A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Overclocking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 9th 08, 02:35 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Kent_Diego[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 47
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that Intel
would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.

  #2  
Old November 9th 08, 06:59 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Augustus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!


"Kent_Diego" wrote in message
...
I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that Intel
would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.


If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are, it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.


  #3  
Old November 9th 08, 05:38 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Augustus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!


"Augustus" wrote in message
news:P_uRk.1304$xJ3.863@edtnps83...

"Kent_Diego" wrote in message
...
I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that
Intel would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.


If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours
without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are, it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.


Follow up: My system is an E8400 running at 3.8Ghz / WinXP32 SP3....a
Gigabyte EP35-DSR3 with a C0 Wolfdale E8400 and a matched set (2x2Gig) 4 Gig
OCZ Platinum DDR 1066. The system runs with the FSB set a 422, with no other
BIOS setting tweaks for memory or voltage. That's it. It runs 24/7, and has
done runs of 5-7 days (when I'm on holiday usually) on Prime95, Orthos and
Memtest. It has never generated a single error during any of these runs. It
doesn't locked up, crash or reboot. I ran Intel Burn....and it instantly did
a hard reboot. I tried it again at 3.6Ghz, 3.4Ghz, 3.3Ghz, etc....same
thing. It generated errors at 3.2Ghz and was error free at 3.1 Ghz. Boosting
core voltage to the point where it and generating unacceptable heat levels
(with decent Scythe hs/f and Antec P180 case with great air flow in a 22C
room ) allowed error free operation at just under 3.3Ghz. So by this stress
test, I should drop my overclock by 600Mhz and have the E8400 run 5-7
degrees C hotter at 3.2Ghz than it does running error free at 3.8Ghz
according to every other stress test.


  #4  
Old November 9th 08, 06:05 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Kent_Diego[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 47
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

.....
... So by this stress test, I should drop my overclock by 600Mhz and have
the E8400 run 5-7 degrees C hotter at 3.2Ghz than it does running error
free at 3.8Ghz according to every other stress test.

I would. It is not that you are not error free at 3.8 GHz, they just occur
(very) infrequently. Some day every system will crash and you are left with
the question; is it was from the overclock or some other reason? If you can
go 20 minutes with Intel Burn then you know you have a stable overclock.
Another reason is I have seen systems that appeared OK, but really had RAM
instabilities, corrupt the hard drive. So some day when your system refuses
to boot you will always be asking yourself if it was the unstable overclock?

  #5  
Old November 9th 08, 06:28 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Phil Weldon[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

'Augustus'
If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours
without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are, it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.


Since a 0.05 voltage increase was all it took for 'Kent_Diego' to get an
error free run with Intel Burn, I'd say Intel Burn did a very good job. And
is MUCH more useful than Prime95 and Memtest86 for overclocking purposes.
Intel Burn would seem to be much more sensitive to overclocking errors and
especially the effect of heat, EXACTLY what is needed as a guide when making
changes to parameters and cooling to increase overclocking. After all, a
sensitive, small grained test for the smallest changes in overclocking is
the goal, NOT proper calculations or even less, memory parity checks. I'd
say your comment on Intel Burn is exactly backwards. It is not 'errors of
real consequence' that are the most useful in a fine grained approach to
overclocking, but rather any errors, and most especially errors of the least
consequence that are most useful.

Phil Weldon
(who may have to skip the 'Nehalem' because he just bought a Meade LX200 GPS
12" telescope - on the other hand, it will be USB'ed to my T7400 notebook
for control and digital image transfer which may require semi-heroic digital
manipulation, so...)

But I'll never leave a.c.h.o; the level of participation here has about the
highest tone and deepest knowledge base of any Usenet group I've seen. -
despite Augustus' momentary lapse B^)


"Augustus" wrote in message
news:P_uRk.1304$xJ3.863@edtnps83...

"Kent_Diego" wrote in message
...
I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that
Intel would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.


If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours
without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are, it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.



  #6  
Old November 9th 08, 06:30 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Phil Weldon[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

'Kent_Diego' wrote:
I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that Intel
would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.

_____

Thanks for your very useful post. Check my reply to 'Augustus', he and I
are of opposite opinions on your results. Please post additional details; I
see a very good discussion resulting. (Something we really need while
waiting for Nehalem.

Phil Weldon

"Kent_Diego" wrote in message
...
I just tried Intel Burn and wow. In just 5 minutes I found that my system
had many CPU errors. I ran tests like Memtest86 and Prime95 for hours and
they did not find any problems. The system seemed fine for months. Once I
raised the CPU voltage 0.05 everything was fixed. It makes sense that Intel
would make the best CPU error detection software.
http://www.ultimate-filez.com/?page=downloads
Using anything else is just a waste of time.


  #7  
Old November 10th 08, 04:50 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Ed Medlin[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 136
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!


"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
m...
'Augustus'
If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours
without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are, it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding
errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.


Since a 0.05 voltage increase was all it took for 'Kent_Diego' to get an
error free run with Intel Burn, I'd say Intel Burn did a very good job.
And is MUCH more useful than Prime95 and Memtest86 for overclocking
purposes. Intel Burn would seem to be much more sensitive to overclocking
errors and especially the effect of heat, EXACTLY what is needed as a
guide when making changes to parameters and cooling to increase
overclocking. After all, a sensitive, small grained test for the smallest
changes in overclocking is the goal, NOT proper calculations or even less,
memory parity checks. I'd say your comment on Intel Burn is exactly
backwards. It is not 'errors of real consequence' that are the most
useful in a fine grained approach to overclocking, but rather any errors,
and most especially errors of the least consequence that are most useful.

Phil Weldon
(who may have to skip the 'Nehalem' because he just bought a Meade LX200
GPS 12" telescope - on the other hand, it will be USB'ed to my T7400
notebook for control and digital image transfer which may require
semi-heroic digital manipulation, so...)

But I'll never leave a.c.h.o; the level of participation here has about
the highest tone and deepest knowledge base of any Usenet group I've
een. - despite Augustus' momentary lapse B^)


I like it too. It does exactly what I would want when overclocking since my
goal is to go as high as possible without "any" errors. I will still
probably do a Nehalem build in early '09. I hinted about doing some
astronomy to my wife and she didn't make any negative comments so I am
looking around at what I may need. It is almost Greek to me at this point,
but I will see how your setup goes and let you lead the way.......:-).


Ed


  #8  
Old November 10th 08, 11:12 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Phil Weldon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

'Ed Medlin' wrote:
I like it too. It does exactly what I would want when overclocking since
my goal is to go as high as possible without "any" errors. I will still
probably do a Nehalem build in early '09. I hinted about doing some
astronomy to my wife and she didn't make any negative comments so I am
looking around at what I may need. It is almost Greek to me at this point,
but I will see how your setup goes and let you lead the way.......:-).

_____

As soon as I can find my digital camera I'll post some pictures of my
telescope. The camera is probably some were under the blizzard of packing
material from the two hundred pounds of telescope and accessory parts B^)
Just to give you an idea of mass, the tripod legs are 3 inch steel tubes.
Meade still uses RS232 connections, four on the fork mount. I think I'll
need only one RS232 to USB convertor for my notebook to control tracking.
The Meade LPI imager is a jumped-up web cam that, of course, has USB out.
It's useful for planets, the moon, and artificial satellites - usually 1/10
second or shorter exposures with multiple frames stacked for noise
reduction.

Don't think I'll have to worry about my notebook overheating in the cold
nights ahead. In fact, it might be a good time to try some overclocking B^)

Phil Weldon

"Ed Medlin" ed@ edmedlin.com wrote in message
...

"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
m...
'Augustus'
If your system is running Prime95 and Memtest86 for hours and hours
without
errors, and this test is finding them immediately while no others are,
it
should tell you that Intel Burn is overly sensitive and not finding
errors
of any real consequence. Using it is more of a waste of time.


Since a 0.05 voltage increase was all it took for 'Kent_Diego' to get an
error free run with Intel Burn, I'd say Intel Burn did a very good job.
And is MUCH more useful than Prime95 and Memtest86 for overclocking
purposes. Intel Burn would seem to be much more sensitive to overclocking
errors and especially the effect of heat, EXACTLY what is needed as a
guide when making changes to parameters and cooling to increase
overclocking. After all, a sensitive, small grained test for the
smallest changes in overclocking is the goal, NOT proper calculations or
even less, memory parity checks. I'd say your comment on Intel Burn is
exactly backwards. It is not 'errors of real consequence' that are the
most useful in a fine grained approach to overclocking, but rather any
errors, and most especially errors of the least consequence that are most
useful.

Phil Weldon
(who may have to skip the 'Nehalem' because he just bought a Meade LX200
GPS 12" telescope - on the other hand, it will be USB'ed to my T7400
notebook for control and digital image transfer which may require
semi-heroic digital manipulation, so...)

But I'll never leave a.c.h.o; the level of participation here has about
the highest tone and deepest knowledge base of any Usenet group I've
en. - despite Augustus' momentary lapse B^)


I like it too. It does exactly what I would want when overclocking since
my goal is to go as high as possible without "any" errors. I will still
probably do a Nehalem build in early '09. I hinted about doing some
astronomy to my wife and she didn't make any negative comments so I am
looking around at what I may need. It is almost Greek to me at this point,
but I will see how your setup goes and let you lead the way.......:-).


Ed


  #9  
Old November 12th 08, 01:45 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Augustus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!

But I'll never leave a.c.h.o; the level of participation here has about
the highest tone and deepest knowledge base of any Usenet group I've
een. - despite Augustus' momentary lapse B^)


My lapse, if I may elabortae, was simply this: If my system is being 100%
stable running the games and software that i use, and not generating errors
at 3.8Ghz with any of the tried and true standard o/c stress tests done over
rather lengthy time periods, why would I wish to raise the CPU voltage and
drop the FSB and speed based on the results of this one stress test which
seemingly (to me, anyway, but feel free to enlighten me) does not relate to
the stable o/c operation of my current system or software. The heat
generated on my E8400 dramatically increases with increasing voltage. This
test on my system indicates continual errors in operation with less than a
10% o/c and fair amount of vcore boost. Yet the system is error free, cooler
and stable at much higher speeds and stock vcore on EVERY other stress test
and the apps/games I run. What am I not getting here? Seriously......


  #10  
Old November 20th 08, 02:32 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
hdmyg8586
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Intel Burn is the Best OC Test SW!


I found that connector you were looking for
Cindy, is this the thing you were looking for?
www.liangdianup.com/computeraccessories_1.htm
It's on the list of computer accessories and parts. They have the DVI
video thing to convert that jap monitor to work with your other
computer. Just about any other kind of wire adaptor, usb connectors,
monitor extension wires, ps2 extention wires, and all kinds of female
and male swap connectors and things that I think would help your shop.
If that above link don't work then goto www.lducompany.com and click on
computer accessories. Let me know if that is what you need and give me
your email address again.




--
hdmyg8586
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Plextor 708A & 716A Won't burn CDR but will burn DVD Brum1969 Cdr 5 June 14th 05 06:58 PM
Maxtor PowerMax "Burn In" Test - Destructive? Paul Moloney Storage (alternative) 1 August 7th 04 08:34 PM
Call for a test on the D865PBZ Intel motherboard. Giuseppe Vitillaro Intel 0 July 26th 04 05:35 PM
AMD vs Intel in stability test nardia Intel 12 November 17th 03 09:41 PM
Nebie Overcloker burn baby burn! Mr. Nangla Overclocking AMD Processors 1 June 29th 03 11:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.