen various reports of temperatures in the high eighties to low nineties for those chips and they are still considered fine. If you look at the Core Temp screenshot, you'll notice that it has a max temp of 100° celsius listed and I'm not even close to that number.

Catamount, on 16 October 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

Ego, that's honestly a typical Haswell OC. Keep in mind that the reviewers who get the ridiculous 4.6-4.8ghz OCs got handpicked Intel chips intended for reviewers to do OCs on, just like reviewers always get in with their hardware samples. Toms Hardware examined OCs from an actual retail sample and found results consistent with what you're getting.

And yes, Haswell does run hot, partly because of the ****** IHS, and partly because of the high TDP. Still, a Haswell chip at 4.4 is NOTHING to complain about

Yeah, I know all that. I just hoped to be lucky once, with the hardware I purchase.

So far I'm impressed with my new toys. The power usage while idle went down by more then 30 watts (on input). Haven't run a real combined CPU/GPU stresstest yet, but 3Dmark only managed to get my load up to 311 watts. I should have taken a smaller PSU. Oh well... at least I have more then enough power to spare to someday add another 7970GHz or R9 280X.

And as I said above, I'm very impressed on how cool my chip runs, compared to the other reports I have seen.

[Maver0ick]

Thank you everybody for the comments. I'll look for a 550W PSU. At the moment I don't plan on going beyond a single 1080p monitor so I probably won't get a second video card. I might upgrade to include an SSD down the road and I occasionally connect a 2nd internal hard drive but it sounds like the 550W should handle that.

[1Sascha]

Quote

I got my new hardware today and have it now installed. Sadly I didn't get a very good haswell chip. Best I can do at overclocking is 4.4 GHz @ 1.3 volt. But at least this setting seems stable. Any less voltage and my GPU driver fails to load. Less then 1.2 and I get a bluescreen.

Sounds pretty normal to me, too.

I had pushed my 4670K to 4.4/4.5 as well, but could only get it stable (sort of) with excessive VCore (>1.30 Volts). And even then I'd get the occasional BSD, sometimes even after 2 - 3 hours of trouble-free benchmarking/torture-testing. And with those settings, I'd get pretty close to the chip's TDP. Ran 80-82°C IIRC, with a TDP of 84, even though I have a pretty good cooler on there (2nd gen Corsair H60).


And since every OC-guide I could find agreed that pushing past 1.3 VCore isn't really desirable with these chips, I settled for an "individual" OC (4.1 on cores 0&1, 4.2 on 2&3 @1.25 Vcore - set to "adaptive"). Anything more on 0&1 with the same VCore, and I'd be back in BSD-territory. But with my current settings, the system has been running completely stable for 2 months now.

It's not what these chips achieved in the press, but like someone else already stated: That's hardly a surprise when you consider they were supplied with handpicked samples..


S.

Edited by 1Sascha, 17 October 2013 - 01:15 AM.

[Gen0]

Egomane, on 16 October 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

Sorry for hijacking this thread a bit. But as I posted my new build already in the second post of the thread and because of the similarity to the one the OP is getting, I'm not completly off-topic.

I got my new hardware today and have it now installed. Sadly I didn't get a very good haswell chip. Best I can do at overclocking is 4.4 GHz @ 1.3 volt. But at least this setting seems stable. Any less voltage and my GPU driver fails to load. Less then 1.2 and I get a bluescreen.

The above mentioned CPU cooler is keeping the cores below 70 degrees celsius at 100 % load (AIDA 64 system stability test).

Spoiler

Now I will need to see if it stays stable in games and other applications too. I'll run some benchmarks early next week.

4.4 isn't that bad for haswell. Haswell is just {Scrap} at OC.

Catamount, on 16 October 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

Still, a Haswell chip at 4.4 is NOTHING to complain about

Until you put it next to the last three generations of Intel i series chips.

[Goose]

http://extreme.outer...lculatorpro.jsp

Even tells you how many volts, on which rail …

Edited by Goose, 12 December 2013 - 10:16 PM.

[ShinVector]

I just use a good 850watt psu and don't bother thinking too much about it.
You need higher on multi gpu, multi oc'ed systems.

[Catamount]

Gen0, on 17 October 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

Until you put it next to the last three generations of Intel i series chips.

Oh, I agree. Tests show the Haswell IPC advantage to be just above nill over Ivy Bridge, the chips are more expensive, and at the end of the day, I'd just rather have a 4.8ghz IB than a 4.4ghz Haswell, running at the same temperatures (and by extension, the same power consumption).

I just see no reason to buy Haswell over IB.

At the same time, though, both are so powerful for any consumer use, that it's also splitting hairs. At the current rate of hardware progress, it'll probably be 2020 before we're seeing a serious reason to replace either.

Edited by Catamount, 17 October 2013 - 07:04 PM.

[Maver0ick]

I ended up getting:

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K
Motherboard: Asus Z87-A
RAM: Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3 1600MHz
Hard Drive: WD Black 1TB 3.5" SATA3 7200RPM 64MB Cache
Graphics: (Used my old Sapphire 7870 GHz Edition)
Optical: Pioneer Internal Blu-Ray Combo Drive
Case: Corsair Carbide 300R Windowed Edition
CPU cooler: Corsair Hydro Series H100i
PSU: Seasonic G 550W 80Plus Gold

Everything was on sale for Black Friday except the PSU. The 4770K was cheaper than 4770 retail, the Z87 MB was cheaper than an H87 MB, the H100i was same price as the H60, ... etc.

The old PC was based on an Intel Q9450 + Sapphire 7770 + Windows XP getting roughly 20 to 35 fps on medium settings. Upgrading to the 7870 provided maybe a 5 fps boost. 4770K + 7870 + Windows 8.1 gives roughly 70 to 90 fps on high.

Edited by Maverdick, 12 December 2013 - 05:35 PM.

[Egomane]

Looks like a solid system to me. And even though you don't plan on overclocking, you absolutly have the hardware to do so.

Have fun with it!

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Imma leave this here.

[Kadix]

A 500W supply is going to be more than sufficient with that rig.

Most people are running power supplies that are way beyond what they need. There may be a few exceptions, but I haven't seen a machine in the last 10 years that would pull more than 330W (outside of a datacenter at least).

[ShinVector]

Kadix, on 15 December 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

A 500W supply is going to be more than sufficient with that rig.

Most people are running power supplies that are way beyond what they need. There may be a few exceptions, but I haven't seen a machine in the last 10 years that would pull more than 330W (outside of a datacenter at least).

Read the requirement specs of High powered graphics card why don't yah ?

I would say 650Watt min for a typical high end card.... Very good safety margin.. Had a crappy PSU blew up a long long time ago... Not going to let it happen again.
If you are going to think about dual cards... 850Watt and above..

Specs for OPs Card.
If he ever want to cross fire... He would need to upgrade to be safe.
Doing any OC will up the power requirements.

http://www.amd.com/U...eon-7870.aspx#2
500W (or greater) power supply with one 75W 6-pin PCI Express power connector recommended⁷

• 600W power supply (or greater) with four 75W 6-pin PCI Express power connectors recommended for AMD CrossFire™ technology.

Edited by ShinVector, 15 December 2013 - 08:38 AM.

[Kadix]

ShinVector, on 15 December 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

Read the requirement specs of High powered graphics card why don't yah ?

I would say 650Watt min for a typical high end card.... Very good safety margin.. Had a crappy PSU blew up a long long time ago... Not going to let it happen again.
If you are going to think about dual cards... 850Watt and above..

Specs for OPs Card.
If he ever want to cross fire... He would need to upgrade to be safe.
Doing any OC will up the power requirements.

http://www.amd.com/U...eon-7870.aspx#2
500W (or greater) power supply with one 75W 6-pin PCI Express power connector recommended⁷

• 600W power supply (or greater) with four 75W 6-pin PCI Express power connectors recommended for AMD CrossFire™ technology.

"Recommended" power supply for the full system is not the same as what it actually needs, and the recommendation from AMD is deliberately high to avoid problems.

No where in the specs you linked to does it say what that card is actually going to use, just a very vague recommendation.

Having a "crappy PSU blow" doesn't have anything to do with the rated output, it has to do with the fact that the PSU is crappy (or other things...I blew threw three big-name PSU's in less than a year once thanks to other bad hardware).

[Thorqemada]

It is never wrong to have a Quality-Brand +600W PSU (550 may be ok too but i feel its a tad low on reserves if you want to upgrade your PC with new Hardware later)

Rule of Thumb: NEVER buy a cheap PSU!
You will buy twice and thrice, have stability problems and may even get broken Hardware from it.

[Goose]

http://www.tomshardw...ew,2916-12.html