Ted Striker

I agree Martin that I may not be stable with only one hour of OCCT testing. Thanks for posting that table. I am at the low end of the voltage range for my overclock. If I run into a stability problems with FSX raising the Vcore will probably be the first thing I try to resolve it. I don't feel comfortable running a 17+ hour Prime95 test with the CPU cooler I have. I cannot fit a larger air cooler in the case that I have and I don't really want to switch to water cooling. However, if I am faced with making a cooling system change or reducing my overclock in the future I'll probably be purchasing some new hardware. Ted

I had to raise my vcore a bit to a manual setting of 1.19V to become stable for an hour run of OCCT:Linpack. A Vcore offset setting of -0.01V gave me the same vcore reading in CPU-Z under load. The -0.01V CPU offset voltage is my new CPU voltage setting and all of the others are still the same as above. Again don't use these settings as a template, but rather as a comparison reference. I don't know if this is the correct way to overclock, but it seems to be working for me so far. OCCT:Linpack runs hotter than AIDA64. My baby Noctua was pushing 87C with these tests, so 4.5 ghz looks like my limit with this cooling system. Room temperature was 67F. Ted.

Well I decided to stress test with OCCT:Linpack with 64bits and AVX enabled. I'm getting an error message after about 7 minutes so I guess I'm not as stable as I thought :blush: This just goes to show you PC Pilot Dave, don't take what you read on the forums as gospel. Ted

The -0.035V Vcore offset was what it took to match the same CPU-Z Vcore reading under the Aida64 Stress test that I obtained using the manual bios setting of 1.165V. I did all my overclocking adjustments and testing using the manual Vcore method in the bios until I felt I had a stable setup. WIthout using LLC I found that I had to input a much higher Vcore into the bios to overcome Vdroop under load. The changes that I have made in my bios that are different from the default optimized settings are: AI Tweaker Page AI Overclock Tuner: XMP Turbo Ratio: Manual Ratio Synchronizing Control: Enabled (This sets all core to the same ratio as the first core) 1 core ratio: 45 Internal PLL Overvoltage: Enabled Memory Frequency: DDR3-2133 CPU Load-Line Calibration: LLC CPU Voltage Frequency: Manual CPU Fixed Frequency: 350 CPU Power Phase Control: Optimized CPU Voltage: Offset Mode Offset Mode Sign: Minus CPU Offset Voltage: 0.035 Dram Voltage: 1.5 CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled Advanced Page Hyper-Threading: Disabled CPU C3 Report: Disbaled CPU C6 Report: Disabled Package C State Support: Disabled Primary Display: PCIe Bluetooth Controller: Disabled Wi-Fi Controller: Disabled (I'm on a LAN connection) I may have some bad settings in here but they seem to work so far. If anyone sees any settings that should not be used or could be improved please let me know. The fact that there is no formal documentation from Intel or the motherboard manufacturers on the proper method to overclock amazes me. If there is, I haven't found it yet. To me this is like buying an airplane and having the manufacturer say "Manuals? Oh, if you want to learn how to fly it or maintain it, just Google it" :lol: Hope these help, Ted

Martin, When I started overclocking my 3770k I was using Prime 95 but then I came across the video below in which an Asus rep recommended using Aida64 and also stated that Prime95 could damage a 3770k. See time 3:50 - 4:30. This video was created in April 2012 so later updates to Prime95 may have corrected this. I switched to Aida64 after seeing this. Going back to my notes I did document that at 4.5ghz the CPU required an extra 0.016V Vcore and ran 10C hotter stress testing with Prime95 (can't remember the type of test I used) than Aida64 at its default stress test settings. The Aida64 default settings stress the CPU, FPU, Cache, and Memory. After doing some more research I found out that only running the FPU test in Aida64 creates the highest CPU temperatures. Running the Aida64 FPU only stress test resulted in CPU temps 10C higher than running the default test with all 4 tests selected, so I think close to the Prime95 temperatures. I just went back and ran a few tests again before writing this. Under load the FPU only test had a max temperature on any core of 80C. Testing with the default settings (CPU, FPU, Cache, and Memory) I had a max single core temperture of 71C in Real Temp. I ran the tests for 10 minutes each and the room temperature was 65F (18.3C). So I've got a max delta of 61.7C under FPU stress test, but as we discussed before, my air cooler isn't nearly a good as yours. In both tests the vcore readings in CPU-Z varied from 1.168 to 1.184V. After the tests have been running for a few minutes the voltages seem to stabilize at 1.168, but they do jump up to 1.184 at times so I should quote that value instead of 1.170. I have my bios set at a CPU offset of -0.035 volts and I am using an LLC setting of Ultra High plus a few other changes to the VRM. When I first started overclocking I used the manual method and used the Asus AI Suite2 Software because it allowed me to very quickly change CPU ratios and voltages without rebooting. However after I while I discovered that the AI Suite2 software had a number of problems and was also confilicting with my other software. After uninstalling AISuite2 I found that the overclocks were a lot more stable by setting them up in the bios. Using the bios manual Vcore method I found that I would pass Aida64 at 1.165 volts but not at 1.160. A 1.165V bios manual settings yielded 1.168-1.176V reading in CPU-Z under stress load with an LLC of Ultra High. I found that this LLC setting allowed my CPU-Z reading to remain close to my bios voltage setting under load. I don't know if this is the correct way to use the LLC setting but it seems to work. I then switched over to the offset Vcore mode and found that a -0.035 offset yielded the same CPU-Z vcore readings under stress test load so I left it there. I also have EIST enabled but not Cstates. I also have Hyperthreading deactivated. With my new settings my idle voltage is 0.868V at 1600mhz. With the Asus default optimized bios settings my idle vcore in CPU-Z was 0.888V. It seems to be stable in FSX so far (knock on wood) however I am running at a vcore voltage only .005V above not passing Aida64. I may find that I need to increase this in the future and that was the reason for my question in the post above. Disclaimer: I am by know means an expert at this. Everything I did above was a result of scouring the internet for hundreds of hours over the last few months. I can't believe that the motherboard manufacturers do not provide better documentation on what their bios settings do and how they should be used. I know that I got a little long winded here but I thought my explanation might help others that are in the same bewildered position that I was in 6 months ago. Ted

That looks like a Power Plant control station that someone loaded FSX on when the plant manager wasn't looking! :lol:

Martin, Adam, What CPU voltages are you seeing in CPU-Z for your 3770K overclocks at 4.5 ghz? I'm seeing 1.17V with a 80C CPU temperture, 68F room temperature, and using Aida64 FPU Stress test. CPU temps in FSX are much lower. Just curious what others are using in case I ever experience any instability in FSX. Ted

Thanks for the clarification Mark. It was a few years ago when i tried the demo and it was on a much slower computer. It probably didn't take more than 30 seconds but seemed like forever. I also vaguely recall that when the traffic did repopulate the AI traffic was different and at different terminal gates. Do you experience this? Ted

I demo'd Ultimate Traffic 2 a few years ago and bought MyTrafficX instead because of this issue. I was curious if it was ever corrected. Looks like it is still an issue for some.

When I had the demo installed all of the AI traffic would dissappear when I accessed the drop down menu. I would have to wait a few minutes for it to repopulate. Does this happen with the current paid version? Ted

I have read in various forums that HT does not impact FSX performance that much in itself but having it on increases the CPU temp when overclocking. Having it on reduces the amount of overclock you can achieve and that impacts FSX performance. I have not had time to confirm this with my own testing. Ted

I tried the UT2 demo a few years ago and my main objection was that if you accessed the FSX drop down menu all of the traffic dissappeared and you had to wait for it to populate again. This to me was a larger negative than the lower quality models of MyTrafficX. In the 3 pages of this topic no one has mentioned this. Has this issue been corrected or did I not have UT2 installed/configured correctly? Also it is my understanding that all development, except for revised annual flight schedules, has stopped for UT2 while MyTrafficX is under constant development. Is this correct? Ted

Thanks for responding to my question on this Scott. It wasn't clear to me whether it was just the VRAM being used that was duplicated or mirrored in the FSX 4gb VAS space or some larger amount. You clarified that it was just the VRAM being used so the physical size of the VRAM on the card should not make any difference in OOMs as long as you control how much is being used. I realize that using DX10 helps but I didn't want to be forced to use it all the time as some add-ons don't support it. Ted

This addresses something I have been trying to figure out for some time. Does the physical size (mb amount) of your card's VRAM effect the VRAM usage of VAS or just the graphic settings? For example, say you were using 3.5 gb of VAS in a flight scenario with certain graphic settings on a 2 gb video card and the video card is using 1.5 gb of VRAM. If you then install a 4gb video card and make the same flight with the same graphic settings would you still only be using 3.5 gb of VAS and 1.5 gb of VRAM? Or would you use up more VAS with the larger VRAM card and possibly have an Out of Memory (OOM) error? My gut tells me you would use the same VAS with the 4gb card as with the 2 gb card otherwise everyone buying the 6gb Titans would be crashing their sims as soon as they hit the "fly now" button. I'd appreciate hearing any knowledge on this as I am about to buy a new video card and prefer not to make a $500 mistake. Ted.

Steve, Just to clarify, based on what Dazz just wrote I am assuming what you wrote applies to only 32 bit operating systems and the switch isn't needed with a 64 bit OS. Ted

Thanks Dazz. I always thought that a 64bit OS assigned 4gb of VAS to each 32 bit program and that is why I bought W7 64 bit. However today I have read in a few threads that some of that 4gb is assigned to the kernal even in a 64 bit OS and that you needed to use the userva edit to allocate more to the program.

Bill, Does this apply to 64 bit OS and if so do you know what the default userva value is for windows 7 pro 64bit? I tried a Google search and didn't find an answer. Ted

So are you saying that you like the new card Mitch? :lol: Glad to hear you are happy with your purchase and thanks for the feedback. I expected a little better IQ, but not that dramatic of a difference. Like you, I thought the only thing that mattered was CPU frequency. I'm still amazed at the improvement I got from going from a 3.5 ghz Q6600 to a 3.5 ghz 3770k. I'm looking forward to being amazed again with the video card replacement. The only thing holding me back is trying to decide between a 2gb and a 4gb card. I would like the 4 gb card for multi monitor use but some very knowledgable people have said that the VRAM gets mapped to your VAS allocation and a 4 gb video card puts you much closer to OOM errors. Other very knowlegable people are buying 6 gb titans and it doesn't seem to be a factor. Fortunately the WOW factor from this 3770k is keeping me plenty entertained with my 285GTX until I decide on the VRAM size. Ted

I wish I could give you some insight but I'm still using my GTX 285 also. So please report back here after you get yours. I just built a 3770k system and the 285gtx from my last build does not seem to be holding it back at all at running the FSMark11 benchmark. I haven't crank up the AA nor loaded high resolution add-ons yet though. I expect that is when it will show its age. Ted

:lol: buy the man a beer.. I just went from page 3 of this thread to page 2 and back to page 3. It took 45 and 43 seconds respectively. My tracert and ping reports are below. Tracing route to avsim.net [205.252.249.58] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1 2 35 ms 13 ms 27 ms c-71-237-124-1.hsd1.co.comcast.net [71.237.124.1] 3 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms te-5-3-ur01.wheatridge.co.denver.comcast.net [68.85.107.29] 4 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms te-7-2-ur02.wheatridge.co.denver.comcast.net [68.86.179.94] 5 15 ms 47 ms 11 ms te-0-10-0-7-ar02.aurora.co.denver.comcast.net [68.86.128.125] 6 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms he-3-4-0-0-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.90.149] 7 44 ms 28 ms 27 ms pos-2-8-0-0-cr01.dallas.tx.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.85.218] 8 43 ms 43 ms 27 ms pos-0-6-0-0-pe01.1950stemmons.tx.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.85.34] 9 27 ms 26 ms 26 ms 173.167.57.166 10 62 ms 62 ms 60 ms www.avsim.com [205.252.249.58] Trace complete. Pinging avsim.net [205.252.249.58] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 205.252.249.58: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=54 Reply from 205.252.249.58: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=54 Reply from 205.252.249.58: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=54 Reply from 205.252.249.58: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=54 Ping statistics for 205.252.249.58: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 58ms, Maximum = 90ms, Average = 67ms I also tried the pingdom test Paul linked to. It reported 60 seconds to load the page. I don't know what the problems is doctors, just reporting the symtoms. Firefox, XP SP3, Comcast cable. Not having any problems with any of my other regular websites. Ted

I found the Avsim forum slow to pull up pages both yesterday morning and this morning. 20 secs to change pages after each click. Frustrating enough that I opened another tab and read another website while waiting for the Avsim pages to load. At 1:30 Mountain time I was reading the latest comments on this thread and just about to do a TRACERT per Tom's suggestion when the response time went back to normal. If this occurs again tomorrow morning I will do a TRACERT and post. Ted

Thanks for catching that Martin..I did mean 90C. I would test again with Aida 64 as I do have it, but I've already installed my Noctua cooler and the stock cooler is not going back on except in an emergency :lol:. The core temperatures have dropped 15C with the Noctua C12P cooler under the same Prime 95 tests. Coming from a Q6600 with a 3.5 Ghz overclock to 3770k with a default clock of 3.5 to 3.9 Ghz in turbo mode, my frame rates doubled. I was enjoying the heck out of my new FSX and did not have an urgent need to overclock (still don't, but I don't use any frame rate eating add-ons yet). However I was alarmed to see how hot the CPU was running. I just wanted to warn others that may be happy with their default bios performance to 1) don't trust the CPU temps Asus provides, 2) change your bios or AI suite fans settings so the fan goes to full speed earlier or is at full speed all the time, and 3) if you want to do any overclocking, get a better CPU cooler. Ted

According to Asus this is normal. I experienced the same temperatures when stress testing with Prime 95 v27.9. See my thread below for details. http://forum.avsim.n...h-default-bios/ The default bios settings did not allow my CPU fan to reach full speed until the core temperatures were over 90C. Check your CPU fan speeds. After I adjusted the fan curve in the AI suite I was able to get my CPU fan up to 2150 rpm and the core temperatures dropped down to 85C in a 72.5 F (22.5C) temperature room. 85 C is still high but better than 95C. With FSX mark11 the core temperatures are 67C. This is all with the stock Intel air cooler. I just wanted to do some testing with the stock setup before I installed my Noctua cooler and started overclocking. I'm glad I did or I would have thought my Noctua cooler was at fault. I believe you can make the same changes in the bios but have not tried that yet. If not you can just set your CPU fan to run at 100% RPM all the time in the bios. Ted

To close out this thread I finally got a response from the Asus Bios/Overclocking group. When I initially contacted them they were very interested in my findings. They said they would test one of their motherboards and let me know if they were seeing the same results with their fan controller. I was optimistic and very impressed with their cooperation and helpfulness. Then I never heard back. After trying a number of times the following week I was finally able to get in contact with the same group, except this time the helpfulness was gone and it seemed like I was talking with the corporate lawyers. They clammed up and their only response was "your board is acting normally". They also said that they did not test another motherboard for the same issue. Well if my board is acting normal then the following is a word of warning to all those with P8Z77 motherboards: Do not run CPU Stress tests or other CPU intensive applications on these motherboards with the default bios settings and the stock Intel CPU cooler or you will experience CPU core temperatures above 90 degrees. This is because the default bios settings do not let the CPU fan reach full speed until the core tempertures are over 90F. To correct this issue you can adjust the fan speed curve in the AI suite and I believe the bios also. I have not tried making the change directly in the bios yet. I would not be surprised if a bios update comes out that corrects this.

I've read comments on these forums from numerous knowledgable folks that a 4gb video card would eat up too much VAS space and that a video card with no more than 2 gb of vram is recommended for FSX. If that is true, wouldn't this video card with 6gb of video ram result in instant OOM? I know nothing about this, just asking the question. Ted