Search the Community

Hi guys New to the forum. I am using an old version of Aida64 extreme to overclock my i5 4690k on a cooler master hyper 212 evo ( im sure you this combination 1000 times already, lol sorry ). I follow what jayztwocents from you tube and others have told me to do so far. I slightly overclock my chip keep the frequency on fixed ( msi gaming 5 bios) , boot into windows, run intel burn test 10 times on standard, 1 times of very high and then run 1 hour of AIDA64 EXTREME system stability test. Am I doing this right or do I need to set my frequency from fixed to dynamic before the system stability test? The reason I ask is that when I ran IBT with the frequency on dynamic it kept cutting out, apparently it could be down to the test drawing to much power as it is on dynamic, but as the system stability test is just that I'm not sure what to set it on and what I can consider a pass. Any help and advice would be appreciated. Also any pointers to AIDA64 Extreme test guides too. Orion

Hey guys, First of all, i love AIDA, as this a thing from my childhood, which i was use with my Athlon 900 and i don't even remember how much years ago it was... I would like to thanks it's creators for this pure masterpiece Testing my 6600k OC modes i was running few popular stability tests: Prime, OCCT, Linx -- all of them burn my CPU quite well and using top clocks i always get an errors or reached temperature limits (i have only performa 10). When i'm doing AIDA Stability Test, my CPU heat is far lower, than with "guys" from above, somewhere around 60-65 C* and without any errors! So it is possible to add more MHz's and make voltages lower a bit, then i was needed for OCCT and others. so, my question is: can i rely on AIDA stress test and keep my OC boundaries higher, than i'd reached with those hellish apps? If you gonna ask me, i use my PC just for games and browsing. I understand, that software from my example designed for ultimate testing purposes, with abnormal CPU overloading which gonna never happen in real life. BUT... if my CPU is ok with AIDA stress test, may be this means i could play any games being OC'ed without risk to receive BSOD or having some of my cores "lagging" at the background? ps: i think AIDA is not using AVX instructions when stress testing, no,? Please, help me figure out with this one. Thanks! please, don't kill me if this thread already exist somewhere

Hi everyone. I hope this is in the right place - I'm new to AIDA64 and in need of some help. The title pretty much says it all really, but here's the specifics. I'm an experienced PC builder, but a novice OC'er with some minor experience on a previous build. I've just built myself a new system and I'm currently going through the OC routine of trying to find the sweet-spot between stability, performance, and safety. My core components are as follows, Intel i7 4770K (Haswell, 4C/8T) Asus Z87-PLUS (running UEFI BIOS 1504, released Oct 2013) 16gb (2x4gb) Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600mhz memory (currently operating at stock 1333mhz, XMP profile not yet applied) Phanteks PH-TC14PE cooler Samsung EVO 840 120gb SSD (Windows 7 x64 installed and up to date) Seasonic 520w Fanless Platinum series PSU The spec was all chosen with a specific use in mind (music production), but also with the intention of taking a shot at OCing it. After reading up on Haswell I grabbed the trial version of AIDA64 since there seem to be plenty of recommendations stating that it's more compatible than competitors like Prime95 (due to AVX dangers concerning voltage increases in those but not in AIDA64?). I'm using the 'system stability test' to stress the CPU, FPU, and cache, but not the memory just yet. After each successful SST of 7 hours upwards I've then gone back into the BIOS and tweaked my settings. My last such stable config was core multi x42, core voltage 1.171v, with the cache mutli at x37 and voltage on auto. This idles around 25°c-30°c and hits a peak 77°c under load, and the test ran at full load, all 8 threads, for around 8 hours before I stopped it. Now.... this is where it get's weird. After this success I increased the multiplier on all CPU cores to x43 and upped the cache multiplier to x38. With the voltages the same as previously I got a BSOD when I attempted to run the SST, so I then upped the CPU core voltage to 1.195v. This time it I was able to launch the SST fine. Again, it seemed the be running as normal, so I left it through the day. However, when I checked on it after 10 hours it was still ticking over... but there was absolutely no load on any core - 0%. AIDA64 showed the 'time elapsed' as ongoing - the sst was still running, but with no load being applied! Both Windows task manager and CoreTemp grapher also confirmed the load as 0%. AIDA64 showed the status of the test as 'Stability Test: Started', with the time that I launched it - there was no mentioend anywhere on-screen, or any other evidence, of a problem. What makes it more frustrating is that I have no idea when the load dropped to 0%. My GF was at home and checked on it periodically for me through the day, but only knew to look for signs that numbers were changing and graphs were moving! I didn't even notice myself that the load had dropped to 0% until looking at the screen a few times after getting home. Following this I rebooted and then tried to run sst again at the same spec... this time I was watching it when after just 5 minutes the load dropped to 0% again. Temps dropped accordingly, and as before... AIDA64's test continued without any notifications or obvious issue. It, again, simply seemed to stop applying any pressure to the CPU. So... I guess what I'd like to know is is this a known bug? A sign that my OC simply isn't stable at the level tested? I'd also like to know if there's any sort of log or report I can pull out of the software that might tell me when within those 10 hours AIDA64 stopped applying load via the SST. Will a log like this exist? I'm now retesting my 'stable' 4.2Ghz OC, since I'm no longer confident that the lengthy test it passed was actually lengthy at all. So far it's hit 4hrs 32mins as I type, and AIDA is still applying 100% load to all cores. Any advice will be appreciated! Cheers Mike

Hello, I'm working on a brand new system, and have found that I lose video on stock clocks with GPU on only. I have posted information about it here: http://www.overclock...0#post_17350004 I have attached the same files here, I don't see anything that sticks out. Any pointers, or is there anything else I can enable in Aida64 to get a lead on the problem? hwlog_2012-05-28_20-10-30_log.htm hwlog_2012-05-28_20-10-30_stat.htm

Hi, I have but together a new PC, so i thought i would find the over-clock limit of my old PC I finished some stability tests after over-clocking my old PC. I tested it with Intel Burn Test and Prime95, both went without any errors. Both have been going for several hours each. So i thought i test with Aida64, but after 7 min. with Aida64 System stability test, i got BSOD. if i lower BCLK the Aida64 Stress test goes just fine. (I don't dare increase voltage anymore) If it's unstable, shouldn't both Intel Burn Test and Prime95 detect that? I also noted that the temp got a few degrees higher with Aida64, than the two other tests. 65C. After 7 min of Aida 64, vs. 63C on both Intel Burn Test and Prime95 after hours. (read all temps with Aida64 if that matters at all, not that 2 degrees DOES matter ). So I'm left wondering if Aida64 is better to test stability and temp than the other two, or is it just that my PC don't like the Aida64 stress test? I wont bother trying to get 12h of Aida64 stress test flawlessly, if its just some weird hiccup from Aida64 (get BSOD every time i try it, and only with AIDA64) Or if they have just made the best torture test, my hats of to the Aida64 team Or i just have to conclude that my computer have developed a sense of humor, and wants to fu** with me And if Aida64 Stress Test is better, should i just skip Intel Burn Test and Prime95 in the future? Everywhere i read people recommends mainly Intel Burn Test or Prime95 and a few others. Never seen Aida64 been recommended. Anyone else noticed any of this?