<![CDATA[Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio - Blogs - Orcin's Blog by Orcin]]> http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/ en Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:24:39 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.head-fi.org/forums/images/misc/rss.jpg <![CDATA[Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio - Blogs - Orcin's Blog by Orcin]]> http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/ My HD800 Impressions, Part 2 http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/842-my-hd800-impressions-part-2.html Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:48:23 GMT I listened to The Beatles' White Album (2009 Remaster) and "Blackbird" was so incredible that I listened to the track twice. Then I jumped over to the Rubber Soul remaster for "Michelle" and it was amazing also. Then I put on Joni Mitchell "Ladies Of The Canyon" and it was spectacular, especially the electric piano in "Woodstock" and the clarinet in "For Free". I need to get around to Leo Kottke's "6 & 12 String Guitar" to truly appreciate the acoustic guitar music. So many albums... so little time.

I am determined not to jump from track to track and instead listen to whole albums patiently because I have my entire life left to explore my collection with these phones. However, the clarity and soundstage of the softer music & prominent vocals from last night did sidetrack me from this good intention for a little while.

Two nights ago, I decided to try some live rock at reasonably high volume. I was afraid that my rig might not drive the HD800 well at the volume that I desired. But actually, it was up to the task and then some. I chose Lou Reed's "Rock and Roll Animal" and it was awesome to say the least. I rested my ears afterwards because I got a little carried away with the volume. It was so clean that I didn't know exactly when to stop.

Another album that really impressed me this week was Kooper/Bloomfield/Stills "Super Session". It is a very bright album and can be painful for me on some headphones. The HD800 was not harsh or sibilant but still presented the sound with the bright signature that I was expecting. So the album sounded great but the headphone didn't alter the sound to get there. Wonderful!

I am now wondering about the common opinion that the HD800 sounds bad on poor recordings. I will have more time this weekend, and I intend to try some recordings that are poorly mastered to see for myself. Many of these recordings end up played with my Denons simply because the HD600 sounds flat or harsh. I am anxious to see if the HD800 cleans them up or at least presents them tolerably without tilting the signature toward the bottom like the Denons. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/842-my-hd800-impressions-part-2.html My HD800 Impressions, Part 1 http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/839-my-hd800-impressions-part-1.html Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:40:33 GMT I have spent the past two evenings sipping wine with my new HD800's on my head. It has been two wonderful evenings! These headphones are like a dream come true for me so far. The summary is "I really like them". However, please continue reading if you want more detailed impressions.

For my initial listening sessions, I chose the following music:

Radiohead - The Best Of
U2 - No Line On The Horizon
Nine Inch Nails - Downward Spiral Deluxe Edition Disc 2
David Gilmour - On An Island
Nine Inch Nails -Year Zero
King Crimson - Court Of The Crimson King (30th anniversary edition)

I purposely stayed away from albums that I knew would sound good on the HD800's, in other words albums that I always preferred on my HD600's over my Denon D2000's (music such as Joni Mitchell or Dave Brubeck). Instead I wanted to immediately address my primary questions about the HD800, which were driven by a lot of recent comments on Head-Fi. Specifically, my concerns were a lack of bass and a "lifeless" sound which I interpreted to mean a lack of impact and "slam". I did not want to spend this kind of money on a specialty "soundstage" phone that offered little advantage over my HD600's and left me wanting more bass or impact with rock music. My concerns were laid to rest and I am left to wonder if my ears are so much different from others or if my amp and the synergy of my mostly copper cables and carefully-selected tubes has given me an advantage.

If there is any doubt about impact and bass, it can be judged quite easily with Nine Inch Nails. I was thrilled to discover that the HD800s provide the same impact and quantity of bass as the Denons, but with a LOT more resolution and clarity in the midrange and upper bass and with more depth to the lower bass. The HD800's delivered that "subwoofer-in-my-head" sound that I love about tracks 4-6 of Year Zero. If the sound doesn't almost pound your ears on these tracks, it's just not right. The HD800 did that just as well as the Denons, which is plenty of bass for me. The thrilling thing about this conclusion is that the HD800 could indeed be my only headphone and I would not be reaching for the D2000's everytime I wanted more "ooomph".

I knew the HD800 soundstage would be spectacular, and it was confirmed with David Gilmour's "On An Island". This album moves all over the place with the soaring guitar riffs, vocals, and supporting instruments all taking turns as the focal point. The HD800 presented this music in a way that I had not previously experienced. Very exciting! The revelation with this album was that the sound was warm and rich, not sterile and flat as with my HD600. This selection, and and my collection of Pink Floyd, always drove me to reach for the D2000's in order to get more depth in the sound, and then I was left wanting to hear more detail. There is no more compromise needed because the HD800 delivers both.

One thing that I had not counted on was the ability of these phones to resolve complex passages. I should have understood that this was a quality of such expensive and well-designed phones, but I had no idea of the leap they make in this regard over my other phones. U2's "No Line" and Nine Inch Nails' "Year Zero" are both excellent albums to reveal this strength of the HD800. There is a lot going on in many parts of both of these selections, and it is very easy for detail to become lost in a wave of sound. The HD800 handled these complexities with ease, and I heard detail in both selections that I hadn't experienced with my other phones. I never felt that the HD800 was overwhelmed by the complex passages, instead it felt effortless like the music was just there instead of struggling to come out.

I chose the King Crimson selection because of its rather odd recording style. It's well-recorded in the sense that it is full of rich detail but it is somewhat under-recorded to provide a dramatic dynamic range. This has the effect of making it sound "lifeless" on my HD600's and I wanted to see how the HD800 handled it. I was very pleasantly surprised. Fortunately, the album starts with a lively selection (21st Century Schizoid Man) that allowed me to adjust the volume to a comfortable level, otherwise I might have turned the amp up too far and lost the dramatic dynamics in the softer passages that came later. The HD800 gave a very full sound to the quiet passages and the detail was astonishing. This album, more than any other, gave me the impression that I had many, many CD's in my collection that I have never really heard.

I chose Radiohead as my first selection because I had been using it recently to A/B my HD600 with my D2000. Therefore, it was very familiar and I knew well the limitations of both my phones on this music. Frankly, I wasn't completely happy with either of them on Radiohead, although the HD600 seemed to be winning. The contest was settled quickly, with both incumbents easily defeated. There was no doubt in my mind by the end of these 16 tracks that I had made the right choice with the HD800. Again, I was very surprised by the rich, full sound of the HD800 on tracks such as Paranoid Andriod and Idioteque. There was no hint of "lifeless" sound and I am left to wonder about the cause of the difference in my experience from that of the many detractors on Head-Fi.

For reference, here are the details of my system:

Sennheiser HD800 headphones with Moon Audio Blue Dragon cable
Woo Audio WA6SE amplifier with Sophia Princess rectifier tube
MHDT Paradisea+ DAC with 1953 WE396A tube
Grover SC RCA interconnects between DAC & amp
Zu Birth power cables on both DAC and amp
PC Audio Duet power conditioner

Source:
FLAC files ripped with EAC played via Foobar2000 using Vista WASAPI
output to DAC via optical cable from motherboard

I will continue to evaluate the phones over the next couple of weeks. I am burning in the phones and Blue Dragon cable on my backup rig during the day and overnight. Maybe the sound will change after a couple of hundred hours. It will be interesting to see the effect but I can't imagine that it will be much better! ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/839-my-hd800-impressions-part-1.html Sennheiser HD800 on the way! http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/835-sennheiser-hd800-way.html Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:39:14 GMT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orcin View Post
Sennheiser HD600 vs. HD800 comparison

I spent a lot of time with Shelly's HD800's in order to make a buy decision. I have been on the fence for months.

(snip)

The HD800's are better. Yeah, I know that's a pretty controversial position. I'll back it up though. The HD800's are more detailed, cleaner, and have a deeper bass.

This statement has been gnawing at me for a month. I ordered a pair of Grado GS1000i's after our October meet, but I had some difficulties with my order and I ended up cancelling it. Maybe a blessing in disguise. I now had a four-digit credit on my MasterCard that was burning a hole in my pocket. $1400 plus cable upgrade no longer seemed like such a monumental jump.

I finally leaped off the fence and bought the HD800's. They will be here on Monday along with a Moon Audio Blue Dragon cable. :D

I have spent the past month listening exclusively to my HD600's. After the drug that is the Denon D2000 bass wore off, I have come to realize that I like the accurate but less accentuated bass of the Sennheiser better. But I also want the dramatic soundstage that I heard in the HD800 and is missing from the HD600.

I decided that I would never be satisfied with the HD600 as my primary headphone, even though they are quite good with an upgraded cable. Once you have heard the HD800 and realize how effortlessly it reproduces music, it is impossible to forget the feeling.

I will probably look around for a used pair of Grados now because I would still like to own them. Variety is the spice of life. However, I am hopeful that the HD800 will be my primary phone for a long time. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/835-sennheiser-hd800-way.html The games continue... http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/769-games-continue.html Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:49:50 GMT I think it is more sensible (and easier on me) if I just link you to my thread on the PureSim forum. If you want to keep up with this league, and you... I think it is more sensible (and easier on me) if I just link you to my thread on the PureSim forum. If you want to keep up with this league, and you know that you do, just follow the link below.

1946 St. Louis Cardinals

We are only one-half game out of first place at the end of May, and the trade deadline is approaching. Things will be heating up soon. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/769-games-continue.html STL April 1946 http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/761-stl-april-1946.html Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:05:44 GMT I thought this blog might improve a lot if I actually played some games. So here we go with the first month of the season.

GM's Monthly Status Report - April 1946

This was a short month since the season started on the 16th. We finished April at 9-5, tied for second with the Giants and 1 game behind the Braves (10-4). Rookie manager Eddie Dyer seems to be getting comfortable in the job, and I don't see any problems with the way he is handling the players or in-game decisions.

Enos Slaughter is very hot and currently leads the N.L. in AVG (.397), HR (tied with 2), and RBI (15). Erv Dusak is hitting .364 and has not made an error in center field. Most of the other regulars are off to mediocre starts. However, we are 2nd overall in runs scored behind the Giants. The bench has played well. Andy Seminick is only hitting .244, but Del Rice is hitting .194 so we are ahead on that deal so far.

The starting pitching has been superb, and looks to be the strength of the club. Joe Dobson has pitched THREE complete game shutouts in 3 starts! He has a batting average against of .100 and a WHIP of 0.59. That's looking like a very nice trade (Fred Martin is 0-1 with an ERA of 3.46 in 2 starts for Boston). The other four starters are all pitching well. Pollet has the highest ERA in the group at 2.84. The rest are below 2.00. Overall, we are second in fewest runs allowed, again behind the Giants.

Ted Wilks has been perfect in the closer role, but the rest of the bullpen has been inconsistent. Al Brazle gave up 8 runs in one appearance but has been fine otherwise. Barrett, Munger and Beazley have pitched poorly nearly every time out. It's too early to panic, but I need to keep an eye out for a veteran reliever.

Unfortunately, Max Lanier suffered a serious calf injury in his first appearance, and went on the DL. He is currently projected to return in early June. Freddy Schmidt was called up to replace him. He might be the reliever that we are looking for but so far Dyer hasn't used him much. He also might be a good candidate to trade when Lanier comes back.

I checked with the Giants GM to see how he likes his club. Sid Gordon (LF) is their best offensive player at the moment. Incredibly, they are willing to trade Gordon for Terry Moore even up. This would mean a $40,000 increase in payroll, so it would require another move or two to make it work. This might be the best way to help ourselves and hurt the competition at the same time, although it would weaken our bench. I'll keep an eye on Gordon's performance over the next month.

We would need to move Dusak up in the batting order if we replaced Walker with Gordon, because Gordon is more of a run producer. We can surely find one CF to bat #1 or #2 among Dusak, Walker, and Gionfriddo. I hope it would be Dusak because he is the best defensive player. Dyer says Schoendienst could also bat leadoff, so we have options.

The Giants also have a reliever, Ken Trinkle, with an ERA of 1.29 that they will trade for a "bag of balls". He is 27 with a 5-year contract at $8,700 per year. I am not sure what the catch is, but I am also watching this one. He doesn't have much major league experience, so it would be a gamble to take him now.

I also made contact with the Braves. Their best offensive player is Tommy Holmes, and they consider him untouchable. The rest of their hitters are either the wrong position or not performing. They have a couple of relievers that they would deal, but nothing jumps out at me. I think we will have to beat these guys on the field.

Looking at the other end of the standings, Brooklyn seems interested in moving Hugh Casey (their closer). He could setup for Wilks, but he is 33 and on a 1-year contract. I don't really like that type of deal unless we are desperate for relief pitching. The Phillies and Pirates are not saying much yet, but it's early. They should start to change their disposition and define their interests soon enough. I'll keep an eye on these teams. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/761-stl-april-1946.html More pre-season news http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/760-more-pre-season-news.html Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:30:45 GMT reprinted from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of April 15, 1946: As the Cardinals prepare to open the season at home tomorrow against the Pirates,... reprinted from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of April 15, 1946:

As the Cardinals prepare to open the season at home tomorrow against the Pirates, General Manager Orcin is busy working the phones and has completed two minor deals today.

Veteran catcher Ken O'Dea was shipped to the Brooklyn Dodgers in return for minor-league pitching prospect, Rex Barney. Orcin said, "Baseball is, and always has been, all about starting pitching. You can never have too much of it. The scouts are very high on Barney, and we expect him to develop into a rotation pitcher for us." Barney hasn't shown much in his brief minor league career, but he is only 22 and still has time to justify this confidence. Barney will report to the AA Houston Buffaloes.

Brooklyn was looking for catching depth with only 3 catchers on their 40-man roster. O'Dea had been pushed down the depth chart in recent weeks, first due to the acquisition of Andy Seminick and then by the strong spring performance of 20-year old rookie, Joe Garagiola.

In another deal, center-fielder Buster Adams was sent to the Pittsburgh Pirates in exchange for 24-year old outfielder, Al Gionfriddo. Adams was not going to see much playing time with the move of Erv Dusak to center and Terry Moore available as the fourth outfielder. Gionfriddo hit .284 for the Pirates last season with an on-base percentage of .371. If he duplicates that performance here, he may push Harry Walker for the starting job in left field. He has the speed to steal bases like Walker, and could be a good leadoff man if he continues to get on base. Gionfriddo will open the season on the major-league roster.

Pittsburgh was very thin in experienced outfielders, and Adams will provide quality depth for them should one of their starters be unavailable due to injury.

Both of these moves make the Cardinals younger as O'Dea is 33 and Adams is 31. Orcin said, "We are always looking to improve our club, and we like to acquire young talent anytime it becomes available without sacrificing our core players."

<end of article>

Well, that's what I told the press anyway. In truth, these two deals were primarily about money, although they also make sense from a baseball standpoint. The trades for Seminick and Dobson had left me roughly $30,000 over budget. Trading Adams and O'Dea for prospects reduced my payroll by $35,000 without sacrificing anyone who would contribute significant playing time. I now have a little budget flexibility in case a high-value player becomes available on the waiver wire or at the trade deadline.

You can't tell the newspapers stuff like this though. They don't understand anything about budgets and money... they would have crucified me for trading these beloved veterans in a salary dump. So we feed them the pablum about improving the club and getting younger. Barney and Gionfriddo might develop into good players someday, so the spin in the paper is not all bull. But if they never develop, at least they are cheap and I saved some money on the veteran players that I would have released to make room for next year's draft picks. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/760-more-pre-season-news.html 1946 St. Louis Cardinals http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/759-1946-st-louis-cardinals.html Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:11:22 GMT 1946...]]> Note: If you have no idea what this post is about, please read my previous "baseball simulation" blog entry for the introduction.

Orcin -> 1946 St. Louis Cardinals (9/3/2009 1:24:24 PM)

I wanted to try a historical replay league with the new AI GM, and this concept was at the top of my list of ideas. The St. Louis Cardinals are my favorite team, and Stan Musial was/is my favorite player. The Cardinals won the WS in 1946, but did not win again until 1964 (one year after he retired). This was partially due to bad management from the time that Branch Rickey left in 1942 through the mid-50's when August Busch bought the team. My goal for this league is to correct this injustice, and have Stan the Man be the cornerstone of the best franchise in baseball during its "golden age".

Shaun's statement in the 1.84 BETA 2 release notes was also a motivating factor in creating this league: "Updated Computer GM AI in real player associations. I doubt any of you guys will be able to beat it now. Good luck!" We'll see about that, Shaun. [;)]

The settings for this league are:
Real Major League Players - Career Mode
Use Finances (start at default 1% scale)
40 Player Organization Roster
Injuries Can Occur (YES)
Allow Computer AI Trades (YES)
Association Expansion Possible (YES)
Player/Team Affinity (YES)
Player Ratings Change In Season (YES)
Import Players Prior To Their MLB Debut (NO)
5-Man Rotations
Modern Closer Usage
Import Player Historical Stats (YES)

The 5-man rotations work ok even in the 40's because the AI often skips the 5th starter anyway. I like the extra starting pitcher for all the double-headers on the retrosheet schedule. The modern closer usage is also ok because some of the teams actually had/used closers even in 1946.

My own competitive rules for this league are:
- must not be the highest payroll in the league (but 2nd is ok)
- payroll must be less than the average of the top 3 teams (excluding the Cardinals)
- every game will be simulated so only the GM skills come into play (will manage WS games though, if I am lucky enough to get there)
- must use each year's initial amateur draft picks to select the Cardinals' major home-grown stars (although I can trade them later)

The Cardinals won the WS in 1946, so I am not starting with a weak roster. I am also starting with a pretty high payroll, which limited what I could do before my first spring training. However, like any good GM, I went looking for affordable upgrades.

My primary need was catcher. I did not like the idea of platooning Joe Garagiola/Ken O'Dea (L) with Del Rice/Clyde Kluttz (R). Del Rice was the Cardinals' primary catcher into the 50's, but he was not a good offensive player. I felt that upgrading this important position with a player that could be a fixture was a key to improving the long-term performance of the franchise. My first choice was Yogi Berra. This was in part to rectify an earlier transgression by Branch Rickey. In the early 40's, Rickey scouted two young catchers who were neighbors in the Italian section of St. Louis. He signed Garagiola but left Berra unsigned because Rickey knew he was leaving for the Dodgers and wanted Berra for his new team. Unfortunately for him, Berra signed with the Yankees instead. Unfortunately for me, Shaun's new AI wanted absolutely no part of a Berra trade that did not include Stan Musial on my side. Not just Stan alone mind you (decent offer but we want just a little more), but Stan plus one of Enos Slaughter, Red Schoendienst, or Marty Marion. I think this extremely high price for Berra is very realistic for a 21-year future HOF catcher who is signed for the next 3 years at $21,000/year. There was no way I would part with Musial though.

Since Yogi was off the table, I went looking for other options. The Phillies were thrilled to trade their 25-year old catcher, Andy Seminick (potential 22 and developing), straight up for Del Rice (age 24, potential 48 and developing). I was thrilled too, so we made the trade. Andy Seminick was a solid starting catcher for the Phillies through the late 40's and early 50's. He was a star on the 1950 WS "Whiz Kids", and finished 14th in the MVP voting that year. Andy Seminick was definitely a better hitter than Del Rice, and possibly a better defensive catcher too. I immediately signed Andy to a 3-year extension. I felt he was well worth it, even though his annual salary was $30,000 more than the very inexpensive Del Rice. This was a fairly realistic trade, considering both players were at comparable stages of a long-term career. No one knows which will turn out to be the better player in this universe. I am betting heavily on Seminick, and hoping that he has upside over his real stats when placed on a great team surrounded by other good hitters.

You can never have too much pitching, and I wanted a solid fourth starter (right-handed) to go with Howie Pollet, Murry Dickson, and Harry Brecheen. Several teams wanted to give me their older (age 37-40) starters cheap, but I was looking for a long-term solution. The Red Sox were willing to part with Joe Dobson for Fred Martin. Martin was a 31-year old career minor-league starter (potential 13 and past-peak) with a brief but relatively successful major league career (12-3 3.78). Joe Dobson was a solid 29-year old starter (potential 24 and past-peak) over 13 major league seasons (137-103 3.62 lifetime) who was very durable, pitched a lot of innings, and was entering the prime of his career. Both were signed for 3 years. I felt the extra $50,000 salary per year for Dobson was very justified, and I plugged him into my rotation. (I also did not feel bad about stealing a pitcher from the Red Sox, who the Cardinals played in the 1946 WS.)

My very expensive starting rotation is entirely signed for 3-5 years each, so I hope they are worth it because I can't afford any more pitchers. In fact, I can't afford any more of anything. There are no available free agents worth signing anyway, so it is time to go to war with this group.

Lineup:
LF Harry Walker (L)
2B Red Schoendienst (S)
1B Stan Musial (L)
3B Whitey Kurowski (R)
RF Enos Slaughter (L)
C Andy Seminick (R)
CF Erv Dusak/Terry Moore (R)
SS Marty Marion (R)

Pinch-hitters:
Dick Sisler (L)
Moore/Dusak (R)

Starting Rotation:
Howie Pollet (L)
Murry Dickson (R)
Harry Brecheen (L)
Joe Dobson (R)
Al Brazle (L) or Ken Burkhart (R)

I'd like to keep Brazle in the bullpen to setup for my closer, Ted Wilks. This will depend upon how well Ken Burkhardt or Johnny Beazley can do as a fifth starter. I will start the season with Burkhardt there and skip his spot in the rotation when possible. Injuries and double-headers will cause me to make adjustments, I'm sure.

The PSPN power rankings are out, and they were apparently not impressed with my pre-season moves. I am predicted at 10th out of 16 teams, finishing 6th in the NL behind the Giants, Braves, Cubs, Reds, and Pirates, and ahead of only the Dodgers and Phillies. Well, PSPN isn't always right so we'll play it out anyway. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/759-1946-st-louis-cardinals.html Baseball Simulation http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/758-baseball-simulation.html Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:05:24 GMT I am posting this under "PC Gaming", although it could be equally correct under "Sports". Another of my life-long (off and on) hobbies is baseball simulation. I wrote a long story about this once, but I'll just put the short version here.

I played Strat-O-Matic baseball as a kid (Google it if you are not familiar with it and curious). In my early adult life, I moved up to computer-based baseball games: Earl Weaver Baseball and Tony LaRussa Baseball. All of these games were played to simulate real players and teams, not fantasy players, and used simulation to generate the results, not input from a keyboard/mouse or joystick. So this is a far more sophisticated and realistic adventure than can be achieved on a Wii.

I spent many, many, MANY hours playing these games, studying real stats to gain insight, and compiling these stats to import into the game. The latter menial task is no longer needed, thanks to the Lahman database that is used by contemporary baseball sim games to import all of the stats for every player and team in history automatically. Wow, what a feature! If you only knew how much time I spent doing this in my life...

I took a long break from these games, but I recently revived the hobby. A game developer, Shaun Sullivan, decided to release his 2007 product (PureSim Baseball) as a completely free download. This was too good to pass up, so I jumped in and became completely hooked. PureSim Baseball 2007, as a commercial product, was considered in the upper tier of simulations, along with Out Of The Park Baseball (probably the leader), Diamond Mind Baseball, and a couple of others. It has been improved as a free version with input from a small but active user community, and is being actively supported by the developer as his hobby.

If you want to take a look at this game for yourself, here is the link: PureSim Baseball free download

Anyway, this is not an advertisement for the game but a story about what I am doing with the game. I am hoping to find a few other baseball sim fans to share the experience with me. If not, at least I will enjoy writing about it.

I am posting this in parallel on the PureSim forum "Locker Room", so it may read like someone who is deep in the PureSim community wrote it. Please try to read past the jargon, but I will be happy to answer questions about it.

I hope you enjoy this story about my latest computer-generated fantasy baseball league. If you share a love for these games, please send me a PM about it. I'd like to hear your experiences.

To read the rest of the story, please move to the next blog entry, entitled "1946 St. Louis Cardinals". ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/758-baseball-simulation.html <![CDATA[Moving to FLAC from CD's]]> http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/651-moving-flac-cds.html Mon, 01 Jun 2009 20:37:08 GMT The new computer is very stable now, and the initial thrill of high-speed gaming is wearing off. So it's time to focus on my headphone rig again, and purpose #2 for the new computer: a source for my high-quality digital music collection.

To achieve my plan, I needed several things:
  • Vista/WASAPI instead of XP/ASIO4ALL
  • Coax/Optical output instead of USB
  • FLAC instead of Apple Lossless
  • A better player (FLAC-compatible) than iTunes
  • A much bigger hard drive (1TB should do it)
I chose EAC as my ripping software for FLAC, and I got it working without much difficulty. It's quick and easy, and it verifies my files via AccurateRip. Now I needed a player/library manager.

My original plan was to use J. River Media Jukebox. It is outstanding as a library manager, but the player did not work well with Vista 64-bit. I had problems with skips/dropouts using ASIO4ALL to USB, and there is no WASAPI driver for 64-bit. I was determined to make no compromise in search of digital nirvana so I took a deep breath, blocked out an evening on my schedule, and dived into Foobar2000.

Foobar was quite a challenge to configure and one evening was not enough. Getting it to sound good was really no problem, but making it functional as a library manager was not so simple. I finally managed to configure an interface, using ColumnsUI, that looks a lot like iTunes and does what I want with some manual intervention. I have downloaded enough plug-ins to give me artwork, ratings, playcounts, and the ability to edit tags. Good enough.

I wanted to use the Realtek on-board sound output directly to my Paradisea+ instead of USB. I chose optical over my Zu Firemine coax only because I wanted the cable to hang loosely behind my desk and not be visible. I am very happy with the over-priced Monster optical cable that I got at Fry's (only thing they had and I was impatient :wink: ). I will keep it even though I could probably do just as well with another brand for less money. The Zu sounds just as good (the same actually) but it isn't as functional for my current setup.

Ahhh, but the sound? It is absolutely as good as my CD transport. I don't know how to describe this last 10% exactly... some people call it "air around the notes"... I call it the "magic". I never got the magic experimenting with FLAC via USB on my old system. But I have it now!

I am really happy with how this setup performs. So happy in fact, that I am considering moving the CD player out of the room. I don't see myself using it anymore as a source, but there is always the possibility that someone will bring their own music to audition and I would not want to waste time ripping it to FLAC for that purpose. So for now, it stays but it does take up a lot of space... and my DAC would look so much sexier alone... :allteeth:

Now it is time to build the FLAC library. I have ripped about 75 CD's so far out of about 200 that I plan to rip immediately. It's a labor of love. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/651-moving-flac-cds.html i7-920 overclock, part 3 http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/627-i7-920-overclock-part-3.html Fri, 15 May 2009 13:56:58 GMT I posted on Mushkin's forums and learned that the proper timings for my memory were 6-7-6-18, 1T. This sounded great, so it was time to get the rig stable with these settings. The starting point was to get serious about the “auto” settings, and get rid of as many as possible.

Advanced CPU Features:
CPU Clock Ratio………….....…. [20x]
Intel(R) Turbo Boost Tech…. [Enabled]
CPU Cores Enabled………...... [All]
CPU Multi Threading………..... [Enabled]
CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E)..… [Disabled]
C3/C6/C7 State Support…... [Disabled]
CPU Thermal Monitor.……..... [Enabled]
CPU EIST Function….…....…. [Disabled]
Virtualization Technology.... [Enabled]
Bi-Directional PROCHOT...... [Enabled]

Ok so far…

Uncore & QPI Features:
QPI Link Speed……….....………[Auto] - Actual value was x36
Uncore Frequency...…..…….. [Auto] - Actual value was x18
Isochronous Frequency....…. [Enabled]

The QPI multiplier should be [x36] for a frequency of 6.012 GHz (based on bclk, landing somewhere between 4.8 and 7.2 GHz). There was no other option that made sense, so I changed this to manual [x36].

Uncore multiplier should be 2x memory multiplier, or possibly 2x +1. But my memory was [x8], so this auto setting was wrong at [x18] or 2x+2. I knew the auto value was [x18] because CPU-Z reported my Uncore frequency at 3006 MHz (bclk of 167 x 18). I lowered this to a setting [x16] that I was sure would work.

Uncore & QPI Features:
QPI Link Speed……….....………[x36]
Uncore Frequency………….... [x16]
Isochronous Frequency..….. [Enabled]

Standard Clock Control:
Base Clock (BCLK) Control….... [Enabled]
BCLK Frequency (MHz)........... [167]
PCI Express Frequency (MHz).. [100]
C.I.A.2…………………….......……… [Disabled]

Advanced DRAM Features:
Performance Enhance ............... [Standard]
System Memory Multiplier (SPD)... [Auto]
DRAM Timing Selectable (SPD)..... [Auto]

Time to input the memory timings supplied by Mushkin…

Advanced DRAM Features:
Performance Enhance ................. [Standard]
System Memory Multiplier (SPD).... [x8]
DRAM Timing Selectable (SPD)...... [Manual]

Channel A, B, C Timing Settings:
CAS Latency Time .................... [6]
tRCD .......................................[7]
tRP ........................................ [6]
tRAS .......................................[18]
Command………………….............….. [1]

All other memory setting left on auto per Mushkin.

Advanced Voltage Control:
CPU Load Line Calibration..... [Disabled]
CPU Vcore......................... [1.30]
QPI/VTT Voltage................. [Auto]
CPU PLL............................ [Auto]
MCH/ICH PCIE.................... [Auto]
QPI PLL…………………….......….. [Auto]
IOH Core…………………......……. [Auto]
ICH I/O…………………….......…… [Auto]
ICH Core…………………......……. [Auto]

DRAM:
DRAM Voltage.................... [1.60]
All other DRAM voltages….…. [Auto]

My concern was QPI/VTT because I had already been burned by lowering this once. The auto value was 1.42v according to Easy Tune, and I knew by experiment that lowering this to 1.34v would improve my motherboard voltage warnings from yellow/green to green/off. I was sure that 1.42v was too high for such a modest overclock, but I wasn’t sure how to be stable with less.

Remember my Uncore frequency had been overclocked by the erroneous multiplier of x18. Perhaps this was the reason that the auto QPI/VTT voltage was so high. I decided to leave this and the other voltage settings on auto and see what happened with the proper Uncore multiplier.

I booted into Vista just fine, and checked my voltages in Easy Tune. Sure enough, the auto setting for QPI/VTT was now 1.34v and the motherboard warning LED’s confirmed this. So the Uncore multiplier had been a stability problem from the very beginning. If I had only manually set the multiplier to [x16] in the first place, as it obviously needed to be, I would have saved myself some effort. Oh well, this is how we learn.

I tested this setup with an hour of OCCT and followed that up with an hour of Crysis. Stable so far, I fired up World of Warcraft and wham… I got BSOD #124. Well, there was probably still something to fix.

The bios CPU voltage was 1.30v, but it was reported by Hardware monitor and OCCT at 1.28v. In OCCT testing at load, this voltage was dropping to 1.24v. Maybe vdroop was the culprit?

Back to the bios for:
Load Line Calibration….... [Enabled]
QPI/VTT Voltage............ [1.340] (instead of auto)

The same round of preliminary testing produced no BSOD’s or other issues, so I ran these settings in OCCT for 10 hours overnight with no errors. Eliminating vdroop seemed to make my current settings stable, so I ended this round of tweaking happy.

Today I am pondering these questions:

1) Am I better off with lower stable idle voltages and the risk of spikes, or higher idle voltages and vdroop? A question for the ages, I guess. My conclusion at the moment is that I won’t be at risk with 1.30v on the CPU. I have lots of headroom. If I increase the CPU voltage, I will need to re-consider this position.

2) Should I try increasing the DRAM voltage to 1.65v and lowering the QPI/VTT voltage further?

3) Should I try increasing the Uncore multiplier to [x17] (memory 2x+1)?

4) Does overclock tweaking ever end?

I think I already know the answer to #4. If I finish, then I have to buy new/more hardware, right? ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/627-i7-920-overclock-part-3.html Overclock instability http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/621-overclock-instability.html Tue, 12 May 2009 16:07:39 GMT Assuming that you can boot into Windows without incident, how do you tell if your overclock is unstable? It's a good sign that you have a problem when you get corrupt data in an application. You can be sure when you run a stress test and get a blue screen of death in two seconds. I'll lay out the story, but there is a newbie mistake and a veteran good move in this tale - see if you can spot them both.

Our saga starts with a very stable overclock at 3.5GHz with many settings on Auto. I thought it would be beneficial to try to run lower voltages than the auto settings, and I also wanted to see if I could improve my memory timings over "auto". Before I started, I saved my current bios settings into a profile and began to poke through the options.

First, I took two key voltage settings off "auto" and set them manually. I lowered the memory voltage from 1.6v to 1.5v, because I was running the memory at its rated frequency of 1333Mhz and it should be able to do that at stock voltage. I lowered the QPI/VTT voltage to 1.34v from 1.42v, because 1.34v was the highest setting that did not give a "pink warning" when it was assigned.

Next, I took the memory timings off "auto" to assign them manually. CPU-Z had reported that my memory was running at 9-9-9-24. It is rated at 6-8-7-16, so I was very sure I could do better than the auto settings. The bios had recommended values of 8-8-8-20, so I thought that was a good start and keyed these values in leaving the other settings on auto.

I re-booted succesfully, and noticed one good thing right away. Previously, my motherboard LED's had reported cpu voltage as yellow (warning stage 2 of 3... the third being red) and the memory and northbridge at green (warning stage 1 of 3... no lights = no warning). The lights had now changed to green for cpu and no lights for the other two. So I had obviously changed the voltages for the better. I checked the memory in CPU-Z, and my target timings were now being reported as the actual. So everything must have worked - so far so good.

I needed to sync my iPod so I opened iTunes and plugged it in. The sync ended and I took a look at my recently played playlist. Hmmm... it shows some songs as being played twice in the past two days, but I know I only played that album once. I'll fix those playcounts later, but just let me sync again to see what happens. This sync caused two files to be copied to the iPod, but I had done nothing to change those files. Ok, this is weird... maybe I am unstable!

I decided this was a good time to run OCCT for an hour and see what happens. I started the program and it gave me a BSOD in two seconds. Obviously not stable.

Did you spot the veteran move? Well, here it comes... I rebooted into the bios and hit "Load Profile". I was back up to my stable settings in the time it took to reboot. ALWAYS save a stable profile and don't trust the "load last good" option because you might get stuck in a reboot cycle or not notice your errors right away.

The newbie mistake... well, I made so many complex changes that I have no idea what caused the instability. Was it setting the voltage too low, and if so which voltage? Or were the memory timings the cause?

I have a suspicion that it was all of the above. A little research revealed that my memory does not like timings of 8-8-8-20, instead it prefers 8-8-8-21. I got a BSOD error 124, which usually indicates low voltage on the northbridge (QPI/VTT). And many people say that even a normal memory timing and frequency requires additional memory voltage over stock when the cpu is overclocked.

So any of my settings could have caused the instability, and it might be that the combination of errors saved me some frustration by failing quickly before I had a chance to corrupt my OS. The only way to know for sure is to go back at the job tonight and try one change at a time, more gradually, with stress testing after each change. I would have done this last night, but I was running short of time and I always like to end the day on a positive note. I had a computer that was reporting all of its readings just as before and was able to re-sync my iPod without unusual results, so I decided to stop while I was ahead.

Lesson learned... fortunately without penalty... at least none that I know of... ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/621-overclock-instability.html Crysis: Maximum Edition http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/619-crysis-maximum-edition.html Sat, 09 May 2009 20:32:29 GMT Fry's had Crysis: Maximum Edition for $35 today, so I ran down there and bought it to test out my rig. Obviously, I had not played this game before on my Dell.

It runs beautifully on DX10 at 1920x1200 with 2x AA! I am getting 30-35 fps with all settings at Very High, except using High for Shadows and Post Processing. I can get 20 fps with all settings on Very High and it's very playable, but lowering those two by one notch gets me an extra 10 fps with very little penalty in image quality. After all, DX9 users don't even get Very High settings! :D

Here are a couple of screenshots with the console open to show the fps. Remember, these are 1920x1200 so I'll just link to them instead of showing them in the post to prevent the browser window from stretching too wide.


Crysis 1920x1200 screenshot #1


Crysis 1920x1200 screenshot #2 ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/619-crysis-maximum-edition.html Unintentional overclock? http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/617-unintentional-overclock.html Fri, 08 May 2009 14:11:45 GMT I went into the "Tweaker" section of the bios last night to continue my quest for a better overclock. I dropped the CPU voltage to 1.35v and disabled C1E and EIST to be sure that they were not interferring with the voltage setting in any way.

I decided to further scan the "auto" settings and evaluate what I might be able to do manually. I noticed PCI-E clock was set to auto. Most o/c guides say to set this manually, so I changed it to the stock value of 100.

I tested my new settings with an hour of OCCT and another hour of World of Warcraft (and it passed all tests). At the end, I noticed that my graphics card max temp had been 67C, instead of the mid-70's that I was seeing before.

Had I unintentionally overclocked my video card in my earlier attempts by leaving the clock speed on auto? The actual clock might have scaled up with the QPI setting (also on auto). I didn't notice any change in frame rates in WoW, but then I don't push the rig for that game anyway.

I guess this is why the overclocking guides tell you to disable all the auto settings and set things to the stock values manually. There are way too many variables to leave stuff to chance. I am learning on the job, and that is exactly what I wanted.

I think it is time to buy and install Crysis this weekend, and see what kind of performance I am really getting. I doubt that I will like the game, but I think it is a better benchmark for my than paying an equal amount for 3dMark and I will have a more entertaining demo program as well. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/617-unintentional-overclock.html Computer power protection http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/615-computer-power-protection.html Thu, 07 May 2009 20:27:37 GMT I decided that the purchase of a new computer was a good time to assess my level of electrical protection. I have my headphone rig covered with a PS... I decided that the purchase of a new computer was a good time to assess my level of electrical protection. I have my headphone rig covered with a PS Audio Duet. My primary video system is plugged into a Panamax MT8Pro. I am really happy with both of those units, and both are less than one year old. However, my computers are overdue for a power protection upgrade.

I have the computer, monitor, and speakers plugged into a 4-year old APC RS800 UPS, which is still using the original battery. This UPS model uses line interactive topology, which means that it switches to battery power via a transformer when the AC voltage is interrupted or falls outside of the defined operating range. This type of UPS outputs a stepped square wave signal when powering via battery.

I have a nagging problem with the UPS that caused me to do some research. Occasionally, my power supply would emit a 3-4 second buzz, then a click. Nothing else bad happens. My old Dell did this once in a while and I could never figure it out. I was concerned that the power supply was being overworked, or perhaps preparing to fail. However, when my new Antec Signature SG850 did it, I became very interested in diagnosing it. I was further intrigued by the fact that my Dell had stopped exhibiting this symptom when I moved it to a new location and plugged it into a normal surge protector.

It turns out that the sound was caused by the square wave signal from the UPS. It occurred when power voltage variations triggered the UPS to switch to battery for short intervals. Apparently, newer power supplies with Active Power Factor Correction do not respond well to square wave signals. In fact, according to Antec, this type of signal can damage the power supply over extended use. Antec, and other manufacturers, recommend that only UPS units that output a true sine wave be used with newer model power supplies.

I became concerned about this. What if I left the house for a while with the computer on, and the power went out? My computer could be subjected to this square wave input for several minutes on battery power until the automatic shutdown sequence was triggered... assuming it worked... or until the UPS battery died if the shutdown software didn't work.

Online UPS units are the only type that output a true sine wave. An online UPS continually converts the AC input to DC for the battery and then back to AC from the battery, providing a steady supply of clean regulated power. When the AC input is interrupted, the UPS continues to supply AC from the battery without interruption, but the battery begins to drain because it is no longer being charged. These units start at $250 and a unit with enough wattage and VA to handle my system would be $300-400! Hmmm... let's review... why do I need a UPS?

Controlled shutdown? I am not in a commercial environment. If my system goes down during a session, at worst I have lost some work or been kicked off my WoW server. Nothing that I couldn't get over easily with a glass of wine.

Protection from voltage variations? Aside from the fact that this was causing my problem in the first place, it turns out that my new power supply has AVR (Automatic Voltage Regulation) circuitry that works exceptionally well. I read a comprehensive review that tested this feature and found that the SG850 will output a constant DC voltage even when the AC input drops to 90V! My power supply, if left alone, does a better job of covering this issue than the UPS.

Surge protection? Most UPS units do a fair but not superb job of surge protection. They are all MOV (Metal Oxide Varistor) units, and usually offer mediocre voltage ratings. In addition, once the MOV takes a hit that exceeds its rating, it will sacrifice itself and no longer function. They can also wear out over time from many small spikes that are not noticeable except to the surge protector. There are many stories of surge protectors that have totally failed but still have a "protected" circuit light shining joyfully. It is a good idea to replace surge protectors in critical service every couple of years as a precaution. I don't want to be doing that with a $300 UPS.

Would I rather have protection from spikes or uninterrupted power? I began to research surge protectors. I quickly discovered that MOV units are not the best kind. What you want is a "Series Mode" surge protector. These units never fail, last a lifetime, and totally stop all current from passing through when they encounter a surge. They offer excellent, fail-safe protection... but they cost $200-300, and I have three computers and two bedroom video systems to protect! I can't justify the expense to protect all of those units with this alternative either.

My conclusion and new power protection strategy... I will buy a new high-quality MOV surge protector ($25-35) for my gaming computer every year, and rotate the older units down the chain to less critical components. Eventually, some will become power strips only, and the oldest units can be thrown away. I will always have 1-2 year old surge protectors on my computers, and decent protection on the other units. I am going to start by buying two new surge protectors today for the main computers, and retiring the UPS unit that is long overdue for replacement. ]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/615-computer-power-protection.html Post #5 - The PC Project: Overclocking http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/614-post-5-pc-project-overclocking.html Wed, 06 May 2009 20:02:27 GMT What is overclocking? Overclocking is the practice of operating a computer component above its rated specifications. Why overclock? There are two... What is overclocking? Overclocking is the practice of operating a computer component above its rated specifications. Why overclock? There are two main reasons: (1) for the challenge of it – as a hobby or competitive pursuit, and (2) to increase the ratio of performance per dollar expended. In my case, I wanted to do it for both reasons, but mainly to see if I could do it and learn how it was done. You may think this is a dangerous game to play with an expensive new computer, and you would be right. Therefore, I approached it cautiously with self-imposed limitations designed to protect me from myself.

I bought a factory-overclocked graphics card, so I was not interested in overclocking it further. My reasoning for ignoring this popular option was related to performance in games. I currently had no games that would stress the GTX285, and I was not likely to buy any in the near future. My future plan to deal with graphics bottlenecks involves a second GTX285 in SLI mode. It will certainly be more expensive, but more effective as well. So there was no reason to push this card and add a variable to the already-uncertain proposition at hand. That leaves the CPU as the primary target.

I was interested in overclocking the CPU to a reasonable goal of 3.5GHz. The Core i7 is a relatively new chip (introduced to the market in late 2008), so there are not too many articles published on overclocking it yet. I read most of them, and they typically overclocked the Core i7 920 to a frequency of 3.8-4.0GHz. I felt 3.5GHz was a conservative target, achievable without a great deal of skill or risk. I read a couple of articles about overclocking my particular motherboard, including one written by Gigabyte. It sounded pretty easy, so I jumped in to the shallow end of the pool.

The basic strategy for overclocking a Core i7 processor starts with increasing the base clock speed of the chip. The stock clock speed of the 920 is 133MHz. The multiplier of the chip is locked by Intel to a maximum value of 20 (but it can be lowered). The resulting stock frequency of the CPU is 2.66GHz (133x20). An overclock to 3.0GHz can be achieved by increasing the clock speed to 150MHz (150x20=3000). That’s where I decided to start, with an ultimate target of 175x20=3.5GHz.

Overclocking is performed by changing values for clock speed and other parameters in the bios. As the operating specs of a component are increased beyond their stock performance, the components may need more voltage. Too little voltage can result in a failure to boot, while too much voltage can damage components over time (or even immediately in extreme cases). Fortunately for me, Gigabyte provides software to help you do this balancing act.

EasyTune6 is a monitoring application that provides operational information about the computer, and it includes a one-step overclocking tool (for dummies). You select the target CPU frequency, and the software makes the appropriate changes in the bios. The clock speed will be set to the proper value and other critical parameters, such as voltage, will be changed using “auto” settings in the bios.

Auto settings are frowned upon by overclockers because these settings typically result in too much voltage, causing overheating and ultimately limiting the top end of the achievable overclock frequency. In my case, that would not be an issue given my low target, so I felt it was safer to go this route rather than supply my own values and possibly nuke the system.

I selected the 3.0GHz setting and rebooted the system. It came up just fine and a check of the EasyTune6 display showed that I had indeed achieved my first overclock. However, the CPU was running at 3.15GHz. Did I click the wrong button by mistake?

A little research revealed my newbie mistake – turning on the “Turbo” performance-boosting option in the bios adds 1 to the multiplier. Since I had enabled this option initially and the auto settings don’t turn things like that off, I was now really overclocking at 150x21=3150. This oversight was not a problem for my baby-step attempt, but it was a good learning exercise.

I checked the temperatures with CPUID Hardware Monitor, and found them to be a little warmer than before but barely so. EasyTune6 showed the CPU voltage had been increased to 1.40v, which is comfortably within the parameters of the chip. The motherboard CPU voltage LED was showing yellow (meaning “caution”) but not red (meaning “stop, you idiot”). A 4.0GHz overclock had been achieved by others with this amount of voltage, so I made note to manually try a lower CPU voltage later. I could not get values for the memory and motherboard voltages from the software, but the respective motherboard LED’s showed green – meaning only slightly increased over stock – so I considered them safe.

The free multiplier point from “Turbo” caused me to think about my target base clock speed. At this point, it is necessary to explain how the remainder of the system is affected by the overclock of the CPU. In a Core i7 motherboard, the bus (FSB) has been replaced with QPI (Quick Path Interface). The memory operates on its own multiplier with a separate path. The QPI and memory speed automatically scale as the base clock speed is increased. A check of the bios revealed that the software had done this for me.

The stock memory multiplier is 8, resulting in a stock memory speed for a Core i7 920 of 1066MHz (133x8). However, my memory is rated to run at 1333MHz, so I could scale up to the rated memory speed with the stock multiplier and a base clock speed of 167 (167x8=1336). The base clock of 167 with Turbo enabled, would give me a CPU frequency of 3.5GHz (167x21).

The synergy of this was just so appealing to me, mainly because I am a Libra (balance, scales, you know…). So I decided to go for 167x21 rather than 175x20. I pushed the clock speed up in two stages – 160 via the EasyTune6 application (its maximum value) and then the final 167 via the bios itself while setting the CPU voltage manually to 1.40.

It booted fine on both settings and an hour of World of Warcraft was completed without incident. The temperatures at load were well within tolerable range… CPU in the high 50’s C and graphics in the mid 70’s C. I communicated my success to my advisor, and he responded with a good question… is it stable? Err… well… it’s not giving off flame or smoke… I guess that’s ok, right?

He explained that I needed to test the overclock by stressing the system beyond what it would normally see. He recommended a program called OCCT, which basically loads all cores of the CPU to 100% for however long you desire. The test also puts load on the memory and QPI to give you a view of how your system will survive extreme loads in operation. It either completes the tests, or it fails and you adjust your overclock and try again. I ran OCCT first for one hour and then eight hours, and all tests were completed without errors. So I declared myself stable… well, my computer anyway.

I was seeing temps in the mid 70’s C for the CPU, which is not bad, but I set out to see if I could lower them. I reduced the CPU voltage in baby steps, checking stability each time, to a value of 1.35v. I moved a few cables inside my case to improve airflow from my intake fans. I turned the case top exhaust fan up to medium, which did not appreciably increase noise since it is a very quiet 200mm fan. Finally, I replaced the conventional light bulb in my desk lamp with a compact fluorescent bulb, which lowered the ambient temperature at my desk by two degrees! These changes combined to allow me to reduce load temps to just below 70C.

That’s my current status, but there are always further improvements to be made. My list of ideas include reducing the CPU voltage even further, changing some of the other voltages (memory and QPI) to manual values and then finding their lower limits, and turning off some of the energy management features of the motherboard to see the effect. The goal of these changes is to further reduce temps and theoretically increase the life of the components. I haven’t quite decided how to approach these changes, so I am just enjoying the system while I continue to monitor for possible problems. After all, the system is only two weeks old.

So I did it… I am an “overclocker”… albeit a somewhat lame one with only a 33% overclock to show for it. Bragging rights start at 50%, but that wasn’t the point for me. I accomplished exactly what I had set out to do – I increased the performance of my system without turning it into a brick and I learned a lot in the process.

Here’s the obligatory screenshot to prove it happened.


]]> Orcin http://www.head-fi.org/forums/blogs/orcin/614-post-5-pc-project-overclocking.html