My E3110 experience begins

[Äߧý∩†H♠H䎀]

Actually I did find one important difference between the E3110 and E8400. The thermal specification is 72.4C on the E8400 where the E3110 is rated at 62.4C. A higher temp zone is much more comforting.

 

[worshipme]

I think ATF should end the confusion by benchmarking and then comparing it to the E8400.

 

[A True Folder]

Actually I did find one important difference between the E3110 and E8400. The thermal specification is 72.4C on the E8400 where the E3110 is rated at 62.4C. A higher temp zone is much more comforting.

Can you link me please, as you can see above the Intel site fails to give that info. At 3.6GHz this thing has trouble breaking 50°C so I think I'm pretty safe

I think ATF should end the confusion by benchmarking and then comparing it to the E8400.

I'll run benchmarks if you want but which ones? If I had the money spare I'd get a E8400 to directly compare but unless I win the Lottery I doubt I'll be buying another processor this side of Nehalem (unless I get a steal deal on a QX9xxx that is)

 

[Äߧý∩†H♠H䎀]

No problem and actually I was off. Thermal Specification for the E3110 is actually 60.1C

http://www.tankguys.com/product_info.php?products_id=1816

Then the E8400 here is rated at 72.4C

http://www.tankguys.com/product_info.php?products_id=1815

Actually the voltage is different as well.

E8400 VID Voltage Range 0.85-1.3625V
E3110 VID Voltage Range 0.956-1.225V

IMO the E8400 is a better value for all the more it costs although the hard part is finding them. Although there in stock now for $209 OEM!

 

[A True Folder]

Yeah, I knew about voltage, the pic I posted above showed that, it was the thermal I was most interested in. With such a low spec it's not surprising that it hasn't broken 50°C at 3.6GHz then.

Cheers for that, I'm off to do some checking.

Tried to rep you, must have been the last person I repped because I got told to "spread the luuurv around" lmao

next time

 

[Cabbs]

Mine is sitting at 3.78 Ghz@ 1.208V. Can't go higher because of my mobo's FSB wall. I also don't know how hot it's running either. Every temperature monitoring program reports 42 idle, and 49-51 load on both cores, while being unaffected by what voltage is going through it, ambient temperature, or fan speed.

 

[A True Folder]

sounds like stuck sensors, there's been a few reports of this, try the sensor test in Real Temp and see if they move.

Also some more reading material for overclockers with 45nm chips.

Anandtech article on CPU degradation

 

[Cabbs]

Can't do Real Temp, doesn't work in Vista.

 

[A True Folder]

I'm sure it does, if you look at the last pages of the thread they got it to run under Vista64 by right click > run as admin

This thread

This program is compatible with any version of XP or Vista, 32 or 64 bit. In Vista you will need to right click on the icon and run RealTemp as an Administrator so that the driver will be properly installed.

Mine is sitting at 3.78 Ghz@ 1.208V.

That's a good voltage there, what's your VID? Is it Prime stable at that? Is that voltage from the bios setting or windows at idle or windows at load??

I had to use 1.25v (bios) at 3.75GHz and that wasn't stable in the slightest

 

[Cabbs]

Oh, I read somewhere that it wouldn't work in Vista. I'll give it a try.

VID is 1.1125, 12 hour prime stable. I tried a new BIOS to see if the 420 FSB wall was still there, and sadly it was. I will probably stable test again tonight to see if the new BIOS causes any stability issues.