I overhauled my rig a few months ago (see sig) but was always a bit disappointed with the overclock I got out of my i7 930, especially after reading BTs rave review about their 4.3GHz OC. I eventually hit 4GHz, but this was at 1.375 Vcore and I had to disable HT to keep temps acceptable. This was while using a Titan Fenrir at max speed. My Corsair 800D arrives tomorrow courtesy of Scan, and I'll obviously be disassembling my whole rig to move it over. My brother is at home for the summer and he has an i7 920, and has no interest in overclocking. Hes offered to let me swap them in hope that the 920 will be a better overclocker, and he will get a slightly faster CPU at stock out of it. Am I crazy?
Out of curiosity, do you really need 4GHz+ quad core to begin with? My i5-750 has some serious issues hitting 4 GHz even under water, so it sits happily at 3.8 GHz atm, and I couldn't tell the difference if my life depended on it.
http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html As you can see, in some games having an OC'ed CPU makes a substantial difference. And, being a tech enthusiast, I consider it a matter of pride because having a stock i7 is craziness.
A little The 930 should be your best bet, but it can't harm to try the 920, if it's worse at overclocking you could always just swap back to your 930 And it must be a cooling issue I reckon which is limiting your overclock.
Not crazy if you can pick up a decent 920, and make a good financial gain from the exchange. But worthwhile..... 4ghz 930 is pretty good and compared to a 4.2 920 then not really worth the hassle.
Well I've seen many people talking about their 920s requiring a lot less voltage than 1.375V to get 4GHz.
Well I'm not really hoping for a higher overclock, just to be able to enable HT and lower the speeds on my Fenrir fan to have a quieter system.
No 2 CPU's will overclock the same I know but I only needed 1.25625V using an Asus Rampage II Extreme to hit a rock solid 4GHz with my i7 930...
If the 920 hits 4.0GHz with under 1.3v, definitely switch it. My old 920 requires little extra voltage to reach 4.0GHz, where as the new one crashes on desktop at 1.32V. I imagine it will require 1.35V which is alot, even for watercooling.
My 930 can achieve 4.4ghz Prime stable, (only on colder days below 19c). But I'm more than happy to have it running 4.2ghz with 1.375v vcore on hotter days. Maybe you just got one from a bad batch?
Find out what stepping his CPU is, might give you a better idea if its any good. I believe a D0 stepping is regarded as best. I got my i7 920 on 1.375V at 4.2GHz and its a D0 stepping.
surely a 920 @ 4ghz is better than a 930 @ 4ghz? the QPI will be at 200mhz as opposed to the 190mhz of the 930, so by extension the RAM will be running faster.
^^ This... Ph4zed: I know you referred to the techspot review but even that only has the i7 @ 3.7GHz. I really don't think you would notice the difference between 3.6GHz, 3.8Ghz or 4GHz, apart from willy waving on your sig (no offence intended). I have a 4GHz *capable* CPU (E8600) but I run it at 3.8GHz simply to reduce the temps & voltages and ensure it lasts a little longer. barndoor101's point about the memory speed could also be relevant as well.
Overall, it's not really worth it, but if it's a D0, and you feel like it, why not? It's there, you might as well That said, you aren't going to really get any perceivable difference in performance, so you'll have to be the final judge as to whether or not it is worth it.
His CPU is definitely D0 stepping. It was ordered from Scan only about a month before the release of the 930. To some of the naysayers - please remember that this is costing me nothing, because my brothers computer is in the house and I can just swap the CPUs.
I didn't spot that his 'puter is in the same house. In that case you have nothing to lose other than the time it will take do do it, I say go for it, what the hell.
No every CPU are made the same, it depends on where the chip was on the platter. I can have the exact same computer as you and can reach over bit-tech without any issues just because the die was on the exact center.
Personally I'd swap it too. My 920 is running at 4009 (19x211) on 1.25v and is prime stable for over 12hrs with HT on. My friend's 930, in my machine, won't run stable at these same settings. As has been said though, no two CPU's are the same. It can't do any harm to try the 920.
Would I swap a 930 that struggles to hit 4GHz for a 920 that doesn't? Sure. Who wouldn't? A faster CPU is a faster CPU regadless of what numbers it has stamped on it. Nothing to lose... try it, and if it's no better, swap back. Not necessarily. My 920 is at 3.8GHz with a 200 BCLK.. not 190. You can have 200 x19 to get 3.8 as well as 190 x 20.