Gigabyte Z77X-UP7 Intel LGA1155

[drdeathx]

Originally Posted by HammerON

I would agree with you in that it would be nice to see how far he could push a board/cpu; however unless someone wants to start donating cpu's for him to use I don't see it happening

You could take any 3770K to 5GHz and not stress it keeping temps respectable and not degrade the chip. you think Gigabyte likes 4.6Ghz when some forums are hitting 5GHz and above? On all flagship boards, I always did a dice run on each and there were some differences. MSI Mpower hit 5.95GHz and The giagabyte Z77-UP7 hit 6.01 and although that is not a ton of difference, the Gigabyte board was higher. Thats what manufacturers like. not that MSI was unhappy with the results. gigabyte was extactic.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by drdeathx

The viewers that are extremists love to see those details.

Sure, but these extremists, really, are still a minority. That's just a fact.

As I've mentioned before, I'm always open to discussing my testing methods. However, comment threads for a specific product might not be the most apt place to do so.

And no, I don't do the most "extreme" reviews, since others already do that. In testing, each board DOES require different voltage at 4.6 GHz, and that is show in the CPU-Z screenshots. I need anywhere between 1.185V, and 1.25V, for 4.6 GHz, so really, I do have that covered, you just failed to look for it. Kinda like Earthdog missing the stock power numbers. When there is something worth noting in that regard, I mention it in my comments at the beginning of the overclocking section.

[drdeathx]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Sure, but these extremists, really, are still a minority. That's just a fact.

As I've mentioned before, I'm always open to discussing my testing methods. However, comment threads for a specific product might not be the most apt place to do so.

And no, I don't do the most "extreme" reviews, since others already do that. In testing, each board DOES require different voltage at 4.6 GHz, and that is show in the CPU-Z screenshots. I need anywhere between 1.185V, and 1.25V, for 4.6 GHz, so really, I do have that covered, you just failed to look for it. Kinda like Earthdog missing the stock power numbers. When there is something worth noting in that regard, I mention it in my comments at the beginning of the overclocking section.

RGR, just sayin. i am done with my thoughts/

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by drdeathx

You could take any 3770K to 5GHz and not stress it keeping temps respectable and not degrade the chip. you think Gigabyte likes 4.6Ghz when some forums are hitting 5GHz and above? On all flagship boards, I always did a dice run on each and there were some differences. MSI Mpower hit 5.95GHz and The giagabyte Z77-UP7 hit 6.01 and although that is not a ton of difference, the Gigabyte board was higher. Thats what manufacturers like. not that MSI was unhappy with the results. gigabyte was extactic.

This, clearly, is sub ambient cooling. One cant expect that type of reviewing really. BUt water or air and pushing it is def something I would like to see here... grow a bigger pair and find more time dave! But use your head!!

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by drdeathx

RGR, just sayin. i am done with my thoughts/

I understand, but that horse does get beat quite often.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

This, clearly, is sub ambient cooling. One cant expect that type of reviewing really. BUt water or air and pushing it is def something I would like to see here... grow a bigger pair and find more time dave! But use your head!!

What I will say is this:


Before MSI was flaunting 4.6GHz Burn-in testing as a marketing "tool", I was posting results at the same clocks, using the same workload. They are using MY methods, with MY clocks, with MY time span. They'll never admit to that, but my reviews have been showing that exact thing long before they used it for marketing, without exception.



If MSI can see it as a valid marketing value...

I present 24/7 testing and overclocks, and that's that, really. What i get, any user can, and that's the point. When they can't, I'm here to help them get there.

[PatoRodrigues]

How much of a difference tighter RAM timings make to CPU overclocking? In almost all reviews i read, 2666MHz RAM is used (just like Dave's setup for testing).

Always good to know.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by PatoRodrigues

How much of a difference tighter RAM timings make to CPU overclocking? In almost all reviews i read, 2666MHz RAM is used (just like Dave's setup for testing).

Always good to know.

to CPU overclocking? Not too much, for daily use. Many, if not most "K" CPUs are capable of 2666 MHz memory. Word is, not all CPUs can go that high, so whether the board is capable of pushing past that 2400 MHz mark that seems to be the breaking point for 24/7 use is useful, I suppose. 2800 Mhz...apparently is very rare, and I'd have to agree with that, for the most part.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Before MSI was flaunting 4.6GHz Burn-in testing as a marketing "tool", I was posting results at the same clocks, using the same workload. They are using MY methods, with MY clocks, with MY time span. They'll never admit to that, but my reviews have been showing that exact thing long before they used it for marketing, without exception.



If MSI can see it as a valid marketing value...

Whoa, someone open a window, This room is getting TIGHT!!!

Let's ask Neliz...

Being serious, 4.4Ghz or 4.5Ghz with more time or less would be just as valuable. You know that testing is really just marketing anyway and a $100 board can do the same thing (Im looking at you Asrock z77 Extreme 4!!). The reality there, to me, is that they actually DO that in the first place. There is no more or less value with clockspeeds close to that and stress test time periods close to that as well.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Whoa, someone open a window, This room is getting TIGHT!!!

Let's ask Neliz...

Go ahead. No matter what he says, my reviews are here, with that testing, so whether they copied me or not doesn't matter..I was doing it first. I did already call them out on that, too, BTW. It's not like they asked me...I was doing it, and magically, they came to the same thing. EXACTLY the same thing.

Either they copied me, or I based my choice of clocks on similar info as they made their choice.

[EarthDog]

You picked a random 24/7 speed and random time... come on dave... seriously... stop fronting like there is some magic at that speed and stress test time that makes the board better or that the 'perfect' thing outside of a bell curve value... hahahahahahahahaha!

Ok, I got squished out a window now in this room.. good god! LOL

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

You picked a random 24/7 speed and random time... come on dave... seriously... stop fronting like there is some magic at that speed and stress test time... hahahahahahahahahah!

Actually, there is, and it's about power consumption. It wasn't random at all. Maybe that's what you'd do...

[Frick]

So where do you do reviews earthdog?

[EarthDog]

Do share why that speed and amount of time make any difference? Apparently I need to know as I sure dont.

@ Frick - Overclockers.com. And lord knows my reviews arent this caliber so dont think Im trying to put myself anywhere above dave.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Do share why that speed and amount of time make any difference? Apparently I need to know as I sure dont.

@ Frick - Overclockers.com. And lord knows my reviews arent this caliber so dont think Im trying to put myself anywhere above dave.

Actually, I think your reviews are fine. We both present different perspectives, and that's better than anything else. If we did the same thing..one of us isn't needed, really. I don't post in your comment threads questioning methodology...



as to the clocks, it's about that point where IVBs need that big voltage jump. It's not the max, when that happens, many CPUs have more legs...but something happens at that point, correct?


And yes, that's not all, but I'm leading into it...

[EarthDog]

+1. We share ideas.. we disagree (a lot would you say?). But all in all, and dave knows this, I have mad amounts of respect for his reviews. I speak frankly, but am not trying to undermine anything (most) reviewers do (dave in this context).

as to the clocks, it's about that point where IVBs need that big voltage jump. It's not the max, when that happens, many CPUs have more legs...but something happens at that point, correct?

Oh that? No doubt. But as I mentioned, 4.5Ghz, 4.4Ghz, would be just as valuable. There isnt any magicsos there with that clock speed, though around there is absolutely a tipping point for IB.

[cadaveca]

Yeah, seriously, I don't take this personal. It's a valid discussion. IF we agreed, that'd be pretty boring.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Oh that? No doubt. But as I mentioned, 4.5Ghz, 4.4Ghz, would be just as valuable. There isnt any magicsos there with that clock speed, though around there is absolutely a tipping point for IB.

Yes, a tipping point. That has a correlation to power consumed(which is why it varies a little, but not much).

[PatoRodrigues]

Why the hell they didn't solder the IHS to the die?

temperatures are really absurd when it hits a certain voltage. Dave, IVB-E sockets will have something special? Any idea?

[drdeathx]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

This, clearly, is sub ambient cooling. One cant expect that type of reviewing really. BUt water or air and pushing it is def something I would like to see here... grow a bigger pair and find more time dave! But use your head!!

LOL, grow a bigger pair!

Why not just use 4.4GHz instead of 4.6Ghz! I broke ,y promise of not saying more... anyway, when most read a review, they quickly scroll through the BS they are not interested in and look at overclocking more than anything. When paging through different website reviews and they see 5GHz and 4.6GHz here, they may just read the 5GHz review thinking it is a better review. We all know that is NOT true and your reviews are very good Dave actually great. I enjoy the what I have seen.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by PatoRodrigues

Why the hell they didn't solder the IHS to the die?

temperatures are really absurd when it hits a certain voltage. Dave, IVB-E sockets will have something special? Any idea?

Nope, no idea what so ever. I don't even know when that chip might come.

Originally Posted by drdeathx

LOL, grow a bigger pair!

Why not just use 4.4GHz instead of 4.6Ghz! I broke ,y promise of not saying more... anyway, when most read a review, they quickly scroll through the BS they are not interested in and look at overclocking more than anything. When paging through different website reviews and they see 5GHz and 4.6GHz here, they may just read the 5GHz review thinking it is a better review. We all know that is NOT true and your reviews are very good Dave actually great. I enjoy the what I have seen.

LuLz. Meh, I just call it like I see it. Ain't no thang but a chicken wang!

[drdeathx]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Nope, no idea what so ever. I don't even know when that chip might come.

LuLz. Meh, I just call it like I see it. Ain't no thang but a chicken wang!

LOL

[PatoRodrigues]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Nope, no idea what so ever. I don't even know when that chip might come.

They say it's coming in Q3 of 2013...

Thoughts on Intel rumors that BGA packages will be replacing the LGA after Haswell?

[EarthDog]

Intel will not move to bga in this segment. No way.

[DOM]

Nice review like always

I'm not a of Orange or gigubutt

And who runs @ 5Ghz I run stock for everyday use XD

[fullinfusion]

Thankx for the review Dave. But imo gigabyte has over priced this board.

Moves on