What to think of vcore.

[Duxx]

So i recently received my E8400 from Danish and have spent the latter of the day dinking around with it. I set the vcore to 1.45 in bios,(on way to finding max with air) however the reported vcore is 1.376 in cpu-z. Is there seriously that much of a vdroop? I just don't see how that's possible... Anybody provide any insight into this matter? Hah. Thanks!

[intel igent]

IIRC there is some option in your BIOS that helps to control Vdroop, may want to look into that

[Dr. Spankenstein]

Yup, quite possible!

My Gigabyte X38 board has around .08 droop which is right in line with what you report. This is WITH Loadline Calibration enabled!

What are the readings under load. is vdrop under control?

Besides, the BIOS setting is of no concern really. In the end analysis, you want to know how much is getting to the CPU which voltage readings in windows will show...

[Duxx]

Yup, quite possible!

My Gigabyte X38 board has around .08 droop which is right in line with what you report. This is WITH Loadline Calibration enabled!

What are the readings under load. is vdrop under control?

Besides, the BIOS setting is of no concern really. In the end analysis, you want to know how much is getting to the CPU which voltage readings in windows will show...

What do you mean when you say is vdrop under control?:confused:

[Dr. Spankenstein]

vdroop=difference between BIOS vCore setting and idle windows voltage reading.
vdrop=drop from widows idle voltage reading to full-load windows voltage reading.

It is a "friendly" built-in Intel specification.

[Duxx]

vdroop=difference between BIOS vCore setting and idle windows voltage reading.
vdrop=drop from widows idle voltage reading to full-load windows voltage reading.

It is a "friendly" built-in Intel specification.

vdroop= Set in BIOS @ 1.45 windows reads 1.4
vdrop= 1.4 in windows no load 1.376 w/ load

I did not know thats what they measured. :) Thanks again!

[Dr. Spankenstein]

Not a problem.

What is your target OC? Currently I'm at 4.03GHz with 1.392V idle 1.376V load.

[erocker]

Make sure to have load line callibration enabled to control the vdroop. Just watch your NB and DRAM V's after you enable it, it tends to overvolt those things. For example, in my Maximus I set the NB to 1.45 and I get 1.49. With my DRAM setting at 2.08 I get 2.19v's.

[Dr. Spankenstein]

Pfffft! "Control" vdroop? I wouldn't exactly call .08V droop, controlled!

Though you make an EXCELLENT point on watching DDR voltages. You hear of more people frying their RAM because of this.

[echo75]

mine is
vdroop-set to 1.55v in bio and is 1.504 in windows idle
vdrop- in windows 1.504 idle and 1.432v under load

so actually in idle mode my processor is getting 0.004v more than the maximum limit specified by intel

[trog100]

lets not play with names.. the voltage drop caused by the mobo not being able to supply enough current for the cpu (mainly a quad thing cos they need more current) aint intentional its a design limitation with some power circuits on some mobos..

the difference between what u set in bios and what cpu-z reads is a bios error.. its a different thing and again a f-ck up.. not intentional..

dont let folks baffle u with names and science.. its down to poor power circuit design and and 45nm chip not being quite handled properly by some bios..

a voltage drop under load is just that.. vdroop is just some made up overlcockers name for the phenomenon.. but it has nothing to do with the bios setting error.. which is just that an error..

i assume what cpu-z tells me is right.. what the bios says its setting should give me is wrong.. but its only an assumption.. my e8400 aint blown up yet thow..

the voltage drop under load is real thow.. i set my bios to allow for it.. with an e8400 it shouldnt be too bad.. simply cos they dont draw much current.. a q6600 with its quad core and need for more current would be far worse..

trog

[echo75]

what are u saying Trog100? u say its "mainly a quad thing cos they need more current" i dont understand coz the older hyperthreaded pentiums sucked more power than the q6600. Explain futher pls.,