OC Contest Done Right: MSI MOA 2009 EU Finals

Tradeshow & OC events by massman @ 2009-07-22

Last weekend, Madshrimps took the plane to Munich to observe the European finals of the MSI Overclocking Arena 2009 competition. Instead of participating in the competition, our local OC Guru Massman crept behind the camera and reports from the EU Finals with scores, OC tips and lots of pictures!

Introduction

Madshrimps (c)


Introduction

Shocker! There has been a European overclocking competition and no Belgian team was present! Although we'd like to attribute our non-presence to many different causes, there's actually a very simple explanation: the Belgian team, formed by Pt1t and Massman, lost in the Benelux live event. So, instead of the Belgian team, there was a Dutch team present in Munich: Gendo and Wava, two relative newcomers in the overclocking scene. As they said themselves before the event, the expectations weren't set that high, so, because of the low expectations the team could start the competition as underdog and try to surprise the overclocking world by beating some of the top teams of Europe.

Before we start throwing pictures and detailed information about the event, let's talk about the prizes first. Basically, the first three teams of the event received a cash reward ($2000-1000-500), but more importantly, the five best European teams received a ticket to participate in the World finals in Beijing end of August. Indeed, the top five, which is much more than solely the European champion, which was the case at the Gigabyte overclocking competition. And that wasn't the only thing different from the Gigabyte competition.

First of all, instead of just one single day of overclocking, the 17 teams had two days to get the most of their system in three different benchmarks: Superpi 32M, Aquamark3 and 3DMark03. At first sight, maybe a weird choice knowing that each benchmark is quite old, but since everyone is competing with the same hardware, that doesn't really matter. In fact, it's probably one of the best choices of benchmarks I've seen on an overclocking event. Why?

When we talk about overclocking events organised by a major hardware manufacturer, we need to take into account that this mainly is a marketing tool. The money spent on such events (the whole picture) is in fact quite a lot and it would be naive to think it's solely to please a bunch of extreme overclockers. Secondly, it's also important for the manufacturers to reach a larger audience than only the overclocking community. Judging by the number of participants on Hwbot.org, which is the world's only continues overclocking competition, that would be an audience of 20.000 people; 30.000 if we take into account that hwbot isn't that popular in Asia. The amount of hardware enthusiasts and, in general, people who are interested in IT is much larger, thus more important. And that's where the selection of benchmarks is important: using older benchmarks may be less interesting for those who don't know the benchmarks and/or the difficulty level of it. Only the true benchmarking community can appreciate, for instance, a 32M result of 6 minutes 50 seconds with an i7 920.

An extra reason why the three benchmarks are so interesting is because each benchmark requires a different skill. For Superpi 32M, it's important to work hard to get the memory subsystem working as performant as possible (notice: I don't use the word 'fast') and also to have the operating system optimised to run low 32M times. To give you an idea: without optimising the memory subsytem, you can lose up to 20 seconds and without optimising the operating system possibly even more! 3DMark03, on the other hand, is a very GPU-bound benchmark, even more than 3DMark05 and 06. So, if you want to score well in this benchmark, you need to figure out how to configure the drivers (yes, more than just setting to 'performance') and be able to figure out the limitations of your graphics card: core, shader and memory clock frequencies are influenced by temperature, voltage and by each other. Finding the right balance is, in other words, the key to success. Aquamark3 might have been the most interesting benchmark, although the cpu frequency of many teams was a bit too low in the end. Aquamark3 is mostly CPU/memory bound, which means that even with a bad videocard, you can still score quite high. Also, with a bad cpu, you can overclock the memory subsystem and still score quite good.

On the following page, we'll go more in detail on the specific benchmarks, what problems the overclockers ran into and how they solved it.

Problems and solutions

SuperPI 32M

As you already know from the previous page, the SuperPI benchmark is mainly stressing the processor and the memory subsystem. In terms of i7 terminology, this means that the following components have to be tuned for maximum performance :
  • Processor
  • Uncore (also known as memory controller)
  • Memory
As for the processor, the biggest issue with the Core i7 950 processor is that the turbo multiplier is 24, which is a so-called even multiplier. It's a well-known phenomenon that Core i7 processors do not overclock very well on even multipliers or to put it differently, they clock better with odd multipliers. So, everyone shifted down and worked with the 23x multiplier, but in order to get the processor up to speed a higher BCLK frequency was needed. As you can read on the Madshrimps forums, there seems to be quite a big variance between the overclockability of the motherboards, but fact is that for this competition most of the competitors were limited by the processor rather than the BCLK itself. For getting the highest BCLK frequency as possible, there are two tweaks that were used by the overclockers: PCI-e and Slow-Mode.

In the past, increasing the PCI-e frequency was only to increase the bandwidth throughput from the videocard to the Northbridge, but on Core i7, it seems that this frequency is linked to the overclockability of the BCLK. On the MSI, and in fact on many other boards, there's only great scaling up till 106-107MHz. Beyond this, there might be a little bit more stability, but not as much as going from 100MHz to 106MHz. Note that increasing the PCI-e frequency can lead to an unstable videocard configuration.

The QPI Slow-Mode is a different approach which doesn't always seem to help. Since this isn't really the place to be discussing this feature in detail, I'll keep it short: you're decreasing the QPI frequency by a larger factor in order to increase the BCLK overclockability. On some samples it helps a lot (+15MHz) on some samples not at all (+3MHz) ... that's really up to the board. Note that because you decrease the QPI Link spectacularly, the 3D performance drops significantly:

Madshrimps (c)

(QPI bus frequency is a possible bottleneck for the videocard since it connects the IOH (pci-e lanes) with the processor)

More on this topic you can find inside the Madshrimps forums: [MASS] - MSI X58 Eclipse SLI.

But, as already mentioned: the processor samples weren't that great, so most people only ran between 5.0 and 5.1GHz. As far the uncore, it's partially having luck, because as we also see on the processor core, there are certain multiplier issues. The problem is, however, that the multiplier issues aren't that easy to solve as on the processor itself, since there seems to be no general rule: certain processors (dis)like certain uncore multipliers, for other samples the bad and good multipliers may be different. So, if you are held back by the uncore frequency, it's sometimes worth to try a higher multiplier than a lower one ... but beware, although the uncore multiplier might be better, the increased frequency might require lower temperatures and/or a higher voltage for the uncore. And if that's not enough, there's also the problem that the coldbug and coldboot temperature of the uncore might be different from the one of the processor core. I think you can already understand why extreme overclocking is more difficult than what it looks like ...

Last but not least: the memory frequency. For this section, I could write a couple of pages, but I won't because I already did that in a previous article. One of the most important settings used in this competition was the 'Back-to-Back Cas Delay timing'. How it works, you can read here: Stabilizing your memory overclock on Core i7 platform - Back-to-Back Cas Delay Investigated. Most teams ran this timing at a value of 4 to 6, possibly 8. In the presentation before the competition started, overclockers were 'advised' to use a value of 31. Seems like MSI was trying to throw some people off track there!

3DMark03 / Aquamark

As for 3D, you need a well-clocking videocard and that cannot happen without the usual liquid nitrogen and voltage modifications. Overclocking legend Hipro5 spent about 16 hours trying to figure out how to modify the card for optimal performance and here are (some of) the modifications:

Madshrimps (c)


So, what are the modifications for:

  • Vgpu: increase the voltage for the core; possible issues: OVP
  • Total IMAX: remove the overcurrent protection on all channels
  • Channel IMAX: remove the overcurrent protection on each channel

    The two last may be a little bit confusing, because most of us are used to make just one modification for the OCP. However, after posing Hipro5 the question, and having received an answer, it's actually quite easy to understand why two modifications have been used.

    Madshrimps (c)


    Example:
  • Imax-A = 30A
  • Imax-B = 25A
  • Imax-C = 15A
  • Imax-T = 50A

    In extreme overclocking situations, you will be increasing the current flow on channel A the most, since that's where you modify for increasing the voltage of the GPU. Now, since channel B and C will hardly increase, you can assume that they'll stay way below the maximum ratings, let's say 10A and 5A. So, that leaves up 35A for channel A if we only take the ImaxTotal into account. But, in order to use the maximum allowed current of 35A, you will have to increase the Imax-A since it's limited to 30A. So, in short, if you run into an OCP issue on this card, it's either because of too much current in total or too much current on one of the channels.

    (Note: values indicated are for example purposes only - they do not reflect the real values for this card)

    These few voltage modifications aren't enough, however, when you want to find the maximum limitation. We still have the OVP and Vmem modification. Before the competition, these didn't really seem that important, but afterwards it became clear that they were. As for the OVP, there's a hardware modification, but wasn't shared by Hipro5. The main issue is that on this card, the OVP kicks in at VID+125mV, which is quite early. The problem with the shared Vgpu modification is that it doesn't change the VID level, so you could only increase the voltage 125mV, which is not enough. So, in order to go higher, you need to change the VID, which can be done by either hardware modifications (not recommended), using the MSI software or use the software provided by Snot_aap. Each method will allow you to increase the VID and not to trigger OVP.

    As for the modification for the memory - you'll have to figure that one out for yourself as it has not been shared yet. It shouldn't be that difficult, though, since more than one team used the modification in the competition.

    The software tweaking part of this chapter can be held quite short: LOD + D3D overrider. For 3DMark03, many people used a LOD value of +15, whereas for Aquamark some used 0, some 2 and some 3. It's up to the reader to figure out the best setting for his hardware configuration.
  • Some pictures of the event

    Pictures

    Enough tech-talk, let's show some pictures!

    Madshrimps (c)

    Marco and Sascha from MSI are ready to get the competition going

    Madshrimps (c)

    Overclockers working hard

    Madshrimps (c)

    Setup of Turkey, as you can see: no mounting necessary

    Madshrimps (c)

    BrandyBuck of Team Turkey thinking about his next move

    Madshrimps (c)

    Air cooling setup of Team Greece

    Madshrimps (c)

    Temperature meter of Hipro5

    Madshrimps (c)

    Apparently, the Greek team needs some luck ...

    Madshrimps (c)

    LN2-cooled setup of the Norwegian team

    Madshrimps (c)

    The Swedish mascot in good company

    Madshrimps (c)

    Russian team seems to be overwhelmed by all these top overclockers - start overclocking guys!

    Madshrimps (c)

    50 percent of the UK team is present in this picture

    Madshrimps (c)

    Stummerwinter's badge - all people present had these badges. For other finals, the MSI team might consider adding the nickname to the badge since that's how most people know each other.

    Madshrimps (c)

    Nosferatu and Noxon form 66% of the Danish team; the other 33% is partially on the right side of the picture.

    Madshrimps (c)

    Hifiking and dpa of team Norway.

    More pictures of the event

    Continuing with the pictures

    Madshrimps (c)

    The Swedish mascot cooling down ...

    Madshrimps (c)

    Team Finland joking around on top of the Olympic Stadium

    Madshrimps (c)

    All overclockers know what the next picture would be - uncensored stuff on Overclocking-TV only!

    Madshrimps (c)

    Bad luck for the other teams, Team Greece manages to survive.

    Madshrimps (c)

    Getting ready to eat something in the BierGarten, or in English: BeerGarden.

    Madshrimps (c)

    Ukranian team looking happy

    Madshrimps (c)

    Inside the restaurant - a lot of people present at this event.

    Madshrimps (c)

    Eric, MSI employee, seems to be quite happy with his birthday cake

    Madshrimps (c)

    Do I need to comment on this? Table 1 of 10.

    Madshrimps (c)

    GPRHellas of Team Greece

    Madshrimps (c)

    Overclocking paper ... an absolute necessity for all extreme overclockers

    Madshrimps (c)

    Everything has to be perfect - German overclocker Stummerwinter illustrates the German Gründlichkeit (thoroughness)

    Madshrimps (c)

    Is it a jacket? Is it a coat? No it's a soldering iron hanging on the peg.

    Results and final thoughts

    Results

    After two days of overclocking and competing each other in three different benchmarks, it's time to render the verdict. The scores where calculated based on the gain in percentage over the base score. So, the higher you score the more points you gather, which is a different approach than Gigabyte has used since the results of the other competitors don't affect your points. So, it's just pushing your system as hard as possible and hoping your scores are good enough to win. On the one hand, it's good because it requires the overclockers to really push their system in each benchmark, but on the other hand, it's more competitive if all teams can have an effect on the ranking, even though their not the best in all benchmarks. For instance, teams who don't have a good VGA can still be important when pushing for the first place in the 32M ranking. Also, in terms of spicing up the competition, it would be good to have a live scoreboard running throughout the entire competition, continuously updated with the highest scores and preferably with instant calculating of the percentages of the scores and the total ranking. This year, the live scoreboard wasn't updated continuously and even when it was updated, not every team shared their score. Why? Mainly because MSI wanted to keep the winner a secret untill the award ceremony, which is understandable. Maybe it would be possible to have a combination of the two: a live scoreboard with percentages and leader boards, but turning it off 1h30 before the competition ends. Or even better, instead of using the best scores of each team, use the second best score. In any case, it would require to have people not to hold back any scores, which in itself requires more judges.

    Here are the results:

    Madshrimps (c)


    The top 5 recieved a ticket to Beijing, China for the worldwide final of the MOA 2009 overclocking competition. Congratulations to all!

    Madshrimps (c)


    Final thoughts

    Before we put an end to this story we have to make an evaluation of the event, preferably in the well-known Madshrimps-style.

    + Close competition
    + Choice of real overclocker's benchmarks
    + Organisation in Munich
    + Intel's in-depth tech presentation before the event
    + Team Poland's preparation (memory scaling)
    + Olympic location
    - Last-minute preparations before the event (information/hardware)
    - Live scoreboard
    - No live stream

    All in all, I found this event to be quite a big success, although there's always room for improvement. But, as I already told to some people, all the complaints before the event do not outweigh against the fun everyone had during the event. When collecting some reactions after the event, I believe I can put 99,9% in the category with the title "Awesome".

    Before I forget, for those who want to see more pictures or gather more information you can always check out the following websites:

  • Hwbot - Live stream of pictures (updated)
  • Overclocking TV, soon video online
  • Unofficial thread on XtremeSystems

    To end with, I'd like to thank Mystar Benelux, MSI Germany and MSI Taiwan for the great event and Marco of Mystar Benelux in special as he had to go through quite some trouble to get me in Munich. 'Till the next time and good luck to the five teams in China!

    Madshrimps (c)




    I hope you enjoyed reading this OC guide, until next time, click the banner below to read up on our previous overclocking endeavours:

    Madshrimps (c)

  •   翻译: